| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| Pakistan Shuts Down Resupply Routes to Afghanistan "Permanently" |
| 2011-12-04 |
| .... So, what does this mean for logistical support of ISAF forces? According to Nesar Ahmad Nasery, the deputy head of Torkham Customs, around 1,000 trucks cross into Afghanistan on a daily basis, nearly 300 of which are NATO contractors carrying NATO supplies in sealed containers. Khyber Transport Association chief Shakir Afridi said that each oil tanker has a capacity of 13,000-15,000 gallons. In October 2010 Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen said that fossil fuels are the number one import to Afghanistan. Noting the obvious, as Afghanistan has no indigenous hydrocarbon supplies, every drop must be brought in, with transit greatly increasing the eventual cost. For 2001-2008, almost all U.S. and NATO supplies were trucked overland to Afghanistan through parts of Pakistan effectively controlled by the Taliban. Ground supplies are shipped into PakistanÂ’s Arabian Sea Karachi port and offloaded onto trucks before being sent to one of five crossing points on the Afghan border, the most important being Torkham at the Khyber Pass and BaluchistanÂ’s Chaman. The recent attack has put all these routes at risk, perhaps permanently. Pakistan, being the shortest and most economical route, has been used for nearly a decade to transit almost 75 percent of the ammunition, vehicles, foodstuff and around 50 percent of fuel for coalition forces fighting in Afghanistan. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #14 ION DEFENCE.PK/FORUMS > OIL SUPPLY [fuel exports] TO AFGHANISTAN ALSO SHUT DOWN [by Islamabad] AT TORKHAM. ARTICLE > MAP = PROPOSED ALTERNATE "SUPPLY ROUTES FOR NATO TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN" > SHORTEST ALTERN LAND ROUTE = from Chabahar, I-R-A-N to Afghan city Delaram. Also from SAME > GRIEVING [Pak] FAMILIES DEMAND JUSTICE FOR SLAIN SOLDIERS. * SAME > BEREAVED FAMILIES DEMAND END TO "AMERICA'S WAR". ARTIC > Dead Soldier's Relative = opined that the family may feel better iff he had died fighting Hindus = INDIA, aka PAKISTAN'S MORTAL ENEMY, but no purpose was served wid him getting killed via US Drone + "friendly fire"??? * WAFF > {Russia Today] US CAN'T AFFORD TO OPEN ANOTHER FRONT IN PAKISTAN. ARTIC > HAMID GUL = opined that iff POTUS OBAMA hopes to get some political = re-election? benefit from this war, he must get the bulk of US Troops out of Afghanistan before November 2012 next year??? * WAFF > ISLAMABAD HAS BEEN STRETCHED TO THE LIMIT. THE ASSUMPTION THAT PAKISTAN HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO OBEY AMERICA MAY TURN OUT TO BE A DIRE STRATEGIC ERROR. IIUC, iff the US-NATO are not careful, they may see Pakistan devol into ANOTHER, ALREADY NUKE-ARMED "REVOLUTIONARY/ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN" IN WEST ASIA??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2011-12-04 21:52 |
| #13 What we need to do is better foment combative discord between various "flavors" of islam. 'Get Shias and Sunnis chopping each other to shreds everywhere we can. Things could not get much better than the old Iran-Iraq war - with competing human wave attacks continually eating up entire cohorts of young asshats. Who will be a better "War President" - Gingrich or Romney? I tend to think Newt will do better. |
| Posted by: Lone Ranger 2011-12-04 21:15 |
| #12 Muqtada Sadr has said his Boyz will resume attacks in Iraq iff the US-NATO maintain evena minimal presence there - prob safe to say ditto for the AFPAK Hard/Bad Boyz as per post-2014 US-NATO presence in Afghanistan. In sum, then ... > To prevent Iran per se from having NucWeaps, the US must attack Iran. > More importantly, to prevent various Regional, International Militant-Terror Groups + aligned NGOS from acquiring Nuke-WMDS MilTechs, the US must attack Iran. > To save post-2014 Iraq from hegemonic Rising Shia Iran, the US must attack Iran. > To save post-2014 Afghanistan from Pak-based MilTerrs despite lack of overland MLLS, + no Balochistan, the US must attack Iran. > To save Israel, now andor post-2012/2014, etc. the US must attack Iran. > To save the Sunni Muslim Middle East from hegemonic Rising Shia Iran, the US must attack Iran. > To deter or prevent a ME Nuclear Arms race as due to Sunni-vs-Shia regional competition for Regional + OWG Caliphate dominance, the US must attack Iran. I can think of other rationales but the above is good for starters. As per the US, to save CONUS-NORAM + EU + even MAMA RUSSIA + CHINA from the threat of Iranian LR IRBMS + ICBMS that be used to deter any international counterresponse agz a "Nuclear 9-11/Mumbai" event(s) vee Nuke-WMD armed pro-Iran or pro-Jihad MilTerr Groups, the US will have to attack Iran. REMEMBER, THE ISLAMIST JIHAD/INSURGENCY IS ULTIMATELY "GLOBAL/UNIVERSAL/INTERNATIONAL" IN SCOPE, not just Regional or Local. By "US must attack Iran" I mean or infer direct US = US-NATO/Allied direct invasion + LT occupation of same. WANNABE SHIA IRAN WANTS + LIKES ITS NUKES JUST AS ALREADY NUKE-ARMED PAKISTAN'S GOVT. LIKE SUPPORTING RADICAL ISLAMISM. Pesky Persians are Pesky = Iran gets its Nukes, or else Iran gets invaded. * ISLAMIST JIHAD > ISLAM CONQUERS THE WORLD, ALA THE OWG CALIPHATE [Nuclear], OR IT DOESN'T. * "PEARL HARBOR" MOVIE > COMMUNISM-SOCIALSM CONQUERS AMERICA, OR IT DOESN'T. * RISING CHINA > ONE-N-ONLY WORLD "SOLE SUCCESSOR" TO THE "WEAK/DECLINING" US SUPERPOWER, OR IT ISN'T. And thusly, my dear Virgina, we once again again again learn why God invented the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction/Annihilation. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2011-12-04 19:08 |
| #11 Elphinstone didn't play by the same rules as Alexander or Xenophon. or Khan. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2011-12-04 19:04 |
| #10 Destroy Pakistan and give it back to India, if they'll have it. Well, Manmohan mentioned they didn't want it back in its current state. After some house cleaning and such...maybe. |
| Posted by: Secret Asian Man 2011-12-04 14:59 |
| #9 Eohippus, fair point. "Free Balochistan!" has a ring to it, and it'd also make the Iranians nervous. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2011-12-04 14:31 |
| #8 I personally think two Marine divisions, combined with ARCLIGHT and Tac Air could open up a supply route PDQ. Bring in a Navy CB battalion and build a da$$ed railroad from Karachi to Kabul or Kandahar. plus a pipeline or three. It's time to call Pakistan's bluff and kick the living sh$$ out of them. You CANNOT win a war against Mooselimbs - or anybody else - by being "nice". Alexander, Genghis Khan both had the same idea. Destroy Pakistan and give it back to India, if they'll have it. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2011-12-04 14:27 |
| #7 The US plan was to replace all Paki routes by year's end. Only 25% of US ground loggie was via Pakistan and troops numbers are decreasing. Cut off all aid to the Paks and support Paki separatists. Make payback a bitch when they try another 9/11 style attack. |
| Posted by: Eohippus Phater7165 2011-12-04 13:26 |
| #6 Xenophon and Alexander showed that in the end a Western Army can walk to the seaports. What did Elphinstone show? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2011-12-04 11:55 |
| #5 ...or the various officials their bribes. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2011-12-04 11:53 |
| #4 Going to cost the haulers big time. Wonder how long before they start whining about lost revenue. |
| Posted by: tipover 2011-12-04 11:50 |
| #3 I imagine the Pakstanis think they can twist our arm for more donations and higher fees using the threat. It may even work, short term. But more of our supplies are coming through the the northern route, and we have fewer troops there to need supplying... |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2011-12-04 11:22 |
| #2 Xenophon and Alexander showed that in the end a Western Army can walk to the seaports. The area and its population along the way, however, usually doesn't do as well. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2011-12-04 11:07 |
| #1 Them and Iran want war! |
| Posted by: Paul D 2011-12-04 09:55 |