Gen Wynne: US Pressure not to be accepted

[cyphercide]

The Pakistani assessment appears to be, and has been for a while, that the US will in fact have to arrive at some sort of accommodation with the various insurgent groups in Afghanistan (this might be an accommodation solely through the GoA initially, with the official US stamp only being applied after a period of relative 'success' in the 'accommodation of insurgent groups'), and hence has been loathe to burn its own bridges and contacts with the same groups.

Ergo,it makes no sense for Pakistan to stick it's head out for forming any sort of consensus between the United States and the insurgent factions. All it needs to do is to swallow a little pride and desist from escalating the current diplomatic war being waged.Things will come around in time.

 

[regular]

I merely presented a fact: that drone strikes have taken out many AQ leaders and mid-level commanders.Firstly, how can opinions be damnation of a person, unless a diversity of views cannot be tolerated at all?

Secondly, my positions are not taken lightly, but are trying to figure out a way forward that will work for both sides. (Yes, I do care for Pakistan.)

One cannot do that unless able to see both sides of an issue dispassionately.

Its a humble request" Plzzzz tell the CIA to stop training new and new Alqaida operatives so there will be no terrorism/terrorists and then there will be no need to kill them through drones"..........Thanks great .........

 

[Awesome]

I merely presented a fact: that drone strikes have taken out many AQ leaders and mid-level commanders.

Which is what 5 guys? 10 guys? If those are facts, the rest of the 2000 kills are fairy tales?

Firstly, how can opinions be damnation of a person, unless a diversity of views cannot be tolerated at all?

Tolerance means hearing you out - not agreeing. We hear you loud and clear and support for such murder is not impressing anyone.

The entire world chooses for itself, including you, you choose for yourself that due process would be followed and everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Your president, with your support, has decided this civilized requirement can be waived off for Pakistanis and he can declare all male adults killed as militants. Also the signature strikes is such a failure of humanity, where that moron decided that he can start killing people if they meet a certain parameters - no need for intelligence. They are killing people for doing jumping jacks in a group - that must be a training exercise for militants in their opinion.

What is this? This is absolutely unacceptable, anyone who accepts this (which you not only do, but support it, fight for it) has a certain flaw in their humanity.

Secondly, my positions are not taken lightly, but are trying to figure out a way forward that will work for both sides. (Yes, I do care for Pakistan.)

One cannot do that unless able to see both sides of an issue dispassionately.

Your position may get me killed. I'm ready to talk it out, your position is all about killing. I have a right to be passionate about my survival. You don't have a side since you don't have an argument you have the use of violence. When you are ready to talk you must abandon the use of violence against Pakistan.

 

[Developereo]

Even more naive is the view that USA should spend its resources to serve others' national interests!

I assume you mean "against America's national interests". There is nothing inherently wrong with supporting another country's interests as long as they align with the donor country's. Case in point is India where American "aid" takes the form of economic, diplomatic and strategic concessions.

I don't deny the genuine altruism of private organizations and specific individuals doing work in Pakistan, but the official foreign aid is primarily intended to buy influence. That's because the US administration has not seen the value in, and made it a priority to, forge a relationship with the Pakistani nation at large. The relationship is still very much limited to a handful of 'representatives'.

 

[Developereo]

Sir, can someone give an assessment as to what is the US goals in that region, surely not just the AQ, there has to be something more. It would be great if we can get some inkling about this.

Rather than hearing the 'Pakistani' version, why not hear it from an Indian-American analyst first hand? Many others, of various nationalities, have written the same thing. (Slightly off-topic, but I don't agree with his assessment that India is a doormat -- I agree with most Indians that India is playing it smart, but that's another discussion.)

 

[cyphercide]

I assume you mean "against America's national interests". There is nothing inherently wrong with supporting another country's interests as long as they align with the donor country's. Case in point is India where American "aid" takes the form of economic, diplomatic and strategic concessions.

I don't deny the genuine altruism of private organizations and specific individuals doing work in Pakistan, but the official foreign aid is primarily intended to buy influence. That's because the US administration has not seen the value in, and made it a priority to, forge a relationship with the Pakistani nation at large. The relationship is still very much limited to a handful of 'representatives'.

Nah silly,he meant primarily that it is not the responsibility of the United States to adopt any posture that will ensure their funds will reach the Pakistani public.They love dealing with corrupt scum cuz they are usually the ones in charge.....Dictators? Even better!!!

 

[Developereo]

Nah silly,he meant primarily that it is not the responsibility of the United States to adopt any posture that will ensure their funds will reach the Pakistani public.They love dealing with corrupt scum cuz they are usually the ones in charge.....Dictators? Even better!!!

That was precisely my point.

We are not talking about Ma and Pa Kornfeld from some farm in Iowa vacationing in a third world country. The US administration knows EXACTLY how things work (and don't work) in these poor countries. If they want to 'connect' with the general population, they know how. If, instead, they want that money to be used as bribes, they also know how.

 

[illusion8]

Rather than hearing the 'Pakistani' version, why not hear it from an Indian-American analyst first hand? Many others, of various nationalities, have written the same thing. (Slightly off-topic, but I don't agree with his assessment that India is a doormat -- I agree with most Indians that India is playing it smart, but that's another discussion.)

Ah!! so no one wants to bell the cat here, Indian assessment is presently in tune with its goals. It's independent of US goals in that region.I agree India is making full use of the situation at hand.

Our goals does line up with US goals - cos if it does not, then it wouldn't succeed.

 

[VCheng]

............. The US administration knows EXACTLY how things work (and don't work) in these poor countries. If they want to 'connect' with the general population, they know how. If, instead, they want that money to be used as bribes, they also know how.

Well, look at it this way: Which method offers the larger return on the investment? Hint: It depends on the make up of the country in question.

 

[RazorMC]

But that's the point. The US is knowingly funding these groups of individuals who have no interest in Pakistan's prosperity. The US is indirectly helping these imbeciles hold on to power.

 

[VCheng]

But that's the point. The US is knowingly funding these groups of individuals who have no interest in Pakistan's prosperity. The US is indirectly helping these imbeciles hold on to power.

But surely it is up to Pakistan to work for its prosperity, and for its people to choose their government, not anyone else. One cannot fault any other nation for working towards its own national goals. Is that too hard to understand?

 

[RazorMC]

Like I said earlier; I completely agree that it is our duty to ensure better people are elected.

There is no doubt that while the blame lies primarily with us for electing the same crooks time and time again, the American administration cannot be acquitted from the guilt of having a pretty good idea where American tax-payer money is going to end up (white cross, red flag).

It's like an indirect bribe to Pakistan's government officials to see to it that all American demands are met, whether they conflict with Pakistan's national interests or not.

While the educated masses favour good relations with the US, it is clear that we also see through the double-games they play.
Giving out money to Pakistan's corrupt leadership while openly critisizing its military in India.
Enlisting our logistic support in a war and then blaming us of sabotaging the war effort.
Saying that Pakistan is an ally etc etc in the early stages of the campaign and then making it very clear that our services will no longer be needed.
Knowing that only a tiny portion of the population have extremist tendencies yet painting an image in the Western media that all of Pakistan is extremist.

Why all these complications? If the US really considers us as an ally and partner then now is the time to show it. If not, then it has no right to expect Pakistan to bend to American wishes.

 

[VCheng]

....................If the US really considers us as an ally and partner then now is the time to show it. If not, then it has no right to expect Pakistan to bend to American wishes.

Well, now is also the time to show that Pakistan is not the problem that needs to be solved one way or another from USA's point of view. Sometimes it is smarter to bend with the gentle hint of a breeze than be forced to snap in two in a rising gale. But then again, it takes a certain modicum of wisdom to see which way the breeze is blowing, and just how dark the storm clouds on the horizon really are.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Who is this General Wyne , he should be told to get in line , Pakistani Government officials have bigger things to worry about then none sense meetings with American soldiers stuck in Afghanistan

Its not our business , we have local issues to focus on

And any drone strike should be decleration of war

 

[RazorMC]

^^
The problem with a "Declaration of War" is that we simply cannot match a superpower's strength, militarily and economically. Our main course of action should be diplomacy and negotiations. We are not as isolated as the Western media would like us to think and we can use that to get around any US-led sanctions (if it comes to it).

ATM, there is no need for war while we have other options.