El Sidd
ELITE MEMBER
![](/styles/default/xenforo/ranks/FieldMarshal.jpg)
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2017
- Messages
- 67,587
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Jab tak choona bikta hai
paint ki demand nhi ayi abhi![]()
distemper paint ya oil paint?
wallpaper laga rahen hain Afghan border pe...wo kaam aega
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Jab tak choona bikta hai
paint ki demand nhi ayi abhi![]()
No. the US wants a satellite Afghanistan to contain Russia, China and Pakistan.The difficulty is that the two countries are pursuing different endgames: the U.S. wants a an independent and prosperous Afghanistan existing under rule-of-law while Pakistan seeks a satellite Afghanistan under the sway of its own pet Talibs; Pakistan remains wedded to the strategy that incubated 9/11.
Thus Pakistan opposes any reconciliation with the Taliban that leads to peace in a Afghanistan absent of Pakistani political domination. As if economic influence wasn't enough! Really, this looks like the product of a military mindset unobstructed by political moderation: dominate or be dominated, etc. Afghanistan's problems are rooted in Pakistan's issues, so the emphasis should be there. Probably the only weak lever the U.S. exercises is to cut off the flow of U.S. "aid" but it seems that Pakistan is both the arsonist and firefighter so the U.S. has been afraid to take that step.
So far.
first of all, what a joke! a person belonging to an illegitimate, genocidal state is criticizing Pakistan for pursuing its interests.The difficulty is that the two countries are pursuing different endgames: the U.S. wants a an independent and prosperous Afghanistan existing under rule-of-law while Pakistan seeks a satellite Afghanistan under the sway of its own pet Talibs; Pakistan remains wedded to the strategy that incubated 9/11.
Thus Pakistan opposes any reconciliation with the Taliban that leads to peace in a Afghanistan absent of Pakistani political domination. As if economic influence wasn't enough! Really, this looks like the product of a military mindset unobstructed by political moderation: dominate or be dominated, etc. Afghanistan's problems are rooted in Pakistan's issues, so the emphasis should be there. Probably the only weak lever the U.S. exercises is to cut off the flow of U.S. "aid" but it seems that Pakistan is both the arsonist and firefighter so the U.S. has been afraid to take that step.
So far.
Afghanistan's problems are rooted in USA's issues, so the emphasis should be there.Afghanistan's problems are rooted in Pakistan's issues, so the emphasis should be there. Probably the only weak lever the U.S. exercises is to cut off the flow of U.S. "aid" but it seems that Pakistan is both the arsonist and firefighter so the U.S. has been afraid to take that step.
Exactly my point, forget the Zionist kike, he is just an idiot.@Solomon2 is a pathetic troll , stop feeding his bullshit guys by enabling him, ignorance is the best policy when encountared with propoganda....
Pakistan also wants a prosperous Afghanistan and be like US to Canada, tried it in 2004 when Pakistan offered weapon and training to ANA but then USA doesn't want Pakistan's influence on Afghanistan and thus forced Karzai to make connection with india, which is not in Pakistan's favor therefore Pakistan has to look for a power in Afghanistan that is friendly toward Pakistan. If USA want's Pakistan to be on their side, they must put and end to Indian presence in Afghanistan.The difficulty is that the two countries are pursuing different endgames: the U.S. wants a an independent and prosperous Afghanistan existing under rule-of-law while Pakistan seeks a satellite Afghanistan under the sway of its own pet Talibs; Pakistan remains wedded to the strategy that incubated 9/11.
Exactly, USA does not want Pakistani influence in Afghanistan.Pakistan also wants a prosperous Afghanistan and be like US to Canada, tried it in 2004 when Pakistan offered weapon and training to ANA but then USA doesn't want Pakistan's influence on Afghanistan and thus forced Karzai to make connection with india, which is not in Pakistan's favor therefore Pakistan has to look for a power in Afghanistan that is friendly toward Pakistan. If USA want's Pakistan to be on their side, they must put and end to Indian presence in Afghanistan.
Propaganda is countered with Logic
Ignorance is stupidity and follishness and a state adopted by weak minds...
The difficulty is that the two countries are pursuing different endgames: the U.S. wants a an independent and prosperous Afghanistan existing under rule-of-law while Pakistan seeks a satellite Afghanistan under the sway of its own pet Talibs; Pakistan remains wedded to the strategy that incubated 9/11.
Thus Pakistan opposes any reconciliation with the Taliban that leads to peace in a Afghanistan absent of Pakistani political domination. As if economic influence wasn't enough! Really, this looks like the product of a military mindset unobstructed by political moderation: dominate or be dominated, etc. Afghanistan's problems are rooted in Pakistan's issues, so the emphasis should be there. Probably the only weak lever the U.S. exercises is to cut off the flow of U.S. "aid" but it seems that Pakistan is both the arsonist and firefighter so the U.S. has been afraid to take that step.
So far.
Don't you think that by 2004 the U.S. could no longer "force" Karzai to do anything?Pakistan also wants a prosperous Afghanistan and be like US to Canada, tried it in 2004 when Pakistan offered weapon and training to ANA but then USA doesn't want Pakistan's influence on Afghanistan and thus forced Karzai -
I don't have access to any secrets but other than that if you have specific criticisms go ahead and make them, otherwise you're mocking without any basis.And a ZIONIST yehudi has all facts and truths before him to deliberate cliched statement?
I'm a pro-Zionist American. That Israel is labelled "an illegitimate, genocidal state" in defiance of facts (and dictionaries) by political diktat is one of Pakistan's problems.first of all, what a joke! a person belonging to an illegitimate, genocidal state is criticizing Pakistan for pursuing its interests.
That is what UNSCR 1373 denies: it says that a member-state's sovereignty is null if another nation attacks terror groups on its territory. If the U.S. "switches" to supporting India, the Indians may be emboldened to take action against terror bases in Pakistan. Then Pakistan can either escalate the battle (without U.S. or Chinese support) or else yield to India's will. Pakistan might possibly keep the terror camps aimed at Afghanistan but will lose those it operates in support of Kashmir. Is that the outcome Pakistan really wants?
By your logic Pakistan have right to attack Afghanistan and India to take out terrorists support.
Why won't Pakistan pursue a good-neighbor policy, like the U.S. has with Canada? Military thinking would demand each face the other armed to the teeth but the politicians control and it is their job to evaluate the key question of intent. And over 150 years ago they determined there was no need for quarreling and the relations have been friendly ever since.