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.
Clinton's ranting is in response to the 'preemptive strike' by Kayani, but in terms of effectiveness, given that it is pretty much the same old same old from the US, Clinton's rants are likely not going to amount to much.hmmm... that preemptive strike by Gen Kayani did not work then??
barking dogs seldom bite
Are you with us or against us?
'Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age' Armitage
And carrying out those threats, assuming they are being made currently, will accomplish what exactly for the US in terms of its goals for the region?Dont you remember the old adage?
And more:
Clinton's ranting is in response to the 'preemptive strike' by Kayani, but in terms of effectiveness, given that it is pretty much the same old same old from the US, Clinton's rants are likely not going to amount to much.
Of course it should be noted that Kayani did not make any of those comments publicly - they were made in briefing by the Army leadership to members of parliamentary committees, and any details we have regarding Kayani's comments are from participants in the briefing, and not the military.
Directly involved? No.My question is to all Pakistani members, what if things did not work out and USA decide to attack Pakistan? do you think China will get involve in this war with Pakistan?
My question is to all Pakistani members, what if things did not work out and USA decide to attack Pakistan? do you think China will get involve in this war with Pakistan?
and what happend if India attack at the same time from east?
And carrying out those threats, assuming they are being made currently, will accomplish what exactly for the US in terms of its goals for the region?
Pakistani Army to tamp down the terrorist actions of the Haqqani network that are killing Americans in Afghanistan,
After 9/11, the US was acting in rage and only had one objective - killing OBL and those who supported him - US threats at that time did in fact carry legitimacy since the US had no goals beyond revenge.What US did accompolish while Musharaf was at the helm.....Musharaf caved in and signed on the dotted line.
Here, the similar deal will be cut out to Uncle Sam - albeit different wording.
I did not delete your post - I think it was deleted because of the way in which you phrased the earlier question. This time around your question is more clear.i don't understand why my posts are beign deleted today ? There was no trolling . mods are being extrememly intolerant of indians .
i just asked Agno , what approach according to him will work with Pakistan . i was actually looking forward to an answer , i come back to see if there is an answer but i see my question deleted. What BS is this ?
After 9/11, the US was acting in rage and only had one objective - killing OBL and those who supported him - US threats at that time did in fact carry legitimacy since the US had no goals beyond revenge.
Now, however, OBL is dead and AQ (in terms of its presence in Pakistan and Afghanistan) significantly weakened with the various leaders neutralized by Pakistan, so 'revenge' is no longer a 'goal'.
You might be able to answer my question in my last post if you first try and determine what US objectives in the region currently are - outline those objectives, and then try and answer how military aggression against Pakistan would help achieve them.
---------- Post added at 12:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:41 PM ----------
Stick to the topic please - this thread is not about Indian invasions and whatnot.