OBL raid: "No one thought we should ask the Pakistanis -"

[Developereo]

By Pakistani elite, I guess you mean the elected representatives of Pakistani Citizens.. Correct??

More than just the civilian politicians. Many generals would also salivate if the US dangles a few F-16 in front of them.

Is there a denouncement of the ally relationship between Paksitan and USA by either of the 2 govts ??

Many relationships are those of convenience to one degree or another. When interests coincide, there is cooperation. When they don't, there isn't.

 

[Solomon2]

Many relationships are those of convenience to one degree or another. When interests coincide, there is cooperation. When they don't, there isn't.

What you demonstrate, then, is that Pakistan lacks the spirit to be a true ally; the failing is not America's.

 

[AhsanAmin]

Developereo said: ↑
Many relationships are those of convenience to one degree or another. When interests coincide, there is cooperation. When they don't, there isn't.
What you demonstrate, then, is that Pakistan lacks the spirit to be a true ally; the failing is not America's.

As I earlier tried to say since smaller gang does wrong and inhuman things on the insistence of the bigger gang, when the big gang tries to ask the smaller gang to do something very right, it cannot enforce anything on the smaller gang because the smaller gang would reveal the so called "humanity" of the bigger gang which might hurt the bigger gang more than anything else. Here starts the culture of giving bribes and bounties to the smaller gang which is even more profitable for it. Both gangs are partners in everything and reasons for this.

We have a word in urdu, "kana". These gangs are "kanas" of each other.

 

[HAIDER]

Sometime lower ranks play very dirty role and jeopardize national interest without keeping in mind their act is putting the whole nation on verge of destruction......

 

[Chronos]

time to go black beard and get this book, all hail ************.....

 

[FaujHistorian]

What you demonstrate, then, is that Pakistan lacks the spirit to be a true ally; the failing is not America's.

This is incorrect statement in light of views of pak military and government elite that I have heard.
My personal views are different, but then, I am a civilian ordianry man perhaps not too unlike your position in America. We can talk but people in power may give two hoots.

Let me know if it is not true for you.

So from Pak military men and government elite Here are few scenarios for your consideration.

1. How do you think USA would have reacted if UK was selling weapons to Cuba during cuban missile crisis?
2. How do you think UK would have reacted if Australia was arming Argentina during falklands war.

Now contrast this to the game play by USA when it comes to India and Pakistan's intense rivalry. While Pakistan was HUGE ally during commie invasion of Afghanistan, Indian army went ahead and occupied Siachin.

And US just stood around and did nothing to warn India to take miltiary out of the glaciar and use negotiated settlement.
Many in top echelons in Pak government think about special civilian nuclear deal with India as a nutcase move by USA. while not even offering something similar to Pakistan perhaps with more safegaurds.

There was no need to involve India in Afghanistan at all. USA should have known that in the 40 and 50s Indian supported Afghanistani government's anti-Pakistan rhetoric.

So as per these ruling elite of Pakistan,

When you chose allies

then you do not chose your ally's sworn enemy as your ally too.

There are times you have to make choices,

And USA has consistently failed in making sure not to take precautionary measures.


so my friend,

you can find many examples of Pakistan deceiving USA

But as per the ruling elite of Pakistan Americans like yourself tend to ignore 100s more when Pakistan totally helped USA.


So I urge you that as an American you should try to limit such accusatory threads

and in order to safegaurd American interests in the region, try to spread the message of hope and friendship.

Hope you understand.

peace

 

[ssethii]

What you demonstrate, then, is that Pakistan lacks the spirit to be a true ally; the failing is not America's.

Does "Do More" comply to "Lick our Boots".

 

[Khan_patriot]

 

[Developereo]

What you demonstrate, then, is that Pakistan lacks the spirit to be a true ally; the failing is not America's.

Alliances are formed when both sides have their interests aligned.

Pakistan's primary interest in Afghanistan is to deny India a launchpad for anti-Pakistan activities. If the US had taken Pakistan's concerns on board, it would have found a very willing ally, since, contrary to popular fiction, Pakistan would prefer the US any day over the Taliban. By denying -- even scorning -- Pakistan's concerns, the US sabotaged its own campaign. Ex-CIA man Michael Scheuer is one of the few Americans who gets it.

The problem is that the US policy wonks mixed up two conflicting campaigns: the WOT campaign and the China-containment campaign. As part of the latter campaign, they tried installing India as the regional hegemon in Afghanistan (and, indirectly, the CARs). This move all but guaranteed Pakistan's response.

The irony is that the US screwed up both campaigns: the Taliban remain the single most dominant domestic player in Afghanistan, and India has failed to establish any hegemony in the region.

 

[Infoman]

"No one thought we should ask the Pakistanis for help or permission. In every instance when we had provided a heads-up to the Pakistani military or intelligence services, the target was forewarned and fled, or the Pakistanis went after the target unilaterally, prematurely, and unsuccessfully."

Gates, Robert M (2014-01-14). Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War (Kindle Locations 9868-9871). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

I feel bad for Pakistan as they had nothing to do with 9-11 it is the Zionist Jews who did 9-11 and Put the blame on others. Only Israel benefitted from 9-11

 

[Solomon2]

1. How do you think USA would have reacted if UK was selling weapons to Cuba during cuban missile crisis?

Probably what the U.S. thought when Attlee sold the Soviets the jet engines that became the foundation of their post-WWII fighter force: "Gee, what dopes! This is going to cost us a lot in money and American lives."

How do you think UK would have reacted if Australia was arming Argentina during falklands war.

Unlike Pakistan which abandoned its Crown status in the 1950s, while the UK and Aus are different countries they answer to the same sovereign. I'm not sure if the UK would then class selling weapons to Argentina during the Falklands War as treason or as stupidity.

A real example was the Exocet anti-ship missile, renowned for sinking and damaging several British ships during the conflict. It was built by both the France and Britain and sold to Argentina. The British support crews departed, but the French remained, while the Brits were reduced to gnashing their teeth.

Now contrast this to the game play by USA when it comes to India and Pakistan's intense rivalry. While Pakistan was HUGE ally during commie invasion of Afghanistan, Indian army went ahead and occupied Siachin.

America was Pakistan's ally far more than Pakistan was America's:

"...I was there principally because the ISI was stalling on providing our new Stinger antiaircraft missiles and other supplies to the Tajiks of the Panjshir Valley and other non-Pashtuns fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. It was the Pakistanis who decided which mujahideen groups— which warlords— got our weapons. CIA could cajole and exert pressure, but President Muhammad Zia ul-Haq and the ISI were the “deciders.” "

Gates, Robert M (2014-01-14). Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War (Kindle Locations 6070-6073). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.​

As for Siachin: the only reason why the Indians acted first was because they caught wind that the Pak Army was going to do the same. The U.S.was out of the loop.

And US just stood around and did nothing to warn India to take miltiary out of the glaciar and use negotiated settlement.

A more sensible response would be to ignore any small outpost until the supporting side got tired of the logistical and manpower cost and withdrew from the glacier. Perhaps announce publicly that Pakistan denied the outpost represented an Indian claim to a poorly-mapped area. It was dumb of both India and Pakistan to rush to conflict over it.

There was no need to involve India in Afghanistan at all. USA should have known that in the 40 and 50s Indian supported Afghanistani government's anti-Pakistan rhetoric.

Gates doesn't mention India in the context of Afghanistan at all, save for a quoted wild speech where Karzai claimed that the Indians thought the U.S. might be to blame for the "'radicalization' of the Pashtuns."

So as per these ruling elite of Pakistan,
When you chose allies
then you do not chose your ally's sworn enemy as your ally too.

If you rely on lies and misinformation, it's no wonder that you make bad choices.

But as per the ruling elite of Pakistan Americans like yourself tend to ignore 100s more when Pakistan totally helped USA.

Examples, pleez.

So I urge you that as an American you should try to limit such accusatory threads
and in order to safegaurd American interests in the region, try to spread the message of hope and friendship.
Hope you understand.

Then the relationship can only remain transactional without building further trust. This contest of values and strategic outlooks has to be played out for that to change, I think.

 

[FaujHistorian]

.....

"...I was there principally because the ISI was stalling on providing our new Stinger antiaircraft missiles and other supplies to the Tajiks of the Panjshir Valley and other non-Pashtuns fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. It was the Pakistanis who decided which mujahideen groups— which warlords— got our weapons. CIA could cajole and exert pressure, but President Muhammad Zia ul-Haq and the ISI were the “deciders.” "..​

In your haste to play blame game, you are (and not Bob Gates) trying to cheat both USA and Pakistan from their victory against commies.

And coming from someone with American flags, is a shame.

If you are that biased, then how could every convince you otherwise?

I have the same problem while opposing and countering misinformation spread by Islamists and Talibarbarians.


peace to you​

Alliances are formed when both sides have their interests aligned.

Pakistan's primary interest in Afghanistan is to deny India a launchpad for anti-Pakistan activities. If the US had taken Pakistan's concerns on board, it would have found a very willing ally, since, contrary to popular fiction, Pakistan would prefer the US any day over the Taliban. By denying -- even scorning -- Pakistan's concerns, the US sabotaged its own campaign. Ex-CIA man Michael Scheuer is one of the few Americans who gets it.

The problem is that the US policy wonks mixed up two conflicting campaigns: the WOT campaign and the China-containment campaign. As part of the latter campaign, they tried installing India as the regional hegemon in Afghanistan (and, indirectly, the CARs). This move all but guaranteed Pakistan's response.

The irony is that the US screwed up both campaigns: the Taliban remain the single most dominant domestic player in Afghanistan, and India has failed to establish any hegemony in the region.

As per my contacts in military and government of Pak,

this is the problem when USA decided to be in two boats (India and Pakistan) at the same time.

Giving $2 billion a year to Pakistan was never going to help USA's miscalculation of including India into Afghanistan conflict.

There was no need for this. No need at all.

One of the biggest goof up



peace


p.s. My view of this sordid affair USA-India-Afghanistan is being overplayed in Pakistan. India can do whatever in Afghanistan, Afgahanistanis consider Indians as old slaves. They will take Indian money and at the first instance will fork it like Nadir Shah.

It is the mentality that is working here.

Indians are $tupid to throw money or resources in Afghanistan.

But their hate for Pakistan makes them make bad decisions in Afghanistan

Does "Do More" comply to "Lick our Boots".

I think you are following marxist agenda like so many Pakistani mediamen.

sadly

 

[BATMAN]

If US shay they didn't asked the than President because he always demand commission, i can believe it.

 

[Developereo]

p.s. My view of this sordid affair USA-India-Afghanistan is being overplayed in Pakistan. India can do whatever in Afghanistan, Afgahanistanis consider Indians as old slaves. They will take Indian money and at the first instance will fork it like Nadir Shah.

It is the mentality that is working here.

Indians are $tupid to throw money or resources in Afghanistan.

But their hate for Pakistan makes them make bad decisions in Afghanistan

Indians are anything but stupid.

All they need to do is to encourage some Afghans' obsession with Greater Afghanistan and rejection of the Durand Line. A simmering conflict which divides Pak army's attention to the western front, and where Afghanistan continues to provide sanctuary to TTP fugitives, is India's plan and Pakistan's nightmare.

Control of Afghanistan also paves their way into the CARs via Iran's ChahBahar port.

Denying Indian control of Afghanistan is crucial to Pakistan's regional strategy and the Americans' cluelessness of this fact shows the abject incompetence of their diplomatic corps.

For a reigning hyperpower, America's diplomatic bungling stands in start contrast to their military and economic power.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Indians are anything but stupid.

All they need to do is to encourage some Afghans' obsession with Greater Afghanistan and rejection of the Durand Line. A simmering conflict which divides Pak army's attention to the western front, and where Afghanistan continues to provide sanctuary to TTP fugitives, is India's plan and Pakistan's nightmare.

Control of Afghanistan also paves their way into the CARs via Iran's ChahBahar port.

I wish it was so

The whole CAR market is not more than one or may two large Pakistani/Indian cities.

Return on investment for CAR is practically zero for both Pakistan and India.




Afghanistan now is so bifurcated that any upheaval in KP will lead to an utter control of Afghanistan by Pakistani Pashtuns.

I mean 30+ million Pakistani Pashtuns can easily overwhelm 20 million Afghans.

why?

Pakistani Pashtuns are now miles ahead of Afghanisgtanis in both education, military training, and business.

I'll see the day when Afgthanistanis will be clamoring for merging with KP

I shall see it sir



peace