S-2
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2007
- Messages
- 4,210
- Reaction score
- 0
I appreciate Energon's comments. They point to our aid as a bonus.
The righteous stance would be to tell us to go screw ourselves and our accountants. The money's not important as reimbursement and doesn't remotely reflect your true costs anyway.
Then you could start afresh. A time-out, if you will.
I'm sure everybody else will wait while you catch your breath.
Now, personally, I believe that all nations bear the responsibility and costs for their self-defense. It's ludicrous to expect others to do so and defies the logic behind "self-defense". The question is whether you believe that your nation is under attack from within or not.
I find this a distractor. I'm sure that the money will be paid. I've no doubt that we're reminded as much constantly. I think that it's a bad policy to demand reimbursement. Such connotes a freely-entered agreement for an exchange of goods and services for payment (possibly at some profit).
That conveys an awful message to your population which suggests that you've a choice here and elect to assist us when they'd clearly prefer that Pakistan NOT do so, particularly at a loss far in excess of your reimbursement.
Here's a thought-why don't you tell your nation that you're at war. Really at war. Draft next. Mobilization. Tell them who you've determined is your enemy and where. Then tell them what you intend doing. Tell them that you hope your allies will assist in every way possible to include sending money, equipment, advisors and trainers-as AID.
But we're going to be sorta rough on FATA and NWFP/Baluchistan for awhile.
Boy! Won't that go over well?
How about you settle down and let the accountants do their book-keeping thingy? It'll get worked out and, until then, console yourselves that you've spent money on saintly deeds and public "clean-up" projects inside your community.
For the most part, those rupees stayed home.
The righteous stance would be to tell us to go screw ourselves and our accountants. The money's not important as reimbursement and doesn't remotely reflect your true costs anyway.
Then you could start afresh. A time-out, if you will.
I'm sure everybody else will wait while you catch your breath.
Now, personally, I believe that all nations bear the responsibility and costs for their self-defense. It's ludicrous to expect others to do so and defies the logic behind "self-defense". The question is whether you believe that your nation is under attack from within or not.
I find this a distractor. I'm sure that the money will be paid. I've no doubt that we're reminded as much constantly. I think that it's a bad policy to demand reimbursement. Such connotes a freely-entered agreement for an exchange of goods and services for payment (possibly at some profit).
That conveys an awful message to your population which suggests that you've a choice here and elect to assist us when they'd clearly prefer that Pakistan NOT do so, particularly at a loss far in excess of your reimbursement.
Here's a thought-why don't you tell your nation that you're at war. Really at war. Draft next. Mobilization. Tell them who you've determined is your enemy and where. Then tell them what you intend doing. Tell them that you hope your allies will assist in every way possible to include sending money, equipment, advisors and trainers-as AID.
But we're going to be sorta rough on FATA and NWFP/Baluchistan for awhile.
Boy! Won't that go over well?
How about you settle down and let the accountants do their book-keeping thingy? It'll get worked out and, until then, console yourselves that you've spent money on saintly deeds and public "clean-up" projects inside your community.
For the most part, those rupees stayed home.