Pakistani Officials Visit Washington

[CENTCOM]

Washington – U.S. Army General, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin E. Dempsey attended the meeting held between senior U.S. and Pakistani Officials. Pakistani military officer depicted in the picture above accompanied Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in his four day tour to the United States as both sides prepared to tackle issues and concerns of significance to both countries. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his team have already met with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and are meeting President Obama today to discuss a matters ranging from regional security to energy. As White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has said, “we want to find ways for our two countries to cooperate even as we have differences on some issues, and we want to make sure the trajectory of this relationship is a positive one."

Haroon Ahmad
DET – U.S. Central Command
www.facebook.com/centcomurdu]

 

[Armstrong]

I dunno why we even bother !

The communication should be clear - Take your aid & shove it up your arse, pay for the supply lines (including years of Accrued Expense) & don't blame us if some Tribal happens to come across a MANPAD & the indication of where to use it whenever one of your Drones crosses into Pakistan !

 

[Oldman1]

I dunno why we even bother !

The communication should be clear - Take your aid & shove it up your arse, pay for the supply lines (including years of Accrued Expense) & don't blame us if some Tribal happens to come across a MANPAD & the indication of where to use it whenever one of your Drones crosses into Pakistan !

Don't blame us whenever there are more bombings in mosques and at markets. Just because the Taliban are mad at drones does not mean they should go bombing mosques.

 

[Armstrong]

Don't blame us whenever there are more bombings in mosques and at markets. Just because the Taliban are mad at drones does not mean they should go bombing mosques.

Of course no one is disputing that !

 

[Dillinger]

I dunno why we even bother !

The communication should be clear - Take your aid & shove it up your arse, pay for the supply lines (including years of Accrued Expense) & don't blame us if some Tribal happens to come across a MANPAD & the indication of where to use it whenever one of your Drones crosses into Pakistan !

Umm..bro, your PM specifically lobbied for the aid to continue, ergo the 2 billion greenbacks (as mentioned in the article posted by Aero) that your boots are soon going to get to play with. Its either this or soft loans from the Swedes and the Chinese, or the Paris Chamber (all the places frequented by the Tind and Zardari crowd).

 

[Armstrong]

Umm..bro, your PM specifically lobbied for the aid to continue, ergo the 2 billion greenbacks (as mentioned in the article posted by Aero) that your boots are soon going to get to play with. Its either this or soft loans from the Swedes and the Chinese, or the Paris Chamber (all the places frequented by the Tind and Zardari crowd).

What aid ? The coalition support funds ? That is our money not aid.

Taxing the Americans as it should have happened 10 years ago & can still happen now is worth more than all the Aid & the Coalition Support Fund combined many times over.

 

[Dillinger]

What aid ? The coalition support funds ? That is our money not aid.

Taxing the Americans as it should have happened 10 years ago & can still happen now is worth more than all the Aid & the Coalition Support Fund combined many times over.

Are you sure, don't remember it being released under CSF. But let us say that it is a part of CSF- is your army/administration willing to forego such payments under whichever garb in the future?

What makes you think anyone will be "taxing" the Americans? Nawaz was busy asking the Americans to intervene in Kashmir, you need to then understand that you need leverage over them sans any corresponding leverage in their hand, can you do that?

 

[Armstrong]

Are you sure, don't remember it being released under CSF. But let us say that it is a part of CSF- is your army/administration willing to forego such payments under whichever garb in the future?

What makes you think anyone will be "taxing" the Americans? Nawaz was busy asking the Americans to intervene in Kashmir, you need to then understand that you need leverage over them sans any corresponding leverage in their hand, can you do that?

Who has said anything about foregoing anything ? Its our money for services rendered to the United States as part of the War On Terror. The aid - economic or military - is not our money & they may do with it as they please.

No one will be taxing the Americans but I was referring to what they should do not what they're going to do !

What more leverage does one need than the one we currently enjoy ? They want a solution to the Afghan Problem & they need to get out of the country - On both counts they need us now ! They won't need us in the future.

At any rate leverage isn't required for a principled stance - Keep your aid....just pay-up for using our roads, our ports & our air-space !

 

[Pakistani E]

Gaali bee Amreeka ko, Paisay bhee Amreeka sai.

 

[Dillinger]

Who has said anything about foregoing anything ? Its our money for services rendered to the United States as part of the War On Terror. The aid - economic or military - is not our money & they may do with it as they please.

No one will be taxing the Americans but I was referring to what they should do not what they're going to do !

What more leverage does one need than the one we currently enjoy ? They want a solution to the Afghan Problem & they need to get out of the country - On both counts they need us now ! They won't need us in the future.

At any rate leverage isn't required for a principled stance - Keep your aid....just pay-up for using our roads, our ports & our air-space !

Their whole operation in Af was contingent upon utilization of your GLOC, SLOC and airspace- FOR A DECADE- You had this leverage from day one. What good has it done? Had you wanted you could have permanently turned off the proverbial tap and seen them flounder from day one. What you need to understand is that you are sitting in the IMF's lap, you have loans stretching all the way to the chambers of commerce I just mentioned. Leverage sans any corresponding leverage in the hands of the "opponent" is what I said. When the basics are missing and only one card remains then its bad to go in for high stake poker bro. Musharraf could have sent them packing when they asked for Samshi, when they enforced NRO (which btw largely dictates your political dispensation today), you are looking at one factor and forgetting the fact that they have ten more hooks dug in to you. They start dicking with the vipers for the PAF and that alone will have your military establishment up in arms (and this is when another nation can provide an alternative), think about what happens when THEY decide to turn the tap off. Can you force them to complete the CSF payments, can you force their hand on an issue? What principles, your's, the US's?

So you have your card, and they have theirs'. Here is the question, who is more dependent on the other in relative terms, who has more hooks into each others' flesh? Who has more areas compromised by the other?

 

[Armstrong]

There whole operation in Af was contingent upon utilization of your GLOC, SLOC and airspace- FOR A DECADE- You had this leverage from day one. What good has it done? Had you wanted you could have permanently turned off the proverbial tap and seen them flounder from day one. What you need to understand is that you are sitting in the IMF's lap, you have loans stretching all the way to the chambers of commerce I just mentioned. Leverage sans any corresponding leverage in the hands of the "opponent" is what I said. When the basics are missing and only one card remains then its bad to go in for high stake poker bro. Musharraf could have sent them packing when they asked for Samshi, when they enforced NRO (which btw largely dictates your political dispensation today), you are looking at one factor and forgetting the fact that they have ten more hooks dug in to you. They start dicking with the vipers for the PAF and that alone will have your military establishment up in arms (and this is when another nation can provide an alternative), think about what happens when THEY decide to turn the tap off. Can you force them to complete the CSF payments, can you force their hand on an issue? What principles, your's, the US's?

The GLOC was closed for what 7 months inspite of the loans, the 10 hooks dug into us & the NRO !

 

[Dillinger]

The GLOC was closed for what 7 months inspite of the loans, the 10 hooks dug into us & the NRO !

And the result was? You did read the apology yes? You can differentiate between an ad hoc measure after a terrible transgression and cogent and consistent policy? Did the status quo change, how many conditions did you incorporate when you re-opened the GLOC? Knee jerk reactions don't help, we all engage in them, but they don't help. If you press them and they call your bluff its lights out!

 

[Dillinger]

@Armstrong See at the end of the day @Secur described it better than anyone else could, you're in the middle of a wizard's war and your wand is patched up and cracked.

 

[Armstrong]

And the result was? You did read the apology yes? You can differentiate between an ad hoc measure after a terrible transgression and cogent and consistent policy? Did the status quo change, how many conditions did you incorporate when you re-opened the GLOC? Knee jerk reactions don't help, we all engage in them, but they don't help. If you press them and they call your bluff its lights out!

The apology was irrelevant the symbolism was not - the GLOC closed for those many months along with a suspension in aid to Pakistan & the CSFs & the relentless media campaign that went about 24/7 against us didn't make us shy away from keeping the GLOC closed.

They were pressed & they did fidget with the lights - Nothing major happened ! In the end even they had to give something to receive something in return & we're not talking about an equal transaction here !

And yes we're missing the principle here - This is how it ought to be....not whether it would be ! Not because we can't but because the sorry arsed basterds calling the shots won't - Not because of some economic consideration but because of 'economic considerations' if you know what I mean.

 

[Dillinger]

The apology was irrelevant the symbolism was not - the GLOC closed for those many months along with a suspension in aid to Pakistan & the CSFs & the relentless media campaign that went about 24/7 against us didn't make us shy away from keeping the GLOC closed.

They were pressed & they did fidget with the lights - Nothing major happened ! In the end even they had to give something to receive something in return & we're not talking about an equal transaction here !

And yes we're missing the principle here - This is how it ought to be....not whether it would be ! Not because we can't but because the sorry arsed basterds calling the shots won't - Not because of some economic consideration but because of 'economic considerations' if you know what I mean.

How its ought to be is not how it is, you know this.

Did they not fidget, why was the GLOC opened then without cessation in drone strikes, without a stop on convert activities in Pakistan, without contingent conditions being imposed upon the Americans. You closed the GLOC and they opened it- net result though- zero. Making symbolic stands sans any tangible change on the ground resulting from said stand is good for celebrating idealistic tropes, not so good for cogent policy making. How much money do you want to bet right now that whatever leverage you think you have will either be under-utilized or not at all?

Obviously your leaders have a "stake" and that will also play role.