Pakistanis are not contracted troops, says PM

[ajpirzada]

there is a term called cooperation.
but you dont know the meanin of that. only relation u are interested in boss-servant relation.
what other price do u want us to pay after we have fucked our economy and are loosin lives on daily basis. only bec we supported u in ur agenda.
tool and money which you have provided, is it more than our total economci loss of $60bn? no its not. not even close. forget about the loss of life.
so bring urselves on equal grounds if u want us to cooperate or all ull get is frustration.

 

[Solomon2]

there is a term called cooperation. but you dont know the meanin of that. only relation u are interested in boss-servant relation.

Pakistan is the boss and the U.S. and Britain exist to serve its needs, that much is clear. I do not think the Pakistani FM wishes to lower himself to "equal grounds".

 

[ajpirzada]

Pakistan is the boss and the U.S. and Britain exist to serve its needs, that much is clear. I do not think the Pakistani FM wishes to lower himself to "equal grounds".

so what needs have u guys served so far? except for shiftin the war to our country.
and making us destroy our economy for few billion dollars which again come with many strings and through ur aid agencies.
please i wanna know what gud have u done to us. enlighten me

ur bad outweighs ur gud by a big margin.

 

[Hulk]

there is a term called cooperation.
but you dont know the meanin of that. only relation u are interested in boss-servant relation.
what other price do u want us to pay after we have fucked our economy and are loosin lives on daily basis. only bec we supported u in ur agenda.
tool and money which you have provided, is it more than our total economci loss of $60bn? no its not. not even close. forget about the loss of life.
so bring urselves on equal grounds if u want us to cooperate or all ull get is frustration.

You have still not answered my question, if you are fighting your own war then why are you asking for money and free weapons for it. To some extent asking for weapons is ok, but why reimbursement.

 

[Solomon2]

ur bad outweighs ur gud by a big margin.

So give us the boot! I'm sure China will be happy to serve Pakistani needs.

For a price, of course. But in China's case, budget matters, while politicized, don't need to be made public. Which do you prefer?

 

[waraich66]

Why Mr PM you are providing logistic support and passage to ISAF supplies and drone attacks permits????? how many dollars you are getting due to these facilities ??????

What you will do if US will not satisfy with your performance ??????

 

[air marshal]

Pakistan not acting as mercenary in war on terror: Gilani

ISLAMABAD, Dec 4 (APP): Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani said that Pakistan is fighting war against terror in its own interest and strongly rejected the notion that it was being carried out on any other country’s behest.

“We are not mercenaries or service providers either, and nobody has to judge our performance,” the Prime Minister said in an interview with BBC in London before concluding his four-day official visit to the United Kingdom and Germany. “One thing I tell you, this is our own war and we are fighting it for the interest of our own country,” he categorically added.

On US President Barack Obama’s new Afghanistan war strategy, the Prime Minister said he wanted “more clarity” from Americans in this regard before his country could take action on it. Gilani appreciated Obama’s intentions about the security and prosperity of Pakistan, however said his government was studying the US plan to send 30,000 extra troops to Afghanistan and also examining its implications on Pakistan.

“We would likely to see what precisely would be [the policy’s] impact on Pakistan,” he said. He said Pakistan had very close cooperation on defence and intelligence side with the United States, and hoped that “it would be taken care of.” The Prime Minister said he had apprehensions that the surge of 30,000 troops in Afghanistan’s Helmand province would result into militants’ influx to Balochistan province.

“But one thing is clear, we cannot afford losing, because it is our own war and a stable Afghanistan is in the interest of Pakistan,” he stressed. He reiterated that Pakistan had the resolve to fight terrorism because failing in Afghanistan would have bad impact on Pakistan.

Gilani said his government was following the exit policy in Pakistan as he believed that military actions were not solution to the problems. He said whenever writ of the government is challenged, there arises a need to take military action in Pakistan.

“But as far as Afghanistan is concerned, yes there has to be an exit strategy,” the Prime Minister said, while appreciating the building of institutions in Afghanistan as a “positive thing”.

When asked why Pakistan did not go after Mullah Omar, Gilani said, “If any credible and actionable information will be passed to Pakistan, we are ready to act.” He mentioned the “excellent intelligence cooperation” with the United States which he said would greatly help in capturing the militants.

About the claims of the US and UK regarding presence of Al Qaeda leadership in Pakistan, the Prime Minister said if there was some credible information, Prime Minister Gordon Brown should have shared with him during the meeting at 10 Downing Street.

He mentioned while addressing joint press conference, the same question was asked to Brown and the answer was not the same. However, he said, “We want to work together. We want more intelligence sharing with UK and with US and I am sure when we will be working together, we can resolve the issue.”

When asked about US’ categorical statements that Osama bin Laden and Aimen Al-Zawahri were inside Pakistan, Gilani said, “They never ever passed any credible information [on this] to Pakistan.”

He said it was not the question of whose intelligence was right, however said he only had the domestic information and intelligence to depend upon. “I can depend only on my intelligence. If they have some information, they should share with us,” he said.

 

[Awesome]

‘We are not contracted troops for others to assess our performance.’

OK, on the one hand Pakistan tells the West, "Give us the tools and we'll finish the job." and on the other hand it tells them, "You can give us the tools, but you're not allowed to care about what we do with them."

Yes, you get paid for them.

 

[PAFAce]

Well, I assume things from what I go through on Internet, including this forum.

Just have a look around and you will see how many Pakistani members, moderators and think tanks think USA should go back from Pakistan. Also, the all time favorite - Zaid Hamid thinks so. I have seen many videos in which common people express anger against USA. But I accept that I may be wrong if the only the videos having such views were uploaded.

Please correct me if I am on wrong path. But at the same time, I hope you have the explanation for Stealth thanking every anti-American post!

Regards, Balance.

Stealth, and a few other members here, represent half of Pakistan for you? And how did you think that wanting the US to get out of Pakistan is equivalent to the PA fighting the US' war?

Should I judge "half of" India by the comments of a few Indian members on this board who live for Pakistan's destruction?

Please explain.

‘We are not contracted troops for others to assess our performance.’

OK, on the one hand Pakistan tells the West, "Give us the tools and we'll finish the job." and on the other hand it tells them, "You can give us the tools, but you're not allowed to care about what we do with them."

That is one way to put it. Another way to put it is, "give us the tools to fight this problem, the problem you brought on us by invading our neighbors without planning, and sit back and reap the rewards of our fighting men and civilians dying because of what you've done". When, 8 years after the war began, your President has the need to explain a "new" strategy, and your highest ranking Officer in Afghanistan has to say "this is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end", then surely, you have no right to complain if we say let us do our job our way.

You talk like you haven't benefited from our fight in our Western region. Well, those in the know, those who you trust you to win this war, will never deny that fact. Your President, your Chief in Afghanistan, even the head of your prime intelligence agency have said openly that Afghanistan cannot be won without Pakistan's support. The quote "CIA gets it's money's worth from the ISI", I believe, explains it rather well.

And yet, a disturbing majority of your country thinks that you've been providing us with charity all these years. I don't know what would give them this idea, except, oh yeah, that's what I heard on Fox the other day. Some stupid "van Venter" lady claiming "we've been giving them billions in aid with a few strings attached and they still are unwilling to help". Yeah, wanting full access to our nuclear program is just "strings attached".

 

[Slides]

And yet, a disturbing majority of your country thinks that you've been providing us with charity all these years. I don't know what would give them this idea, except, oh yeah, that's what I heard on Fox the other day. Some stupid "van Venter" lady claiming "we've been giving them billions in aid with a few strings attached and they still are unwilling to help". Yeah, wanting full access to our nuclear program is just "strings attached".

Bingo. Apparently NATO is supplying it's forces through air ships from Europe.

 

[ajpirzada]

You have still not answered my question, if you are fighting your own war then why are you asking for money and free weapons for it. To some extent asking for weapons is ok, but why reimbursement.

answer to ur question again lies in the word of cooperation.
goin back to 2001. it was not our war. but we screwed up and decided to cooperate. now knowin that we are a developin country, it is quite obvious we dont have extra funds. secondly this reimbursement also includes port fees and other services they have been using.

 

[ajpirzada]

So give us the boot! I'm sure China will be happy to serve Pakistani needs.

For a price, of course. But in China's case, budget matters, while politicized, don't need to be made public. Which do you prefer?

no doubt ill go the chinease way.
ur views dont help me wipe out our gud history with china

 

[Hulk]

no doubt ill go the chinease way.
ur views dont help me wipe out our gud history with china

Thx for your answer on my last question. I have one more, China being the best friend of Pakistan, how much are they helping in Aid.

 

[normalindiancitizen]

The PM of Pakistan only said what the PM of any self respcting nation would. And about the fight about money and getting paid. There may be some justification in expecting some return from Pakistan for the aid they are receiving because ultimately it is directly helpful to them too, but expecting them to behave like slaves to every western wish would be stupid.

See its like this, If I live in a house and my neighbour is a criminal or just he is a threat to me too. But I may not today be so strong financially today to tackle him nor may this particular problem be on the top of my priority list, but if the local rich businessman wishes the criminal to be eliminated or his activities restricted, and appeals to me, then I have the full right to ask him for re-imbursement because I am putting aside my priorities, and taking up his fight( cause unlike my priority list, the criminal is probably on the top of the rich man's priority list). That it helps me too is just a by product. But just because I am helping the rich man does not give him th right to ask me what ever he wishes for, nor am i required to giv in to him.....
Pardon my analogy, its a bit weird but these are my views on this topic

 

[Thomas]

Thx for your answer on my last question. I have one more, China being the best friend of Pakistan, how much are they helping in Aid.

How much does China help any country with aid? They are not much on giving. The U.S. on the other hand gives more in foreign aid then many countries have in GDP.