The growing agitation of Pakistanis against USA

[haviZsultan]

We've pissed away enough tax dollars on Afghanistan and Pakistan now you guys are on your own we killed OBL idk why we're still in Afghanistan i guess we don't want a rapid repeat of Saigon (although it is inevitable) time to get the hell out of there and be spectators.

Thank God... at least someone there sees things the way I do. Then vote for Ron Paul. No one wants you here nor do a lot of Americans want to be there with their troops dying in the desert. Time to pack up and go home and let these people decide their own future. Plus we secularists looked up to you guys and we feel betrayed. Time to pack and leave us Pakistanis alone.

 

[muse]

I do not believe we should forget the points I mentioned

Havi:

I did not mean to suggest that we forget these, quite the contrary - whereas you have highlighted specifics, I had focused on what I thought was a canopy which the specifics you mentioned, play out.

 

[TruthSeeker]

From muse's last post quotation:

"At the same time, the depredations that the people are suffering at the hands of an incompetent, corrupt elite coalition, make the democratic structure vulnerable to mass political pressure mounted by a demagogue with the facility of what Boris Pasternak called the “tyranny of the glamorous phrase”."

-----------------------------------

Does Imran Khan fit this "warning" of a demagogue potentially arising in current Pakistani politics?

 

[haviZsultan]

Now for my final post in this thread unless there is a good response.

The US-Pakistan relationship today is held only and only by one glue and that is the war on terror. To be more specific Pakistan's unquestioned subservience and our acceptance of US as a Godfather.

If we seek the point where are views converge we will find that there are no such points. Let us take a look into this glue that binds us into this uneasy relationship. It is the war on terror. But even within this war there are differing interests. The US wants to ensure attacks do not occur on its forces in Afghanistan. Pakistan (should be) wishing to ensure attacks do not occur on its people and bombings and attacks are stopped. Therefore US is interested in Haqqani, Gul Bahadur, Bahawal Khan and Hekmatyar and a number of smaller groups as well. Pakistan's primary enemy is the TTP and other groups like LEJ, IMU and other movements that support it. So you see we have totally differing interests in the war.

Now look beyond the war on terror and at some of the points I raised.

-US wants to set up India as a possible bulwark against China-Pakistan wants to be at a competitive standing with India and does not want its only reliable ally encircled (nuke deal, offer of better F16's)
-US wants to ensure Pakistan remains a shadow state of India-Pakistan does not want this and there is a feeling India may be being treated differentially than Pakistan. (nuke deal, offer of better F16's, Presler)
-US does not want Pakistan being a nuclear power while it accepts India with the nuclear deal as a responsible nuclear power-Pakistan seeks nuclear weapons as a deterrent to India (nuke deal, presler amendment against Pakistan)
-US wants a relationship with Pakistan with no tags-Pakistan wants US to have no deals with India and favor us in disputes (Siachen/Kargil, nuke deal, F16 offer)
-US does not care about its soil being used by TTP but cares about any attack emanating from Pakistan-Pakistan wants Fazlullah down. (Fazlullah in Kunar, Faqir Muhammad's escape to Afghanistan when Bajur was cleared)
-US does not care about support to dictators as long as its task is done-Pakistani people are sick of dictators.
-US wants to be the dominant partner in this relationship-Pakistan wants a relationship that is equal (Afia-Davis case)

So basically when interests of nations differ so much you do not sign alliances with such nations but seek new ones. I don't know why or how I resemble an Islamist when I say this since I am committed to secularism. These things I mentioned are the reason of the biases Pakistan suffers. I have given examples of this before and will not go into this. But I do not see what Pakistanis are expecting. US is going to come out on top by breaking the relationship when it wants. That is after its departure from Afghanistan. In the end we will part ways and the last time we parted ways after the Afghan-Soviet war we had to pay a price with the Presler amendment. We may have to pay it again. I do not know why I am the only one with the cognizance to realize this but eventually it will happen.

I know Shukrijumah and many innocents today lie in US jails, I know US betrayed my nation by supporting the Indians at Siachen and not us in Kargil, I know about the nuke deal with India and the same one refused to Pakistan. I know about further secret dealings with India too. This isn't an equal relationship. It is foreign policy surrender by Pakistan. Pakistan and USA's only glue is the war on terror where they need us. That ends and Pakistan is on a lonely road yet again. China can be the bulwark of a strong foreign policy.

 

[muse]

Havi

I think we need to do more work to make people understand, and especially people in the US, that it is their own best interests to move away from the kind of relations we have had or rather have, towards relations in which commerce and civilization or culture are first and foremost - after all why would you want a security relationship with country with which your commercial and cultural relations were not just under developed but where in huge chunks of the populations have any number of misconceptions of the culture and intentions of the other?

More pople in the US have to think, whom would you trust? Generals who looking to take you for a ride? politicians who seek to rob the treasury and run away to the West? Or deep commercial relations in which civil society has investment and makes a profit on both sides, and where in you have a civil cultural discourse and exchange??

 

[FaujHistorian]

Havi

I think we need to do more work to make people understand, and especially people in the US, that it is their own best interests to move away from the kind of relations we have had or rather have, towards relations in which commerce and civilization or culture are first and foremost - after all why would you want a security relationship with country with which your commercial and cultural relations were not just under developed but where in huge chunks of the populations have any number of misconceptions of the culture and intentions of the other?

More pople in the US have to think, whom would you trust? Generals who looking to take you for a ride? politicians who seek to rob the treasury and run away to the West? Or deep commercial relations in which civil society has investment and makes a profit on both sides, and where in you have a civil cultural discourse and exchange??

This is never either/or situtation.

civilian relationship leads (or could lead) to military cooperation.

And

military relationship leads (or could lead) to civilian cooperation.


as we all know, military work is more risky to the people involved. So the charges for military work are 10 to 100 times higher.

Case in point. An outsourced call center employee in Gurgaon can be placed for civilian work at the rate of say $10-20 per hour .

An outsourced army solider posted in Afghan theater is typically costing Americans anywhere between $100-$1000.



Now you guys can see that anyone rejecting military outsourcing contract is pound foolish (in fact tone foolish).



However military contracts run from 5-10 years. Then there is a break of 5-10 years.

This lull in military activity must be filled by civilian outsourcing.


the tragedy in Pakistan is that we do the military cooperation for 5-10 years.

then don't prepare in advance to fill the gap with civilian work.

Instead we sit on our behinds and shout and f@rt against the very Americans who paid us the asking sum.

Instead of appreciating the military work, and using it as a leverage to tell Americans--

---- Hey we worked so nicely on military stuff, please give us more civilian work

We go on tirades against them, yell at them, froth at our mouths,

And make it absolutely impossible for the American civilian businessmen to come work in Pakistan.


This is nothing but Socialist, communist, and now Islamist yelling

that has consistently destroyed civilian cooperation between Americans and Pakistanis.

This is why we kick out Americans as soon as their military contracts are over.


So my dear think tanks, use your head and try to figure out our own mistakes before going to Americans and telling them what's wrong with them.


peace

p.s. American military has been begging us to set up permanent joint ventures. The only thing we have to do is keep our nuclear fangs hidden (like Israel). We should have kept totally quite about our nuclear assets. Let the world guess. Indians knew it and so did Americans. The only thing our $tupid explosions did was that now people in Timbaktu know about it. What the heck did we gain from telling timbaktu-ins that we have nuki toys. Nothing!

 

[muse]

This is never either/or situtation.

civilian relationship leads (or could lead) to military cooperation.

And

military relationship leads (or could lead) to civilian cooperation.


as we all know, military work is more risky to the people involved. So the charges for military work are 10 to 100 times higher.

Case in point. An outsourced call center employee in Gurgaon can be placed for civilian work at the rate of say $10-20 per hour .

An outsourced army solider posted in Afghan theater is typically costing Americans anywhere between $100-$1000.



Now you guys can see that anyone rejecting military outsourcing contract is pound foolish (in fact tone foolish).



However military contracts run from 5-10 years. Then there is a break of 5-10 years.

This lull in military activity must be filled by civilian outsourcing.


the tragedy in Pakistan is that we do the military cooperation for 5-10 years.

then don't prepare in advance to fill the gap with civilian work.

Instead we sit on our behinds and shout and f@rt against the very Americans who paid us the asking sum.

Instead of appreciating the military work, and using it as a leverage to tell Americans--

---- Hey we worked so nicely on military stuff, please give us more civilian work

We go on tirades against them, yell at them, froth at our mouths,

And make it absolutely impossible for the American civilian businessmen to come work in Pakistan.


This is nothing but Socialist, communist, and now Islamist yelling

that has consistently destroyed civilian cooperation between Americans and Pakistanis.

This is why we kick out Americans as soon as their military contracts are over.


So my dear think tanks, use your head and try to figure out our own mistakes before going to Americans and telling them what's wrong with them.


peace

p.s. American military has been begging us to set up permanent joint ventures. The only thing we have to do is keep our nuclear fangs hidden (like Israel). We should have kept totally quite about our nuclear assets. Let the world guess. Indians knew it and so did Americans. The only thing our $tupid explosions did was that now people in Timbaktu know about it. What the heck did we gain from telling timbaktu-ins that we have nuki toys. Nothing!

A security relationship with the is anon-starter - Pakistan are Muslim and Nuclear, these are two things that are a red flag to the US - so any new relationship with the US must avoid these issues -- I understand you are afraid that Pakistanis will end up in dog collars and leashes (Abu Gharib), or have their corpses urinated on, or... you know it's a long list and we all know - I encourage you look past your fears -- The US understands commercial relations and it understands the ability to defend oneself and it understands that Pakistan is a Muslim majority country - her relations with such an entity can never be one of deep connection and fidelity - so, lets go for what is normal, commercial relations -- , a change in the nature of politics of Pakistan is necessary, not only for the good of the Pakistani people but also to allow the US to consider and act with the knowledge that it is dealing with a nation that not only has the ability to defend itself but also the will to do so - if it becomes necessary.

American military has been begging us to set up permanent joint ventures

Time for that is past and entirely unnecessary - joint ventures are not for US military but US non-military businesses.

 

[FaujHistorian]

A security relationship with the is anon-starter - Pakistan are Muslim and Nuclear, these are two things that are a red flag to the US .

Dear Muse,

Not sure what the fuss is about being Muslim.

Us Pakistanis are no more Muslim than Turkey, or many other Muslim countries who happen to be working with the USA and much more closely than what I wrote.

Being Nuclear is another false flag.

We never threaten the West. Our wrestling match is only with our lovely loverly neighbor on the East. And that neighbor of ours can beat the cr@p out of us if we start the war with it.

Thus Pakistan's nuclear doctrine is entirely defensive and entirely focused on one country.


So please bring some other reason to create anti-USA hysteria, because these two reasons are pretty softy softy.

Oh and before Pakistanis forget to understand,

USA is oriented around military business. Think Japan, Germany, Italy, Korea, Taiwan, they all started with military business and then established civilian contacts.

But perhaps you all won't care about rational discussion. Perhaps this thread is about irrational and emotional rioting forum style.


peace

 

[Contrarian]

A security relationship with the is anon-starter - Pakistan are Muslim and Nuclear, these are two things that are a red flag to the US - so any new relationship with the US must avoid these issues --

.

Please..US has no issues with countries being Muslim. They just expect them to be rational and not terrorist spawning.
Please stop giving canards about how US is against Muslims.

US is concerned about Pakistani nukes because frankly compared to all other countries that have nuclear weapons, Pakistan is a joke - the economy, frequent dictatorships, a military unaccountable to anyone but itself and whatnot, unclear public institutions.

The rest of the nuclear countries dont have these issues.

 

[muse]

Please..US has no issues with countries being Muslim. They just expect them to be rational and not terrorist spawning.
Please stop giving canards about how US is against Muslims.

US is concerned about Pakistani nukes because frankly compared to all other countries that have nuclear weapons, Pakistan is a joke - the economy, frequent dictatorships, a military unaccountable to anyone but itself and whatnot, unclear public institutions.

The rest of the nuclear countries dont have these issues.

These are assertions with absolutely no basis in reality - US has no problem with Muslim major countries? Clearly it does, it does not matter whether it is because as you say, Muslims spawn terrorism or whether Muslims majorities find US policies objectionable, the fact of the matter is that the US has a problem with Muslim majority countries - it is not a coincidence that the US has terrible relations with all Muslim majority countries, even in Turkiye, majorities find US policies objectionable.

Pakistan a joke? Perhaps - but then if it's a joke, then the kind of response the US has fashioned is what? Listen, first try not to get emotional, secondly, make sense or refrain from posting - I want to take you seriously, for that you must offer thinking not emotion

 

[Jungibaaz]

Please stop giving canards about how US is against Muslims.

Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Syria, Libya. Perhaps they don't intend to take on Muslim countries only, but I know for a fact that this war on terror has as much to do with national security as it has to do with pride and revenge.

Do you honestly think this was some massive co-incidence and had to do with terrorism?

Well then, enlighten me as to why, Iraq was attacked in 2003.

US is concerned about Pakistani nukes because frankly compared to all other countries that have nuclear weapons, Pakistan is a joke - the economy, frequent dictatorships, a military unaccountable to anyone but itself and whatnot, unclear public institutions.

Pakistan's nukes are 100% safe, they know that and we do, perhaps you don't.
But the safety of Pak nukes in the media is a propaganda game rather than a valid threat.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Viewed from here in the USA it seems clear that American business interests would be at severe risk of being attacked if located in Pakistan. What American CEO in his right mind would send one of his rising stars to help get started a new venture in Pakistan? Perhaps you could say it is a "chicken and egg" problem, but the USA will never have normal commercial relations with Pakistan as long as individual Americans do not feel they would be safe to live and work in Pakistan, let alone to even visit their investments, if made. Until the terrorist menace is eliminated in Pakistan, it will remain a no-go zone for Americans and a no-invest zone for most businessmen in Europe and America.

 

[muse]

The change in the structure of Pakistani economy can only be brought about by changing the nature of Pakistani politics -- The economy is controlled by the state - the reason for this control is entirely political and economic - the politician and his cronies, along with bureaucrats extract maximum benefits from loss making state entities - the ordinary Pakistani is left out of this economy, as is the investor without political connections.

Why not begin with going public with state enterprises? Why not allow entities such as WAPDA and entities such as PIA, and Railways, and all organizations having to do with exploration, and distribution of energy, go public, go public or create multiple companies and let the dam building and energy marketing go public? Why not introduce legislation that will make clear that the state will protect property rights?

Before making Pakistan safe for foreigner and foreign investment, shouldn't pakistan be safe for Pakistanis, their investment and properties??

Is this commie stuff? Is this anti-Americanism??

 

[Da-Bang]

Blaming is the national pastime of Oakistanis is what i gather
-Allied with the US, started off blaming India,
-Allied with the Chinese, started blaming US
-Next in line- blame Chinese
-Sometime later Start blaming the aliens, of course as soon as they are discovered.

 

[haviZsultan]

Dear Muse,

Not sure what the fuss is about being Muslim.

Us Pakistanis are no more Muslim than Turkey, or many other Muslim countries who happen to be working with the USA and much more closely than what I wrote.

Being Nuclear is another false flag.

We never threaten the West. Our wrestling match is only with our lovely loverly neighbor on the East. And that neighbor of ours can beat the cr@p out of us if we start the war with it.

Thus Pakistan's nuclear doctrine is entirely defensive and entirely focused on one country.


So please bring some other reason to create anti-USA hysteria, because these two reasons are pretty softy softy.

Oh and before Pakistanis forget to understand,

USA is oriented around military business. Think Japan, Germany, Italy, Korea, Taiwan, they all started with military business and then established civilian contacts.

But perhaps you all won't care about rational discussion. Perhaps this thread is about irrational and emotional rioting forum style.


peace

Fauj I don't understand how you can support our policy. The only thing holding us together is the war on terror and that ends we split faster than a hollywood marriage gone bad. We have to think what we are going to do in the future. We are highly pro-American. They abandoned us in the past-its going to happen again. We need to think about alternative policy. US isn't the only thing and a relationship with them isn't the only thing that can happen.

Even in the war on terror which is the only glue here in our relationship we have differing interests. We want the TTP militants like Hakimullah, Fazlullah, Faqir Mohammed Afridi, Mullah Toofan, Asmatullah Shaheen etc they want the Haqqanis, Bahawal Khan's Hekmatyar's and Gul Bahadurs. We are on diametrically opposite poles here.

One day the relationship will break down... what will we do then? We can fight the terrorists in our own way. Please understand this. We have been bashing our skull against a wall since 2007. We need a change in strategy and it won't happen unless we decide the party for the Americans is over.