US had stopped Jordan from sending jets to Pakistan in 1971 war

[SQ8]

1971 was a different era, amigo. From your post it appears that you did not come into existence then.

There were TWO SUPER-POWERS then USA and USSR. As a matter of fact the USSR, under Leonid Brezhnev was then at the the Zenith of its Imperial powers. They out-manuevered the US in every move at that time.
The USA could neither influence the final outcome nor could they have even hoped to reverse it.

Read up on the history of that period; its quite fascinating and intriguing!

There were three periods in the history of the cold war where it seemed it would go hot. The first could be the period that encompassed the Cuban missile crises.. the other was in the mid 70's where the Soviet union was pulling away militarily from the US while it bled in Vietnam...and the last were the economic desperation years of the late 80's in the USSR when Afg was draining it.

 

[Saleem]

Thank You, @BLACKEAGLE !

From now on @al-Hasani @Arabian Legend @Yzd Khalifa - Those plans about annexing Jordan & making it a part of my Kingdom are off the table !

Gosh, I would've loved to see @BLACKEAGLE begging me for mercy as I would be munching on some tender chicken leg from Al-Baik whilst he wouldn't have had food & water for a fortnight !

I suppose Brotherhood is more important !

annexing jordan? what a joke...they had to call in thfrench just to retake the cube!,,,,,they'd be licky annexing the bathroom of the royal palace in riyadh...

Jordanians are very good people. The Hashemite Kingdom, despite the many false accusations and accusations of being "puppets" are a honorable family and people that have done a lot for Jordan, Muslims and nearby countries. Ask the Syrians, Palestinians and Iraqis. Despite not having much. That is very remarkable. I am happy to see that they were prepared to do such a big gesture towards Pakistan.

the royals of jordan? in the yom kippur war, the king ratted on the "arabs" and told the israelis of the arrack thus costing the "arabs" literally thousands of casualties! the israelis got a 12+ hour warning..considering how close the "arabs" got to winning as it is, what might have happened if israel had no warning....

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Now just to drive the final nail into the Coffin of the pure BS that this thread is based on:

The move to transfer the RJAF F-104As was initiated in Washington D.C. (in the White House, not "Foggy Bottom")
Jordan was simply used as the American "Client State" (aka Chamcha) to facilitate that transfer.
Following are the contents of a Memo to Kissinger on 7th Dec 1971 :

December 7, 1971
Memorandum for Mr. Henry A. Kissinger The White House
From: Theodore Eliot Jr
Subject: Jordanian F-104's for Pakistan
At the WASAG meeting on the morning of December 6, the question was raised as to the legal and policy problems involved in responding to a Jordanian request for a USG consent to transfer F-104's to Pakistan.
Since the United States provided the F-104's now in Jordanian possession, USG consent would be necessary for their transfer to any third country, including Pakistan. Under the present U.S. policy of suspending all arms transfers to Pakistan, the USG could not consent to such a transfer. Section 9 of Public Law 91-672 (January 12, 1971), amending the Foreign Military Sales Act, provides:
"In considering a request for approval of any transfer of a defense article to another country under section 505 (a) (1) and (a) (4) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and section 3 (a)(2) of the Foreign Military Sales Act, the President shall not give his consent to the transfer unless the United States itself would transfer the defense article under consideration to that country."
The United States has, since the 1965 Indian-Pakistani hostilities, refused to supply or to license the export of lethal end items for Pakistan. The only exception to this policy since 1965 is the so-called one-time exception which was announced in October 1970. Under this one-time exception, the United States offered to supply 300 armored personnel carriers and approximately 20 aircraft. The aircraft offered were F-104's but, after the Pakistanis expressed a preference for F-Ss, the United States indicated a willingness to supply F-5's under the one-time exception. The United States offer of aircraft was never formally accepted by the Pakistani Government, but a contract for armored personnel carriers was signed in January 1971. Following the outbreak of fighting in East Pakistan in late March 1971, the USG announced, among other things, that it would hold in abeyance any further action on the one-time exception. This policy was formally confirmed in a public statement of policy issued on July 1, 1971.
Conclusion:
In view of the foregoing, the President could not give his consent to the transfer of Jordanian F-104's to Pakistan unless he were also willing to establish, as a matter of policy, the USG's willingness to supply the F-104's directly. Such a policy decision would be consistent with the October 1970 one-time exception, but would conflict sharply with our general policy since 1965 against supply of lethal end items and, specifically, with the July 1, 1971 announcement that action on the one-time exception would be held in abeyance. It would also conflict with the prohibition on military assistance and sales to Pakistan, in the pending aid legislation, which has been approved by both Houses.
Furthermore, the transfer of these aircraft to Pakistan would create a serious deficit in Jordan's fighter inventory. Our consent could lead to a Jordanian expectation that the USG would replace these aircraft. At present there is no suitable aircraft available. Even if there were, to replace them through MAP would, in view of the present shortage of funds, require postponing the supply of APC's, tanks, and engineering equipment which the Jordanian army badly needs.

Theodore L. Eliot, Jr

This was in reply to Kissinger's query to State regarding the implications of arranging/facilitating the transfer of the RJAF F-104 Starfighters.

State's Memo in reply is rather revealing of some things..........

@KRAIT, @Contrarian, @Bang Galore, @Indischer @samantk

 

[Echo_419]

Whatever you say doesn't change the fact that NO ONE will stand with you while most Muslim states will keep standing up for us.

Indian f. Policy is 'business oriented'...you get what you want and others get what they want from you. Its a product of the reality you live in, ours is the result of the reality we live in.

Back to the topic.

I object just like you have your Ummah we have our close friends to
Isreal & USSR(Russia) to name a few
& this talk of brotherly relations that you do is a complete fantasy
The works we live in matters Power & Money more than anything
The sooner you realise this the more money you can make
While the Isrealis were helping us during Kargil
Which one of your Brorherly nation came forward & supported you not diplomatically but with arms

 

[GURU DUTT]

Ahmedis and Shias are way more safe in India than in Pakistan. And BTW Ahmedis are still Muslim under Indian law.

to whome are you trying to convince bhai ji they are way to baised and they hate every thing indian or specially hindu to see with open eyes they have a very narrow tunnel vision that to with a prism of racial superiority, and relegeon .......lolzzzz most of them think pakistan and its elite did nothing bad in history that is effecting there present and whatever wrong is going on its deu to USA-INDIA & israeli interfearences while they strongli beleave that if they conert all infedels to silam then there messiah will come do Gazwa e hind and after that this regon of earth will be more better and prosporous than jannat itself ....

 

[KRAIT]

@RescueRanger Sir, I for one, have always stood for respect to other people's religion and their ideals. We lived with Jains and we never brought meat in the house.

I ask Muslims to just respect Hindus feelings just like I ask Hindus to respect theirs.

I was against a Pakistani poster, and in support of another Pakistani poster, when former one made wild remarks of Chisti Saheb of Ajmer. I have visited Ajmer Sharif and also Vrindavan. I felt the same peace.

I am not saying that I am better than others, but when it comes to someone forcing their religion down my throat, then I will protest. We also have concept of fighting against Adharma.

I have no problem with Muslims not eating pork or Hindus not eating beef. But when we come on this forum, we expect same understanding that others want us to be.

If there are double standards and even if a moderator is going against the rule, I will speak against it. If the forum is allowing this double standard, then I think most of us Indians won't visit this forum.

Respect goes both ways sir. I walk my own path but that doesn't mean I throw the dirt in my path on someone's path.

 

[Dash]

There were three periods in the history of the cold war where it seemed it would go hot. The first could be the period that encompassed the Cuban missile crises.. the other was in the mid 70's where the Soviet union was pulling away militarily from the US while it bled in Vietnam...and the last were the economic desperation years of the late 80's in the USSR when Afg was draining it.

Thats the saddest part of it, the saddest of all 3 you described.

 

[Aslan]

Why do so many Indians hate Islam that much? Do they also hate the nearly 200 million Muslim Indians? Don't understand it.

You think, uhm uhm. You dont even know the half of it.

That is grade 1 crap.

You wish Bangladeshi's supported you
Bengalis would never support Pakistan against India.
You believe what you wish to believe.
The Jamaati brigade on PDF does not reflect the reality of Bangladesh.

Bangladesh is close to India. They support India.

And the opinion of the hindu brigade dont reflect the reality of Bangladesh either. Wake up from your wet dream.

 

[Aslan]

You just hate Hindus while I don't hate Muslims.

You are a bigot and don't deserve to be a moderator.

You dont hate Muslims. Jhoot boltay huway sharam bhi nahi aati.

And his moderation is non of your business, nor do u have a say in it.

I don't like rulings of Pakistani society especially regarding Ahmedis.

I have been against all ill practices done in name of religion. Whether its sati pratha, dowry done by Hindus or blasphemy laws by Muslims.

Just like we Muslims dont bother you with your practices. You have no right to criticize ours. No matter your disagreement. Because from what I have seen of your kind one word about your religion and all your panties get bunched up.

 

[Contrarian]

Had America wanted to prevent the independence of Bangladesh, the 7th Fleet could have been catastrophic for any adversary. When has Russia not backed down??



I believe the real purpose of the ACC was to ensure that the war did not continue on the other side. Bangladesh was a forgiven conclusion. Had the US wanted, even the surrender of Pak Forces in Bangladesh could have been reversed.

No.
Russia sent its own forces.
The detente was that if US intervenes in the war directly, Russia would as well.
US could do nothing other than make sure India didnt start attacking West Pakistan. Something we had no plans for either.

 

[Uxama]

usa is a pig...

 

[RescueRanger]

usa is a pig...

Did you make an account just to post that?

 

[GURU DUTT]

Don't bother with her ...
the total number of rapes in BDesh was 400,000 and the number of soldiers deputed in B.Desh was 50,000.
That makes 4 rapes / piece.
Indian women droll when they see men performing like that; that is their only interest in this story.

is that why women in pakistan dont report about rapes do you want me to give you links about rapes in pakistan

 

[Sinnerman108]

is that why women in pakistan dont report about rapes do you want me to give you links about rapes in pakistan

Guru, keep out of it.

 

[RescueRanger]

PLEASE STICK TO THE TOPIC, WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER THREAD ABOUT RAPES.