US lawmakers strongly oppose weapon sales to ‘snitch’ Pakistan

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Exactly my point. There is no need to fight with Pakistan. At all.

So you see no US goals being met through military or economic conflict with Pakistan, given the current Pakistan military dynamics?

 

[VCheng]

So you see no US goals being met through military or economic conflict with Pakistan, given the current Pakistan military dynamics?

Not at all. Pakistan's stability serves US national interests. Clearly.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Not at all. Pakistan's stability serves US national interests. Clearly.

I agree with you on that - that was the gist of my previous posts.

I asked for the clarification because your response to my comments was interpreted by some Pakistani posters as 'negative' or 'anti-Pakistan' - this helps set the record straight, no?

 

[VCheng]

I agree with you on that - that was the gist of my previous posts.

I asked for the clarification because your response to my comments was interpreted by some Pakistani posters as 'negative' or 'anti-Pakistan' - this helps set the record straight, no?

Some are too busy in attacking me personally because they cannot respond to the content of my posts, as my signature says. That is their problem, not mine.

Pakistan remains an important country in its own right for USA. Pakistan's nuclear weapons have contributed to the longest period of peace without all out war in South Asia. Why would USA want to disturb the balance that was achieved with its own help in the first place?

Besides, if USA wanted to de-nuclearize Pakistan - which it clearly does not - there are much better ways to do so as I mentioned above. There is simply no need for war. At all. Now is there anything anti-Pakistan in saying that? Nope.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan remains an important country in its own right for USA. Pakistan's nuclear weapons have contributed to the longest period of peace without all out war in South Asia. Why would USA want to disturb the balance that was achieved with its own help in the first place?

That said, @Oscar is correct about a significant amount of anti-Pakistan sentiment in the US military (especially in the lower level officers and recruits) and in the chattering classes (Christine Fair, Lisa Curtis etc etc). The former is driven by extended exposure through deployments in Afghanistan and with the ANA and NDS (the latter especially feeding volumes of concocted intelligence along the lines of the MSF Hospital being run by the ISI to US intelligence and military).

However, anti-Pakistan sentiment, even if it was justified, is not a substitute for rational policy making that weighs the pros and cons of punitive actions (military or economic) in furthering US National interests over time. Unless US policy makers are really deluded enough to view China as an enemy equivalent to the USSR during the height of the Cold War, the destabilization of Pakistan via military and/or economic means (as part of a larger strategy to weaken China by freeing up India and basing Uighur terrorists in a destabilized Pakistan), makes no sense in a world that is increasingly bound through economic ties and in which the Chinese economy plays a massive role.

 

[VCheng]

That said, @Oscar is correct about a significant amount of anti-Pakistan sentiment in the US military (especially in the lower level officers and recruits) and in the chattering classes (Christine Fair, Lisa Curtis etc etc). The former is driven by extended exposure through deployments in Afghanistan and with the ANA and NDS (the latter especially feeding volumes of concocted intelligence along the lines of the MSF Hospital being run by the ISI to US intelligence and military).

However, anti-Pakistan sentiment, even if it was justified, is not a substitute for rational policy making that weighs the pros and cons of punitive actions (military or economic) in furthering US National interests over time. Unless US policy makers are really deluded enough to view China as an enemy equivalent to the USSR during the height of the Cold War, the destabilization of Pakistan via military and/or economic means (as part of a larger strategy to weaken China by freeing up India and basing Uighur terrorists in a destabilized Pakistan), makes no sense in a world that is increasingly bound through economic ties and in which the Chinese economy plays a massive role.

US policy will remain geared towards serving US interests, and for now, that includes Pakistan an an important country to ally with. I see no problems here for the time being, given that nothing in international politics is permanent.

Pakistan has the sovereign right to pursue its own policies to serve its own national interests. If things change, for example if a few more Pakistanis attack inside USA, then both sides need to see what each needs to do. That is the way it works.

Nothing surprising or anti-Pakistan or anti-USA in saying that either.

 

[SipahSalar]

Since when is an F-16 worth $165million?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

If things change, for example if a few more Pakistanis attack inside USA, then both sides need to see what each needs to do.

What I see is that a radicalized American learn to build pipe bombs with another American (neither of whom had been to Pakistan), one of whom married a Pakistani girl raised in Saudi Arabia, ostensibly brainwashed her and carried out a terrorist attack in San Bernardino.

Where's the 'more Pakistanis' in here? Sounds like the US needs to get a handle on domestic radicalization in the US, which in my view partly needs to be through supporting reformist Islamic research and scholars through educational grants and funds etc.

 

[VCheng]

What I see is that a radicalized American learn to build pipe bombs with another American (neither of whom had been to Pakistan), one of whom married a Pakistani girl raised in Saudi Arabia, ostensibly brainwashed her and carried out a terrorist attack in San Bernardino.

Where's the 'more Pakistanis' in here? Sounds like the US needs to get a handle on domestic radicalization in the US, which in my view partly needs to be through supporting reformist Islamic research and scholars through educational grants and funds etc.

You are entitled to your views, but unfortunately things work differently in US media, as opposed to Pakistan, as you very well know. Trying to pretend that the Times Square Bomber and the San Bernardino killers were not connected to Pakistan and the vicious anti-Americanism there, will not work, Sir, in my view.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Trying to pretend that the Times Square Bomber and the San Bernardino killers were not connected to Pakistan and the vicious anti-Americanism there, will not work, Sir, in my view.

Did the husband visit Pakistan? He was born in the US, educated in the US, learned to build pipe bombs in the US, and was radicalized in the US - and he had a brother who served in the US military with distinction.

What's Pakistan's role in this?

 

[VCheng]

Did the husband visit Pakistan? He was born in the US, educated in the US, learned to build pipe bombs in the US, and was radicalized in the US - and he had a brother who served in the US military with distinction.

What's Pakistan's role in this?

As I said, you may keep thinking whatever you want. It is your right. Others will do the same according to their own thoughts. Eventually, all the inputs make their way into US policies by due process.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

As I said, you may keep thinking whatever you want. It is your right. Others will do the same according to their own thoughts. Eventually, all the inputs make their way into US policies by due process.

You appear to disagree with the fact that the husband was radicalized in the US with no influence from Pakistan? Why? Why was his brother, raised in the same environment, immune to radicalization and served with distinction in the US military?

 

[VCheng]

You appear to disagree with the fact that the husband was radicalized in the US with no influence from Pakistan? Why? Why was his brother, raised in the same environment, immune to radicalization and served with distinction in the US military?

Well, it won't be the first time that we agree to disagree and move on.

 

[rockstar08]

The day is not far when SOCOM will be roaming around Pakistani nuke facilities conducting raids and neutralizing facilities and all the bravado along with love for General Raheel will leave people in tears due to helplessness.

even if for argument sake we consider what you are saying is right , than it mean US is the Dumbest Country in the world ? what they did in Iraq is still haunting them , the already thousand dead American are not enough ? and yet you are saying that they will attack a Nuclear armed state , oh a Country with a Standing army of 617000 Active troops and almost the same in reserve with a Average Air force and Missile Tech , what makes you think the day US attack us and neutralize our Command and control , our army will be paralyzed ? and we can not order a nuke Strike on US forces in Afghanistan and Gulf ? yes we cant hit the US mainland but we will make sure US wont be able to withhold their title of Super power .. their entire Fleet in Bahrain can be hit along with all bases in Afghanistan , you can do the Maths with Casualties .. and as per Pakistan and its forces ? yes we will have our army to be bombed heavily by US , but than what ? US will send its forces to hold Pakistan ? LOL
forget it yaar , you cant be believing in those fairy tale stories they tell you in US , you know what happen in Iraq when you dismantle a army and leave the infrastructure destroyed ? even if Half of the Army went out to become Jihadi, every US soldier in Pakistani land will leave in a body bag
let alone the 2 Million armed Tribal , and other Tribes of Quetta and Sindh ...
Attacking Pakistan will be a nightmare for US , look how they deal with Iran ...we can do it , we will do it and in the end , lets do the peace deal

and as far as i am concerned , if your country is planning to attack a nuclear state they do have done the maths if the nukes fall into the hands of Extremist after you bomb our army?
and as for Salala , even if 2-3 soldiers there have anza SAM, results would have been much different
attacking a check post with poor equipped Soldiers in night time is bravery and tactics ? yeah they can do it again no doubt ... but that will cost some Pampers to US army fighting in Afghanistan

 

[VCheng]

even if for argument sake we consider what you are saying is right , than it mean US is the Dumbest Country in the world ? what they did in Iraq is still haunting them , the already thousand dead American are not enough ? and yet you are saying that they will attack a Nuclear armed state , oh a Country with a Standing army of 617000 Active troops and almost the same in reserve with a Average Air force and Missile Tech , what makes you think the day US attack us and neutralize our Command and control , our army will be paralyzed ? and we can not order a nuke Strike on US forces in Afghanistan and Gulf ? yes we cant hit the US mainland but we will make sure US wont be able to withhold their title of Super power .. their entire Fleet in Bahrain can be hit along with all bases in Afghanistan , you can do the Maths with Casualties .. and as per Pakistan and its forces ? yes we will have our army to be bombed heavily by US , but than what ? US will send its forces to hold Pakistan ? LOL
forget it yaar , you cant be believing in those fairy tale stories they tell you in US , you know what happen in Iraq when you dismantle a army and leave the infrastructure destroyed ? even if Half of the Army went out to become Jihadi, every US soldier in Pakistani land will leave in a body bag
let alone the 2 Million armed Tribal , and other Tribes of Quetta and Sindh ...
Attacking Pakistan will be a nightmare for US , look how they deal with Iran ...we can do it , we will do it and in the end , lets do the peace deal

and as far as i am concerned , if your country is planning to attack a nuclear state they do have done the maths if the nukes fall into the hands of Extremist after you bomb our army?
and as for Salala , even if 2-3 soldiers there have anza SAM, results would have been much different
attacking a check post with poor equipped Soldiers in night time is bravery and tactics ? yeah they can do it again no doubt ... but that will cost some Pampers to US army fighting in Afghanistan

Such fearmongering is designed only to reinforce the impression that it is the noble Pak Army against the rest of the world, and only it is brave enough to stand up to evil Uncle Sam. It serves to keep the faithful in line, that is all. A favorite theme peddled at PDF, nothing more.