US & Pakistan Dispute and Tensions over Haqqani group

[LEGENDARY WARRIOR]

The U.S. didn't "lie" on the WMD bit - the U.S. was deceived by the Iraqis. And there were many other reasons cited to oust Saddam. Nevertheless, the U.S. doesn't want to be caught in such a web twice.

OH MY!! POOR americans! Deceived by Iraqis. .

 

[Rafael]

OH MY!! POOR americans! Deceived by Iraqis. .

In the last century the poor Americans have been deceived by so many wicked nations to attack themselves. Vietnam, Cambodia, Iraq and Afghanistan to name a few.

 

[LEGENDARY WARRIOR]

"Join hands", no. Submit to them, yes.

Think of what kind of nation you are. Are you the sort to risk your necks by standing up against tyranny, or are you the sort to keep quiet and make money in your fat and beautiful land, by hook or by crook,

Ah haa. . And who provides our corrupt politicians with all this money?? Its you guys. As far as we people are concerned, we have protested a thousand times to stop american aid because we know that it is not being spent at the right place. And your government even after knowing this are happy to feed our corrupt politicians. So, who is stupid over here??

always justifying your choices by reassuring yourself that there is somebody worse out there whose deeds and choices should be reviled before your own, or somebody else who should fight the good fight?

and we are'nt wrong in a sense as history proves your policies and your motives. .

 

[EastWest]

how pakistan can get usa on back foot??
if u r indicating towards supply routes,they are ready with new route.
or anything else.

if u r using proxies then they will kill more in drone strikes,result to the more civilian casualities.

you cant exchange nukes,they have better systems than u.

so tell me how can pak bring down usa??

They will nuke America..errr..no ..India...no no...themselves..

If America does nt listen to Pakistan ,, they will nuke themselves...

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Since the USA has little leverage now. It should wait until it has lowered its footprint in Afghanistan to a level that can be supported by non-Pakistani supply routes. Then it should take its revenge on the ISI. There are many ways to take revenge later.

okey dokes!!! what's stopping them

 

[muse]

These statements attributed to officials "on the condition of anonymity", are element of pressure - I don't really know if such pressure is actually effective, it certainly does put Pakistan on the back foot, but I think interested observers will find the Pakistani response curious - Gen. Pasha rushes off, by himself, for a one to one meeting with individuals with whom he has neither personal or institutional relationship or seemingly respect for and then equally quickly, rushes back, and near simultaneously, other Pakistani and US officials meet and promise that they have made progress and that further talks are called for -- The US are depositing much anger and helplessness on the ISI and promise even more, as if they have not bled enough and wish to bleed more.

 

[karan.1970]

These statements attributed to officials "on the condition of anonymity", are element of pressure - I don't really know if such pressure is actually effective, it certainly does put Pakistan on the back foot, but I think interested observers will find the Pakistani response curious - Gen. Pasha rushes off, by himself, for a one to one meeting with individuals with whom he has neither personal or institutional relationship or seemingly respect for and then equally quickly, rushes back, and near simultaneously, other Pakistani and US officials meet and promise that they have made progress and that further talks are called for -- The US are depositing much anger and helplessness on the ISI and promise even more, as if they have not bled enough and wish to bleed more.

In my view, something big is going to go down in next few weeks.. Either from a policy perspective from Pakistan side or a change in US Military's operating procedure within Pakistan..

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

The U.S. didn't "lie" on the WMD bit - the U.S. was deceived by the Iraqis.

that's a new one....

so let me guess, the CIA put all its cards in one basket by listening to one Ahmed Chalabi (whom one day you'd call your friend, next day you were raiding and bugging his offices). His lies were enough "actionable intelligence" ? I didn't realize one person could have so much influence to convince NATO to bomb and invade another country -- a war that only brought (or induced) destruction and civil war to Iraq.....



the excuse to invade Iraq was based on a pack of white lies....history will judge (it already is)


I'll ask you a very elementary question; if you could go back in time (knowing what you know now -- that you were lied to and invaded a sovereign country based on those lies) would you STILL invade Iraq??

And there were many other reasons cited to oust Saddam. Nevertheless, the U.S. doesn't want to be caught in such a web twice.

the reason to invade Iraq was to uncover and remove WMDs -- which were never found.


ousting Saddam and bringing "democracy" to Iraq came later


you may think people on this forum live in a bubble and/or were born yesterday. Unfortunately for you, Solomon, you fail to convince

Now you are in lu-lu-land and your thoughts can no longer be respected. The rule is you are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts

again --- when the media tows the line of your government (for its own interest, which i'll be happy to explain) then easily "facts" or even "half-facts" can be self-created.


for example:

I suppose U.N. exposure would merely embarrass Pakistan further without changing its policies.

whatever harm to Pakistan's image the west (particularly certain 'ally' NATO countries) could attempt to do, they've already tried

Pakistan's recent policy of non-cooperation of certain blindly-made NATO demands is bringing much diplomatic squabbles and attempts to embarass Pakistan. It is a failed strategy and I personally believe that sooner or later, you will find out.

Indeed, at this stage it looks less like Pakistan is running the Haqqanis than like the Haqqanis are running Pakistan.

same talk we've been hearing for over a year.....as if Haqqanis are the sole reason why Afghanistan is in civil war and the sole reason why NATO isn't being "received" with rose petals and Royal treatment! Last time I checked, your boots are in a foreign country. Resistance is only inevtiable.

if the Mexican Army crossed the border and occupied Texas, New Mexico and California -- would they not face any resistance?

If Sirajuddin Haqqani is to be believed, they (the Haqqanis) are having more presence in Afghanistan than in Pakistan.

As Zardari tells us (Wikileaks), Pakistan may be a nuclear power but when a Pakistani policeman arrests a militant he has to worry that somebody will slip into his home at night and slit his throat.

The dear leader says a lot of things. His approval ratings reflect his credibility.

but go ahead and nit & cherry-pick whatever little tidbits that suit whatever 'argument' you have or are trying to get across



and don't talk about Haqqanis or your concerns when the coalition forces have failed to heed to Pakistan's long-standing concerns regarding cross-border militancy emanating from NATO-occupied Afghan side.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

OH MY!! POOR americans! Deceived by Iraqis. .

seriously........!!

 

[Solomon2]

Unfortunately for you, Solomon, you fail to convince

Not trying to convince about Iraq here 'cause Iraq isn't the topic. I picked up on this to emphasize that the U.S. doesn't want to be fooled twice, hence its caution.

Pakistan's recent policy of non-cooperation of certain blindly-made NATO demands is bringing much diplomatic squabbles and attempts to embarass Pakistan. It is a failed strategy and I personally believe that sooner or later, you will find out.

Certainly "non-cooperation" is a strategy where the people of Pakistan will be among the losers.

if Haqqanis are the sole reason why Afghanistan is in civil war and the sole reason why NATO isn't being "received" with rose petals and Royal treatment!

Americans aren't Brits. The U.S. is not in Afghanistan to colonize and rule, but to eliminate terror threats and help nurture the country so it is no longer hospitable to them and (hopefully) can stand on its own two feet. Why should we care about being loved?

and don't talk about Haqqanis or your concerns when the coalition forces have failed to heed to Pakistan's long-standing concerns regarding cross-border militancy emanating from NATO-occupied Afghan side.

I think there is a prospect for cooperation here by establishing suitable mutual security arrangements between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Yet not only does Pakistan show little interest in such things there is no indication such an agreement would be worth the paper it is written on. As long as Pakistan continues to be perceived as supporting terror groups in defiance of international law and custom, its credibility will be low and its national honor will remain in the toilet.

 

[Doctor09]

They will nuke America..errr..no ..India...no no...themselves..

If America does nt listen to Pakistan ,, they will nuke themselves...

dont troll and stick to topic.......we will nuke you soon so dont worry about it
on topic : we will do what is in interests of our country and our own security and we are not responsible for US troops in Afghanistan .... USA should stop our aid now and and do what they can and we will do what we want to...............

 

[Solomon2]

dont troll and stick to topic.......we will nuke you soon so dont worry about it

Do you really think nuking India will save you from a Haqqani knife on your neck in the middle of the night, or being blown up by a bomb in the middle of the day?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Not trying to convince about Iraq here 'cause Iraq isn't the topic. I picked up on this to emphasize that the U.S. doesn't want to be fooled twice, hence its caution

uh huh...

Certainly "non-cooperation" is a strategy where the people of Pakistan will be among the losers

if i'm not mistaken, some of the so-called "aid" is being with-held and I don't see things getting any worse than they were before that.....

it isn't Pakistan that has sent our Army to occupy another country.....it's NATO. When will you man up and take responsibilty for your actions. You invade a sovereign country and then cry that there are people shooting at your forces. Resistance is inevitable. We can't be policing the neighbhourhood when you are unable to even police a few patches of Afghan country where you have at least a modicum of control.

Pakistani people (i.e. the common man) never felt any benefit from "cooperation" with the U.S. The money bags go to the politicians and their off-shore accounts. In that sense, my sympathies to the be-fooled American tax-payer. It's bad for them.

Americans aren't Brits. The U.S. is not in Afghanistan to colonize and rule, but to eliminate terror threats and help nurture the country so it is no longer hospitable to them and (hopefully) can stand on its own two feet. Why should we care about being loved?

it's an honour-based society....it always has been, always will be. NATO were warned that they would be stepping into a hornet's nest, but they didn't listen. If you are perceived as an occupier there -- then good luck trying to achieve even one of your objectives. It's no different from when the soviet boots were there (and in fairness to them, at least they were invited -- by the puppet president at the tme)

Afghanistan (and the region in general) are even more unstable today. And because of this, Pakistan is now home to the largest refugee/displaced population in the world (over 4 million Afghans)

I think there is a prospect for cooperation here by establishing suitable mutual security arrangements between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Yet not only does Pakistan show little interest in such things there is no indication such an agreement would be worth the paper it is written on.

Arrangements on security between Pakistan and Afghanistan are affairs that will be handled between the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan. Therefore, it is of no concern to you what path we pursue in the future.

it is regrettable that the Afghan Army is not only ill-trained, but it's also demonstrated its ability to recruit opium addicts and illiterate pawns who sell their American-provided weapons and equipment to the taleban insurgents -as has (and still does) happen!

As long as Pakistan continues to be perceived as supporting terror groups in defiance of international law and custom, its credibility will be low and its national honor will remain in the toilet.

Pakistan should work towards securing its interests in the region, and working towards its national interests as well. If Americans want Pakistan to blindly do anything it tells them to do (evein if it is against our interest), then they are in for a rude shock.

we have an interest to eradicate terrorist groups existing in the region, however we will take action based on actionable intelligence and based on immediate threat assessments. Those that pose the largest danger to Pakistan will be targetted first.

and if you don't 'appreciate' or 'accept' that -- well, it aint our problem! I really wish we could help alleviate your grievences, but unfortunately -- not our problem.


and its silly to talk about perceptions. New York Times gave much one sided coverage (both when we made peace deals which later fell through the cracks -- in Swat -- and then subsequently eradicated TTP from the valley and brough peace and hope back to the troubled land)


firs they say "inaction......capitulation...." and then they say "Army excesses......extra-judicial killing......human rights abuses of detained suspects"




media's a business, Solomon........and politics are dirty. You live in DC, I would have thought you would have picked up on that by now. You are very very emotional, and very naiive.

 

[lem34]

Do you really think nuking India will save you from a Haqqani knife on your neck in the middle of the night, or being blown up by a bomb in the middle of the day?

mr zion lova you are off topic as usual. We pakistanis dont want to be bribed by american govt. We dont want american blood money. I wish we had a govt that truely represented us and pakistan would have nothing to do with americans. Anyway americas going busty musty and wont have any money to bribe corrupt leaders soon, cant wait.

 

[lem34]

"Join hands", no. Submit to them, yes.

Think of what kind of nation you are. Are you the sort to risk your necks by standing up against tyranny, or are you the sort to keep quiet and make money in your fat and beautiful land, by hook or by crook, always justifying your choices by reassuring yourself that there is somebody worse out there whose deeds and choices should be reviled before your own, or somebody else who should fight the good fight?

Mr Zion lova I would say that this is a case of the kettle calling the pot black