VCheng
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2010
- Messages
- 48,460
- Reaction score
- 57
- Country
- Location
But in transit trade we don't give free petrol.
NATO supplies did not include any free "petrol" ever.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
But in transit trade we don't give free petrol.
Is it traitorous, or is it that the economic pressures are simply too great to resist long term?
It's traitorous if you accept the premise that the WOT in Afghanistan is a smoke screen and America's regional goals are inimical to Pakistan's long term interests. Pakistani politicians are doing what they do best: pocket the immediate payout and let posterity worry about the long term consequences.
It's worse. These traitors are just itching to resume NATO supplies.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...imited-relationship-pakistan.html#post2428532
Any new security framework will also require increased transit fees for the thousands of trucks that supply NATO troops in Afghanistan, a bill that allied officials say could run into the tens of millions of dollars.
The Brian Cloughley article posted earlier indicated that the offer to participate in the US investigation would have made Pakistani participants akin to 'observers' - Pakistani officials would not have had the authority to summon and question anyone involved that they wished.This is one of the reasons why I still feel Pakistan should have participated in the investigation so as to be able to press home these points for maximum advantage.
A sure way not to have one's voice heard is to leave the table, after all. Yes, I know you are convinced of the futility of participation, but I disagree with that contention.
What I don't understand is what was the big deal they accept at the very least that mistakes were made by their people why cant they apologise?
The Brian Cloughley article posted earlier indicated that the offer to participate in the US investigation would have made Pakistani participants akin to 'observers' - Pakistani officials would not have had the authority to summon and question anyone involved that they wished.
This question of 'why the delay' is one that the US investigators should address in any case, they don't need Pakistani observers to do so.
If you see the long report published by DoD, there is no shirking away from mistakes.. However some mistakes have also been pointed towards Pakistan army, like the first fire and continued attack even after display of air assets.. That I believe is where the point of contention lies..
If you see the long report published by DoD, there is no shirking away from mistakes.. However some mistakes have also been pointed towards Pakistan army, like the first fire and continued attack even after display of air assets.. That I believe is where the point of contention lies..
New Recruit
guys i tell u from real credible source that it was a planned attack.the americans were given coordinates of all the post along the Pakistan afg border well in time.where the hell was all that tech once they crossed thr intl border.it was no mistake.it was a sheer act of blunt aggression.
Yahya, you are too old man. You have post old informations many times we already discussed, why??