YAYYY!! America is making sense now!

[SekrutYakhni]

"WASHINGTON: Heavy military spending in India and Pakistan has been detrimental to the citizens of both countries, a US think-tank said on Thursday while urging the two neighbours to reinvest in trade and confidence building."

Link: Heavy military spending hurting India, Pakistan: US report - Newspaper - DAWN.COM


Ohh really? What kind of a think tank it is? I think CIA?

How about Mr. Think less tank - How about you tell the same to your own country?

Heavy military spending has been detrimental for the US. So lets urge trade between China, Russia etc and no proxy fighting? No pivot to Asia.

But wait - I am a tank less think. I mean think less tank. Amrikans can print as much money as they want. After all, zion banksters are with them, for now

I have never ever seen such hoez in my entire life.

How much money does it take to condition one's brain?

In a foreword for the report, former US Secretary of State George P Shultz notes that the cost of the military itself is substantial.

“But the cost of arms and armies is only part of the problem. Here we have two countries full of competent people and many complementary capabilities,” he writes. “In this setting, trade should be booming, much to the benefit of people in both countries. Instead, trade is at a mere trickle.”

So I think Jews also want this to happen?

So if Pakistan becomes a "goood" boy - I think Baloch thing will die off - India will have a lot of gas to control the Pakistani culture. Eventually, Afghan will change.

So no more country to worry about? No more country to culturally invade?

But dont worry Let Englistan go down first and very very soon. Sooner than you think. After that, mans and bergs and shcultz won't find an escape route after few years You will also take your jihadi brothers with you too How ironic it is...Evil and jihadi puppies going down together? I mean the latter always used to think that they were the saviours of Islam, no?

 

[VCheng]

Here is the full report for those interested:

http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/imag...Pakistan_Opportunity_Cost_of_Conflict_web.pdf

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
India and Pakistan, born out of a single British-ruled entity in 1947, have continued an implacable rivalry marked by periodic wars and hostilities as well as through proxies. This unending conflict has led them to invest heavily in their militaries and even to choose nuclear weaponry as a deterrence on the part of Pakistan toward India and on India’s part toward both Pakistan and China. Although there have been occasional moves toward confidence building measures and most recently toward more open borders for trade, deep mistrust and suspicion mark this sibling rivalry. Their mutual fears have fuelled an arms race, even though increasingly civil society actors now appear to favor rapprochement and some sort of an entente. The question is whether these new trends will help diminish the military spending on both sides.

It is clear that increased spending has not brought foolproof security to either country. Indeed, their threats have changed much over the decades. Internal militancy and insurgencies continue to bedevil both states. The production of newer missiles, and tactical nuclear weapons adds further volatility and danger to this mix. Unless both sides can begin a dialogue on economic and military relations, they will continue to feed their defense budgets, increasing the opportunity costs of such expenditures. Such spending, even by an economically growing and more powerful India, will be at the expense of its massive segment of poor people, roughly a fifth of whom live at subsistence or below subsistence level. The foregone benefits in the economic and social sectors in Pakistan, which has a smaller economy overall and will likely be one-sixteenth the size of India’s economy by 2030, are huge.

Both countries need to shift this trajectory of military spending and turn toward greater confidence building. They can do this by many means, including:

• increased people-to-people contacts and thus eliminate old stereotypes that fuel fears of each other;
• direct communications between their militaries, through exchange visits and more transparency about their military plans and movements;
• open borders for trade and tourism; and
• joint investments in energy, water, and export industries.

Recent statements, among others by Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif at the United Nations, on the need to end the nuclear threat, portend some hope. But, given uncertain internal and regional developments, it is too early to see if there will be any major shift in spending on the military and on developing new weapon systems.

 

[k_arura]

"WASHINGTON: Heavy military spending in India and Pakistan has been detrimental to the citizens of both countries, a US think-tank said on Thursday while urging the two neighbours to reinvest in trade and confidence building."

Link: Heavy military spending hurting India, Pakistan: US report - Newspaper - DAWN.COM


Ohh really? What kind of a think tank it is? I think CIA?

How about Mr. Think less tank - How about you tell the same to your own country?

Heavy military spending has been detrimental for the US. So lets urge trade between China, Russia etc and no proxy fighting? No pivot to Asia.

But wait - I am a tank less think. I mean think less tank. Amrikans can print as much money as they want. After all, zion banksters are with them, for now

I have never ever seen such hoez in my entire life.

How much money does it take to condition one's brain?

In a foreword for the report, former US Secretary of State George P Shultz notes that the cost of the military itself is substantial.

“But the cost of arms and armies is only part of the problem. Here we have two countries full of competent people and many complementary capabilities,” he writes. “In this setting, trade should be booming, much to the benefit of people in both countries. Instead, trade is at a mere trickle.”

So I think Jews also want this to happen?

So if Pakistan becomes a "goood" boy - I think Baloch thing will die off - India will have a lot of gas to control the Pakistani culture. Eventually, Afghan will change.

So no more country to worry about? No more country to culturally invade?

But dont worry Let Englistan go down first and very very soon. Sooner than you think. After that, mans and bergs and shcultz won't find an escape route after few years You will also take your jihadi brothers with you too How ironic it is...Evil and jihadi puppies going down together? I mean the latter always used to think that they were the saviours of Islam, no?

What are you so riled up about increased trade? After all you guys never tire of hating US (west) but at the same time seeking greater access to their markets and aid. Am I out of my mind? Please help!

 

[AugenBlick]

Here is the full report for those interested:

http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/imag...Pakistan_Opportunity_Cost_of_Conflict_web.pdf

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
India and Pakistan, born out of a single British-ruled entity in 1947, have continued an implacable rivalry marked by periodic wars and hostilities as well as through proxies. This unending conflict has led them to invest heavily in their militaries and even to choose nuclear weaponry as a deterrence on the part of Pakistan toward India and on India’s part toward both Pakistan and China. Although there have been occasional moves toward confidence building measures and most recently toward more open borders for trade, deep mistrust and suspicion mark this sibling rivalry. Their mutual fears have fuelled an arms race, even though increasingly civil society actors now appear to favor rapprochement and some sort of an entente. The question is whether these new trends will help diminish the military spending on both sides.

It is clear that increased spending has not brought foolproof security to either country. Indeed, their threats have changed much over the decades. Internal militancy and insurgencies continue to bedevil both states. The production of newer missiles, and tactical nuclear weapons adds further volatility and danger to this mix. Unless both sides can begin a dialogue on economic and military relations, they will continue to feed their defense budgets, increasing the
opportunity costs of such expenditures. Such spending, even by an economically growing and more powerful India, will be at the expense of its massive segment of poor people, roughly a fifth of whom live at subsistence or below subsistence level. The foregone benefits in the economic and social sectors in Pakistan, which has a smaller economy overall and will likely be one-sixteenth the size of India’s economy by 2030, are huge.

Both countries need to shift this trajectory of military spending and turn toward greater confidence building. They can do this by many means, including:

• increased people-to-people contacts and thus eliminate old stereotypes that fuel fears of each other;
• direct communications between their militaries, through exchange visits and more transparency about their military plans and movements;
• open borders for trade and tourism; and
• joint investments in energy, water, and export industries.

Recent statements, among others by Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif at the United Nations, on the need to end the nuclear threat, portend some hope. But, given uncertain internal and regional developments, it is too early to see if there will be any major shift in spending on the military and on developing new weapon systems.

Doesn't affect India
Even if all issues including kashmir were to be sorted, India will increase its military spending to counter china.
Its a problem only for Pak.

 

[xyxmt]

Here is the full report for those interested:

http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/imag...Pakistan_Opportunity_Cost_of_Conflict_web.pdf

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
India and Pakistan, born out of a single British-ruled entity in 1947, have continued an implacable rivalry marked by periodic wars and hostilities as well as through proxies. This unending conflict has led them to invest heavily in their militaries and even to choose nuclear weaponry as a deterrence on the part of Pakistan toward India and on India’s part toward both Pakistan and China. Although there have been occasional moves toward confidence building measures and most recently toward more open borders for trade, deep mistrust and suspicion mark this sibling rivalry. Their mutual fears have fuelled an arms race, even though increasingly civil society actors now appear to favor rapprochement and some sort of an entente. The question is whether these new trends will help diminish the military spending on both sides.

It is clear that increased spending has not brought foolproof security to either country. Indeed, their threats have changed much over the decades. Internal militancy and insurgencies continue to bedevil both states. The production of newer missiles, and tactical nuclear weapons adds further volatility and danger to this mix. Unless both sides can begin a dialogue on economic and military relations, they will continue to feed their defense budgets, increasing the
opportunity costs of such expenditures. Such spending, even by an economically growing and more powerful India, will be at the expense of its massive segment of poor people, roughly a fifth of whom live at subsistence or below subsistence level. The foregone benefits in the economic and social sectors in Pakistan, which has a smaller economy overall and will likely be one-sixteenth the size of India’s economy by 2030, are huge.

Both countries need to shift this trajectory of military spending and turn toward greater confidence building. They can do this by many means, including:

• increased people-to-people contacts and thus eliminate old stereotypes that fuel fears of each other;
• direct communications between their militaries, through exchange visits and more transparency about their military plans and movements;
• open borders for trade and tourism; and
• joint investments in energy, water, and export industries.

Recent statements, among others by Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif at the United Nations, on the need to end the nuclear threat, portend some hope. But, given uncertain internal and regional developments, it is too early to see if there will be any major shift in spending on the military and on developing new weapon systems.

thank you for posting the real report without retard comments

 

[Sugarcane]

"WASHINGTON: Heavy military spending in India and Pakistan has been detrimental to the citizens of both countries, a US think-tank said on Thursday while urging the two neighbours to reinvest in trade and confidence building."

Link: Heavy military spending hurting India, Pakistan: US report - Newspaper - DAWN.COM


Ohh really? What kind of a think tank it is? I think CIA?

How about Mr. Think less tank - How about you tell the same to your own country?

Heavy military spending has been detrimental for the US. So lets urge trade between China, Russia etc and no proxy fighting? No pivot to Asia.

But wait - I am a tank less think. I mean think less tank. Amrikans can print as much money as they want. After all, zion banksters are with them, for now

I have never ever seen such hoez in my entire life.

How much money does it take to condition one's brain?

In a foreword for the report, former US Secretary of State George P Shultz notes that the cost of the military itself is substantial.

“But the cost of arms and armies is only part of the problem. Here we have two countries full of competent people and many complementary capabilities,” he writes. “In this setting, trade should be booming, much to the benefit of people in both countries. Instead, trade is at a mere trickle.”

So I think Jews also want this to happen?

So if Pakistan becomes a "goood" boy - I think Baloch thing will die off - India will have a lot of gas to control the Pakistani culture. Eventually, Afghan will change.

So no more country to worry about? No more country to culturally invade?

But dont worry Let Englistan go down first and very very soon. Sooner than you think. After that, mans and bergs and shcultz won't find an escape route after few years You will also take your jihadi brothers with you too How ironic it is...Evil and jihadi puppies going down together? I mean the latter always used to think that they were the saviours of Islam, no?

Report is written by two Desis - Shuja Nawaz & Mohan Guruswamy

 

[VCheng]

Doesn't affect India
Even if all issues including kashmir were to be sorted, India will increase its military spending to counter china.
Its a problem only for Pak.

I would disagree. India is also paying a huge price in social development, just as Pakistan is, altogether depriving 1.5 billion people for generations. Very sad, since there are clearly better options.

 

[AugenBlick]

I would disagree. India is also paying a huge price in social development, just as Pakistan is, altogether depriving 1.5 billion people for generations. Very sad, since there are clearly better options.

In principle I agree, Higher defense budget => lower social spending. Your argument has flaws however.
a) That it is only the defense budget that is increasing- Not true , in fact as a percentage of spending and GDP it has remained constant. In the last decade, barring the last year , India has witnessed good growth. so everything is getting more money.
b) That defense spending is impeding poverty alleviation - This one is a blurry picture. While no of people at less than 1.25$ line has halved (i.e. from 44 to 22 % of total pop. between 2005 and 2013 ) there is still a large population in the semi poor. People that meet food and shelter need (even if barely) but are not able to break into middle class/semi middle class.
c) That peace will decrease defense spending - Nope. not for India at least. We have China to take care of. Even peace with China wont stop our spending, although it won't be as urgent. For the simple principle of self reliance.
India has much to gain from status quo. Its spending not only equips its forces against China, it forces pakistan to reduce development/Education spending and spend more on military and "asymmetrical" warfare ( which bites pak back...lol). At the same time chanting peace peace , trade trade doesn't let pakistan break which would be a nightmare for all. Quite the pragmatic way to take care of an "Frenemy".
Finally, poverty reduction needs a multidimensional approach and a higher budget is necessary but not sufficient to solve the problem.
The only way for this to reverse is if India suddenly drops to 3 % growth rates. at 4.9 % the people are up to the neck of the government. You will see riots at 3% . Not possible as next PM is known for Good economic development.

 

[VCheng]

In principle I agree, Higher defense budget => lower social spending. Your argument has flaws however.
a) That it is only the defense budget that is increasing- Not true , in fact as a percentage of spending and GDP it has remained constant. In the last decade, barring the last year , India has witnessed good growth. so everything is getting more money.
b) That defense spending is impeding poverty alleviation - This one is a blurry picture. While no of people at less than 1.25$ line has halved (i.e. from 44 to 22 % of total pop. between 2005 and 2013 ) there is still a large population in the semi poor. People that meet food and shelter need (even if barely) but are not able to break into middle class/semi middle class.
c) That peace will decrease defense spending - Nope. not for India at least. We have China to take care of. Even peace with China wont stop our spending, although it won't be as urgent. For the simple principle of self reliance.
India has much to gain from status quo. Its spending not only equips its forces against China, it forces pakistan to reduce development/Education spending and spend more on military and "asymmetrical" warfare ( which bites pak back...lol). At the same time chanting peace peace , trade trade doesn't let pakistan break which would be a nightmare for all. Quite the pragmatic way to take care of an "Frenemy".
Finally, poverty reduction needs a multidimensional approach and a higher budget is necessary but not sufficient to solve the problem.
The only way for this to reverse is if India suddenly drops to 3 % growth rates. at 4.9 % the people are up to the neck of the government. You will see riots at 3% . Not possible as next PM is known for Good economic development.

I am not saying it, the report is, and it does present its line of reasoning very well.

 

[AugenBlick]

I am not saying it, the report is, and it does present its line of reasoning very well.

It is flawed. eg. I quote

It notes that “the production of newer missiles and tactical nuclear weapons adds further volatility and danger to this mix. Unless both sides can begin a dialogue on economic and military relations, they will continue to feed their defence budgets, increasing the opportunity costs of such expenditures.”

Sounds logical right???
Wrong!! it may be true for Pak, but India needs to be able to target most of china from as far as possible. Hence we are now developing 8000 km range missile. In defence preparedness we have met all needs against Pak. A side effect of this is that Pak will spend more just to keep up. So the report argues solely from what is beneficial to Pak, while foolishly thinking that Indians/India will not keep its own interests.

 

[VCheng]

It is flawed. eg. I quote

Sounds logical right???
Wrong!! it may be true for Pak, but India needs to be able to target most of china from as far as possible. Hence we are now developing 8000 km range missile. In defence preparedness we have met all needs against Pak. A side effect of this is that Pak will spend more just to keep up. So the report argues solely from what is beneficial to Pak, while foolishly thinking that Indians/India will not keep its own interests.

Surely you see the parallel here: what the defense spending does to Pakistan with regards to its approach to India is the same as what the defense spending does to India with regards to its approach to China.

 

[Imran Khan]

i agree with uncle sam

 

[AugenBlick]

Surely you see the parallel here: what the defense spending does to Pakistan with regards to its approach to India is the same as what the defense spending does to India with regards to its approach to China.

Yup. But the attitude in India is different. We would still spend the same on defence even after peace with china, simply because its a national pride thing and we have the cash to do both. Peace with china would just decrease our speed, not change our Aim.
Here is some data
World spending on Education:
Public spending on education, total (% of GDP) | Data | Table
World military expanditure:
Military expenditure (% of GDP) | Data | Table

for the four years in the table , Education spending alone is higher than military.
That means we are not cutting corners , at least significantly from Social development.
Note : the case is just the opposite for Pak eductaion is to the tune of 2%+ and military is to to tune of 3%+ while for india military is 2%+ and education is 3%+

 

[VCheng]

That means we are not cutting corners , at least significantly from Social development.

China is at #101, but India (#136) and Pakistan (#146) are not all that different, supporting the report:

 

[AugenBlick]

China is at #101, but India (#136) and Pakistan (#146) are not all that different, supporting the report:

Are we debating on spending or current position??
In terms of spending India is already spending more than Pak both in absolute terms (obvious) and % of GDP.
As far as current position is concerned, if even after 3 decades of double digit growth china is at 101 then for India , it is going to take a very long time and more spending will not solve the problem.
Again Pak has two advantages here :
a) Smaller : Thats means a sharp increase in spending will quickly help pakistan not India.
b) more homogeneous: that means its easier to make and go after projects and targets than India.
Also I noticed Pak is at .515 and india is at .554 but an advantage of .03 is very high in absolute terms considering india has to work on a 7x larger population.
My argument stands: this report considers what is pro Pak and wraps it up in feel good mantra of peace implies development to sell it to India/Indians/World/whomever .