Nebor
Lifer
Sounds good. Can you PM me your address so I can stop by and see you when we're in Pakistan?
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Pakistan cuts off NATO supply routes
Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Sounds good. Can you PM me your address so I can stop by and see you when we're in Pakistan?
The Green Bean
Diamond Member
Lets just say the 1500 soldiers that have been killed in this war from your side will seem insignificant. Usa has already lost the war. It may soind crazy but pakistan has won. Bettee to accept defeat now and gtfo rather than prolonging the inevitable and wasting billions. Once the usa leaves, there will be a pakistani backed puppet in kabul.
Sorry for the typos. Suck and tableta...
Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk
TGB is a beloved patriot government agent. Anyone who doesn't think this must be a newbie around here.
That being said, we could turn that shitty country to glass with a couple Tridents in about a half hour. Sadly, this isnt an option, because we have too many troops in Afghanistan that would be in the fallout zone.
The real question is: If we nuked Pakistan, would it look any different afterwards?
That being said, we could turn that shitty country to glass with a couple Tridents in about a half hour. Sadly, this isnt an option, because we have too many troops in Afghanistan that would be in the fallout zone.
The real question is: If we nuked Pakistan, would it look any different afterwards?
Zebo
Elite Member
Pakistan seems in a precarious situation. On the one hand the powers that be want to help fight terror, want modernity, liberalism etc but public is against it and may have a full revolt on their hands if not careful. The ranks of ISI and what not seem to have fundi infiltrators already ; see Osama living large, some hits done on liberal govt ministers and so on. Basically it's retarded to be attacking anything inside Pakistan as what we hope to prevent may occur though our own actions. But then maybe that's the intention after all. Sure would get our minds off economy having WW3.
cybrsage
Lifer
Ah, ok. I thought you meant if Pakistan and NATO went to direct war. You could be right on the current situation, it really depends on if Obama cuts and runs or if we stay to finish stabilizing the situation. IMO, since we created the current situation, we need to stay and help fix it.
Lemon law
Lifer
I don't know where OCGuy get his brainfart, that "TGB is a beloved patriot government agent. Anyone who doesn't think this must be a newbie around here."
When I have always more assumed that TGB is a young adult descendant of a fairly wealthy Pakistani family. And you don't get wealthy in Pakistan without taking advantage of modern technology.
Being in the upper few percent of Pakistani wealth may not make the TGB a cross section view of Pakistani views, but still TGB is far more typical of Pakistani national viewpoints that any of us non-Pakistanis.
So why demonize TGB for honestly reporting Pakistani thinking, its simply killing the messenger without changing the unpleasant message in any way. And simply the strategy of an Ostrich, stick your head in a hole in the ground and you won't hear or see anything of reality. As we go forward self blinded and fail to try anything better.
The last thing to say about TGB, is that he has a somewhat exaggerated view of Pakistani self importance. All three rings of the main 3 ring circus are all located in Afghanistan and Pakistan is just a side show and a rather minor player. Its the Afghan people and their views who are the judge, jury, and executioner of Nato policy. And when Nato can't even win second place in a beauty contest with the Taliban in Afghanistan, its should be wake up time for our Ostrich's too.
the Taliban is also giving Pakistan more than they can handle in the Pakistani tribal regions, and when the Pakistani army tries the Taliban kill em all strategy, it flops even worse than it does in Afghanistan.
After all, the Taliban is not like a person, its a reactionary idea, and ideas can't be killed.
But ideas can be replaced by better and more productive modern ideas but they have to be shown to benefit almost everyone first. And instead Nato and most of anand tech P&N wants to believe its own propaganda instead.
When I have always more assumed that TGB is a young adult descendant of a fairly wealthy Pakistani family. And you don't get wealthy in Pakistan without taking advantage of modern technology.
Being in the upper few percent of Pakistani wealth may not make the TGB a cross section view of Pakistani views, but still TGB is far more typical of Pakistani national viewpoints that any of us non-Pakistanis.
So why demonize TGB for honestly reporting Pakistani thinking, its simply killing the messenger without changing the unpleasant message in any way. And simply the strategy of an Ostrich, stick your head in a hole in the ground and you won't hear or see anything of reality. As we go forward self blinded and fail to try anything better.
The last thing to say about TGB, is that he has a somewhat exaggerated view of Pakistani self importance. All three rings of the main 3 ring circus are all located in Afghanistan and Pakistan is just a side show and a rather minor player. Its the Afghan people and their views who are the judge, jury, and executioner of Nato policy. And when Nato can't even win second place in a beauty contest with the Taliban in Afghanistan, its should be wake up time for our Ostrich's too.
the Taliban is also giving Pakistan more than they can handle in the Pakistani tribal regions, and when the Pakistani army tries the Taliban kill em all strategy, it flops even worse than it does in Afghanistan.
After all, the Taliban is not like a person, its a reactionary idea, and ideas can't be killed.
But ideas can be replaced by better and more productive modern ideas but they have to be shown to benefit almost everyone first. And instead Nato and most of anand tech P&N wants to believe its own propaganda instead.
busydude
Diamond Member
Nuking Pakistan creates more problems than it solves. I know Americans don't give a flying fuck about the region. South Asia needs peaceful and stable Pakistan. It might seem like a small player to the west, but it certainly has much greater influence than it is being portrayed.
I can certainly understand how Pakistani people feel.. as India also has a hostile, more powerful, player bordering the country. I personally saw the attitude in Indians change in a span of 15 years. India does not want to go into a war with Pakistan.. as evident after 2008 Mumbai attacks(compared to 2001 Parliament attacks). I don't agree with most of the foreign policies of India, but I see the India Govt. is taking cautious and more mature decisions.
I also don't see the attitude of Pakistani Govt. to shift much.. than it is now. The army controls most of the policies regardless of who running the office. What worries me is the attitude shift in common Pakistanis. They are turning hostile everyday.. their hate for America and the world communities is going to take a toll on them. The most recent floods being the perfect example of the world not interested in helping Pakistan.
TGB said that American influence(Read: Military aid) is overly exaggerated, that maybe true. He also said that Pakistan can take sanctions from the US..just as it did in the past. Well, I am not so sure about that one. Last time Pakistan and India both has sanctions imposed on them.. so they both were growing at the same pace. Right now.. if US imposes sanctions on Pakistan.. can it come out unscathed? I ask because India is going to grow much powerful, and relying only on China is not good in the long term. If given a choice in choosing between The US and Pakistan.. China will almost always side with The US.
The Green Bean
Diamond Member
I still dont have access to a computer for a couple more days so ill try to answer everything the best i can. Sorry for the bad puncuation and typos.
Has anybody read the report by the british telegraph? It says the americans gave the wrong coordinates to the pakistanis befoe attacking.
First busydude: unilateral american sanctions wont have that big an impact. Pakistani businesses that import to the usa are already struggling because of a weak usa economy and the energy crisis at home. By 2015, china will be pakistan's biggest trade partner not the usa. Also, recent years have seen massive growth in the middle class here and more and more businesses are now focussing on the local market.
You are overestimating the power of the military in local governance. I dont know why all international media likes to point out that the army controls everything. I think its because the cant accept the fact that a democracy can be hostile towards the west. I live in pakistan and i'll tell you that local affairs are all handled by civilians. If the military did control everything you would not have such diverse politics like we have here. Its just that most people respect the military more than the civilian government who people view as corrupt western pawns.
I also think that this spat with the usa is a huge blessing in disguise. Its made people realize that it's not india they should be worried about. I see much closer ties with india in the future. Its a matter of time befoee india realizes that it will have to resort to open non-hostile ties with pakistan ro maintain growth. Indias economy has already started faltering in the recent months.
Also, tgb is right about be coming from a wealthy upper class family. But its time to open youe minds: 2 wealthy americans cam have two opposite political stands. Among freinds and collegues, i would place myself in the center regarding views towards the usa. As far as the general masses are concerned, many hate the usa out of jelousy, though i beleive some of it is justifies-- america is a greedy country.
Ive said it before but nothing would give me more pleasure than the abolition of national borders altogether. Economics and not religion is cause of most modern wars.
Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk
Has anybody read the report by the british telegraph? It says the americans gave the wrong coordinates to the pakistanis befoe attacking.
First busydude: unilateral american sanctions wont have that big an impact. Pakistani businesses that import to the usa are already struggling because of a weak usa economy and the energy crisis at home. By 2015, china will be pakistan's biggest trade partner not the usa. Also, recent years have seen massive growth in the middle class here and more and more businesses are now focussing on the local market.
You are overestimating the power of the military in local governance. I dont know why all international media likes to point out that the army controls everything. I think its because the cant accept the fact that a democracy can be hostile towards the west. I live in pakistan and i'll tell you that local affairs are all handled by civilians. If the military did control everything you would not have such diverse politics like we have here. Its just that most people respect the military more than the civilian government who people view as corrupt western pawns.
I also think that this spat with the usa is a huge blessing in disguise. Its made people realize that it's not india they should be worried about. I see much closer ties with india in the future. Its a matter of time befoee india realizes that it will have to resort to open non-hostile ties with pakistan ro maintain growth. Indias economy has already started faltering in the recent months.
Also, tgb is right about be coming from a wealthy upper class family. But its time to open youe minds: 2 wealthy americans cam have two opposite political stands. Among freinds and collegues, i would place myself in the center regarding views towards the usa. As far as the general masses are concerned, many hate the usa out of jelousy, though i beleive some of it is justifies-- america is a greedy country.
Ive said it before but nothing would give me more pleasure than the abolition of national borders altogether. Economics and not religion is cause of most modern wars.
Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk
The Green Bean
Diamond Member
There are about 10 million pashtuns. Pakiatan has a pop of 180 million. Why do people get the idea that all of pakistan is...
Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk
5150Joker
Diamond Member
There's over 44 million in Pakistan, more than enough to take over.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
PingviN
Golden Member
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Programs/FP/pakistan%20index/index.pdf
Seems to me there is less than 27 million Pashtuns in Pakistan, or 15.4% of the population.
cybrsage
Lifer
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/pk.htmlEthnic groups:
Punjabi 44.68%, Pashtun (Pathan) 15.42%, Sindhi 14.1%, Sariaki 8.38%, Muhajirs 7.57%, Balochi 3.57%, other 6.28%
Population:
country comparison to the world: 6
187 Million * 0.15 = 28 Million just a rough estimate.
The numbers agree with PingviN
busydude
Diamond Member
I'll reply to your other points.. but what possible economic reason can you give for America going to war with the Taliban?
werepossum
Elite Member
Pakistan is a peaceful and stable nation like the Mafia is a peaceful and stable civic group. And China will side with whomever it perceives most benefits China on an issue by issue basis.
Um, NOT having our very expensive buildings destroyed and our very valuable people murdered?
It's no accident that the Taliban/al-Qaeda ask for thousands of their prisoners in exchange for one of ours, or Israel's. They know their worth. And we know our own.
Lemon law
Lifer
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
busydude, I may not agree with TGB contention that modern wars are economic, but I can give you a one word answer on why America went to war with the Taliban.
And drum roll please, that one word explanation is STUPIDITY. And or EGO.
Which explains much of modern history.
cybrsage
Lifer
Agreed. Even some Islamic nations were supporting us when we said we would smoosh the Taliban if they did not hand over Bin Laden.
5150Joker
Diamond Member
Wiki has it at 44 million but even 27 million is significantly higher than 10.
That's like a bully threatening someone much smaller. We wouldn't dare do the same with Russia or China. Its easy to boast and push around the small guy.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
Lemon law
Lifer
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't assume, chucky2, that I totally agree the Taliban should have handed over OBL.
But if GWB had been less arrogant and more patient, there is some evidence that the Taliban would have handed OBL over.
I will let future historians debate about an EGO and Stupidity question in what amounts to a lost opportunity.
As it is, ten years down the road, a US favorable outcome in Afghanistan is now less likely than it was immediately after 911. As the USA and Nato embraced every STUPIDITY possible allowing Nato to grasp defeat from the jaws of almost certain victory.
Cucky2, if you are not as pissed off as I am at those results, there is something deeply wrong with you. But somehow, GWB and now Obama have managed to achieve those results by staying stuck on stupid.
LOL! If Russia or China was harboring someone recognized worldwide as the head of a major terrorist organization, and that org just killed 3k civs on US soil (with the hope of killing many more), we wouldn't have to ask, for that person, that person would either wind up dead or be given to the UN or the US.
Both would likely backchannel ask us if they'd like for this person to have an "accident", before they provided their official response.
Chuck
Why would not anyone (who has any functioning braincell in their Western mind) assume that? You're saying there is some doubt, however small, in your head that the Taliban shouldn't have handed over OBL to US/UN?
The Taliban had OBL himself on tape...there was no need for no arrogance or more patience. Somehow you fail to understand that when the most power country - by far - in the world gets 3k of its civs slaughtered on its own soil, at once, a shitstorm is going to happen somewhere/to someone. The Taliban don't need that explained, they do the exact same thing to their people when the winds blow, nevermind a 9/11 type event.
What 'lost opportunity'? The 'opportunity' to have radicals "play" the West ala Saddam/KimJongIl/etc? That opportunity? The US gave the Taliban a chance, they must have thought this was a dismissable incident like the Marine barracks/Cole/etc, or that Bush was going to allow himself to be played. Guess that dog didn't hunt huh?
You won't find me happy at how we went about Afghanistan or Iraq (should have had far larger presence, should have had much more massive infrastructure projects using local labor supplanted with knowledgable western forces...and in the case of Afghanistan, commit to taking over their country's Leadership for at least 20 years).
That said, what exactly did you want to see us doing that we didn't do?
That's Chucky2, I don't have weird fetishs like you Libs...
As I said earlier, I'm certainly not pleased with how we went about Afghanistan and Iraq, however, I'm not going to bash Bush or O'Bummer at every turn. Certainly both have been modern learning experiences every country with similiar future issues can draw on to hopefully learn how, and how not, to do things.
You seem to think you have some recipe for success - if that's even possible in Afghanistan - I'd like to hear it. Tell me/us, how did you want 'the evil "Bush&Co"' to handle getting OBL after 9/11, and then once we went into Afghanistan, how did you want The West to do that?
Chuck
Last edited:
Lemon law
Lifer
Well chucky2, now that you wound your mouth up like some jack in the box, you still fail to have a single insight into the fact we continue to lose in Afghanistan.
And worse yet, fail to question the very Nato behavior that caused those results happen.
Well congratulations, Chucky2, at proving that Nato is winning in Afghanistan, and you have done an excellent job at convincing yourself that its so.
You only have one little problem chucky2, your iron clad proof has zero to do with present reality. As you refuse to think that US propaganda could be possibly be anything but totally TRUE.
Sorry chucky2, there is no hope in ever educating the totally delusional. As I suggest to you that you will be happier to continue to believe Nato is winning in Afghanistan. Just keep believing in the tooth fairy no matter what actually happens. Behold the power of denial.
Will it make you happier if I told you we won in Vietnam too?
And worse yet, fail to question the very Nato behavior that caused those results happen.
Well congratulations, Chucky2, at proving that Nato is winning in Afghanistan, and you have done an excellent job at convincing yourself that its so.
You only have one little problem chucky2, your iron clad proof has zero to do with present reality. As you refuse to think that US propaganda could be possibly be anything but totally TRUE.
Sorry chucky2, there is no hope in ever educating the totally delusional. As I suggest to you that you will be happier to continue to believe Nato is winning in Afghanistan. Just keep believing in the tooth fairy no matter what actually happens. Behold the power of denial.
Will it make you happier if I told you we won in Vietnam too?
cybrsage
Lifer
Which is why they should have handed him over. Imagine the biggest kid saying you had to step aside so he could repeatedly punch the kid who hit him with a rock or he punch you repeated as well. Now, keep that image and add to it that the entire playground is standing around agreeing the big kid was right.
What do you do? Do you step aside and turn over the kid who attacked the big kid? If you do not turn over the kid who attacked the big kid, will anyone care when you cry that the big kid hit you?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
