• 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: Still Showing Us the Love

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
It should be open season on ISI personnel.

Let the CIA go hog wild on these assholes, the Pakistani government will be better off for it.
 
Double Trouble said:
Hey, have at it, they can all share that piece of garbage of a country, just like they can share pakistan, another terrorist piece of garbage country.



Few million? Try $20 billion since 2002. For that kind of money we could have just flattened that garbage heap of a country and converted it into a walmart with a giant parking lot :|
Click to expand...

Do you have any proof of this or are you just passing out gas from your mouth and presenting as facts?
 
Fern said:
With friends like this who needs enemies?

So when we withdraw from Iraq we must be concerned with Iran inserting itself. Now when we withdraw from Afghanistan we have the Pakistanis ready to jump and destabilize the Afghani govt?

We've got a lot of fires burning all at once. What's Obama gonna do?

Fern
Click to expand...

in all honesty, I think it is smart for that country to do what it is doing. Historically, it is evident that we have used that country to do our bidding, when we have wanted. From opening a pathway to China, to spy flights over USSR flying out of that country to Afghanistan, we have used Pakistan as a dirty whore.
If Pakistan does not finally become sensible and use its resources to impact what it thinks best, then and only then would hope be lost for that country.
 
I will try to be logical and address items with responses in bold.
The Green Bean said:
Well the USA has very little credibility. They said that Saddam had nukes ready to launch against London and Paris within hours and now they're saying this. I do not ever recall anyone stating that Saddam had nukes. Saddam was thought to be trying to acquire nuke technology. He was known to have mated chemical weapons onto the Scuds. There was never any talk of missile technology that could reach London. They have lost the Afghan war and are looking to put all blame on us. 10 years and Afghanistan is worse than it was to begin with.
Afghanistan had two concepts. 1) Remove the Taliban who were supporting AQ. (Succeeded) 2) Standup a new government that would replace the Taliban. (Questionable results). The Taliban were not completely defeated as a political force and by retreating into the hills, made it difficult to eliminate. The ability of the people to accept a new government was overestimated

The problem for the USA today is that it's not irreplaceable. Senator Mccain has said the USA will not isolate Pakistan like they did in the past. The USA is still the biggest investor in Pakistan but China will overtake them by 2015. They are still our main export market but that is set to change to as we develop stronger trade relations with our neighbors. Besides, the American market is shrinking with their economy struggling. We, on the other hand are out of immediate economic and financial collapse and we won't be needing an IMF loan and we won't have a problem paying them back either.

We no longer need to depend on the USA for our military needs either. The problem with military is that you are still dependent on the US for parts. Iran has had serious problems because their advanced F14 planes are grounded. One of the best weapon platforms in the world for 20 years; and completely grounded. Without spares, a military is forced to cannibalize which reduces its effectiveness. Our main enemy in the region is India. However, I don't think we will be able to afford a conventional arms race with them and I think our generals agree with that. We are still aggressively upgrading our conventional arsenal but the strategic focus has shifted towards WMDs. I do think that since Kargil, our approach towards India has shifted to a more defensive approach.

As for the Afghan war, it's over for America. Their only potential sphere of influence in Pakistan has plans of its own. Once the USA leaves, Afghanistan will be another battle zone between the regional powers including Russia, China, Iran and India.

And to those that think that American aid is actually significant: you are getting a great deal. You are getting to use our resources and even have CIA operatives here. The few million in "aid" that we are getting is nowhere near the $70 billion we have suffered in economic losses.Your economic losses are due to your own countries policies Most of your aid is used in fighting militants. The US does not cause those militants to attack Pakistan. This is the result of the government's actions with respect to the population and the rise of radical Islam There is some aid that has been used for development but it's peanuts compared to what needs to be done. You refuse to grant us better market access. You refuse to give us access to civilian nuclear tech. You refuse to let us build gas pipelines to Iran. You really think you are helping? The refusals have been because of what has been learned of how Pakistan has "cooperated" with our needs and what they have done with respect to nuclear technology. As more information has been obtained about what Pakistan has done; a resulting backlash has occurred. Pakistan has previously opted for the short term gain at the expense of long term growth. Now the results of such attitudes are being felt. For to long, Pakistan has acted as if the fact that they have nukes means they do not have to answer for their actions feeling that it gives them leverage.

The absolute worst that will happen is unilateral military sanctions.As previously stated, there is no justification at this time, nor talk of an absolute arms embargo against Pakistani. The restriction of US products shows displeasure at what the Pakistani government is doing may be justified. The attitude of the government has changed forcing the US to then change it attitudes. The US also has the authority to restrict what companies are allowed to work with the US for civilian development; again this is based on the actions of the Pakistani government. Pakistan has the same right - to choose what companies it allows to work on projects under its control. I don't think the USA will be successful in imposing an outright arms embargo on us and that could be dangerous. The solution is simple: the USA needs to stop acting like world police. The problem with the "world police" is that other smaller countries realize that they are unable to perform functions that they desire. Many feel it is safer to request help from the US vs China or Russia. Very few times does the US go acting as the police alone; it is usally with other groups of countries. Prior to the fall of the Soviets, it may have been a different story. Then everyone was meddling - just that when the Soviets did it, it was not allowed to be reported. It needs to realize that all is lost in Afghanistan. They need to declare victory, get out and let everybody else figure out what to do with Afghanistan.

Then there is another version: America is blaming Pakistan in public to save face for it's imminent defeat while the situation is different behind closed doors. We have already realized when the Russians did previously. Afghanistan. The place is not ready to have a central government that meets the standards of that of a third world country. This is a defeat of our original attempt of standing up a strong central government; however the actions (right or wrong) of the perceived deception and slight of hand that is continually being displayed by Pakistan that is affecting the American public. Pakistan is stating one thing and then being shown to do another which is opposite of their original stated intentions.
  • The prime example is Bin Laden. For years Pakistan states that they are an ally against AQ and are trying to help the US locate him in the wilderness. Then the US locates him living comfortably next to a large military base. Pakistan claims that they have no knowledge of such. Then they hand over access to China the copter wreckage in retaliation for the US doing what Pakistan should have been expected to do. [*]Camps for weapon manufacture are located and kept under observation for days. After that info is past to Pakistan; those camps suddenly are closed up and moved. Multiple times. This is what is being shown to the world on how Pakistan operates. For some countries that think and operate the same, it is no big deal. To others that are trying to eliminate terrorism, it is.
Pakistan is being continually hit by attacks and suicide bombers, this is because of it's policies; right or wrong. Pakistan is having problems in that regard; assistance might be available, but at this point, few countries want to step in to help even if Pakistan asked.
Click to expand...
 
The Green Bean said:
....

We no longer need to depend on the USA for our military needs either. Our main enemy in the region is India. However, I don't think we will be able to afford a conventional arms race with them and I think our generals agree with that. We are still aggressively upgrading our conventional arsenal but the strategic focus has shifted towards WMDs. I do think that since Kargil, our approach towards India has shifted to a more defensive approach.
Click to expand...

Your enemy is a feckless feudal class who are yet to realize their game is up. Your enemy are the illiterate mullahs and ultra-corrupt useful-idiot politicians. Your main enemy is your army who feed hatred for India like mother's milk right from the time you are born, when logic says that India couldn't care a rat's aese for Pakistan were it not for your main export - terror that is directed towards it. And using all the the food and nutrition towards growing ten-inch claws at the expense of the body doesn't matter, because your body is withering away and will collapse from within over it's bones.
 
Heh. Sounds to me like McMullen et al are just scapegoating policy failure onto the Pakistanis.

The situation in Afghanistan is the result of irreversible Policy Failure at the highest levels of the Bush Admin. Obama walked right into it, eyes wide shut, propping up the ineffectual and utterly corrupt Karzai regime. If we'd have had the vaguest idea of how to succeed there, we'd have been done and gone years ago.

It's turned into Nixon in Vietnam- all we really want is a way to get out without taking lead in our ass on the way & look good doing it.
 
Jhhnn said:
Heh. Sounds to me like McMullen et al are just scapegoating policy failure onto the Pakistanis.

The situation in Afghanistan is the result of irreversible Policy Failure at the highest levels of the Bush Admin. Obama walked right into it, eyes wide shut, propping up the ineffectual and utterly corrupt Karzai regime. If we'd have had the vaguest idea of how to succeed there, we'd have been done and gone years ago.

It's turned into Nixon in Vietnam- all we really want is a way to get out without taking lead in our ass on the way & look good doing it.
Click to expand...
Riggghhht. Obama is trying to scapegoat Pakistan for Bush admin policy failures.

That statement smacks of partisan hackery. Of course it's really no surprise, considering the source.
 
TastesLikeChicken said:
Riggghhht. Obama is trying to scapegoat Pakistan for Bush admin policy failures.

That statement smacks of partisan hackery. Of course it's really no surprise, considering the source.
Click to expand...

Obama bought into the BushCo narrative- hook, line, & sinker, so it's no surprise he's defending it. He's trying to do what Nixon did in Vietnam- bring enough pressure to bear to make a deal, give the appearance of a negotiated peace, then clear out.

Shee-it, Sherlock- BushCo had fewer than 40K troops in Afghanistan as late as 2009, inviting insurgents to regroup and attack, along with backing a corrupt regime that did little to discourage it. They ignored the lessons of history, one of them being that Afghanistan is an easy place for an army to march into, a tough one to get out of in one piece. They didn't care, arrogant Neocons that they are. They didn't need no steenking exit strategy, and it shows.
 
When you have some actual proof that Pakistan is being scapegoated do come back and present it. Until then it's nothing more than your standard partisan hackery that you are pulling straight out of your behind, Jhhhn.
 
TastesLikeChicken said:
When you have some actual proof that Pakistan is being scapegoated do come back and present it. Until then it's nothing more than your standard partisan hackery that you are pulling straight out of your behind, Jhhhn.
Click to expand...

And when McMullen has some proof of his own, he should do the same. As it is, all we have are accusations, convenient ones, at that.

Are the Pakistanis playing a double game? Likely, but that should be expected behavior when we pooh-pooh their interests. If we want to persevere in Afghanistan, we need the Pakis more than they need us- the most cursory glance at a map of the region tells us that. And it's not like we didn't know that the ISI were big supporters of the Taliban in the first place, either.

Mostly, I'm just saying that McMullen needs to STFU and do his job, or he'll end up like his predecessor.
 
Jhhnn said:
Are the Pakistanis playing a double game? Likely, but that should be expected behavior when we pooh-pooh their interests. If we want to persevere in Afghanistan, we need the Pakis more than they need us- the most cursory glance at a map of the region tells us that. And it's not like we didn't know that the ISI were big supporters of the Taliban in the first place, either.

Mostly, I'm just saying that McMullen needs to STFU and do his job, or he'll end up like his predecessor.
Click to expand...

Pakistanis are only interested in begging, borrowing or stealing whatever they can from their benefactors to continue their one-sided blood-feud against India. They have no national identity except as an "anti-India" and they want the U.S. to subsidize this ideology.

As for it's "usefulness", harboring bin Laden in the very heart of the military establishment, in and of itself, would have been considered an act of war. The pakistanis think they can go on playing their games for ever whereas they've used up even their bonus lives.

As for Mullen, the guy stuck his neck out for years for the weasel pakistani army; if he has thrown his hands up in the air, one can imagine the levels of anger within the U.S. military establishment.
 
Jhhnn said:
And when McMullen has some proof of his own, he should do the same. As it is, all we have are accusations, convenient ones, at that.

Are the Pakistanis playing a double game? Likely, but that should be expected behavior when we pooh-pooh their interests. If we want to persevere in Afghanistan, we need the Pakis more than they need us- the most cursory glance at a map of the region tells us that. And it's not like we didn't know that the ISI were big supporters of the Taliban in the first place, either.

Mostly, I'm just saying that McMullen needs to STFU and do his job, or he'll end up like his predecessor.
Click to expand...
Who is McMullen? Are you talking about Mike Mullen? And do you really think Patreus and Panetta would also chime in if we didn't have some valid intel about this? Or are they all in on the scapegoating conspiracy too?

🙄
 
TastesLikeChicken said:
Who is McMullen? Are you talking about Mike Mullen? And do you really think Patreus and Panetta would also chime in if we didn't have some valid intel about this? Or are they all in on the scapegoating conspiracy too?

🙄
Click to expand...

I apologize to Mullen wrt the addition of an erroneous prefix. My mistake.

The rest of it? I dunno... weren't we supposed to have some valid intel wrt Iraqi WMD's, reconstituted nuclear program & links to Al Qaeda? I seem to recall an enormous chorus, official and unofficial, rising up behind GWB when he said so...

It's always amusing when Righties who wouldn't trust the govt to administer an after school program go down on military intelligence faster than a cheap hooker goes down for a 50... They're professional liars, but they're telling you the truth right now? Why would they, particularly when they need somebody to blame other than themselves?

How about applying some of that healthy skepticism to this?
 
Jhhnn said:
The rest of it? I dunno... weren't we supposed to have some valid intel wrt Iraqi WMD's, reconstituted nuclear program & links to Al Qaeda? I seem to recall an enormous chorus, official and unofficial, rising up behind GWB when he said so...

How about applying some of that healthy skepticism to this?
Click to expand...

In the case of Pakistan, wouldn't finding bin Laden as an honored guest of their military establishment qualify as the equivalent of actually finding WMD's in Iraq?
 
badb0y said:
Not with a ten foot pole, are you retarded?
Click to expand...

Feel free to add something of substance that can actually be responded to. In this case I present you with a choice of which suggestion you despise.

Feeding the Afghans to the Pakistanis, or simply destroying Pakistan. Take your pick.
 
The Green Bean said:
The solution is simple: the USA needs to stop acting like world police. It needs to realize that all is lost in Afghanistan. They need to declare victory, get out and let everybody else figure out what to do with Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

😵 I find myself in agreement with The Green Bean.

Though I have no qualms with seeing his country as an enemy, and utterly destroying it as a result, I have to think that there's a better way to deal with the situation.

Before we go to war with a nuclear country we should do the obvious. Leave Afghanistan. Remove ourselves from the equation and suddenly Iran and Pakistan are no longer actively killing Americans there. This solution is cheap. It would not risk WW3 and the detonation of nuclear weapons.

The locals should have always been the ones to police themselves after our invasion. They don't need to be rebuilt and micro managed. They can take their punishment and live with it. Their neighbors are forcing the issue. We can either draw our sword and strike them all down, or we can step back and assess the situation to provide ourselves a more realistic course of action.

Give them a chance to make a smart move and lead by example. Diffuse the situation. We know who to invade if we get struck again.
 
grebe925 said:
In the case of Pakistan, wouldn't finding bin Laden as an honored guest of their military establishment qualify as the equivalent of actually finding WMD's in Iraq?
Click to expand...

Hiding out right under Pakistani noses doesn't mean that Bin Laden was their "honored guest", at all. Nor does it change what I offered wrt the credibility of our own excuse makers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top