FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


USA and the PAK an unrealistic relationship





yagnyavalkya
USA and the PAK an unrealistic relationship
Is the USA merely trying to justify its past relationship with PAK ?
Is the USA making the same mistake? Having a honey moon with the PAK?
Is it not correct that if the US need to win the war on terror it has to take on PAK and AFGAN
I predict a drastic change in the South East Asian region in the near Future
Taliban may not only capture the rest of AFGAN but also PAK
I think the US is paying for all the biogotry it had done thru CIA in PAK and AFGAN in the 70s and 80s
what are your comments?
prithvi
The US knows that many terrorist activities across the world has had its roots in Pakistan.
Yet it has to take the 'support' of Pakistan, only to fight its war against the Taliban.

Come to think of it, such a big democratic power has been forced to have Pakistan, an unofficial military state, as an ally against its war against Taliban.

In its turn, Pakistan reluctantly has to keep up with the US presence in that area, so as to be in their 'good books'. Without sanctions and economic aid from US, Pakistan would have a big problem at hand.

So its really about seizing the opportunity, not morality.
yagnyavalkya
prithvi wrote:
.

So its really about seizing the opportunity, not morality.

What opportunity?
What did the USA gain by driving out the Russians from Afgan?
with the help of ISI, PAK and other Mujahiddin
1. In the Short Run ( till 1995)
2. In the Long Run ( Till Now
3. What will they gain in future
you can also say what they lost! bonus points for that!
deanhills
yagnyavalkya wrote:
What opportunity?
What did the USA gain by driving out the Russians from Afgan?
with the help of ISI, PAK and other Mujahiddin
1. In the Short Run ( till 1995)
2. In the Long Run ( Till Now
3. What will they gain in future
you can also say what they lost! bonus points for that!


Well hopefully they will finally find Bin Laden, although by the time they do, he could possibly be very old and grey Smile I am not holding much hope that they will find him, and am as cynical about that as about Sadam Hussein. Why did it take the US so long to sort out Sadam? And why has it not found Bin Laden yet? I think we know so little about the truth as basically all we hear most of the time are lies on a "what the public needs to know" basis.

From a safety point of view though, another benefit for me is that I sleep much better at night, knowing that the US is observing the terrorists up close and personally where they are located in Afghanistan, and are keeping them on the defensive. Only part that has me seriously worried though is what happened in Mumbai, and whether that is going to be a new style of terrorism. As the sophistication of it far outstripped the capabilities of India security forces, and that does not say that the latter was inadequate, but only inadequate relative to the super sophistication of the invaders. One wonders who the sponsors are for that level of sophistication and hopefully the US has figured that out already. It would be a major catastrophe for the world if Pakistan and India were at war with one another, possibly that could have been the main objective of the invaders? Easier to work with Pakistan as a friend, rather than an enemy so good for the US to be on good footing with both countries?

Lastly, there are quite a number of very large countries surrounding Afghanistan who are armed with nuclear armaments. Possibly strategically good to be at close quarters to observe their goings on? As well as of course Afghanistan is an important oil pipeline, think I probably should have put that first. And expenditure on the military of course keeps the economy going as well as keeps it in shape, along 'if you do not use it, you loose it' lines. Smile
ocalhoun
Its good to have an ally there, even if it was a farce. It is important to keep it on the basis of USA vs the terrorists rather than USA vs the Middle East. Having friendly nations over there, even if they have troubled relations, keeps it that way.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
Its good to have an ally there, even if it was a farce. It is important to keep it on the basis of USA vs the terrorists rather than USA vs the Middle East. Having friendly nations over there, even if they have troubled relations, keeps it that way.


Very true. And if you meet people from Pakistan you will find it very easy to do. There is something special about the country and its people. The majority of them. Awful how a minority can really spoil it for the others as at one stage Pakistan was a sought after destination for Western expats and currently expats will think a number of times before they would decide to travel to Pakistan.
yagnyavalkya
The relationship is based on the fact that the US has to make use of what ever it can because of the proximity of PAKISTAn to Afgan so that it can send in Drones to kill terrorist
deanhills
yagnyavalkya wrote:
The relationship is based on the fact that the US has to make use of what ever it can because of the proximity of PAKISTAn to Afgan so that it can send in Drones to kill terrorist


I doubt it is only that yagnyavalkya. It is always much more than that. There would definitely be an economic relationship between the two of them, and since it is the military in Pakistan who are calling the shots (proverbially speaking), I am almost certain supply of armaments would be playing a major role in this. When I was doing some research for one of the Frihost threads a long while ago about export of oil, I actually found that Pakistan was exporting oil to the US. Bizarre! There most be quite a long list of quid pro pro deals between the US and Pakistan. I'm very happy that there is this relationship. Pakistan is an important ally and it is important that they should be a stable one. There are so many disturbances in its Northern parts, hope they can sort out those terrorists.
prithvi
Now with the Taliban trying harder day by day to establish its strong presence in Afghanistan, it would be more interesting than ever before, to watch how the Pakistan Government balances its relationship with the US and the extremist groups.
deanhills
prithvi wrote:
Now with the Taliban trying harder day by day to establish its strong presence in Afghanistan, it would be more interesting than ever before, to watch how the Pakistan Government balances its relationship with the US and the extremist groups.
In what direction do you think it is likely to progress? To me it feels like an escalation of something.
ptfrances
Relations between Pakistan and the US has been really unsane since long time.
Maybe the era Obama could make these relations more sane.

Wink
deanhills
ptfrances wrote:
Relations between Pakistan and the US has been really unsane since long time.
Maybe the era Obama could make these relations more sane.

Wink


Lets hope that will happen. Hillary Clinton seems to be doing a good job with diplomacy so far. I like her dedication, as well as strong way of talking. Without being aggressive.
vineeth
The problem with Pakistan is the presence of extremist activities in their soil. As they had grown even to challenge the legal system of Pakistan (like in Swat region) and Pakistan Govt. often expressed their inability to manage these forces, US will continue to operate in the region.
deanhills
vineeth wrote:
The problem with Pakistan is the presence of extremist activities in their soil. As they had grown even to challenge the legal system of Pakistan (like in Swat region) and Pakistan Govt. often expressed their inability to manage these forces, US will continue to operate in the region.


Following the thread in World News about lack of education of a large percentage of its citizens in India and this being responsible for conflict, do you think this could be the same in Pakistan as well? I read in the Newspaper today that there is more conflict coming with party politics. Pakistan has conflict everywhere, and has had that for many years. The terrorist groups in the vicinity of the border with Afghanistan must make it that much more complicated. I can also imagine that the populations near the borderwould be less educated than people in the larger cities and towns, with less infrastructure and access to education and essential services, so also easily swayed in the direction of conflict?
yagnyavalkya
deanhills wrote:
vineeth wrote:
The problem with Pakistan is the presence of extremist activities in their soil. As they had grown even to challenge the legal system of Pakistan (like in Swat region) and Pakistan Govt. often expressed their inability to manage these forces, US will continue to operate in the region.


Following the thread in World News about lack of education of a large percentage of its citizens in India and this being responsible for conflict, do you think this could be the same in Pakistan as well? I read in the Newspaper today that there is more conflict coming with party politics. Pakistan has conflict everywhere, and has had that for many years. The terrorist groups in the vicinity of the border with Afghanistan must make it that much more complicated. I can also imagine that the populations near the borderwould be less educated than people in the larger cities and towns, with less infrastructure and access to education and essential services, so also easily swayed in the direction of conflict?

India and PAk are fools to fight for Kasmir
they coudl well give the state a buffer status and look in the lines of economic and scientific developments instead of strategic expenditure in arms and the defence
what these tow countries need now id more money pumped into the scientific infrastrure there is immense amount of talent in these two countries that is going waste due to petty squables
deanhills
yagnyavalkya wrote:
India and PAk are fools to fight for Kasmir
they coudl well give the state a buffer status and look in the lines of economic and scientific developments instead of strategic expenditure in arms and the defence
what these tow countries need now id more money pumped into the scientific infrastrure there is immense amount of talent in these two countries that is going waste due to petty squables


Agreed, but how do you get them to end all the conflict? How do you see the solution to that?
vineeth
I suspect, we are too 'religiously tolerant' while discussing about and taking actions against global terrorism. Afghanistan and remote areas of Pakistan holds countless terrorist camps where innocent youth from both the countries are brain washed to become human bombs. It is a fact that no body in the world would kill another person without any specific reason, if he is not mad. Here, the reason is religion, or faked religion.

Lack of modern education, poverty and lack of exposure to international community often attracts youth in these areas to camps of terror. These camps will not teach how to use weapons and kill someone initially but they will be put under religious training, and the essence of training is this - "Only Allah is the real God, everything else is fake. It is the duty of every Islam to establish this truth at any cost".

Then they will send them for 'holy war' which almost all of us will call 'unholy'. Everything in the name of religion, in the name of the religion that preached peace always !

situations in India are different. Even though we have poverty, lack of education and unemployment, we can't resort to kill others for our daily food. We don't believes that killing someone will solve all the problems once for ever. You know, India is one of the largest victim of global terrorism, sponsored by terrorism outfits in Pakistan, Afghanistan and even ISI sometimes. We are maintaining a good army and if we desired, we could have send our forces to those areas and clear-off the situation. But would this solve the problem? We don't think so. Terror will take a new shape and will emerge from a new country with different people on hand.

The final solution for terrorism is only development both secular and religious. I must say that Islam has to grow up to the standards of a world religion and should learn to adjust with time. Hinduism is existing for more than 4000 years at least, just because we have successfully separated essentials and non-essentials in religious practice.

The foundations of all world religions in the world is and should be universal love, acceptance and upliftment of man towards divinity. We may have different paths towards this goal but I must accept and recognize your path while traveling in my own roads. Please note its not tolerance, but acceptance. When the world learns these preliminary facts, terrorism will come to an end, at least those which has its foundations in religions extremism.
deanhills
vineeth wrote:
Please note its not tolerance, but acceptance.


Good point. Just a pity that people are usually selfish and focussed on their own agendas, and perhaps the agenda may be one of indoctrinating people not to accept. Maybe we have to accept that? There has always been conflict in the world and there will always be conflict. Similarly there will always be people trying to make peace. As long as there can be a balance between the two the world can still turn around Smile
Related topics
Where do you live?
The Unofficial Jokes Thread
Cheaper to patch--Windows or open source?
Europe vs. Usa lol
I NEED ALL YOUR HELP
Coalition of the Gloating: No Hurricane Relief for USA!
US Offers F-16 to Pakistan
Democrats at it again: Caught in another lie
Eliminate California from USA?
All About Metallica
Bush Visit to india .How should we Treat it ?
Have You Ever Ask Your Friend To Break with Their Beloved?
Your relationship to Christmas
What do you look for in a Relationship
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.