http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/11/bae-dakota-meyer/?mbid=ob_ppc_dangerroom Interesting twists & turns. Would one of these scopes be sold on by Pakistan?
What's not enough? You realize with out Pakistani help, US troops in Afghanistan would be cutoff from resupply.
They should cut all military "aid" to Pakistan, and the Pakistan Government should cut all military "co-operation" too.
Is that kinda like the ongoing attacks on NATO resupply vehicles that aren't allowed through to Afghan? It is past time for the US to leave Afghanistan anyway, and as for pakistan, we should cut them off completely. All that military "co-operation" has done so well in finding OBL, hiding right under their noses, and mullah omar.... Let's not forget them letting china have access to our stealth chopper that went down in the OBL mission....some cooperation... It is apparent that pakistan does not want to be involved with the US and we don't want to be involved with them. Time for each side to go our own way.
Pakistan is not one single entity. It's civilian government, military and intelligence services are all working on their own interests.
Sure. But as far as I can tell none of those interests coincide with those of the United States. We're just not natural allies. Or friends. Or anything else short of coldly neutral.
I think if the civilian government were in charge, they'd be more inclined and happy to work with the US in Afghanistan. The military and intelligence services see an Indian conspiracy in Afghanistan to encircle Afghanistan.
I read an op-ed piece in the Nation (Pakistan), which I found interesting and was curious to find out whether it reflects the current mood among people in Pakistan? Hunting the hunter: Learning from Iran
The military and intelligence services see an Indian conspiracy in pretty much everything. The problem with the civilian government is that it's much more beholden to the populace, most of whom (unless reporting on the issue is entirely skewed) would be thrilled if the United States disappeared into a lake of fire.
LOL, the civilian government under Zardari kiss more US ass than the military. There was a story a while back about the civilian government trying to conspire with the US (I think the state department) to clip the wings of the military in order to prevent any coup or transfer of powers away from Zardari. Pakistan has lost 30,000 lives fighting a war that is not in their interests. The authorities should simply have adopted a neutral policy, not allowing their country to be used as a supply route and not attacking their own people in the tribal areas, and they would have saved lives, money and the suport of their population.
So you're saying it's not really a civilian government, just a third "branch" that isn't connected to the military and intelligence services? So basically, the people of Pakistan live under not 1, but 3 different governments, none of which have the slightest interest in their well being. Fantastic. No wonder they are mostly dirt poor, uneducated and continue to breed like rabbits.
It's essentially a feudal system there, and power oscillates between the Bhutto clan whose power-base is in Sindh (aka PPP), the Pakistan Muslim League run by Nawaz Sharif whose base is in Punjab, and the Army. Although they are all adroit at manoeuvring for the support of the masses, none of them have anything to lose by not supporting the poor.
Yes they do, and it's unfortunately taken our military and policy people a decade to figure out that no matter what we do in Afghanistan, the military is going to think it's an Indian plot. Newflash: Pakistan is a mess, and they have nukes. Sleep tight.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Glob...e-on-NATO-bombing-of-Pakistani-soldiers-VIDEO "Americans failed to share crucial information about their future military movements because its commanders didn’t trust their Pakistani counterparts, but ... Pakistani troops fired on a joint US-Afghan patrol, even after the joint patrol identified itself." "a joint US-Afghan commando raid on a supposed militant camp on the Afghan-Pakistan border apparently stumbled onto a Pakistani paramilitary force instead. US investigators say the Afghans and Americans came under fire, and called in for air support when the Pakistani patrol continued to fire."
Even assuming the veracity of the latest American version of what transpired, most nations would consider the American action an act of war. You have armed foreign troops enter into another country without its permission or knowledge, and when that group is fired upon, they call in air support to kill the troops firing at them. And air support is flown and the Pakistani troops doing their job are killed in the process. As was suggested in an opinion piece I posted, the time is ripe for an alliance between Iran and Pakistan. Each of us have something to bring to the table in that alliance.
The American version, as you call it, has remained consistent: a joint American-Afghanistani patrol, searching for Taliban, who operate freely along the ill-defined border, encountered and was fired upon by Pakistan troops first. There is no rational basis for the claim that an A-A ground force, seeking Taliban, would deliberately attack Pakistani troops, then call in air support. Failure of cooperation & communication at higher levels between the two countries is to blame. I would like to hear the tapes or read the transcripts, but suspect that they are not being revealed, because they would be embarassing to Pakistan. If they were not, Pakistan would have already revealed them. "us"? Did you ever obtain US citizenship? Have you renounced it? Pakistan's main concerns are India and internal dissention, not Iran. How would an alliance with Iran help solve the problems on the Pakistan-Afghan border?
An Iran-Pakistan alliance would help with hostility among their common border so an alliance would likely reduce the Baluchi unrest in Iran (this is a minor point however). Both would like to see US influence in Afghanistan decline. Nice that you brought India into this. An alliance with Pakistan would surely result in a significant reduction in ties between Iran and India which have historically been strategic allies (even when Iran basically invaded India and stole Indian jewels). Pakistan needs Iran's energy resouces and Iran needs trade partners. Even though Iranians are largely Shi'a and Pakistanis are largely Sunni...if both feel a greater perceived threat from the West, there is a greater tendency to ally with each other. That said, an alliance with Iran will not help Pakistan with India. The likely effect of such action will be India strengthening its relationship with Israel and Persian Gulf states and reducing its cooperation with Iran. But an Islamabad allliance with Tehran will likely anger Riyadh so perhaps you will see Riyadh allowing Israel to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. The IRI is playing a dangerous game. If they are successful, they become the undisputed power in the region. If they are not, their regime will be overthrown.
Does Iran have to be in every thread? Is there a Persian version of Risk? Does the current regime want to risk its own existence, over dreams of regional power or influence? Despite their religious zealotry, some have described them as pragmatic. They already know that their power is based on oppression. That lead to the downfall of the Shah. Will history repeat itself? The Arab/Sunni world has no great love for Shia ayatollahs. Where are their real friends? It seems unlikely, that they could outmaneuver the Saudis, Israelis & the USA at the same time. Does Russia want a powerful Iran? Turkey? Anyone? Bueller?