• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pakistan Tells U.S. It Must Sharply Cut C.I.A. Activities

The Giant Noodle

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
7,332
Reaction score
2,011
Location
Northern Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
And we are going to tell em a few 'Yo Mama' jokes too! What a bunch of jerks!

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan has demanded that the United States steeply reduce the number of Central Intelligence Agency operatives and Special Operations forces working in Pakistan, and that it halt C.I.A. drone strikes aimed at militants in northwest Pakistan. The request was a sign of the near collapse of cooperation between the two testy allies. Pakistani and American officials said in interviews that the demand that the United States scale back its presence was the immediate fallout from the arrest in Pakistan of Raymond A. Davis, a C.I.A. security officer who killed two men in January during what he said was an attempt to rob him.
In all, about 335 American personnel — C.I.A. officers and contractors and Special Operations forces — were being asked to leave the country, said a Pakistani official closely involved in the decision.

CONTINUED: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/12/world/asia/12pakistan.html?_r=2&smid=tw-nytimes
 
Yeah, when is Obama going to stop warmongering and meddling in other people's business? :mrgreen:
 
Such a move is not surprising. Pakistan continues to slide toward failed state status. That outcome is, in part, the result of U.S. policy that accelerated the departure of Pakistan's former authoritarian ruler, President Musharraf. The naive assumption at the time was that an election would create a broadly representative, stable, and effective government. In reality, that possibility was always a long-shot.

The latest developments highlight anew that one of the great dangers of trying to accelerate events toward an elected government in the absence of a strong institutional framework can be the emergence of a fractured and weakened government. That's where things stand today and the latest request by Pakistan's government is a product of its weakness as it tries to stave off rising domestic pressures, including pressure brought on by radical elements. In its pursuit of self-preservation, Pakistan's government will, if it feels it is necessary or expedient, sacrifice previously-made commitments.
 
Such a move is not surprising. Pakistan continues to slide toward failed state status. That outcome is, in part, the result of U.S. policy that accelerated the departure of Pakistan's former authoritarian ruler, President Musharraf. The naive assumption at the time was that an election would create a broadly representative, stable, and effective government. In reality, that possibility was always a long-shot.

The latest developments highlight anew that one of the great dangers of trying to accelerate events toward an elected government in the absence of a strong institutional framework can be the emergence of a fractured and weakened government. That's where things stand today and the latest request by Pakistan's government is a product of its weakness as it tries to stave off rising domestic pressures, including pressure brought on by radical elements. In its pursuit of self-preservation, Pakistan's government will, if it feels it is necessary or expedient, sacrifice previously-made commitments.

DonSutherland, you are one DP user whose back story I wish I knew. ;) I've learned a great deal from your posts.
 
And the Pakistani government is correct in this matter, by the US doing drone strikes and sending in CIA agents and SF, they are effectively attacking Pakistan's sovereignty and the attacks have only caused the Pakistani people to become more anti-American.

You don't seem to understand the situation.....a crucial development

Pakistan is our main land supply route into A-stan. Without comm lines, we cannot fight that insurgency.

Also, if the issues in Paki are not dealt with and contained then nothing positive will come out of A-stan
 
Without comm lines, we cannot fight that insurgency.

IMO we cannot fight the insurgency, period. not to the point of a victory. Bush went in after 9/11, and bombed the taliban into submission. Sent them running and hiding to the point that the citizens of Afghanistan came out en masse and voted. Proudly, dyed thumbs and celebrating the new found.
Once you leave the "insurgency" comes back out and starts thier terror ridden policies all over again.
What it is that would make one think you can do the same thing again and again and get different results is beyond sanity.
it simply cannot be done. the solution lies with finding a way to bring the taliban into the conversation and internally monitoring the threat 24/7.
 
IMO we cannot fight the insurgency, period. not to the point of a victory. Bush went in after 9/11, and bombed the taliban into submission. Sent them running and hiding to the point that the citizens of Afghanistan came out en masse and voted. Proudly, dyed thumbs and celebrating the new found.
Once you leave the "insurgency" comes back out and starts thier terror ridden policies all over again.
What it is that would make one think you can do the same thing again and again and get different results is beyond sanity.
it simply cannot be done. the solution lies with finding a way to bring the taliban into the conversation and internally monitoring the threat 24/7.

We went in A-stan to find and kill AQ. AQ ran...fled. Theres no AQ in A-stan...so, why I we still there? Nation building???? lol

We should of pull out of there a along time ago. We've got no business setting up huge bases and flooding thousands of troops. It's counter-productive and stop nation building in places where it won't do any good


Also..not letting, the taliban participate in elections and declaring them unrepresentative is an age-old tactic in the strategy of de-legitimatizing the government.
 
I agree with you on Afghanistan, but
Nation building worked, and is working quite well in Iraq for Instance, where there is an infrastucture and hope for a better way.
For we can bomb AQ or the Taliban, or any one who wishes us harm into the stone age if we will, but we will never win unless we offer some kind of alernative and hope.
The scum that wil kill you in the name of hate alone festers only amongst an oppressed people.
 
You don't seem to understand the situation.....a crucial development

Pakistan is our main land supply route into A-stan. Without comm lines, we cannot fight that insurgency.

Also, if the issues in Paki are not dealt with and contained then nothing positive will come out of A-stan

You do not seem to understand that the more we do drone strikes and send in SF to kill civvies, the more the people hate us and the more likely they are to turn to AQ and the (pakistanti) Taliban.

I agree that the issues in Pakistan do need to be dealt with, but not by attacking a nation's sovereignty and pissing off the citizens of that nation.
 
You do not seem to understand that the more we do drone strikes and send in SF to kill civvies, the more the people hate us and the more likely they are to turn to AQ and the (pakistanti) Taliban.

I agree that the issues in Pakistan do need to be dealt with, but not by attacking a nation's sovereignty and pissing off the citizens of that nation.

Excuse me? The massive amounts of aid (billions) we give their country kinda throws that lame "sovereignty and pissing off the citizens" in the dumpster...

Pakistan won't be able to do both forever (taking our money while at the same time condemning the US attacks to keep the vocal Pakistani population at bay.

Sooner or later, they will have to pick a side. The chief backers of this movement is Iran. Pakistan falls - the threat of a nuclear power falling to extremists is too great a risk.

An extremely difficult situation for our current foreign policy makers.
 
without pakistani cooperation, which we've never really had, our efforts in afghanistan are hopeless, our mission incoherent

american casualties in OBAMA'S WAR have increased 400% since he ESCALATED

why are we there, especially if we can't win?

pray
 
Back
Top Bottom