Trump withholding millions in aid to Pakistan, as he accuses country of giving 'safe haven' to terro

[j-mac]

I am not sure if this is the best way to go about it, but it is true that Pakistan harbours terrorists.

What exactly should we do? For a decade we've been asking 'pretty please' and that certainly doesn't work.

 

[j-mac]

I just hope there is some sort of policy in play with all the geographical hornet’s nests that are being kicked......

There is...America first...For a change.

 

[Lerxst]

This has always been nonsense.

The obvious difference is that we aren't there to "conquer" Afghanistan. There is no fifty-first star in the work. There is no new flag.

The plan, just like everywhere else in the twentieth century, is to eventually leave. Our problem is that we have stayed long past our expiration date.

A big part of the problem with regard to Afghanistan is we went in with inadequate resources and no clear plan for victory. Goal posts were all over the place and we were always a step or two behind. I agree that we never intended to conquer Afghanistan, but our desire to neutralize the Taliban and their support apparatus for Islamic militant groups was simply unrealistic given what we had to work with.

I believe we should have attempted to complete the back channel deal that was in play to allow the Taliban leadership a way to save face with their own people as they justified giving OBL over to one of our allies. But we just could not allow that because we had already laid our dick on the table. After that there was simply no way the Taliban was going to be able give up Bin Laden voluntarily.

There is a very good book about the history of Afghanistan and why it has never been tamed, regardless of how many armies tried conquer it (I agree with you, we weren't there as conquerors, however the amount of time we have spent there certainly paints as foreign occupiers of a country that simply does not want us there anymore). It's certainly not light reading but interesting for anyone seeking some kind of understanding of the nation and it's people.

Games Without Rules: The Often Interrupted History of Afghanistan by Tamim Ansary

 

[j-mac]

It is about fricken' time. However, Trump is a blow hard so this most likely means nothing.

Pakistan has never been a proper ally. During the 1990s, when the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan was fighting the Taliban, Massoud's economic, military, and humanitarian support came from Russia, Iran and India. India involved itself because Pakistan was running operations (mostly clandestine) in Afghanistan to support the Taliban. Despite Massoud's pleas for U.S. aid, Clinton erred on the side of Pakistan, mostly because Massoud was receiving aid from Iran and the Russians.

By the time the CIA figured out how stupid we were being, it was too late. In 2000, the CIA convinced Massoud to unite the south with the north, and Iran was to establish a supply route. Days before 9/11, Massoud was assassinated. Up to that point he had survived multiple attempts by Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and Pakistan's ISI. It is understood that Osama Bin Laden ordered the suicide attack that finally got him.

Bush turns around, spurns Iran's offer to assist under the pretense that Iran "probably supported the Taliban," and pulled Pakistan closer as an ally against the Taliban.

How absolutely retarded are we? Pakistan's "loyalty" has always been bull ****.

I agree with you there MSgt, all but for one point, and that is the crack at Trump. I realize you don't like the man, didn't vote for him, and want to see him fail, but at the very least halting any money we send their way will wake them up that we no longer believe them to be an honest player with our interests at heart.

 

[j-mac]

What, you don't believe the Pakistani government and military were unaware that that was Osama Bin Laden holed up in that compound? For shame.

No, no I don't...

 

[jet57]

Agree with Trump on this one. It's a damn shame we have to rely on Pakistan to be an ally in the region.

Pakistan has big bombs, that's why.

 

[Rogue Valley]

What is it with you haters, that you think that everything should be instantaneous?

Haters? I said I agreed with Trump re: Pakistan.

But I don't swallow all his kool-aid like ... ahem ... some here do.

 

[Lerxst]

I just hope there is some sort of policy in play with all the geographical hornet’s nests that are being kicked......

There should be something new, not what we have done for the past several decades. At some point we have to abandon the tradition of interventionism and regime change and just let these nations determine their own destiny. If they turn out to be hostile towards American interests, so be it. We've got to quit trying to export Western democracy and corporate interest. It does not work. All we do is created enemies.

I recommend everyone check out Stephen Kinzer's book "Reset: Iran, Turkey, and America's Future." There is a great deal of information on past foreign policy failures and how to turn them around for the benefit of future generations.

Reset: Iran, Turkey, and America's Future

 

[Lerxst]

Haters? I said I agreed with Trump re: Pakistan.

But I don't swallow all his kool-aid like ... ahem ... some here do.

Trump's "Jerusalem" proclamation sent any hope for a U.S. led peace strategy right down the ****ing toilet. He has absolutely no clue as to what he's is doing with regard to the Israel-Palestine issue. None. We just got shoved all the way back to 1948 by that jackass.

 

[j-mac]

Haters? I said I agreed with Trump re: Pakistan.

But I don't swallow all his kool-aid like ... ahem ... some here do.

No, like many you rail against everything he does, says, or utters...Short of this action, you tried to dishonestly say that the statement made after the reprehensible vote in the UN a mere 10 days ago or so, that once he made that statement, I guess he should immediately cut them all off or something....What he was saying is more a something to look at in the future when some of those very same countries want our aid, or help....We should say 'why would we do that'?

See RV, you tried to be clever, but it fell flat.....That's all....

 

[j-mac]

Trump's "Jerusalem" proclamation sent any hope for a U.S. led peace strategy right down the ****ing toilet. He has absolutely no clue as to what he's is doing with regard to the Israel-Palestine issue. None. We just got shoved all the way back to 1948 by that jackass.

Why's that? How's the current 50 year old strategy of kissing up to Arab demands just to have them reject any proposal going? Face it...There is only one thing that would bring peace in the Arab/Israeli situation, the total destruction, and annihilation of Israel in total.

 

[Fishking]

Agree with Trump on this one. It's a damn shame we have to rely on Pakistan to be an ally in the region.

World domination makes strange bedfellows, hence Saudi Arabia.

 

[Fishking]

I agree with Trump here, but there is also an immediate downside to be considered.

A sizable portion of the gasoline/petroleum products used by US/IAF forces in Afghanistan travel via tanker-truck convoy through Pakistan and into Afghanistan.

Replacing such a vital pipeline wouldn't be easy.

Not just gas/fuel but a lot of our equipment. Though, I'll say it wasn't uncommon for us to receive a conex that was emptied out of said equipment.

 

[danarhea]

It's about frickin time.....For at least a decade now I have been questioning Pakistan's actual loyality to us as an supposed ally...

For the first time ever, I think we agree on something. As critical as I am of Trump, he actually did something good here. Never give anything to someone who is just going to spit in your face anyways.

 

[MSgt]

I agree with you there MSgt, all but for one point, and that is the crack at Trump. I realize you don't like the man, didn't vote for him, and want to see him fail, but at the very least halting any money we send their way will wake them up that we no longer believe them to be an honest player with our interests at heart.

This is assuming that this is more than just another fun little Tweet.

 

[Rogue Valley]

No, like many you rail against everything he does, says, or utters...Short of this action, you tried to dishonestly say that the statement made after the reprehensible vote in the UN a mere 10 days ago or so, that once he made that statement, I guess he should immediately cut them all off or something....What he was saying is more a something to look at in the future when some of those very same countries want our aid, or help....We should say 'why would we do that'?

See RV, you tried to be clever, but it fell flat.....That's all....

With regard to UNGA resolution A/ES/10/L.22 - Trump should stop trying to punk nations with his asinine threats. Makes him look foolish and impotent.

 

[danarhea]

Trump's "Jerusalem" proclamation sent any hope for a U.S. led peace strategy right down the ****ing toilet. He has absolutely no clue as to what he's is doing with regard to the Israel-Palestine issue. None. We just got shoved all the way back to 1948 by that jackass.

Trump might not have a clue, but Israel made a huge mistake, which allowed all the mayhem there to continue. They should have annexed ALL of Jerusalem, as well as the West Bank in 1967. After all, they were the ones being invaded, and the Palestinians were assisting in that invasion. IMHO, the Palestinians lost all their arguments for their own homeland when they did that. Israel should have settled that question immediately.

 

[j-mac]

With regard to UNGA resolution A/ES/10/L.22 - Trump should stop trying to punk nations with his asinine threats. Makes him look foolish and impotent.

Unless as we see with this action, he carries through....Then I think it would be a good thing. As for being "punked" that has been the US for like forever....We carry the load while these despot nations take our aid, take our help, take our assistance in their war torn ****holes keeping their peace with our troops, they work against our interests...I'd be in favor of us saying to them...pound sand.

 

[JacksinPA]

With regard to UNGA resolution A/ES/10/L.22 - Trump should stop trying to punk nations with his asinine threats. Makes him look foolish and impotent.

He is still acting as a NYC real estate developer, pushing people around to get his way & stroke his ego.

 

[MSgt]

And in addition to staying past, we've done little to help.

That's because we continue to shape our Foreign Policy around bad habits and vanity. In the end, it is always going to be the foreigner in his own country that has to realize his own future.

It used to be easier. We could take out a dictator (or a democracy), pop in another dictator, and call it stability. We can't do that anymore for various practical and ideological reasons. But we have to realize that, after we depose the offender, our time in theater is limited in cultures that we simply do not understand.

In regards to Afghanistan specifically, our plan was to hand the country over to Massoud, who was probably going to unite the country's various local leaders into a federation of autonomous territories under a single government umbrella. This is how Afghanistan was organized before the Soviet invasion and while it was prosperous. But al-Qaeda assassinated Massoud for the Taliban on September 10, 2001. Not a coincidence. It left us without a good option.

Still, we needed to leave years ago. "Conquering" Afghanistan was never the goal. But like Vietnam, we don't seem to ever know when to pull up stakes. We continue to behave as if our power has no limitations. Of course, with Vietnam, our stay was largely about each President not wanting to lose as they sought ways out. But Afghanistan is not like Vietnam in this regard. It never really was. We just continue to not know how to define success when it comes to the Middle East and its fringe Muslim nations. It's not the U.S. that loses in Afghanistan. If Afghanistan can't do anything for themselves against the Taliban after all this time, they lose. We do what we were always intending to do - come home to ponder our wasted treasure and blood.

 

[j-mac]

That's because we continue to shape our Foreign Policy around bad habits and vanity. In the end, it is always going to be the foreigner in his own country that has to realize his own future.

It used to be easier. We could take out a dictator (or a democracy), pop in another dictator, and call it stability. We can't do that anymore for various practical and ideological reasons. But we have to realize that, after we depose the offender, our time in theater is limited in cultures that we simply do not understand.

In regards to Afghanistan specifically, our plan was to hand the country over to Massoud, who was probably going to unite the country's various local leaders into a federation of autonomous territories under a single government umbrella. This is how Afghanistan was organized before the Soviet invasion and while it was prosperous. But al-Qaeda assassinated Massoud for the Taliban on September 10, 2001. Not a coincidence. It left us without a good option.

Still, we needed to leave years ago. "Conquering" Afghanistan was never the goal. But like Vietnam, we don't seem to ever know when to pull up stakes. We continue to behave as if our power has no limitations. Of course, with Vietnam, our stay was largely about each President not wanting to lose as they sought ways out. But Afghanistan is not like Vietnam in this regard. It never really was. We just continue to not know how to define success when it comes to the Middle East and its fringe Muslim nations. It's not the U.S. that loses in Afghanistan. If Afghanistan can't do anything for themselves against the Taliban after all this time, they lose. We do what we were always intending to do - come home to ponder our wasted treasure and blood.

And when we leave that country for real, tell me, who do you think will take over? And we already know that ISIS is looking to set up safe haven there....Wouldn't we just be repeating the scenerio that led to 9/11?

 

[Serenity]

Pakistan is not what I would consider a reliable ally. I agree with that and have spoken of my concerns here in the past.

What I am not a fan of, (nor can I imagine I will ever be), is President Trumps attempts at diplomacy via rants on twitter. Social media is not the platform for a leader of one Country to address the other.

 

[Lerxst]

Why's that? How's the current 50 year old strategy of kissing up to Arab demands just to have them reject any proposal going? Face it...There is only one thing that would bring peace in the Arab/Israeli situation, the total destruction, and annihilation of Israel in total.

We didn't kiss any Arab nation's ass, with the exception of Saudi Arabia. The U.S. has had a very pro-Israeli foreign policy since 1948. I'm not sure where you get your information from, but the U.S. has been solidly aligned with Israel since it's birth as a nation. The Arab-Israeli problem is their problem, not ours. It never should have been. Israel does not need U.S. assistance or support in dealing with it's Arab neighbors. They have the absolute best military in region and are a nuclear power. Other than terror attacks there is not one viable conventional military threat to Israel in the entire region at this point.

I would suggest brushing up on U.S. foreign policy in the ME and the Israel lobby in DC. I sincerely have no clue what you mean by 50 years of kissing Arab ass. We've been involved in regime change and destabilization in the middle east for decades, not kissing ass.

 

[j-mac]

We didn't kiss any Arab nation's ass, with the exception of Saudi Arabia. The U.S. has had a very pro-Israeli foreign policy since 1948. I'm not sure where you get your information from, but the U.S. has been solidly aligned with Israel since it's birth as a nation. The Arab-Israeli problem is their problem, not ours. It never should have been. Israel does not need U.S. assistance or support in dealing with it's Arab neighbors. They have the absolute best military in region and are a nuclear power. Other than terror attacks there is not one viable conventional military threat to Israel in the entire region at this point.

I would suggest brushing up on U.S. foreign policy in the ME and the Israel lobby in DC. I sincerely have no clue what you mean by 50 years of kissing Arab ass. We've been involved in regime change and destabilization in the middle east for decades, not kissing ass.

I say that in terms of the supposed "Peace process" involving the West Bank....We should be aligned with Israel...They are the historical, and rightful people of that territory...And tip toeing around the fact that the so called "Palestinians" want that land, should be met with the simple fact that Palestine is a pipe dream. This is Jewish land, and always be such....And as an ally in the region, Israel should be able to depend on our support regardless of how loud the anti Semites are in this nation.

 

[j-mac]

Pakistan is not what I would consider a reliable ally. I agree with that and have spoken of my concerns here in the past.

What I am not a fan of, (nor can I imagine I will ever be), is President Trumps attempts at diplomacy via rants on twitter. Social media is not the platform for a leader of one Country to address the other.

Social Media is fast becoming the only way for the current administration to get their message unfiltered through a hostile media out to the people...