US boosts Pakistan military ties - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-20-2004, 08:34 AM   #1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Song of the week "sentimental" by Porcupine Tree
Posts: 3,854
Local Time: 08:46 AM
US boosts Pakistan military ties

From BBC

"""The US Secretary of State Colin Powell says Washington will elevate its military ties with Pakistan, making it a major ally outside of Nato.

In effect, Pakistan now joins a club of 10 or so militarily most-favoured nations that include Israel, Egypt and Jordan among them. It may make it easier for Islamabad to acquire the arms.. """


These weapons would come back to America and then America would say who gave Weapons to terrorists !!!

Great ! Isnt it ?
__________________

__________________
AcrobatMan is offline  
Old 03-21-2004, 06:24 PM   #2
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 6,163
Local Time: 09:46 AM
Well, it is a nice reward for spreading around nuclear knowledge,
__________________

__________________
Rono is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 05:17 AM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Song of the week "sentimental" by Porcupine Tree
Posts: 3,854
Local Time: 08:46 AM
also ..

"""The United States government is reportedly paying Pakistan 100 million dollars a month for logistics support in the global war against terrorism. """


so that they can buy those weapons & these weapons can be used against america or resold to those who can
__________________
AcrobatMan is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 05:32 AM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
DrTeeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Q continuum
Posts: 4,770
Local Time: 09:46 AM
Heh, Pakistan is probably the most dangerous 'rogue state' around at the moment. Interesting choice.
__________________
DrTeeth is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 12:42 PM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:46 AM
No other country on the planet outside of the United States, has done more to catch members of Al Quada than Pakistan. Sending money to fund their operations against Al Quada is vital to saving lives around the world from terrorism. Pakistan is more heavily involved in fighting Al Quada than any single European country.

The 100 million dollars is for logistic support, not weapons. If you know of any new weapons the USA is going to sell Pakistan, please name them.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 12:55 PM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 6,163
Local Time: 09:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
No other country on the planet outside of the United States, has done more to catch members of Al Quada than Pakistan. Sending money to fund their operations against Al Quada is vital to saving lives around the world from terrorism. Pakistan is more heavily involved in fighting Al Quada than any single European country.

The 100 million dollars is for logistic support, not weapons. If you know of any new weapons the USA is going to sell Pakistan, please name them.
Yep, and Pakistan is also a very democratic country,...
__________________
Rono is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 01:04 PM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:46 AM
More so than our Ally the Soviet Union in World War II.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 01:07 PM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 6,163
Local Time: 09:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
More so than our Ally the Soviet Union in World War II.
__________________
Rono is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 01:14 PM   #9
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:46 AM
Pakistan scares the out of me. They've tried to assassinate Musharraf (OK, I murdered the spelling of his name) several times and came dangerously close once. The killers would just have to be a little luckier, or the dictator a little less lucky. The place has a terrible poverty problem, which is partially the reason so many kids are in anti-American Wahhabist madrassas (schools). They are better off at these schools than they are at home in slums, etc, etc. Some of Al Qaeda's people are graduates of these schools. Before 9/11 Pakistan was one of only three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan, along with Saudi Arabia. I admit I can't remember the third-was it the United Arab Emirates or Yemen? There are many Taliban supporters in Pakistan. It's dangerous to be giving this much support to a country as unstable as Pakistan. They could shoot the dictator and put in the Anti-American Wahhabist Government From Hell. It's my worst political nightmare.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 02:41 PM   #10
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:46 AM
Rono,

My point was that the USA has in the past supported governments that were not democratic entirely because there was a legitamite national security reason to do so. Perhaps the biggest case was the USA's support for the Soviet Union in World War II. To this day that was the greatest supply effort in the history of the world in terms of material and money sent to another country by one of other country. Stalin's Soviet Union was just as brutal as Hitler's in many ways, but Hitler at the time was the greater threat to global security and aiding the Soviet Union was key in winning World War II.

Today, despite the many fundamental problems that Pakistan has, it is key in winning the war against Al Quada. Pakistan has detained thousands of Al Quada supporters and sent them to the USA.

Sending 100 million dollars in logistical supplies is rather small. Again, it is logistical supplies and not weapons. If you know of new USA weapons being sent to Pakistan, please list them.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 06:24 PM   #11
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:46 AM
Today, despite the many fundamental problems that Muhajeen /Bin Laden has, they are key in winning the war against USSR.




Today, despite the many fundamental problems that Saddam Hussein has, he is key in winning the war against Ayatollah/Iranian Revolution.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 07:41 PM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:46 AM
deep,

Most of the Northern Alliance who are former Muhajeen would not take kindly to you lumping them in with Bin Ladin. Its like saying that because Timothy McVay was in the US Army, the US Army are a bunch of terrorist. Thats simply rubbish.

The USA offered 1/3 of the supplies for the Muhajeen during the Soviets occupation of Afghanistan. That was indeed the right choice at the time. The Mujahadeen essentially disolved in the early 1990s after the war was over. The Northern Alliance was formed around Moosod who was the biggest leader of the Mujahdeen. Bin Ladin had Moosod murdered by suicide bombers on 9/10/2001.

The Taliban and Arabs forming the core of Al Quada did not start to enter into Afghanistan until after 1996. The Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989 and the war against the Communist Government ended in 1991. US support dried up in 1991, and most of the Mujahadeen continued with Moosod as their leader in the Northern Alliance.


As far as the USA's response to Saddam and the war with Iran, the USA was not the big backer of Saddam, the SOVIET UNION was. I can produce the weapons charts that show this if you disagree.

The USA did not send any weapon systems to Saddam's Iraq. It did send Tow Missiles to Iran though, during the war, in the arms for hostages deal.

A case can certainly be made for strong US support of Iraq during the war, but the USA did not have to as Saddam was already being flooded with Weapons from the Soviet Union as well as over 1,000 Soviet troops to help in the training of the Iraqi Military in the latest Soviet tactics.

Iranian victory in the Iran/Iraq war was not in the interest of any country.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 09:32 PM   #13
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:46 AM
Sting, bin Laden moved to Pakistan in 1982. He settled in Peshawar, a fundamentalist stronghold, along with engineers and heavy equipment to build roads for the majahedeen in Afghanistan. They started work on the Khost tunnel complex in Afghanistan, deep in the mountains around the Pakistani border. The Pakistani president at the time was Zia ul Haq. He had grabbed power in 1977 and imposed both martial law and a strict interpretation of Islamic law, or Sharia, on Pakistan. Not quite as repressive as the Taliban later was, but worse, in my view, than even the Wahhabists of Saudi Arabia. He wanted a strict Islamicist state in Afghanistan to counter the influence of India on his eastern border. Thus he supported the fundamentalists in Afghanistan. One of the warlords Pakistan supported was a notorious named Gulbaddin Jekkmatyar, the head of a faction called Hezb-e-Islami. He had been involved in heavy duty harrassment of political activists at the University of Kabul; this included the murder of a young poet. Later on these people were involved in the murder of Meena, the founder of RAWA, Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan, a feminist group. I don't like the idea of my tax dollars going to support 's like this. As evil as the Soviet Union was, we should not have supported the majahedeen. They were like a proto-Taliban, complete with a bin Laden connection dating to 1982.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 09:37 PM   #14
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:46 AM
verte76,

I know Bin Ladin was there and involved in the 1980s, but anyone in the Northern Alliance well tell you Bin Ladin never represented them when they were apart of the Mujahadeen. I don't like how one persons involvement in a cause to remove Soviets from Afghanistan gets extrapolated into Bin Ladin was in charge of all Mujahadeen forces and the #1 leader of the Mujahadeen. Bin Ladin was an Arab, an outsider who tried to help push the Soviets out.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 03-22-2004, 09:41 PM   #15
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
verte76,

I know Bin Ladin was there and involved in the 1980s, but anyone in the Northern Alliance well tell you Bin Ladin never represented them when they were apart of the Mujahadeen. I don't like how one persons involvement in a cause to remove Soviets from Afghanistan gets extrapolated into Bin Ladin was in charge of all Mujahadeen forces and the #1 leader of the Mujahadeen. Bin Ladin was an Arab, an outsider who tried to help push the Soviets out.
OK. I'm sorry, got a bit confused there. You're right, he was an outsider who came in with a bit of help. But generally the mujahadeen are not the kind of people I start fan clubs for.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com