The main problem with the americans is they failed to understand the radical islamic streak in pakistan Army and ISI.In their anxiety to use the pak army as Pentagon extension in the region they could not see through the Pak people's and more so of the men in uniform of their adulation to Osama and pak army's strategic depth ambitions to dominate the region especially India and lead in expanding Islam in the region. Given this background the two countries are totally incompatible to fight a successful war on jihadi terror. But oblivious of all these, america wrongly banked upon pakistan to nab Osama .At least now after the Osama experience the americans should learn to put the U.S.-Pak alliance on WOT in proper perspective. They must understand that considering that except Bin-laden most of the other major terror leadreship are still very active inside Pakistan any prospect of a stable Afghanistan in near future will be a distant dream.
Re: THE INCOMPATIBLE U.S.-PAK ALLIANCE ON WOT
by vikram sisodia on May 04, 2011 08:52 PM
That is not the reason,actually if you see world map you will understand that nature have awarded a rich location to pak' without pak it is very difficult to have a close watch on central and south asia. Now U.S have a close eye on Litium value 1 trillion $(used in laptop battery) source in Afgan region. This is a was less againt terrer and more for personal interest.
poorkis have openly slapped US in the face and challenged their authority!
Its becoming visible that US is losing its supremacy in the world.
Backed by powerful china, pooorkis have showed US the finger but keeping osama under their wings and not worrying about what will happen to them if US finds out!
Is this how the US will crumble in international circles?
It's a well know fact that Pak has been allowing Osama to live in one of their towns or cities. He was anyway ill and was being treated by military doctors. There's a saying which says that you make lot of money through an elephant, whether it is alive (by making it work) or dead (by selling its body parts and ivory). This applies well to Pak and Osama. Osama is the elephant here. Through out his life, Pak army used him and aired his clippings to create fear and get the dollars. After he died due to illness, they stuck a deal with Obama that they would hand over his body to them, so that they can shoot him and take photos, do a facial recognition, do DNA tests, so on, and then throw his body into the sea. The deal would be that Obama gets all the popularity and Pak gets more funds and after US exit from Afghanistan, would get more say in that country. Since, Pak doesn't wish to bear the brunt of fundamentalists, it is distancing itself from this Op and pretending that it is not aware of helicopters travelling 200 Kms, into a military town. Though Pak authorities are acting to be in a spot to explain to the world, US would definitely not act against Pak for obvious reasons. The entire episode would be forgotten in a short time period. Note down my words - this entire event was stage managed by US and Pak authorities. There's definitely more to it than what meets the eye.
In spite of the revelation that Pakistan indeed is a rogue, terror state, USA has to comply and pursue their interest in Pakistan as it is strategically located and serves their vested interests. Pakistan indeed has proved that it is a liar and a hub centre for terrorists and activities
There is no doubt that US has critical compulsions to befriend with Pak. But, fact remains, If the truth is that Pak has hidden Osama where abouts for sure, US would one day get the lesson of a millennium sooner than later or it would go to prove that Pak indeed is Good ally and most trust worthy of any strategic relations come what may. (see the parallel with Indian PM – Because coalition compulsions, MMS has turned blind eye to corruption as well as inducting corrupt and dangerous people into his cabinet – To comply with coalition rules/dharma and avoid so called burden of elections on the people MMS and Sonia have accepted corrupt and dangerous people in UPA cabinet – if this can be justification for UPA, US-Pak strategic relations and blind eye to Indian allegations on Pak about terror heaven are much more justifiable). May be two wrongs do not prove or go to make one right and US could be wrong. But in any case US has not betrayed or compromised domestic wrong doing in-spite of or despite of it’s befriending with Pak. But, US may have to beware that by now Pak may have handed nuclear power to terror groups.
Pak believes geographically it has a strategic location that US & world cannot bypass. So even if it gets rogue, US will have extreme limitations in acting against it. Hence its support to Al Qaida, Haqqani & Taliban for a strategic role in Afghanistan. They also firmly feel that like it defeated USSR, it can do the same to US in Afghan as US is dependent on Pak.
But US has already started changing the rules of the game. It has begun re-routing some supplies thru Russia & uses Drones to blunt the total dependence on Pak. The Paki cry against use of Drones is actually bcoz it is loosing its geographic importance - & hence US aid in future, as far as this war on terror is concerned.
If Panetta's strong words are a guide, then US has already worked out its plans minus Pak, if push comes to shove. US will not allow Pak to dictate terms of this war. Pak definitely is in trouble but it is difficult for the leopard to change its spots unless Paki people rise against it.
In a country where the media is traditionally scared to question the military but is eager to criticize the civilian govt though it has no power at all, it is very difficult to see people rising against the military doctrine even though they have suffered the most.
Pak believes geographically it has a strategic location that US & world cannot bypass. So even if it gets rogue, US will have extreme limitations in acting against it. Hence its support to Al Qaida, Haqqani & Taliban for a strategic role in Afghanistan. They also firmly feel that like it defeated USSR, it can do the same to US in Afghan as US is dependent on Pak.
But US has already started changing the rules of the game. It has begun re-routing some supplies thru Russia & uses Drones to blunt the total dependence on Pak. The Paki cry against use of Drones is actually bcoz it is loosing its geographic importance - & hence US aid in future, as far as this war on terror is concerned.
If Panetta's strong words are a guide, then US has already worked out its plans minus Pak, if push comes to shove. US will not allow Pak to dictate terms of this war. Pak definitely is in trouble but it is difficult for the leopard to change its spots unless Paki people rise against it.
In a country where the media is traditionally scared to question the military but is eager to criticize the civilian govt though it has no power at all, it is very difficult to see people rising against the military doctrine even though they have suffered the most.
Pak believes geographically it has a strategic location that US & world cannot bypass. So even if it gets rogue, US will have extreme limitations in acting against it. Hence its support to Al Qaida, Haqqani & Taliban for a strategic role in Afghanistan. They also firmly feel that like it defeated USSR, it can do the same to US in Afghan as US is dependent on Pak.
But US has already started changing the rules of the game. It has begun re-routing some supplies thru Russia & uses Drones to blunt the total dependence on Pak. The Paki cry against use of Drones is actually bcoz it is loosing its geographic importance - & hence US aid in future, as far as this war on terror is concerned.
If Panetta's strong words are a guide, then US has already worked out its plans minus Pak, if push comes to shove. US will not allow Pak to dictate terms of this war. Pak definitely is in trouble but it is difficult for the leopard to change its spots unless Paki people rise against it.
In a country where the media is traditionally scared to question the military but is eager to criticize the civilian govt though it has no power at all, it is very difficult to see people rising against the military doctrine even though they have suffered the most.
Re: US & Pak
by Ramdas Vengurlekar on May 04, 2011 05:42 PM
One should understand that ISI is the organisation who mint mony, by making use of the Al-Quida, Haqqani, Taliban and other nations. they have direct control over various organisations and their so called leaders. they were using Obama. Once they found he is of not much importance they have traded him with US. Also other criminals like Dawwod are ISI's pawns. they will make use of them, and one day they will trade them for material gain. World should understand that by using ISI for their own interest, they themselves are creating criminals. It is up to the Leaders of the world, what they really want.
