Gollum Posted April 22, 2015 Posted April 22, 2015 http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-are-we-sending-this-attack-helicopter-to-pakistan-1429480299 http://www.ndtv.com/world-news/pakistan-will-end-up-using-us-weapons-against-india-not-jihadists-says-former-diplomat-756869?utm_source=taboola The nearly one billion dollar worth of attack helicopters, missiles and other defense equipment being sold to Pakistan by the US will end up being used in the fight against India instead of being deployed against jihadists, according to a former Pakistani diplomat, Hussain Haqqani. Quotes from the article in Wall Street Journal: "Pakistan's failure to tackle its jihadist challenge is not the result of a lack of arms but reflects an absence of will. Unless Pakistan changes its worldview, American weapons will end up being used to fight or menace India and perceived domestic enemies instead of being deployed against jihadists" "Competition with India remains the overriding consideration in Pakistan's foreign and domestic policies. By aiding Pakistan over the years-some 40 billion dollars since 1950, the US has fed Pakistan's delusion of being India's regional military equal. Seeking security against a much larger neighbor is a rational objective but seeking parity with it on a constant basis is not" "Instead of selling more military equipment to Pakistan, U.S. officials should convince Pakistan that its ambitions of rivaling India are akin to Belgium trying to rival France or Germany. India’s population is six times as large as Pakistan’s while India’s economy is 10 times bigger, and India’s $2 trillion economy has managed consistent growth whereas Pakistan’s $245 billion economy has grown sporadically and is undermined by jihadist terrorism and domestic political chaos. " "Pakistan also continues to depend on Islamist ideology—through its school curricula, propaganda and Islamic legislation—to maintain internal nationalist cohesion, which inevitably encourages extremism and religious intolerance." "It’s a mystery why the president suddenly trusts Pakistan’s military—after mistrusting it at the time of the Navy SEAL operation in May 2011 that found and killed Osama bin Laden living safely until then in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad. " "Between 1950 and 1969, the U.S. gave $4.5 billion in aid to Pakistan partly in the hope of using Pakistani troops in anticommunist wars, according to declassified U.S. government documents. Pakistan did not contribute a single soldier for the wars in Korea or Vietnam but went to war with India over the disputed border state of Kashmir instead in 1965. " "During the 1980s, Pakistan served as the staging ground for the jihad against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and received another $4.5 billion in aid, as reported by the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations to Congress. Pakistan diverted U.S. assistance again toward its obsessive rivalry with India, and trained insurgents to fight in the Indian part of Kashmir as well as in India’s Punjab state. It also violated promises to the U.S. and its own public statements not to acquire nuclear weapons, which it first tested openly in 1998—arguing that it could not afford to remain nonnuclear while India’s nuclear program surged ahead." "Since the 1990s, Pakistan has supported various jihadist groups, including the Afghan Taliban. After 9/11, the country’s military dictator, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, promised to end support for the Islamic radicals. Based on that promise, Pakistan received $15.1 billion in civil and military aid from the U.S. until 2009. In February, Gen. Musharraf admitted in an interview with the U.K.’s Guardian newspaper that he continued to support the Afghan Taliban even after 9/11 because of concerns over close relations between Afghanistan and India. Thus the U.S. was effectively arming a country that was, in turn, arming insurgents fighting and killing American troops in Afghanistan." "After the Dec. 16, 2014, attack on a Peshawar school, where the Taliban massacred 160 people, including many schoolchildren, Pakistan claimed it had changed its policy toward terrorist groups and would no longer distinguish between “good†and “bad†Taliban. The Pakistani military has since sped up military action against terrorist groups responsible for mayhem inside Pakistan. But the destruction, demobilization, disarmament or dismantling of Afghan Taliban and other radical groups is clearly not on the Pakistani state’s agenda. There has been no move against Kashmir-oriented jihadist groups. " "Given Pakistan’s history, it is likely that the 15 AH-1Z Viper helicopters and 1,000 Hellfire missiles—as well as communications and training equipment being offered to it—will be used against secular insurgents in southwest Baluchistan province, bordering Iran, and along the disputed border in Kashmir rather than against the jihadists in the northwest bordering Afghanistan. "
Invasion 550 Posted April 23, 2015 Posted April 23, 2015 Yeeeep. Right on the money Haqqani memo gate shb. We will definitely used those 30 or so helis America is providing FOR WHICH WE ARE PAYING to conquer India because screw Talibans, India is the main issue. This guy defintely speaks out of his ass. Dont think he cares though, his coffers are filled with american government's dollars.
dial_100 Posted April 23, 2015 Posted April 23, 2015 Yep. Pak army ended up in Kargil accidentally. They were sleeping and somehow ended up on our side of the border because of the wind blow.
Sachin=GOD Posted May 15, 2015 Posted May 15, 2015 America's Pakistan Policy Is Sheer Madness C. Christine Fair http://nationalinterest.org/feature/americas-pakistan-policy-sheer-madness-12894
velu Posted May 15, 2015 Posted May 15, 2015 in Battle of Longewala , pakistan had vastly superior american tanks .. but in the battle they lost all , because it was too complex for pakistanis to operate :phehehe:
jalebi_bhai Posted May 15, 2015 Posted May 15, 2015 in Battle of Longewala , pakistan had vastly superior american tanks .. but in the battle they lost all , because it was too complex for pakistanis to operate :phehehe: Strategy has never been their strong suit.
Muloghonto Posted May 15, 2015 Posted May 15, 2015 Strategy has never been their strong suit. i think the Indo-Pak and Indo-China wars demonstrate one thing above all: Neither India nor Pakistan has any great army record in offensive operations. They bolloxed up Longewalla worse than any commander with that many tanks should against an outpost like that but we also bolloxed up Chawinda. Generally speaking, Indian army has been below par in offensive operations and quite competent in defensive operations while Pakistan has been below par in defensive operations and quite amateurish and laughable in offensive operations.
jalebi_bhai Posted May 15, 2015 Posted May 15, 2015 i think the Indo-Pak and Indo-China wars demonstrate one thing above all: Neither India nor Pakistan has any great army record in offensive operations. They bolloxed up Longewalla worse than any commander with that many tanks should against an outpost like that but we also bolloxed up Chawinda. Generally speaking, Indian army has been below par in offensive operations and quite competent in defensive operations while Pakistan has been below par in defensive operations and quite amateurish and laughable in offensive operations. I've observed that as well. I believe that there was a communication mishap, regarding ammunition, within Indian ranks during 65 which prevented us from going all out in our counter-offensive. Pakistan has been of great help by constantly shooting themselves in the foot. Their self goals have made our offensive measures seem better than they were. Another interesting thing I've read is that the US applied some serious diplomatic pressure on us towards the end of the 65 war to not invade Pakistan. They threatened to stop importing a certain kind of wheat to which LB Shastri told them to go take a hike. Ultimately, it was the Soviets who convinced us to hold back and attend the Tashkent summit. As it stands, we are capable at playing the defensive-offensive game and that's good enough for present circumstances. The whole idea of diplomacy is to avoid war from happening in the first place.
Invasion 550 Posted May 16, 2015 Posted May 16, 2015 in Battle of Longewala , pakistan had vastly superior american tanks .. but in the battle they lost all , because it was too complex for pakistanis to operate :phehehe: The airplanes definitely werent complex. ;)
Clarke Posted May 16, 2015 Posted May 16, 2015 500 air-to-air missiles definitely weren't meant to take on any terrorist group. They're directed at India, period. Its one thing to simply extent favors to a partner and another to give the war on terror nonsense. Its good that our current govt also understands the same and has continued to maintain ties with Russia (President attended the WWII anniversary) while attempting to improve ties with China.
Invasion 550 Posted May 16, 2015 Posted May 16, 2015 500 air-to-air missiles definitely weren't meant to take on any terrorist group. They're directed at India, period. Its one thing to simply extent favors to a partner and another to give the war on terror nonsense. Its good that our current govt also understands the same and has continued to maintain ties with Russia (President attended the WWII anniversary) while attempting to improve ties with China. The Helis are bought for that. I can hundred per cent ensure you. Pak Army really needed some helis for fata.
gs Posted May 17, 2015 Posted May 17, 2015 The Helis are bought for that. I can hundred per cent ensure you. Pak Army really needed some helis for fata. But are the nutters in FATA flying combat sorties against Pak to warrant the sale of air to air missiles?
Invasion 550 Posted May 17, 2015 Posted May 17, 2015 But are the nutters in FATA flying combat sorties against Pak to warrant the sale of air to air missiles? LOL. These missiles are for india prolly. Why the crying? Doesnt your army buy air to air missiles?
KeyboardWarrior Posted May 17, 2015 Posted May 17, 2015 But are the nutters in FATA flying combat sorties against Pak to warrant the sale of air to air missiles? You should ask ur buddy aamreeka why they are giving these Weapons to ur Enemy ..... :orderorder:
velu Posted May 17, 2015 Posted May 17, 2015 I really don't think any full scale war between india and pakistan is possible.
randomGuy Posted May 17, 2015 Posted May 17, 2015 I really don't think any full scale war between india and pakistan is possible. No s**t, Sherlock!:giggle:
velu Posted May 17, 2015 Posted May 17, 2015 The airplanes definitely werent complex. ;) flight cockpits r more complex than tank controls:phehehe:
swatpulla Posted May 17, 2015 Posted May 17, 2015 Like many of the posters above, I doubt the Pakistani forces have technical know-how to use their imported weapons. I bet their new planes have features Pak army is not even aware of yet. :haha:
gs Posted May 17, 2015 Posted May 17, 2015 You should ask ur buddy aamreeka why they are giving these Weapons to ur Enemy ..... :orderorder: Don't think we are buddies, just business partners. But Pak appears to be umreeka's brothel. First gets effed and then gets lavished with goodies.
Recommended Posts