Bills suggesting curbs on US assistance to Pakistan okayed

[StraightShooter]

then what we have to do with our own 9bn$ defense budget sir ?

$300 million does not replace you $9 billion defense budget. It is just a bonus.

 

[Imran Khan]

$300 million does not replace you $9 billion defense budget. It is just a bonus.

with this tinny bonus USA have license of bashing and ordering us whole damn year .

 

[maximuswarrior]

$300 million does not replace you $9 billion defense budget. It is just a bonus.

LOL it is over man. The Americans can keep their bribe aid and F-16s. We have other plans now. Much bigger than aid money amounting to peanuts and F-16s attached with stringent conditions. The Americans should have got the memo by now.

 

[StraightShooter]

with this tinny bonus USA have license of bashing and ordering us whole damn year .

That's something you would have to negotiate and result would depend on what you both agree to.

If you are now averse to drones, you may agree to some covert intelligence sharing etc.

You just need to play your cards right and the money is there to take.

LOL it is over man. The Americans can keep their bribe aid and F-16s. We have other plans now. Much bigger than aid money amounting to peanuts and F-16s attached with stringent conditions. The Americans should have got the memo by now.

What conditions. Aren't F-16s used against India in the past?

 

[Laozi]

You just need to play your cards right and the money is there to take.

It seems that Americans has already written off their friendship with Pakistan.

The stiff conditions like not helping a US desegnated terrorist could never be met by Pakistan.

Do you think that Pakistan would arrest Masood Azhar for $300 mn ?

 

[StraightShooter]

It seems that Americans has already written off their friendship with Pakistan.

The stiff conditions like not helping a US desegnated terrorist could never be met by Pakistan.

Do you think that Pakistan would arrest Masood Azhar for $300 mn ?

OP does not mention that. US would be pretty satisfied if Pakistan cooperates with US on Afghan front to get Taliban on US side as part of the negotiations.

 

[maximuswarrior]

That's something you would have to negotiate and result would depend on what you both agree to.

If you are now averse to drones, you may agree to some covert intelligence sharing etc.

You just need to play your cards right and the money is there to take.



What conditions. Aren't F-16s used against India in the past?

You know the ridiculous conditions to monitor the usage and all that.

It is done and dusted between Pakistan and the US. We wish orangeman the best of luck. We are now on our own path. These hollow threats don't mean anything.

 

[StraightShooter]

You know the ridiculous conditions to monitor the usage and all that.

It is done and dusted between Pakistan and the US. We wish orangeman the best of luck. We are now on our own path. These hollow threats don't mean anything.

But the fact is US has not restricted Pakistan from using F-16s, AH-1Z Vipers and other equipment against India.

The end user licensing agreement is to protect US IP falling into wrong hands as Pakistan has close relations with China.

On the other hand US had explicitly put a restriction on India that it cannot use USS Trenton rechristened as INS Jalashwa from using against Pakistan.

You are just being hard on US. US has always went out its way to support Pakistan.

 

[Laozi]

OP does not mention that. US would be pretty satisfied if Pakistan cooperates with US on Afghan front to get Taliban on US side as part of the negotiations.

OP has quoted a Pakistani source which has some handicaps and therefore cannot publish the following facts:

One of Poe’s amendment, as passed by the House proposes to withhold reimbursement funding for Pakistan unless the Secretary of Defence can certify that Pakistan is not providing military, financial, or logistical support to any individuals designated by the US as a terrorist operating in Pakistan or Afghanistan.

http://indianexpress.com/article/pa...ions-for-defence-funding-to-pakistan-4751374/

 

[StraightShooter]

OP has quoted a Pakistani source which has some handicaps and therefore cannot publish the following facts:

One of Poe’s amendment, as passed by the House proposes to withhold reimbursement funding for Pakistan unless the Secretary of Defence can certify that Pakistan is not providing military, financial, or logistical support to any individuals designated by the US as a terrorist operating in Pakistan or Afghanistan.

http://indianexpress.com/article/pa...ions-for-defence-funding-to-pakistan-4751374/

Firstly, Operating in Pakistan or Afghanistan is euphemism for Pakistan to get Taliban on US' side. US could care less about Pakistan's support to Kashmir.

Secondly, this has to be passed by Senate where Pakistan's friends like Graham and McCain would raise amendments. The final version would be very different. I am sure Pakistan and US are already negotiating the scope of the cooperation for this $300 million.

 

[wiseone2]

question is how this bill is effective . with 47bn$ budget we have 300mn$ like peanuts. with defense budget of 9bn$

every bit of money helps

 

[Arsalan 345]

i think it's good for pakistan.we want to stay away from america and i think,we must reject any aid in future but our politicians are so hungry.america is no one to dictate us on afghanistan.they have created a mess in afghanistan and now blaming us.what is hostile forces including india are doing in afghanistan? we must look at our national interest first.america is providing indians every kind of weapons and soon they might give india armed drones.america is in indian camp in order to contain china but it's a mistake by american policy makers.if not today,than might be tomorrow, they will leave afghanistan.they are defeated in afghanistan and they should grow up.they are in afghanistan not for talibans but for pakistan and china.they will continue to punish us because we are friends of china.we are basically fighting a proxy war.neither india nor america wants CPEC.america don't want a stable pakistan.

 

[wiseone2]

i think it's good for pakistan.we want to stay away from america and i think,we must reject any aid in future but our politicians are so hungry.america is no one to dictate us on afghanistan.they have created a mess in afghanistan and now blaming us.what is hostile forces including india are doing in afghanistan? we must look at our national interest first.america is providing indians every kind of weapons and soon they might give india armed drones.america is in indian camp in order to contain china but it's a mistake by american policy makers.if not today,than might be tomorrow, they will leave afghanistan.they are defeated in afghanistan and they should grow up.they are in afghanistan not for talibans but for pakistan and china.they will continue to punish us because we are friends of china.we are basically fighting a proxy war.neither india nor america wants CPEC.america don't want a stable pakistan.

It sounds like sour grapes

 

[BRAVO_]

it was obvious after the news of setting up the chines naval basse in gawadar in last month. tables are already changed, pakistan has growing relations with Russia and further strengthening relations with china... keeping in view the above they cant entertain the Americans same way as they were doing in past. Americans will never push pakistan up to that level where it could hit back. because Afghanistan is the only base of Americans where they have access to control the central Asian states, iran, china and Pakistan and without the help of Pakistan it would be all most impossible for Americans in a longer run to sustain their power in Afghanistan.

one more interesting thing without the presence of Americans in Afghanistan this entire region could turn in to a strong Block starting from Russia, Turkey, Central Asia, China Pakistan and the source of their alliance could be american enmity. therefore these amendments are a routine business through which Americans are trying to bring themselves in a more assertive position

 

[shahbaz baig]

Do more Do more wtf Do more is ? more then 50 thousands lives, after suffering economically, military within 16 years then U.S wants do more... what is this Do more by the way?

U.S wants that Pakistan should confront with every terrorist organization within Pakistan... no thanks we cant do this at same time we already did enough, we dont want more anarchy, we dont want civil war inside Pakistan by confronting all terrorist organization at same time.

U.S is deliberately not understanding Pakistan's narrative that you cant eradicate terrorist mindsets with power, military. To eradicate terrorism you also need to educate your people, you need to create peaceful environment, you need to provide necessity to those family who suffered in this war.. otherwise you will kill their leaders/supporters and next day they will announce next leader with more supporters, is this really hard to understand for U.S ? but Pakistan have understood and exactly doing this in order to eradicate terrorism.. if U.S is really sincere then dont ask for time duration. eradication of terrorism will take enough time may be 2 to 3 decades.. U.S should tolerate with Pakistan and should understand Pakistan's ideology to eradicate terrorism.

Pakistan has wasted more then 150$ billion Dolor within 16 years in this war & terror more then U.S aid to Pak military and now which U.S have to bear.. as according to U.S nothing is free.