What's new

Embrace India, not Pakistan, says US columnist

You know i continue to laugh at those idiot Americans who think Pakistanis hate them for their so called freedom and because they are not Muslims.Get a ******* life.We don't hate Chinese and they're atheists.Pakistanis have very positive views about China so does it mean we want to be atheists..?It's much more complex then the usual right wing neocon agenda.

You love anyone who dosent disagree or view didn't asked to do much. ..... They give you loans, planes, weapons ,

Why you Hate America, Its America who humiliated you Father of N Bomb and PAK in front of its own citizen and Pak in front of whole country. Now it is asking you take control off you land and do something about Muslim terrorist training center which bombing whole europe and US which you dont like to agree.
 
Why you Hate America, Its America who humiliated you Father of N Bomb and PAK in front of its own citizen and Pak in front of whole country.


Explain then why India likes to bend over backwards?

"We really slobbered over the old witch," says President Nixon.

"The Indians are bastards anyway," says Mr Kissinger. "They are starting a war there."

He adds: "While she was a *****, we got what we wanted too. She will not be able to go home and say that the United States didn't give her a warm reception and therefore in despair she's got to go to war."


Kissinger: They are the most aggressive goddamn people around there
Nixon: The Indians?
Kissinger: Yeah
Nixon: Sure

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4633263.stm

A lack of self esteem or self worth perhaps?
 
Gee thanks for posting something from 40 years ago. It really proves your point. [sarcasm]

Because of the US reaction to the 71 war, India dropped its neutralist policy and aligned itself to the soviet side. It took a visit from Clinton in 2000 for us to be friendly again.
 
Gee thanks for posting something from 40 years ago. It really proves your point. [sarcasm]

Because of the US reaction to the 71 war, India dropped its neutralist policy and aligned itself to the soviet side. It took a visit from Clinton in 2000 for us to be friendly again.

my point wasnt about the Indians. My point was that the problems average Pakistani has with the American gov is not that we dont want to control our lands. that is just crazy talk. The problem is much deeper, there is a feelng of betrayal and abandonment which took decades to build up and is a combination of many things. not as comically shallow as that T 50 person was making it out to be.

for example when Pakistan bought the F16s and the americans refused to give it to Pak because of the embargo. but then they refused to give back the money so Pakistan couldnt purchase something from elsewhere either.

Not only that, they then charged us fees for storing and upkeeping the planes that they had refused to give us. Why wouldnt an average person off the street despise that type of behaviour.
 
Clarification: you guys should know that Nixon's private conversational habits were pretty weird. Kissinger discusses them in his books. Seems that Nixon would often say one thing at first but later give orders to do something else. Most aides learned not to act on the first thing Nixon said - and learned that what he mouthed wasn't necessarily always what he felt. Nixon seems to have had a surface of prejudice, but his inner core was (usually) what drove his actions.

My point? You can't necessarily go by snippets of any conversation Nixon had with his aides to prove anything about U.S. policy.
 
my point wasnt about the Indians. My point was that the problems average Pakistani has with the American gov is not that we dont want to control our lands. that is just crazy talk. The problem is much deeper, there is a feelng of betrayal and abandonment which took decades to build up and is a combination of many things. not as comically shallow as that T 50 person was making it out to be.

for example when Pakistan bought the F16s and the americans refused to give it to Pak because of the embargo. but then they refused to give back the money so Pakistan couldnt purchase something from elsewhere either.

Not only that, they then charged us fees for storing and upkeeping the planes that they had refused to give us. Why wouldnt an average person off the street despise that type of behaviour.

Since you know so much backstabbing that US did to PAF(pak) regarding F-16's...tell me why on this earth you think those sanctions were applied on PAK....Once you tell me that then we will see weather those sanctions are in line with US policies or not....Only then we will be able to find out if US actually back-stabbed Pakistan or Pakistan did something which compelled US to put those sanctions..

P.S : I am just curious....Not taking any sides so don't use any pre-conceived parameter against my intent...I have high regards for Solomon2 and i am sure he would be able to fill up where we two can't....Wanna do that???
 
Calling America's ties with Pakistan a "sick relationship'' that "is becoming dangerously diseased,'' noted US columnist and author Christopher Hitchens says the US should recognize India as its "long-term ally in Asia.''

Writing in the Canadian daily Calgary Herald Wednesday, the author of best-selling "God is not Great'' hit out at Pakistan's duplicity in its war on the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

He said, "The United States made Pakistan a top-priority Cold War ally. It overlooked the regular interventions of its military into politics. It paid a lot of bills and didn't ask too many questions.

"It (the US) generally favoured Pakistan over India, which was regarded as dangerously 'neutralist' in those days, and during the Bangladesh war, it closed its eyes to a genocide against the Muslim population of East Bengal.

"During the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, Washington fed the Pakistani military and intelligence services from an overflowing teat and allowed them to acquire nuclear weapons on the side.''

Despite all the preferential treatment it received from the US all these years, he asked: why the Pakistani elite hates the US.

"It hates it (the US) because it is dependent on it and is still being bought by it. It is a dislike that is also a form of self-hatred of the sort that often develops between client states and their paymasters. (You can often sense the same resentment in the Egyptian establishment, and sometimes among Israeli rightwingers, as well),'' Hitchens wrote.

"By way of overcompensation for their abject status as recipients of the American dole, such groups often make a big deal of flourishing their few remaining rags of pride. The safest outlet for this in the Pakistani case is an official culture that makes pious noises about Islamic solidarity while keeping the other hand extended for the next subsidy.

"Pakistani military officers now strike attitudes in public as if they were defending their national independence rather than trying to prolong their rule as a caste and to extend it across the border of their luckless Afghan neighbour,'' said Hitchens who is a columnist for Vogue and Slate.

Calling it a sick relationship which is becoming "dangerously'' diseased, he it is not possible to "found a working, trusting, fighting alliance on such a basis.

"Under communism, the factory workers of Eastern Europe had a joke: 'We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.' The Pakistanis don't even pretend that their main military thrust is directed against the common foe, but we do continue to pay them. If we only knew it, the true humiliation and indignity is ours, not theirs.''

This relationship will only "get nastier, more corrupt and degrading until we recognize that our long-term ally in Asia is India,'' he said.

"India,'' Hitchens said, "is not a country sizzling with self-pity and self-loathing, because it was never one of our colonies or clients. We don't have to send New Delhi 15 different envoys a month, partly to placate and partly to hector, because the relationship with India isn't based on hysteria and envy.

"Alas, though, we send hardly any envoys at all to the world's largest secular and multicultural democracy, and the country itself gets mentioned only as an afterthought. Nothing will change until this changes.''

Hitchens said the Pakistani army is "coddling'' the Taliban in Afghanistan because they have been told that the US will not be deploying there in strength for very much longer.

"Who can blame them (the Pakistani army) for basing their plans on this supposition and continuing to dig in for a war with India that we are helping them to prepare for?" the US columnist asked.

Why does Pakistan hate the United States? - By Christopher Hitchens - Slate Magazine

Every Tom, Dick, Harry and Ramchand out there writes all kinds of crap. Who is this Hitchens again and who reads this ''Slate'' Magazine? Pushaw!!! :tdown:
 
Read the title of this discussion. Now they want to embrace the very same people.

Embrace??!!?? :hang2:

India is just 'Flavor of the Month' which will be history & dead and gon in a few years from the US administration.
 
Not a big surprise,



now its this:

b0e937353adf21d27ad84837ada80cdb.jpg
 
Is this something new? I thought the embrace has already happened..where has Hitchins been?

Something that Hitchins also needs to understand is that the US does not give aid or money to someone when its not yielding anything. As always, journalists in the West have this idea of a "Knight in shining armour" about their own people & governments. The fact is that Pakistan has interests which cannot be sacrificed for US interests (this has been appreciated by no less than the Chairman Joint Chiefs of staff, Adm Mullin). Pakistan did not ask for the US to come and wage a war on Pakistan's behalf in Afghanistan. As things are, for situation to turn out alright in Afghanistan, both US and Pakistan have to shape their interests so they are mutually agreeable. For this the US has to give Pakistan aid and also accommodate Pakistan at the table when all is settled. Pakistan has to deal with the issue of massive domestic instability and unrest in the Pashtun minority, which is a very serious problem with security, social and economic implications, the costs of which have not even been seen as of yet. As such financial assistance to Pakistan in the form of a few billions here and there is not a whole lot (I may offend some here for the statement I have made).

US has already embraced India but it would do Hitchins a little good to find out that by doing so, it does not help the situation in Afghanistan one bit. US-India relations are a separate issue from what is happening in Afghanistan. For the US to be successful in Afghanistan, it cannot come at a cost of only Pakistan losing out on her interests. For as long as this simple calculation is not understood by the Western journalists, they will keep on writing such removed from the reality type pieces.

Lastly, there is no such a thing as "hate for America". Our Mullahs can say that day and night but then they say the same about other Pakistanis too. The reality is that a vast number of Pakistani diaspora lives in the US and thrives in a culture that is welcoming and fair. This is not lost on the Pakistani people. Most of the Pakistani elite have been educated in the US, and only look to bring some semblance of fairness in US views about a country that has been turned into a monster with claims of "double dealing, cheating, aiding and abetting the bad guys etc. etc." Why should Pakistan or for that matter anyone in Pakistan's place not hedge against the scenario of post US withdrawal? Pakistan has to live in this neighbourhood and instability or hostility against Pakistan by a future Afghan government is a serious issue for us and this has to be considered by those looking to change things in Afghanistan.
 
Last edited:
US also enjoyed the same kind of love in Pakistani hearts back in 1900....becaused they gave you money...they gave you weapons...aggainst India and overlooked whatever you did against your neighbours..... but now that thay have started scrutinizing Pakistan...they have suddnly turned into enemies......
Who knows what future holds for China in Pakistan.. they are friends because they are giving money...and weapons....that can be used against India...lets see if this love for China holds ground after China gets tierd of supporting Pakistan.
The popularity rating of Chinese has always been good in Pakistan and mind you we dont get any aid from China.We only get soft loans which are repaid with interest.There were rallies against US even back in 80's when US was giving us billions and it still is giving us billions.Hell Even during 1965 war Pakistanis did not like American interference.There's a article about it on Times Magzine..We just don't want any other country messing with internal affairs be it China, US or any other power.Only Saudi Arabia gets away with this because Pakistanis have too much respect for KSA as its place of holy cities...and people are now even becoming anti KSA now.China is giving weapons so what the **** is your problem?We're paying for it..we bought weapons from France, Sweden, Ukarine, Brazil, Russia which will be ultimately used against anyone specially India if they attack us ...listen the world does not revolve around India.Pakistan is a foreign independent nation and other countries will sell it weapons whether you like it or not.Your dream of blocking every defense sale to an independent nation Pakistan will continue till the cows come home.In other words you can say "rasi jaal gai per bal nahin gaea"The mere fact that other countries are selling us weapons will continue to haunt indians till eternity.
 
Last edited:

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom