Gen.Raheel's Visit & Staged U S Reception---Pres. Obama's Threat To Strike Pakistan

[MastanKhan]

HI,

Gen Raheel's visit to the U S started with so much pomp and vigor and ended in much fanfare---but in its true self----it was just all for show and drama.

All the receptions and get together's and the time given by the senators and congressmen---the briefings by the general to the pentagon did not seem to have any substance to it at all---. The americans were attentive listeners---they were extremely cordial throughout all the time that the general was here in washington---but in truth---this welcome was basically a disguised goodbye to someone they had known over the years---it was basically all fluff.

It was done in a very polite and courteous manner---because the americans are not rude people---they are a wonderful people and will shove it up your's with a smile on their faces while holding your hand in a firm grip so that you do not have the time and the chance to run away.

The general's visit was as meaningless for the U S as it could be and of not much help for pakistan---because the U S has already walked out on afghanistan----it is not interested in pakistan's efforts if it does not include killing the afghan taliban and forcing them into submission to the northern alliance afghans.

The americans did not need any briefings from the generals at what good deeds the pakistani military is doing in Fata---they simply care less.

It is simply like this----you get to a stage when just one day you do not have any feelings for someone---because you simply have walked away in a different direction---or if there is someone else in your life that has entered that has shown more promise.

I feel terrible for Gen. Raheel---for he is a wonderful soldier---an extremely simple man with no fanfare---.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

HI,

Gen Raheel's visit to the U S started with so much pomp and vigor and ended in much fanfare---but in its true self----it was just all for show and drama.

All the receptions and get together's and the time given by the senators and congressmen---the briefings by the general to the pentagon did not seem to have any substance to it at all---. The americans were attentive listeners---they were extremely cordial throughout all the time that the general was here in washington---but in truth---this welcome was basically a disguised goodbye to someone they had known over the years---it was basically all fluff.

It was done in a very polite and courteous manner---because the americans are not rude people---they are a wonderful people and will shove it up your's with a smile on their faces while holding your hand in a firm grip so that you do not have the time and the chance to run away.

The general's visit was as meaningless for the U S as it could be and of not much help for pakistan---because the U S has already walked out on afghanistan----it is not interested in pakistan's efforts if it does not include killing the afghan taliban and forcing them into submission to the northern alliance afghans.

The americans did not need any briefings from the generals at what good deeds the pakistani military is doing in Fata---they simply care less.

It is simply like this----you get to a stage when just one day you do not have any feelings for someone---because you simply have walked away in a different direction---or if there is someone else in your life that has entered that has shown more promise.

I feel terrible for Gen. Raheel---for he is a wonderful soldier---an extremely simple man with no fanfare---.

The General's primary objective is to put Pakistan's security in order, which he is successfully doing. The rest are all details. If not getting 8 F-16s is considered as the epitome of failure then need to say that the millions of discussions in this forum have gone down the drain. As for the Afghans, they're going to figure it out among themselves even if it takes another hundred years lest we should forget they are descendants of Ghouri, Abdali etc.

 

[sady]

Having lost and actually paying in cash to someone who made sure you lose. What can you expect? F22 and other goodies nicely packed? lets not bullshit ourselves. Pak was in a direct war with US and almost has gone away with it. Establishment has very cleverly played with US weaknesses and their modus operandi. It is a victory any day in my calendar.

 

[kasper95]

no one knows the actual reason why he went there, unless we know the objective of his visit there is no way we can tell if the visit was a success or failure or whatever.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

I just heard the state of the union address---and for that reason I changed the title of this thread as well.

In his state of the union address---Pres Obama directly threatened to take military action against pakistan.

If you listened to his speech----he talked about some areas where there will always be trouble---and pakistan was named amongst those countries---he further went on to state that military action will be taken against those coutnries---and one of those countries was pakistan.

This attitude of the U S has been picture clear for the last few years to find an opportunity and excuse to take out pakistan. If it was not for isis---the mission to neutrallize pakistan would have already started.

For the last few years there is nothing much positive coming out for pakistan---other than the regular feel good statements---.

The U S likes Nawaz Shareef---because he is a coward and a gutless man---he can be forced into taking the direction that the U S wants to give---actually Nawaz is happy to oblige---as long as he gets his business deals in the package.

So---going back to the threat---it seems like the paf has failed to understand the changing scenario---just like it did with france regarding the radar and electronics warfare package for the JF17---.

I just could not comprehend that long visit by the air chief marshall. Are they so dellusional and so deep into their self beliefs that they did not see what kind of change was coming---.

Same thing with Gen Raheel---what was he thinking---with Nawaz Sharif I can understand---he likes to be spanked by powerful leaders and likes to look compliant and submissive to look good in their eyes.

The General's primary objective is to put Pakistan's security in order, which he is successfully doing. The rest are all details. If not getting 8 F-16s is considered as the epitome of failure then need to say that the millions of discussions in this forum have gone down the drain. As for the Afghans, they're going to figure it out among themselves even if it takes another hundred years lest we should forget they are descendants of Ghouri, Abdali etc.

Hi,

It is not a matter of getting 8 F16's only---it is a matter of changing the battle plans---it is a matter of breaking away from the enchantment that the F 16 has created and focusing on something else.

The thing is that we should have had over 150 F16's by now and over a 150 JF17's to date.

We only got 70 F16's and 60 JF17's---and no true air superiority fighter aircraft of the caliber of the Rafale or the eurofighter---.

As for the afghans---pakistran must ask the afghan pashtuns to join pakistan and seperate from northern alliance territories---.

 

[Sully3]

Pakistan has moved on from depending on American aid, Musharraf and Zaradi made a habit of going to the US with a beggars bowl and then giving an opinion to the public that Pakistan is depended on USA and would be destroyed without it.
Nawaz Sharif has changed this opinion within months of taking office, Pakistan is now an emerging economy with countless business opportunities

 

[sady]

Hi,

I just heard the state of the union address---and for that reason I changed the title of this thread as well.

In his state of the union address---Pres Obama directly threatened to take military action against pakistan.

If you listened to his speech----he talked about some areas where there will always be trouble---and pakistan was named amongst those countries---he further went on to state that military action will be taken against those coutnries---and one of those countries was pakistan.

This attitude of the U S has been picture clear for the last few years to find an opportunity and excuse to take out pakistan. If it was not for isis---the mission to neutrallize pakistan would have already started.

For the last few years there is nothing much positive coming out for pakistan---other than the regular feel good statements---.

The U S likes Nawaz Shareef---because he is a coward and a gutless man---he can be forced into taking the direction that the U S wants to give---actually Nawaz is happy to oblige---as long as he gets his business deals in the package.

So---going back to the threat---it seems like the paf has failed to understand the changing scenario---just like it did with france regarding the radar and electronics warfare package for the JF17---.

I just could not comprehend that long visit by the air chief marshall. Are they so dellusional and so deep into their self beliefs that they did not see what kind of change was coming---.

Same thing with Gen Raheel---what was he thinking---with Nawaz Sharif I can understand---he likes to be spanked by powerful leaders and likes to look compliant and submissive to look good in their eyes.

I think we over estimate US power when it comes to taking military action against countries. There is no single country which US has taken a direct military action against which has;
1 A Democratically elected government
2 A good professional Army
3 A backing of another big country like China or Russia

I always had this feeling 'a conspiracy theory' you may call, that the establishment in Pakistan got rid of Musharraf, brought in PPP minus Benazeer(read openly anti islamist party) during hot times when US was in maximum strength during the Afghan invasion. I think powers to be understood that if Musharraf(read secular dictator) stays USA can demonise him as they demonised Saddam Hussein(secular dictator) and will make it a pretext to give Pakistan 'real' democracy and 'freedom'. The reference to this can be found why Musharraf did not like Kiyani at the end and how the Lawyers movement got so much momentum. TTP also served the purpose of deflection however this did got out of hand and somewhere along the road there were underestimations as well. Anyhow like any good conspiracy theory this lacks strong and credible references from mainstream to back it up.

Now coming to why Gen Raheel went to US with such high hopes is;
1 Governments are always pragmatic. US knows where Pakistan stood and how it played US but they had to get out of this mess called Afghanistan. They were lucky in Vietnam as it was decades ago fortunately/unfortunately world does not work like it used to in those times. Gen Raheel leverage was to give US a good exit with Taliban on table for lasting settlement in exchange of continued military support and bringing India to table. How could US refuse?
2 Gen Raheel had the edge of being a general who had shown TTP the door, not many can boast of this feat and he showed US that he could be the man to tackle India centric and US centric groups as well when push comes to shove provided Pakistan interests are also taken care of.

In my opinion with a view of whats happening around, it wouldn't be too naive to say he did his job whether US likes him or not. Whatever Obama says Pakistan's days of turmoil are over IA

F16 J22 JF17 SU35 are all toys. Their significance can never overbear a good stroke of strategy. Pakistan wont require these toys so badly if not at all if things work out they way they are planned

 

[MastanKhan]

Pakistan has moved on from depending on American aid, Musharraf and Zaradi made a habit of going to the US with a beggars bowl and then giving an opinion to the public that Pakistan is depended on USA and would be destroyed without it.
Nawaz Sharif has changed this opinion within months of taking office, Pakistan is now an emerging economy with countless business opportunities

Hi,

The U S was not giving aid---that was just the term used and Mushy did not have it changed---.

The U S was paying for containing the terrorists that it pushed into pakistan that started with the systematic bombings from northern afghanistan towards pakistan's border----pushed the taliban and al qaeda terrorists and forced them into pakistan.

This was a payment for the expenses of pakistan military to carry out a military operation against these guys.

I think we over estimate US power when it comes to taking military action against countries. There is no single country which US has taken a direct military action against which has;
1 A Democratically elected government
2 A good professional Army
3 A backing of another big country like China or Russia

I always had this feeling 'a conspiracy theory' you may call, that the establishment in Pakistan got rid of Musharraf, brought in PPP minus Benazeer(read openly anti islamist party) during hot times when US was in maximum strength during the Afghan invasion. I think powers to be understood that if Musharraf(read secular dictator) stays USA can demonise him as they demonised Saddam Hussein(secular dictator) and will make it a pretext to give Pakistan 'real' democracy and 'freedom'. The reference to this can be found why Musharraf did not like Kiyani at the end and how the Lawyers movement got so much momentum. TTP also served the purpose of deflection however this did got out of hand and somewhere along the road there were underestimations as well. Anyhow like any good conspiracy theory this lacks strong and credible references from mainstream to back it up.

Now coming to why Gen Raheel went to US with such high hopes is;
1 Governments are always pragmatic. US knows where Pakistan stood and how it played US but they had to get out of this mess called Afghanistan. They were lucky in Vietnam as it was decades ago fortunately/unfortunately world does not work like it used to in those times. Gen Raheel leverage was to give US a good exit with Taliban on table for lasting settlement in exchange of continued military support and bringing India to table. How could US refuse?
2 Gen Raheel had the edge of being a general who had shown TTP the door, not many can boast of this feat and he showed US that he could be the man to tackle India centric and US centric groups as well when push comes to shove provided Pakistan interests are also taken care of.

In my opinion with a view of whats happening around, it wouldn't be too naive to say he did his job whether US likes him or not. Whatever Obama says Pakistan's days of turmoil are over IA

Hi,

I would agree to certain extent on your comments about the Gen Raheel's visit-----but Mushhy had great confidence in Kiyani----. He was his go to guy---. My brother told mush twice not to promote him---.

Mushy got canned because of bad marketing strategy---he did not have anyone who could strategically fight for him.

Plus the opposition politicians were going crazy---there was so much money in pakistan---they had never seen it before---so---they made a fool out of the public---the public fell for it.

i mean to say---how stupid is pakistani public---what they would not do for the security of their house---they did it for pakistan---.

Nowe---would you hire a security guard at your house whom you fired twice and the last time you kicked her / him out---you degraded and humiliated them with a vengeance.

 

[I.R.A]

As for the afghans---pakistran must ask the afghan pashtuns to join pakistan and seperate from northern alliance territories---.

Why would they listen to Pakistan when they know that it is just matter of a decade at max to get where they were. They have faced the well equipped and trained forces in last decade now only opposition is drug addict ANA so why would or should they listen to us? What is the offer?

And sir if Zardari was still the president, Haqqani the viceroy and Kiyani the sipah salar may be US would have militarily colonized Pakistan but now I think its too late for them to attack Pakistan. Rather I would recommend them to declare Pakistan their 56th or 57th or whatever latest number of their states is, Pakistanis would be grateful for this and would oblige to make sure it happens, no bloodshed, no violence simple winning the minds and hearts strategy.

 

[OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ]

The purpose was not to make Pakistan stronger it was to destabilize and find fissures. Next administration Republican or Democrat will be very overtly vying for a stronger assertive India. Because Indians even powerful ones remain loyal to hands that feed 'em. So the largest democracy, the only democracy and the fountain of democracy have their hands full for next few years. Even seemingly pliant Pakistanis tend to be unpredictable.

 

[Viper0011.]

Gen Raheel's visit to the U S started with so much pomp and vigor and ended in much fanfare---but in its true self----it was just all for show and drama.

All the receptions and get together and the time given by the senators and congressmen---the briefings by the general to the pentagon did not seem to have any substance to it at all---. The americans were attentive listeners---they were extremely cordial throughout all the time that the general was here in Washington---but in truth---this welcome was basically a disguised goodbye to someone they had known over the years---it was basically all fluff..

Oh you are going to get me banned again through my emotional Mods buddies on here who don't like anything against the Pakistani military. But, I'll write the truth no matter what. So here I am, getting ready to be banned. But my post is actually the truth and it has some sense and not just written out of hate for the Pakistani Army.

Gen. Raheel wasn't invited to the US. He went there on his own, as some corps commanders didn't think that the "civilians" would convey their "opinions" correctly. The SAME mistake the military has ALWAYS made!! And with the past 60 years of NO progress, they are finally understanding the power of a Civilian elected government and her relationships across the globe!!

And you are right. The trip was a photo op to say the best. The US, out of sheer respect, allowed Gen. RS to meet with the VP. Joe Biden. Remember, you and I've discussed it before, SUITS, TIES and Salesmen!!!! Polite talk, present your case nicely, no push, build relationships, fun talk, get things done, meet in the middle and give some take some... Everyone's happy!! That's the American way of doing business and the militaries aren't designed for such result oriented negotiations. Nor will the American businessmen and politicians would meet with generals for these negotiations. It has to be civilians from all sides. Worst case, they'll "deal" with a general like Mushy when they have to. But no real love. That's only for an elected official.

At the end of the day, it was a Civilian elected leader's case that the US heard and supported, resulted in Modi going to Lahore. And it were two leaders (Modi and NS) who agreed on a peace initiative and due to which, the Indian side hasn't made any crazy war mongering after the Pathankot event. So this is the civilian magic at work (add CPEC and all other investments to it also).

On Gen. RS's tour, NS had already done the talking for the military, agreed on and had strategized the next steps. There was no reason for a knee jerk reaction from the Pakistani Military. But, Gen. Sharif is very much liked by the Pentagon and people he met in the US government from what I've heard. He's got good reputation and ethics, and he's a great guy.

 

[sady]

Hi,

The U S was not giving aid---that was just the term used and Mushy did not have it changed---.

The U S was paying for containing the terrorists that it pushed into pakistan that started with the systematic bombings from northern afghanistan towards pakistan's border----pushed the taliban and al qaeda terrorists and forced them into pakistan.

This was a payment for the expenses of pakistan military to carry out a military operation against these guys.




Hi,

I would agree to certain extent on your comments about the Gen Raheel's visit-----but Mushhy had great confidence in Kiyani----. He was his go to guy---. My brother told mush twice not to promote him---.

Mushy got canned because of bad marketing strategy---he did not have anyone who could strategically fight for him.

Plus the opposition politicians were going crazy---there was so much money in pakistan---they had never seen it before---so---they made a fool out of the public---the public fell for it.

i mean to say---how stupid is pakistani public---what they would not do for the security of their house---they did it for pakistan---.

Nowe---would you hire a security guard at your house whom you fired twice and the last time you kicked her / him out---you degraded and humiliated them with a vengeance.

He indeed was at onetime but we do have to take into account that people who have strong thinking heads over their body will one day start to think for themselves and will eventually get out of the shadows. Musharraf had for years crippled command structure of Army. There were hidden resentments. I personally never liked Musharraf. Those who love him love him like hell and those who despise him , hate his guts. I think it is to do with two personalities in Army 'Shupalo type' and 'balanced type'. Anyhow I wont go into details.

 

[MastanKhan]

Why would they listen to Pakistan when they know that it is just matter of a decade at max to get where they were. They have faced the well equipped and trained forces in last decade now only opposition is drug addict ANA so why would or should they listen to us? What is the offer?

And sir if Zardari was still the president, Haqqani the viceroy and Kiyani the sipah salar may be US would have militarily colonized Pakistan but now I think its too late for them to attack Pakistan. Rather I would recommend them to declare Pakistan their 56th or 57th or whatever latest number of their states is, Pakistanis would be grateful for this and would oblige to make sure it happens, no bloodshed, no violence simple winning the minds and hearts strategy.

Hi,

what I am saying is that the pashtun afghans must split from afghanistan and join pakistan-----they need to seperate themsleves from the northern alliance---.

That way there are two seperate countries----the N A can have a country of their own---the afghan pashtuns can have a better life with pakistan---and a major part of the problem is resolved----and then we can start with new problems.

There is a reason the thrash pakistan good----. Pakistan is the supposed poster child of bad boyz---it is the number one bad boy---and the U S would really like smash its fist into pakistan's face real hard and with a christian vengeance.

 

[Viper0011.]

I think we over estimate US power when it comes to taking military action against countries. There is no single country which US has taken a direct military action against which has;

1 A Democratically elected government

2 A good professional Army
3 A backing of another big country like China or Russia

Number 1 is the answer. You hit it RIGHT on the head. The Blue Suits in Washington respect and extend courtesy to whatever types of Civilian clothes exist across the globe!! Also, take a look around, how many democratic countries have terrorism, lack of public welfare, opportunity for their nations????

When you give people their right, when you plan for the people's growth, when you spend time and money in spreading education and economic infrastructure, that entire nation grows. Everyone gets busy in making a better life for them and for their children. Civilian countries mean success and there isn't any terrorism and religious drama, to an extent that becomes disruptive to the entire nation. So you are right, the US doesn't attack democratic countries as democracy ensures modernization and civilization and it eliminates extremism and terrorism!!

On number 2 and 3: Really? We've been at nuclear threshold with the Russians many times. You think all that was a joke?
Also, if the US tomorrow decides to go to War with Iran (supported by the Russians big times), you think the US would care? You know our estimate of war casualties for the First Gulf War? 40% of our forces!!!!!! And you think we'd chicken out from a "China or Russia" supported country? Like Iraq, Libya, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan weren't supported by the Russians????? So the only right choice is the number 1 form your list!!

 

[sady]

Number 1 is the answer. You hit it RIGHT on the head. The Blue Suits in Washington respect and extend courtesy to whatever types of Civilian clothes exist across the globe!! Also, take a look around, how many democratic countries have terrorism, lack of public welfare, opportunity for their nations????

When you give people their right, when you plan for the people's growth, when you spend time and money in spreading education and economic infrastructure, that entire nation grows. Everyone gets busy in making a better life for them and for their children. Civilian countries mean success and there isn't any terrorism and religious drama, to an extent that becomes disruptive to the entire nation. So you are right, the US doesn't attack democratic countries as democracy ensures modernization and civilization and it eliminates extremism and terrorism!!

On number 2 and 3: Really? We've been at nuclear threshold with the Russians many times. You think all that was a joke?
Also, if the US tomorrow decides to go to War with Iran (supported by the Russians big times), you think the US would care? You know our estimate of war casualties for the First Gulf War? 40% of our forces!!!!!! And you think we'd chicken out from a "China or Russia" supported country? Like Iraq, Libya, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan weren't supported by the Russians????? So the only right choice is the number 1 form your list!!

How many wars with Russia?
how many wars with Iran?
Iraq? ok lets admit it had some semblance of a professional army which had almost depleted to its last legs thanks to years of fighting neighboring countries, where Iraqi soldiers would rather flee than fight because of fear of Saddam, the cult leader.
Libya? Syria? Afghanistan? Would you want me to go one by one? Boots on ground?
Why does not US send its forces as peace keeping force in Ukraine? Why did USA not put boots on ground in Serbia? Why is Syria still off limits to US boots? Why is Syria such a cesspool for USA?