Pakistan a bad investment for U.S.

[President Camacho]

"Poor" contractor Raymond Davis? Who is in jail "just" because he killed 2 people who tried to rob him? The article is beyond BS.

What do you think, who is Raymond Davis?

 

[SMC]

Who cares.

A no name professor writing an article in a no-name newspaper. Why are some Pakistanis getting worked up over this? Just ignore this stuff and forget about or just make quick comments.

 

[Archie]

US should get its own books audited

War in IRAQ and Afganistan has cost USA 3 Trillion USD since 9/11 , thats like 2 times the GDP of india

even today US has an annual war bill of more than 150 Billion USD

I think these figures alone are responsible for Global financial crises

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Wat a third class article written by some moron...This idiot needs to do some research thn write.

Yeah, you're right. Being a Moron is an essential qualification to be a professor at Stanford Univ. (an Ivy League Univ.); to be a Pulitzer Prize winner (a premier prize for journalism). And of course, the "New York Times" is a worse news-paper than "Rupee News"!

The issues that Joel Brinkley writes about are very real; after all the "ducks and drakes" (hera-pheri) that the Pakistani Establishment (incl. Deep State) has been doing--- little wonder that the Establishment has to buckle down every time, be it 'Drones' or 'Raymond Davis'.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Yeah, you're right. Being a Moron is an essential qualification to be a professor at Stanford Univ. (an Ivy League Univ.); to be a Pulitzer Prize winner (a premier prize for journalism). And of course, the "New York Times" is a worse news-paper than "Rupee News"!

The issues that Joel Brinkley writes about are very real; after all the "ducks and drakes" (hera-pheri) that the Pakistani Establishment (incl. Deep State) has been doing--- little wonder that the Establishment has to buckle down every time, be it 'Drones' or 'Raymond Davis'.

For u anybdy who is against Pakistan is a scholar, ur best bud.... Is been a bad investment for Pakistan.... since 1950s.

 

[muse]

I think it's a great thread - because, well, I am not approaching it from a an investment point of view, but I think it's as valid as any - I just think the two countries Pakistan and US have very different world views and their roles - and Pakistan and US did experience a period where the way the two thought of each other and the way they ensured a measure of decorum in public diplomacy with each other, was a stabilizing factor -- but Pakistan will not buy into the US ideas of endless war and US will not, cannot turn away from engaging in wars in Muslim and against Muslim majority countries - now for whatever reason, either they misunderstand each other, or they are insincere with each other -- they need to go their different way.

Pakistani readers will soon find that the US is in a kind of quick sand, not it's not these wars themselves, it's the ideas behind these wars, the idea that these seemingly endless wars as a way of life is "dulce et decorum" -- -- readers will notice the degree to which, and openly, seriously, US politicians now pander not just to domestic constituents but foreign interests, a case in point is Sarah Palin's speech to business interests in India, these wars will not be limited to Muslim majority countries - so really US is now structurally, a very different country than one their narrative of themselves would suggest - So yeah, Pakistan is a bad investment for them, and they should be made welcome to seek greener pastures elsewhere. No need for bad blood or ill will

 

[Capt.Popeye]

For u anybdy who is against Pakistan is a scholar, ur best bud.... Is been a bad investment for Pakistan.... since 1950s.

This Bloke is not my best bud. He is not Indian, he does not work for an Indian university or newspaper and he did not win any Indian award for journalism. On the other hand; even if you don't like him he is not some ill-informed, uneducated guy writing some blog.

Now the meaning of what Joel Brinkley is writing about. He says that the USA has invested so much money into Pakistan in the form of aid over so many years. But USA has not received any worthwhile returns from Pakistan in the form of Pakistan upholding the US interests or helping the US to carry out its aims. Therefore he concludes that the US investment in Pakistan has been a 'Bad Investment'. That is not my opinion.

My opinion is this: the US aid to Pakistan has not created any worthwhile benefit to Pakistan, rather it has tempted people to divert money here and there, including the pockets of both dubious individuals and organisations. But most of all the Pakistani Establishment has got trapped into doing things that it can ill-afford to do; viz. the 'Drones' and 'Raymond Davis', unless that is a part of the Pakistani establishment's determined policy!

Maybe that might clear some matters. Now you decide who is for whom etc.

 

[Time Assassin]

$22 billion dollars?

The war with the Taliban has cost us $40 billion dollars. The deaths costs us more, the developt of our country has been stalkled. Before he mentions the donations or funding he should actually do research and find out how much we have soent and lost while taking care of their thrash.

 

[Malik Usman]

Joel Brinkley, a professor of journalism at Stanford University, is a Pulitzer Prize-winning former foreign correspondent for the New York Times. E-mail him at Brinkley@foreign-matters.com. Contact The Chronicle at SFGate.com/chronicle/submissions/#1.\

So much for a 'moron'.

If he is a prize winner.........then Obama he also got a Nobel Prize for making peace in this world (Peace just in speaches)...............But where is peace in this world....see....Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Phlastine, Kashmir and Lebia etc..
I am sure the next president will get the nobel prize because he will see a dream to make peace in the world.
Same way lot's of journalists they even never went in those areas they worte the stories about.

 

[DesiGuy]

"Look at that poor CIA contractor, Raymond Davis, who languished in a miserable Pakistani prison for more than a month after shooting two men who were trying to rob him."


It's hard to digest this statement...

 

[muse]

So, what's your point? Is Pakistan a good investment for the US and if so, why ?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That the article is nonsense and yet more anti-Pakistan propaganda pushed by the US establishment is clear from many points in the article, but lets take one paragraph for instance:

A Congressional Research Service Report notes that "the Defense Department has characterized F-16 fighters, P-3C patrol aircraft and anti-armor missiles as having significant anti-terrorism applications." Come on. Anti-armor missiles? How many tanks does al Qaeda have?

Perhaps the esteemed 'Joel Brinkley, a professor of journalism at Stanford University, is a Pulitzer Prize-winning former foreign correspondent for the New York Times' should ask the US military what it is using F-18's and various other far more advanced fighter jets in Afghanistan for.

And as for complaints about the TOW missiles asked for by Pakistan, how about the more advanced Javelin used by US forces in Afghanistan?

********.com - Javelin Kill - Afghanistan

See any 'Taliban Tanks' around?

The BS propaganda out of the US media never ceases to amaze.

 

[JanjaWeed]

So, what's your point? Is Pakistan a good investment for the US and if so, why ?

i think the writer got it completely wrong. pakistan has never been an investment for US. it's a necessity for America!!

 

[graphican]

ketchup filled heads won't see any contribution of Pakistan for the US.. but let me put something for their eye and the other eye-opening.

• We let US create their largest embessy in the world which does all the haramkari against Pakistan and our neighbors.
• We let them travel across/opened inaccessible areas which are even unaccessible to Pakistan.. without stopping them unless they killed few Pakistanis
• We let them have their drones and fly upon us and kill us
• We supported them in the war beyond (literally beyond) our bareable capacity
• With flacid economy, we embrassed huge ecnomic losses.. for the sake of same idiotic sam
• We lost 31,000+ of our civilians because they needed our support in their war for their reasons
• We lost or got handicaped some 10,000 of our brave soldiers, the largest contribution and more then combined contribution of rest of the world together.
• We fought with our own people and went against them, troubled them and received tons of trouble back
• We compromised on our strategic asserts for them
• and Finally, we lost our self-respect in the row to make them happy.

What did they offer in return? 10 billions? America is spending more money in Afghanistan in one month. Now if you call all this a "bad-investment", you are surly a poor guy to make "cost/benifit" analysis.

 

[muse]

i think the writer got it completely wrong. pakistan has never been an investment for US. it's a necessity for America!!

Ok, I really like that.

And if it is a necessity, how would one characterize US attempts to secure what you say is a necessity?