Pakistan has spent $80 bn in terror war

[Hulk]

So US is half responsible for the problem, no? Why are you singling out Pakistan? Has something to do with your nationality, I think. Taliban wasn't 'created' by Pakistan FYI. You ought to read up on the history.

OTOH, the Afghan Taliban are not involved in any terrorism in Pakistan. The TTP are, which were founded in 2007.


The way I see it, this whole WoT is unnecessary. We're seeing all this terrorism across the world because of this useless WoT that is only causing more terror. Taliban were ready to hand over OBL on multiple occasions to the US - both before and after 9/11. US should have taken him and be on their way. Instead, they wanted to fight an unnecessary war - one which has caused far more issues, while basically having no benefits.

80 billion is the total loss due to WoT - economic loss, infrastructure, money spent on the WoT, etc. Zardari is either high or was misquoted.

You miss the key point. Two people one local and one foreigner does a murder. The foreigner goes back to his country and the local gets punished.
Now local can say that punish the foreigner too, he is not wrong, but that does not mean he is not the culprit. Also the local is an idiot because he should have thought about implications on him when committing the crime.
As per war on terror, you made the choice and you are happily making the choice to be with US. If you do not like it, get out.

 

[SMC]

Its nothing to do with nationality. US is equally responsible for Taliban. How can you fund raising a violent organization and then leave it without dismantling it. It was bound to happen, 9/11. It just took many years. US allowed these terrorist organizations to grow so that they can have reasons to invade any country on name of WoT. US foreign policy makers are among the most intelligent and far-sighted people, they knew it will happen. It was just matter of time and they used the occasion to get best out of the worst attack on American soil.

While I think you have a point, I just want to point out that Taliban were not involved in 9/11. Sure, OBL operated out of Afghanistan, but Taliban didn't help Al Qaeda. To the contrary, they were willing to hand over OBL both before and after 9/11.
Your point is still valid though.

I personally believe neither US nor Pakistan should've got involved in Afghanistan. It was obviously more so in US interests to get involved because they wouldn't feel the repercussions of their actions as much, given where they're located geographically. It should've been a definite no-no for Pakistan, but the leaders at the time had a short-sighted policy.

 

[KRAIT]

You miss the key point. Two people one local and one foreigner does a murder. The foreigner goes back to his country and the local gets punished.
Now local can say that punish the foreigner too, he is not wrong, but that does not mean he is not the culprit. Also the local is an idiot because he should have thought about implications on him when committing the crime.
As per war on terror, you made the choice and you are happily making the choice to be with US. If you do not like it, get out.

Pakistan didn't have the choice to join WoT or not. G.W. Bush said, you are either with us or against us. If you won't cooperate, we will bomb you to stone age.

Pakistan needed US back in 2001, still does for variety of reasons. They HAD to join WoT.

 

[SMC]

You miss the key point. Two people one local and one foreigner does a murder. The foreigner goes back to his country and the local gets punished.
Now local can say that punish the foreigner too, he is not wrong, but that does not mean he is not the culprit. Also the local is an idiot because he should have thought about implications on him when committing the crime.
As per war on terror, you made the choice and you are happily making the choice to be with US. If you do not like it, get out.

No, I get your point. I still meant implicitly that Pakistan is responsible for other half of the problem. I do have a problem with the whole issue being blamed on Pakistan but some.

 

[Mercenary]

Pakistan didn't have the choice to join WoT or not. G.W. Bush said, you are either with us or against us. If you won't cooperate, we will bomb you to stone age.

Pakistan needed US back in 2001, still does for variety of reasons. They HAD to join WoT.

Even Iran was supporting USA and India offered US Air Bases in which to bomb Afghanistan.

Pakistan raised snakes in its backyard to throw them at its neighbours houses.

What it failed to anticipate that other snakes slithered into that area who then began attacking other people and when the entire neighbourhood united to fight the snake menace Pakistan had no choice but to go along or see its house burned down.

 

[SMC]

Yes.. US is half responsible and they have spent an upward of a trillion dollars in this war.. You dont see their president though whining about it and expecting rest of the world to compensate them for that money..

A trillion dollar is 1/15 of their GDP. For Pakistan, 80 billion is about 30-35% of it GDP.

 

[SMC]

Even Iran was supporting USA and India offered US Air Bases in which to bomb Afghanistan.

Pakistan raised snakes in its backyard to throw them at its neighbours houses.

What it failed to anticipate that other snakes slithered into that area who then began attacking other people and when the entire neighbourhood united to fight the snake menace Pakistan had no choice but to go along or see its house burned down.

You're way too 'bhola'. Your analogy is far too overly-simplistic to be applied to the real life case. To start off with the first problem in your analogy - Taliban didn't attack the US. Al Qaeda did. Taliban never attacked anyone outside of Afghanistan. In addition, Taliban agreed to hand over OBL both before and after 9/11. Your analogy makes no distinction between Al Qaeda and Taliban -- it basically considers them one and the same. This makes your analogy invalid. I can't begin to point out other issues with your analogy.

 

[deepak.chauhan2312]

Looks like you're on a high dose of crack. Best for you to sleep and come back tomorrow.

y..??am i wrong in anyway..??

 

[Mercenary]

You're way too 'bhola'. Your analogy is far too overly-simplistic to be applied to the real life case.

I disagree. I think it works perfectly and describes the current situation accurately.

 

[Hulk]

No, I get your point. I still meant implicitly that Pakistan is responsible for other half of the problem. I do have a problem with the whole issue being blamed on Pakistan but some.

I agree US is responsible for it too, but two reasons you are to be blamed more.
1) it was done on your soil, you should look at your interest.
2) You happily joined.
3) After afghan war, you should have closed the camps.

 

[SMC]

I agree US is responsible for it too, but two reasons you are to be blamed more.
1) it was done on your soil, you should look at your interest.
2) You happily joined.
3) After afghan war, you should have closed the camps.

Neither of this has any bearing on US being just as responsible for the issue, IMO. The problem wouldn't have happened if Pakistan OR the US didn't get involved. i.e. if one party pulled out, the whole issue would've never happened.

 

[iranigirl2]

Pakistan will NEVER win the war on terror, as long as there are schools, Mosques, etc.. in Pakistan from Saudi Arabia. Sorry.

 

[Tshering22]

I am shocked at this figure.

Does the writer even know how much is $ 80 billion!?

 

[INDIC]

Can anyone provide the detail how Pakistan lost 80 billion or 10 billion per year.

 

[Emmie]

I am shocked at this figure.

Does the writer even know how much is $ 80 billion!?

If you had read the news article you wouldn't have ended up shocked. Spending here means damage to the economy!

ISLAMABAD: President Asif Ali Zardari has said that no country had suffered so much as Pakistan from terrorism and it had lost 40,000 innocent lives in addition to $80 billion in economic terms

Can anyone provide the detail how Pakistan lost 80 billion or 10 billion per year.

At least read the article!!