Pakistan Lost Its Chance For Security

[R0H1T]

Keep your car horn quiet, this nation is sleeping

Seriously WTH

 

[Solomon2]

why dosent america gives drone and civil nuclear technology to Pakistan...

I doubt Pakistani officials, military and civilian, could be trusted - indeed, I doubt they trust themselves - to use the drones responsibly without succumbing to corruption. (As for nukes, how is that on-topic?)

when it denied we found out american evil and negative attitude...so we decided to go our on way..

Not intelligible.

What makes u think Pakistan will trust a zionist funded/run banana republic of america?

Um, it's the Chinese, Europeans, Japanese, and Sauds who fund the American government by buying our gov't bonds. In addition, the Sauds use a fraction of their money to propagate the meme that Muslims should blame Zionists for their ills. It works so well that you don't question this, do you?

There is a long record of Pakistan-U.S. relations. Imo, Pakistani leaders are quite certain that they can trust America to fulfill its stated commitments to them. What they are not so sure about is whether America can be trusted to fulfill their expectations of what they want America to do. The two can be quite different - just looks at the FRUS record of the 1965 war and you'll see that Pakistani leaders wanted to convert by the fait accompli of unilateral war the Pakistan-U.S. mutual defense treaty into a straight anti-India alliance.

which has nuked civilians not once but twice.

Can you show how this comment is relevant to the thread topic?

 

[FaujHistorian]

I doubt Pakistani officials, military and civilian, could be trusted - indeed, I doubt they trust themselves - to use the drones responsibly without succumbing to corruption.?

My dear dear poster, my dear Sir,

Do not put too much trust in some of the anti-US rants. These folks will bring any excuse, even a tiny tiny one, if it helps their rabid-anti-Americanism.


However I do take an exception when you lump every Pakistani civilian and military and throw them to the dogs of mistrust.

Pakistan has had American techni-toys of military variety for ages, and time clearly shows that Pak military has used them responsibly.

Unless you have a proof positive that F-16 tech (most modern in its time), P3-Orion tech (most modern in its time), Cobra helicopter gunships (most modern in its time), and C-130s were ever used in an irresponsible way, or if there was ever an inkling of misuse, abuse, and uncle Sam pointed that out, and even then Pak military continued abusing misusing that tech.

Drones too if provided to the Pak military would be used responsibly. You can take it to the bank dare I say.

Drone BTW cannot be used against a full fledged army/airforce. These are only useful against a low tech enemy and so unlike F-16s, or Cobras, or P3-C, the drones cannot be used against a well-established high tech military such as India.

However the question is not for drones per se.

A drone is nothing but a pilot-less platform that is highly reliable and it can carry modern imaging equipment and few missiles.

Pakistan and USA should have come up with a piloted version long time ago.

Put the darn imagers, the night vision equipment and few missiles on a manned Cessna and let Pakistani pilots fly the thingy for 10 hours. We have plenty of pilots old and new who would love to be flying even a low tech plane over Wazirastan.


The real issue behind drone debacle is not the planes but American approach that refuses to trust Pak army.

And here is the core issue.

American planners have not realized that Pak army may have issues big and small with India, but India is no UAE facing Iran, or Taiwan facing mighty China.

India is 10+ times larger than Pakistan in many many aspects, and thus Americans do not have to be their saviors. No Siree Bob, Indians can take care of Pakistan many many times over.

The history of Pak army will show even a freshman student of Pak-US relations that as an institution, Pak army is 98% pro-USA.

Pak civilians on the other hand are majority leftists and Islamists and thus carry deadly strains of anti-US viruses.


And the reasons for this are many, but let me say that Pak Civilian institutions have different history while Pak army has much different history. Pak army history and traditions go 100+ years before even the countries called Pakistan and India came into being. This is the institution that fought and died and sacrificed as part of the mighty British-Indian army that muscled its way through Far-East, Middle East, Africa and Southern Europe alongside fellow allied forces.

Unless you keep the history of different institutions separate in your mind, your analysis will as confused as a typical Pakistani street vendor who mixes MSNBC and Fox in one bowl just because they are TV stations and both are American.

Hope you understand

peace.

 

[Solomon2]

However I do take an exception when you lump every Pakistani civilian and military and throw them to the dogs of mistrust.

Pakistan has had American techni-toys of military variety for ages, and time clearly shows that Pak military has used them responsibly.

Unless you have a proof positive that F-16 tech (most modern in its time), P3-Orion tech (most modern in its time), Cobra helicopter gunships (most modern in its time), and C-130s were ever used in an irresponsible way, or if there was ever an inkling of misuse, abuse, and uncle Sam pointed that out, and even then Pak military continued abusing misusing that tech.

Not only do I have no proof, but I haven't even heard an unsupported allegation about this. I accept your correction.

Drones too if provided to the Pak military would be used responsibly. You can take it to the bank dare I say.

In this instance I'm not so sure; there are two primary reasons:

One, Pakistan's record is of supporting some terrorist groups while opposing others. No, I don't think the Pakistan Army would give LeT or the Taliban a drone or two, but after 26/11 I can't rule out that Pakistan would use drones to support terrorist operations - or take bribes from terrorists who wish to not be attacked.

Still, your argument strikes me as powerful. If not for the support Pakistan's navy provided on 26/11, I'd consider it better than mine.

Two, I'm not convinced that Pakistani officials want to bear the onus of having (a) attacked terrorists who are Pakistani citizens and (b) the collateral killing of innocents, either by mistake or due to their employment as war materiel - human shields. Wasn't it President Zardari who told American leaders (ref: Wikileaks) that the difference between American soldiers and Pakistani ones was that the Pakistani ones have to go home at night and there they will be vulnerable to retribution?

The history of Pak army will show even a freshman student of Pak-US relations that as an institution, Pak army is 98% pro-USA. Pak civilians on the other hand are majority leftists and Islamists and thus carry deadly strains of anti-US viruses.

If U.S. leaders truly believed that they would never have sent Navy SEALS to Abbottabad, would they?

And the reasons for this are many, but let me say that Pak Civilian institutions have different history while Pak army has much different history. Pak army history and traditions go 100+ years before even the countries called Pakistan and India came into being. This is the institution that fought and died and sacrificed as part of the mighty British-Indian army that muscled its way through Far-East, Middle East, Africa and Southern Europe alongside fellow allied forces.

Yes, the British Indian Army did those things but its primary responsibility was to enforce colonialism - crowd control and local political manipulation, from Bangalore to Baghdad. Once split, the Indian half accepted accountability to the civilian leadership whereas the Pakistan half has been loath to give it up. As the French say, Pakistan is an army with a country, not a country with an army.

 

[shuntmaster]

Now let me tell you the reality,

Once NATO leaves Afghanistan, India is F***ed there.

And, can you please elaborate how will India get F***ed in Afghanistan once NATO leaves?
I suppose Pakistans wet dreams have to wait until US leaves. But US will be in Afghanistan atleast until 2014.

 

[shuntmaster]

Another Bharat Verma type analysis which is completely off the ground fact..and only bashes or belittles Pakistan.

The is an American named David Ignatius, reputed columnist on international current affairs.

 

[FaujHistorian]

.... I accept your correction.
.

Thank you.

....

..... Pakistan would use drones to support terrorist operations -......

Still, your argument strikes me as powerful. .......

.

Drones data could be fed to both US and Pakistani army command centers, or they can have joint command. Both of these will address the possibility of un-intended use.

Having said that, Drones or other prop-driven spy planes cannot fly outside Pakistan's borders. On Indian side, a powerful Indian airforce can detect and shoot these down with no problem whatsoever.

These drones are no stealth planes. Remember!

On Afghan side, NATO/US would know if a drone is picking up info. See my note on joint command center.

So your assertion about Pakistan's use of drones for terrorist activities is misplaced at best. See the map and understand the geography before making a point. Please!

Oh and BTW Pak army never said that once they have the drones, NATO cannot operate at all. They have always talked about joint ops (Planning, or execution, or both).

....If U.S. leaders truly believed that they would never have sent Navy SEALS to Abbottabad, would they?
.

You my dear Sir, are focused on the very last step of Ben-fing-Ladeen's demise. Years prior to that, Pakistani army housed both CIA and US army personnel on its bases as well as in Pakistani cities.

There is a Pak army's special serives group (SSG) base in Mangla. SSG is similar to green berets (I am sure you know by now being a regular member of PDF). This base is at stone's throw from Abbotabad (as the crow flies). Blackhawk helicopters and US personnel have always been regular guests there not for hours, but for weeks and months.

What you are talking about is a sliver of work that went into sending that @hole Ladeen to hell. You forget the hard work done jointly before that moment.

Pakistani army has always been open American officials visiting their field headquarters, their cities, and towns.

Why would you insist on treating Pakistan as a country with iron curtain? That's totally unfair.


p.s. Your comparison with Indian system is incorrect. Indians and Pakistani may look similar, they both eat curry, but Pakistanis do not shake their head sideways and their geo-strategic and political challenges are hugely different. Putting Indians and Pakistanis in the same political and geo-strategic basket is a street vendor's view and not an intellectual one.

FYI. Indians never faced Commie invasion, instead they were commie lackies and it did no harm to them.
In Pakistan on the other hand, every fing politician of some salt was a leftie at least, and thus Pak army in cooperation with USA, managed the country and its anti-commie policies. Ask anyone and they will tell you that Pakistan enjoyed the best economic years under Gen. Ayub. Following him, elected officials brought Islamism and socialism. Gen Zia's period was exception because the country was fighting active war against commies so he did use Mullahs but then USA was using them too.

Therefore it is unfair on your part as an American to get all the fruits of victory against commies and promptly forget all those who helped along the way. Not only that, but also start sharing bed with those who supported commies until the death of communism.

 

[Haseebullah]

Let's do a thought experiment and consider what would have happened in WWII had the British adopted current Pakistani attitudes:

Instead of a combined military command with the Americans there would have been two separate ones;
Instead of one gigantic invasion of France there would have been two much smaller ones, later in the war, as no American troops would have been allowed to be stationed in Britain;
Instead of allowing their traditional enemy, the French, to form an independent government under De Gaulle Britain would have insisted on a satellite government, hogtying the Americans to do so;
Instead of partnering with the Russians to defeat the Nazis the British would have employed balance-of-power to reach an accommodation that would certainly allow the Nazis free to kill and pillage everywhere as Russia suffered;
Instead of cracking down on local racists the Brits would, as part of the accommodation with Nazi Germany, allow them to establish themselves firmly as Fifth Columnists in the military and police forces, so that law and order would decay into extremism.

Yes, it's just Pakistan "playing games". How much better off would Pakistan be if it hadn't? You only have a few weeks, imo, until it's too late to reverse course.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strategic-geopolitical-issues/101253-pakistan-ally-war-terror.html

Yes, we looove to nuke innocent saintly nations....something to keep in mind....

What's the point of repeating something that is obvious and well understood.