'Pakistan, US need to work together to destroy IS before it gains foothold in Afghanistan

[Path-Finder]

The ambassador's statement neither asserted that nor ruled it out; your claim that I did so is a misrepresentation.

By definition a tyrant is one who uses cruel, unreasonable, and arbitrary application of power to rule. Why don't you think that definition applies more to Pakistan that to the U.S.?

It does not matter if it is misinterpreted/misrepresentation or tyranny. The US is now a cuckold in or too afghanistan. That is a Factoid!

 

[haviZsultan]

The ambassador's statement neither asserted that nor ruled it out; your claim that I did so is a misrepresentation.

By definition a tyrant is one who uses cruel, unreasonable, and arbitrary application of power to rule. Why don't you think that definition applies more to Pakistan that to the U.S.?

If Pakistan used nukes, got involved in wars constantly against much weaker foes, demanded and wrested concessions from allies, spied on allies (wikileaks) and was the number one asshole in the world today it would apply to Pakistan. When America dies we will celebrate, as I said before. One day America will be worse than a gutter.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

The ambassador's statement can easily be interpreted as Pakistan threatening the U.S.: do what we say or else we'll let Daesh eat Afghanistan!

Whether or not the U.S. is "willing to work with Pakistan" the ambassador has asserted Pakistan will have a role in the consequences.

Your statement give impression that as if Pakistan controls every single proxy that is going on in this planet. "Star of David" is hidden behind the flags of IS, yet its Pakistan who will "let" Daesh eat Afghanistan. The audacity!

 

[Solomon2]

If Pakistan used nukes, got involved in wars constantly against much weaker foes, demanded and wrested concessions from allies, spied on allies (wikileaks) and was the number one asshole in the world today it would apply to Pakistan.

Strength vs. weakness has nothing to do with it. Frequency of wars has nothing to do with it. The actions have to be arbitrary and cruel in context.

When America dies we will celebrate, as I said before. One day America will be worse than a gutter.

So you, too, embrace the proclamation of @hussain0216 that "hatred is Pakistanis' birthright."

Your statement give impression that as if Pakistan controls -

It's not "my statement." The Pakistani ambassador's statement does not rule this out but does not assert it either. A threat wrapped in diplomatic ambiguity.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

It's not "my statement." The Pakistani ambassador's statement does not rule this out but does not assert it either. A threat wrapped in diplomatic ambiguity.

Give your mind a rest.

 

[xyxmt]

I think the news have not reached Pakistan that ISIS is US sponsored proxy

 

[Solomon2]

Give your mind a rest.

I could be over-analyzing, yes.

 

[haviZsultan]

Strength vs. weakness has nothing to do with it. Frequency of wars has nothing to do with it. The actions have to be arbitrary and cruel in context.

So you, too, embrace the proclamation of @hussain0216 that "hatred is Pakistanis' birthright."

It's not "my statement." The Pakistani ambassador's statement does not rule this out but does not assert it either. A threat wrapped in diplomatic ambiguity.

So raping and killing Vietnames and Koreans isn't cruel? Using nukes on Japan isn't cruel when they can't even respond in the same manner? Invading one country after another is not cruel. Releasing gas in Fallujah isn't a contravention of basic rights? Keep supporting that gutter of a country. It will get what it deserves one day.

 

[VCheng]

It's not "my statement." The Pakistani ambassador's statement does not rule this out but does not assert it either. A threat wrapped in diplomatic ambiguity.

It is more of a desperate plea than a threat.

 

[Solomon2]

So raping and killing Vietnames and Koreans isn't cruel?

When such incidents occurred they were by deviant U.S. servicemen who knew they could be prosecuted for it; there is nothing in modern U.S. military history to compare to the orders given to the P.A. to commit such deeds in E. Pakistan in 1971.

Using nukes on Japan isn't cruel when they can't even respond in the same manner?

WWII had already reached the level of mass killing of civilians and in this Japan, not the U.S., was the leader: see Nanjing Massacre. Also consider that the firebombing of Tokyo by "conventional" weapons killed more civilians than both atomic bombs combined.

Invading one country after another is not cruel.

I had this discussion with Noam Chomsky once! In 1944 the U.S. invaded Normandy to liberate France. Do you think the French considered that invasion "cruel"?

Releasing gas in Fallujah isn't a contravention of basic rights?

Never happened. But the hate is important to you so you want to believe it did, right?

It is more of a desperate plea than a threat.

Forty years ago a Pakistani ambassador convinced terrorists to surrender just by talking to them. Now I'm supposed to believe a Pakistani ambassador is a desperate victim-in-waiting?

 

[Taimoor Khan]

It is more of a desperate plea than a threat.

Its just a advise, because if yanks wont act, the Russian are just sitting across the border, and you have another Syria in making, but the difference is, here the Russians got supply lines going all the way to Moscow.

It is in yanks interests to act and act fast, if they want to stay relevant in this region.

 

[VCheng]

The Russian bogeyman is a disingenuous and self-serving claim by Pakistan only, in the Afghan context. Russia will not be in any position to interfere here for a long time to come. And let us not forget India's important role in Afghanistan either. That will become crucial in the months and years ahead.

 

[salarsikander]

Yes, after 13 years of invasion of NATO , large territory is still under the control of the people that US came to fight. What a waste of money and life.

The Russian bogeyman is a disingenuous and self-serving claim by Pakistan only, in the Afghan context. Russia will not be in any position to interfere here for a long time to come. And let us not forget India's important role in Afghanistan either. That will become crucial in the months and years ahead.

Is that why china and Russia had a meeting on Afghanistan issue ? They dynamics are shifting too quickly than the asian pivot.

 

[VCheng]

Is that why china and Russia had a meeting on Afghanistan issue ? They dynamics are shifting too quickly than the asian pivot.

So what became of said meeting?

 

[salarsikander]

So what became of said meeting?

Well I'm not sure. They didn't give me memo though