Petraeus Scandal: US Rusting Swords With Rusting Characters | PKKH.tv

[FinalCountDown]

Of course, despite all the perceived crudeness and claimed lack of moral authority, not one US fauji has dared defy the order of his civilian superiors. Ever. Imagine that!

Besides, in Pakistan, any interference from the outside is usually invited from those within. Where should the blame be placed for that, I wonder?

(Ladies and Gentlemen: I think we now have found the Pakistani version of PressTV! )

Mr. Vcheng, I assume that you didnt even get near to what the author of this piece wanted to say or tell us.

Comparing our Faujis with the Mighty Warriors like in US and allied forces is itself an insult to them...no??

Before jumping on to conclusion...try to relax, always take a deep breath,,in fact take two to three deep breaths, try to give a serious thought to the post and then reply. I hope that will bring a major shift and change in your posts with something serious in it Cheers

Of course, despite all the perceived crudeness and claimed lack of moral authority, not one US fauji has dared defy the order of his civilian superiors. Ever. Imagine that!

Besides, in Pakistan, any interference from the outside is usually invited from those within. Where should the blame be placed for that, I wonder?

(Ladies and Gentlemen: I think we now have found the Pakistani version of PressTV! )

Mr. Vcheng, I assume that you didnt even get near to what the author of this piece wanted to say or tell us.

Comparing our Faujis with the Mighty Warriors like in US and allied forces is itself an insult to them...no??

Before jumping on to conclusion...try to relax, always take a deep breath,,in fact take two to three deep breaths, try to give a serious thought to the post and then reply. I hope that will bring a major shift and change in your posts with something serious in it Cheers

 

[Hellraiser007]

US Govt. wants to change the policy related to Afghanistan and they are doing some clean up.

 

[jhungary]

Perhaps you have given a little too much thought the other way around. The CIA director is the one responsible for giving shots and was very much involve in decision making process. The only dilemma we have is that we donot understand their structure of following orders and think that they only are the obideint ones. Think again. Langely and Pentagon are not the one who actually go for just what some of our brothers think here. Obama administration are thinking for major changes in their team. Once that will happen, you may see a shift of policy regarding *******, if not, the reinforcement of old policies will only bring up new faces with old same stories. Rest Assured.

I think you mixed up the title CIA director with National Security Advisor. (APNSA)
Basically CIA did not do anything but follow the National Security Advisor advice, CIA do not even have control of their own NOC team, (Which were directly report to APNSA and directly to the President.)

Being a CIA director have only limited resource to spend and limited responsibility interm of secuirty or intelligent gathering. While the NSA guy make all the decision, the CIA head will only keep in the loop. Basically D/CIA is only a yes man and the man who ask congress for funding for the CIA, NSC incharge of CIA, and APNSA inchrage of NSC.

 

[jhungary]

Well, just as i thought, as soon as he is resigned this start surfacing.

Scandal around US spy chief widens - Yahoo!7 News

you need to know, a man with his job, he is not allow to fool around and left personal contact everywhere, there are clean up from afghanistan, there are no clean up from libya, there are no rift from Petraeus and Barrack, it's the private email with the lady that broke it all.

People don't understand was when you hold certain security clearence (Confidential, Secret or Top Secret) you are not allow to freely discuss anything (Whether or not is it information to the government) do that and you will have your clearence revoke and fired from your job. All chatter for people holding clearence are monitored, so that there should be no "Private" Communication. But in this case, Petraeus hold TS Clearence (or maybe more) and this is a very big scandel if there are some private e-mail from him to anyone.

 

[VCheng]

Mr. Vcheng, I assume that you didnt even get near to what the author of this piece wanted to say or tell us. .............

Please do explain in easy English what you think the author attempted to tell us.

I am all ears.

 

[VCheng]

Well, I am still waiting to benefit from your insights on the topic .... ....

 

[Oldman1]

US Govt. wants to change the policy related to Afghanistan and they are doing some clean up.

No because they have done it many times already with other generals. We have a man who has high security clearance and access to many classified info. Imagine if an enemy were to find out that he is having an affair they could threaten to expose him unless he does what they demand.

 

[smackdown]

ok, so for you guys having an extra-marital affair is no big deal,, moral don't count for you,, somehow you give me a feeling that all made-in-US is good,, even if its crap.

the point in the article is, i think, that people without a moral standing cannot be allowed to make judgement in matters pertaining implications on world affairs,, and that its not just Petraeus, the whole machine is corrupt..

but of course,,you wont see that if you'r in love with the US...

 

[jhungary]

ok, so for you guys having an extra-marital affair is no big deal,, moral don't count for you,, somehow you give me a feeling that all made-in-US is good,, even if its crap.

the point in the article is, i think, that people without a moral standing cannot be allowed to make judgement in matters pertaining implications on world affairs,, and that its not just Petraeus, the whole machine is corrupt..

but of course,,you wont see that if you'r in love with the US...

Not that moral standard does not matter, nor How Moral influence world politic decision, the question is rather simple, What is moral enough?

If you ask what is moral standard, different country will give you a different answer, if everyone of us are of high moral standard and live by our code everyday, we will not need law, jail nor police, the problem is, all those things are needed to form a society.

People cannot be moral all the time, people are human, human make mistake, it's doesn't matter if you are American, British, Pakistani, Iraqi, or whatever affiliation you are, people make mistakem it's not holding a high moral value that count, but rather if you can reform that count. If you fail to see that, either you are asking yourselve too much or you are just plain stupid and living in a imaginary world, cause in this world, people make mistake.

 

[FinalCountDown]

My point is this: the writer attempts to confuse the US system of checks and balances with a situation "where one instrument of the government is vying against the other" and using that confusion to deny anyone the moral authority to question the true state of affairs within Pakistan, as part of the agenda-driven misleading bias that is as evident as day.

Instead of trying to shut me up, you, and Pakistan, would be better served by trying to understand the utter foolishness of the particular brand of demagoguery being pushed down the throats of the gullible to their own disadvantage, by not just PKKH, but many others too.

Perhaps, you dont understand Vcheng, that point in the article isnt about "Technical" proceedings. Its an opinion about the outcomes of a war that was waged by a military might like US. But those who donot believe in any "morals", how can they talk and fight for such a thing?

and Just asking? Perhaps as a figure of speech you said: "You and Pakistan", I mean are you not a Pakistani??

 

[FinalCountDown]

I think you mixed up the title CIA director with National Security Advisor. (APNSA)
Basically CIA did not do anything but follow the National Security Advisor advice, CIA do not even have control of their own NOC team, (Which were directly report to APNSA and directly to the President.)

Being a CIA director have only limited resource to spend and limited responsibility interm of secuirty or intelligent gathering. While the NSA guy make all the decision, the CIA head will only keep in the loop. Basically D/CIA is only a yes man and the man who ask congress for funding for the CIA, NSC incharge of CIA, and APNSA inchrage of NSC.

Agreed....The point is not to elaborate it in detail. Another piece would do the work perhaps. But, this is what we assume that CIA has its own limitation, despite of being abused by some other organizations in the states. More powerful and more lethal.

 

[VCheng]

Perhaps, you dont understand Vcheng, that point in the article isnt about "Technical" proceedings. Its an opinion about the outcomes of a war that was waged by a military might like US. But those who donot believe in any "morals", how can they talk and fight for such a thing?

and Just asking? Perhaps as a figure of speech you said: "You and Pakistan", I mean are you not a Pakistani??

International geopolitics, including the use of war as an instrument of policy, cannot be judged by morals or ethics, but by national interests alone. That is the blunt truth, and it renders the whole thrust of the article ineffective.

And yes, I am a Pakistani-American.

 

[jhungary]

Agreed....The point is not to elaborate it in detail. Another piece would do the work perhaps. But, this is what we assume that CIA has its own limitation, despite of being abused by some other organizations in the states. More powerful and more lethal.

While i agree a change in policy is welcomed, but the fact remain the same, some organisation just cannot change or become more transparent.

Intelligence Organization work best if their operation remain opaque, to preserve their covertness, the problem is, with changes, there are risk to come with, and in intelligence circle, risk mean somebody dies. Worse yet, risk mean the failure of long term objective. In this case, changes are usually not welcome.

I cannot tell you how CIA, NSA or NSC work without giving out any classified information, but rest assure, the only you see in director position in those organisation is only the fall guy, they don't have any power what so ever with their own organisation, otherwise you know where the guy live, you would just simply capture the guy or blackmail him and all your organisation will pulge into stoneage of information. You will never see whoever in charge, that's about the only thing i can tell you. That's the same we don't advertise the exist of covert opreration.

By the way, the D/FBI is in the same title with D/CIA, the only different is they are controlled by DOJ in turn controlled by DHS.

 

[LeGenD]

Of course, despite all the perceived crudeness and claimed lack of moral authority, not one US fauji has dared defy the order of his civilian superiors. Ever. Imagine that!

Besides, in Pakistan, any interference from the outside is usually invited from those within. Where should the blame be placed for that, I wonder?

(Ladies and Gentlemen: I think we now have found the Pakistani version of PressTV! )

Are you really a Pakistani American?

Pakistani politicians are responsible for breakup of Pakistan, since you conveniently forgot. Due to unstable political climate within Pakistan, military is forced to take charge time and again. Of-course, this shouldn't happen but then should we give free hand to corrupt politicans to further damage Pakistan?

And before you bash military further, do not forget that the times of Ayub and Musharraf were golden for Pakistan. It is unfortunate that everybody gets tainted with bad reputation in Pakistan.

International geopolitics, including the use of war as an instrument of policy, cannot be judged by morals or ethics, but by national interests alone. That is the blunt truth, and it renders the whole thrust of the article ineffective.

And yes, I am a Pakistani-American.

And the national interest of US is to loose in Afghanistan or win?

Every smart person has noticed that US military leadership is at odds with Obama's leadership on how to handle the war in Afghanistan.

If US looses in Afghanistan, then this would be a major blow to its WOT campaign. US military leadership wants to succeed in Afghanistan but Obama (who doesn't have a military background) is unable to see through the issue. Obama thinks that drone attacks will solve all problems.

 

[VCheng]

Are you really a Pakistani American?

Yes.

Pakistani politicians are responsible for breakup of Pakistan, since you conveniently forgot. Due to unstable political climate within Pakistan, military is forced to take charge time and again. Of-course, this shouldn't happen but then should we give free hand to corrupt politicans to further damage Pakistan?

Both the civilian and military government are to blame for the disaster called Pakistan these days.

And before you bash military further, do not forget that the times of Ayub and Musharraf were golden for Pakistan. It is unfortunate that everybody gets tainted with bad reputation in Pakistan.

What you call golden was only a veneer of fool's gold, hiding the rot and tarnish underneath that became evident soon thereafter.

And the national interest of US is to loose in Afghanistan or win?

Every smart person has noticed that US military leadership is at odds with Obama's leadership on how to handle the war in Afghanistan.

If US looses in Afghanistan, then this would be a major blow to its WOT campaign. US military leadership want to succeed in Afghanistan but Obama (who doesn't have a military background) is unable to see through the issue.

The major goals of US involvment in Afghnastan will be met: OBL is dead, and the area will not be useable for attacks against the mainland for quite a long time.

What you see as being at odds is the US system at work in its natural state, but most people with little understanding of the US will not be able to see that.