Republicans sharply criticize Pakistan in debate

[Tangent]

When Republicans comes to power next year, they will be itching for war....and pakistan may a ripe and perfect case for them..Iran is a tougher nut to crack.

 

[StandForInsaf]

When Republicans comes to power next year, they will be itching for war....and pakistan may a ripe and perfect case for them..Iran is a tougher nut to crack.

Really that's the case ? let them try then ... we Pakistanis know how to kick *** of enemies.

 

[deckingraj]

Are you as clueless as you appear or are you just TROLLING ?

What the heck do you know about American Political scenario ?

Have you been following the Republican field ?

Republicans have a snowballs chance of winning next election.

Even if they did by any fluke of destiny, what the candidates say to get elected and what they actually do after they are elected is two different things. By the way, a Republican victory will be a nightmare for India. Every Republican President has sold F16's and other military hardware to Pakistan ( starting from Ronald Reagan to George W Bush). Republicans are always open to making deals with Pakistan and stabbing India in the back.

For Pakistan, next election is a win win proposition. If the Republicans win, we will make deals in Pakistan's National interest. If Obama wins, he will be a different President than he is today because after his second term he cannot run anymore so he does not have to consider any consequences of his Pro Pakistan policies.

Either way India loses. BYE BYE INDIA

I must say sir that your POV is missing one key thing i.e. You cannot bank on past for future...Just to let you know that the most talked about nuke deal b/w US-India happened right under the nose of Republican's...Though the seeds of US-Indian relations were sown in the Clinton era but the real work was done under Bush era...

Keep in mind the stern warning that you got after 9/11..."Support our action or face stone age"...As said before republicans are conservative and well known for using brute force to get the job done...Pakistan was a different ball game back in USSR era..And India is a different ball game in today's era...

I hope you might wanna consider the ground reality and re-consider all that you said above...

 

[iPhone]

Really that's the case ? let them try then ... we Pakistanis know how to kick *** of enemies.

dont worry, as much as Indians love to see US attacking Pakistan, it wont happen, even under Republicans. Republicans as hard as their stance is, not just about Pakistan but on many other domestic and international issues, they hardly have any two-faced behavior or policies, unlike the democrats. That makes dealing with the republicans easier because you know they are not something entirely different on the inside.

 

[deckingraj]

dont worry, as much as Indians love to see US attacking Pakistan, it wont happen, even under Republicans. Republicans as hard as their stance is, not just about Pakistan but on many other domestic and international issues, they hardly have any two-faced behavior or policies, unlike the democrats. That makes dealing with the republicans easier because you know they are not something entirely different on the inside.

Are you sure about that??? WMD is Iraq was not the work of democrats, no??? In short they are going to protect American interests in the same valor as democrats would do....

 

[RKhan]

As a Pakistani American and as an American citizen who keeps track of politics I can safely say that the Republicans have no chance in hell of winning when they clearly are pushing forth policies against the middle class and the low class. Perry to many is another George Bush ( a person who just memories statistics and blurts them out even if they don't correspond with the question asked)

 

[StandForInsaf]

I must say sir that your POV is missing one key thing i.e. You cannot bank on past for future...Just to let you know that the most talked about nuke deal b/w US-India happened right under the nose of Republican's...Though the seeds of US-Indian relations were sown in the Clinton era but the real work was done under Bush era...

Keep in mind the stern warning that you got after 9/11..."Support our action or face stone age"...As said before republicans are conservative and well known for using brute force to get the job done...Pakistan was a different ball game back in USSR era..And India is a different ball game in today's era...

I hope you might wanna consider the ground reality and re-consider all that you said above...

2 words for this theory "shut up" .

 

[VelocuR]

Don't discuss with pathetic Indians chest thumping....

Pak-US ties: ‘It’s like a bad marriage, but divorce is impossible’

" Both benefited from the Bush- Musharraf alliance; Pakistan militarily and economically and the US by killing Al Qaeda elements," Dennis Kux.

LAHORE: Pakistan and the United States are at the lowest point of their relationship since 9/11, but they still need each other and will continue to remain allies, said former US ambassador Dennis Kux at a seminar at the Pakistan Study Centre on Monday.

“Pakistan-US relations are like a bad marriage where divorce is impossible and the couple is likely to continue to rock along,” said Kux, who was keynote speaker at the seminar, titled Recent Irritants in Pak-US Relations.

He said that after the killing of Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad and the Raymond Davis affair, the US and Pakistan had developed a trust deficit. Islamabad had reduced military and intelligence cooperation and also demanded an end to drone attacks. The US administration had suspended the disbursement of $800 million in military aid. Former US defence secretary Robert Gates described the relationship as a bad marriage, he said.

However, he said, the two countries are not heading towards a ‘divorce’ because they need each other. Therefore these relations with ups and downs are likely to continue in future, he said.

Kux said that members of Congress had accused Pakistan of pursuing two-faced policies towards terrorist groups. “Washington considers the Afghan Taliban, the Haqqani Network and the militants led by [Gulbuddin] Hekmatyar as terrorists. Pakistan, on the other hand, considers these groups as useful proxies to protect itself after the US/NATO forces leave Afghanistan for good,” he said.

Kux, who served as US ambassador to Pakistan from 1957 to 1959 and 1969 to 1971, gave a detailed review of the “rollercoaster” US-Pakistan ties since 1954. The Eisenhower administration and Gen Ayub Khan cooperated with each other and Pakistan became America’s ‘Most Allied Ally in Asia’. But when military aid was given to India in 1962, after the India-China war, Pakistan was infuriated. Pakistan’s friendship with China and criticism of the US role in Vietnam angered Washington. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson cut off military and economic aid to Pakistan due to its war with India, ending the US-Pakistan alliance altogether. When Richard Nixon came to the White House, US-Pakistan relations were once again revived and Pakistan-China friendship became a positive point for the US, he said.

He said that Pakistan facilitated the emergence of friendly relations between the US and China. During the Gerald Ford administration, good relations continued. Jimmy Carter’s focus on nuclear nonproliferation, democracy and human right issues turned things sour once again.

“In 1979, the attack on the US embassy in Islamabad and the slow response of Pakistan’s law-enforcement agencies during the incident, resulting in the death of 4 US embassy employees, further deteriorated the relations between US and Pakistan. But the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan once again revived this relationship and made Pakistan a front line state,” he said.

President Ronald Reagan and Gen Ziaul Haq developed very friendly relations fighting against the Soviet Union and the US deliberately ignored the development of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, Kux said. Certification was given by the US president that Pakistan was not developing a nuclear bomb.

But after the destruction of the Soviet Union, Pakistan’s nuclear programme became the critical issue between the two countries and US intelligence agencies confirmed that Pakistan possessed a nuclear weapon. The nuclear issue and the ISI role in supporting Islamic radicals affected the relationship during the close of the 20th century, he said.

Under George Bush Sr and Bill Clinton, the US was deeply worried at Pakistan’s support for the insurgency in Kashmir and close relations with the Taliban regime in Kabul. The Clinton administration was angered by the Kargil operation and when the Nawaz Sharif government was thrown out by Gen Pervez Musharraf in 1999.

“The tragic events of 9/11 once again made Pakistan a key player in US involvement in Afghanistan,” he said. “Musharraf became the number one ally in the US war against terror. Both countries benefited from this Bush-Musharraf alliance: Pakistan benefited militarily and economically and the US benefited from Islamabad’s help in killing and capturing Al Qaeda elements.”

Pakistan became an indispensable US ally and Musharraf was supported by the US despite the fact that the main political parties in Pakistan protested against the US attitude, he added.

In 2009, when George W Bush left the White House, Pakistan’s political scene had completely changed, he said. Although a great deal of military and economic aid had been given to Pakistan, the differences between the two countries began to multiply.

The Raymond Davis affair and the Abbottabad operation created a great deal of mistrust between the two countries, he said. The US administration, Congress and the US media harshly criticised the ISI role in supporting the Haqqani network in Afghanistan. “Relations between the US and Pakistan have spiralled downward to their lowest point since 9/11,” Kux said, but added that despite the ups and downs the relations between the two countries would continue. The seminar was organised by the Punjab University’s Pakistan Study Centre in collaboration with the Department of History.

PSC Director Prof Musarrat Abid and Prof Dr Farooq Hasnat also spoke on the occasion.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 15th, 2011.

 

[Icarus]

Love us or hate us, be it the Republicans or Democrats, America NEEDS Pakistan to make it out of Afghanistan. We were supposed to link up on the border of Bajaur-Kunnar 2 years ago and press the Taliban between our columns, thus producing the Hammer and Anvil effect. We made the deadline, the Americans still haven't. We checked infiltration, fought for their posts which we handed to them and they deserted those posts in a month due to the absence of road links. Now we hold them again.
America is stuck in the world's worst neighbourhood, it will pay to be nice to the one helping hand you have before it decides that it's interests are better served elsewhere.

 

[NeutralCitizen]

Pakistan is kind of like that Crazy you know we have to tame her until we have a more capable brain aka president.

 

[Omar1984]

Democrats or Republicans it doesnt matter. Obama is a democrat and during his presidency, we have triple of amount of drone attacks than when Bush was President of the U.S.

America is losing in Afghanistan and most Americans want out of Afghanistan.

In 2013, when Imran Khan leads Pakistan he will show the finger to Uncle Sam's policies for our region.

 

[ApparentRaceTraitor]

Oh please, any republican you bring out there has about as much credibility as Glenn Beck or the monster underneath your bed.

 

[OrionHunter]

"This is instead a nation which is close to being a failed state...."

Haven't we heard all this crap before? Yep! First heard from the Yanks 5 years ago! But Pakistan is alive and kicking! There's no indication of it becoming a 'failed' state. Like Somalia is, and Pakistan cannot be compared with such countries. Period!

 

[TaimiKhan]

Love us or hate us, be it the Republicans or Democrats, America NEEDS Pakistan to make it out of Afghanistan. We were supposed to link up on the border of Bajaur-Kunnar 2 years ago and press the Taliban between our columns, thus producing the Hammer and Anvil effect. We made the deadline, the Americans still haven't. We checked infiltration, fought for their posts which we handed to them and they deserted those posts in a month due to the absence of road links. Now we hold them again.
America is stuck in the world's worst neighbourhood, it will pay to be nice to the one helping hand you have before it decides that it's interests are better served elsewhere.

Same happened in SW operation, they were to monitor the border on their side, instead they left their border posts at precisely that moment and let the militants cross over and have a safe heaven in Afghanistan. Bajaur / Mohmand operations same story.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

if they have candidates like this


exhibit A:

and candidates like this


exhibit B:

then we don't have to be worried about what they can do.......i followed what Mr. Ron Paul said and I actually agree 100% with him. He is for cutting back on needless US military presence overseas (e.g. Okinawa Japan) and he's also for cutting foreign assistance to countries. However I think he commit political suicide when he said he would cut funding and aid to Israel.


anti-Pakistan lobby is working day and night to try to smear Pakistan and have Pakistan be side-lined; we know why they are having nefarious and ulterior objective and agenda against the country....