Sub-Prime fiasco Pakistan Cannot be attacked anymore
- Thread starter MastanKhan
- Start date
Asalamulaykum,
As for this issue, I highly doubt America or her allies would want to attack Pakistan.
All America wants, is to destroy Al-Qaeda and arrest Osama Bin Laden.
Obviously since Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden are imposing a false image of Islam, we have to go there; kick them out of power, and lock them in a prison.
About the Taliban... Even though they fought aganist the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, they are absolutely insane. They haven't even tried to fix the social, not to even mention the economic problems of Afghanistan.
I hope inshallah when all these rediculous issues are solved, a new Durrani empire will form between Pakistan, Afghanistan, and even Tajikistan. However we must solve the present-day issues first...
No, Balochistan will not secede away, since the insurgency has been destroyed. All those "feudal" leaders have been defeated, and there hasn't been much trouble since the 1970's.
Whether Sindh wants to secede or Karachi wants to become another "Singapore" is a joke. Eventhough the province makes a considerably large chunk of the country's GDP, it will not survive without the rest of the country. Obviously Unification of Islamic communities within Pakistan, should be the goal, not mindless nationalism.
Allah Hafiz
As for this issue, I highly doubt America or her allies would want to attack Pakistan.
All America wants, is to destroy Al-Qaeda and arrest Osama Bin Laden.
Obviously since Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden are imposing a false image of Islam, we have to go there; kick them out of power, and lock them in a prison.
About the Taliban... Even though they fought aganist the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, they are absolutely insane. They haven't even tried to fix the social, not to even mention the economic problems of Afghanistan.
I hope inshallah when all these rediculous issues are solved, a new Durrani empire will form between Pakistan, Afghanistan, and even Tajikistan. However we must solve the present-day issues first...
No, Balochistan will not secede away, since the insurgency has been destroyed. All those "feudal" leaders have been defeated, and there hasn't been much trouble since the 1970's.
Whether Sindh wants to secede or Karachi wants to become another "Singapore" is a joke. Eventhough the province makes a considerably large chunk of the country's GDP, it will not survive without the rest of the country. Obviously Unification of Islamic communities within Pakistan, should be the goal, not mindless nationalism.
Allah Hafiz
Energon
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 1,077
- Reaction score
- 0
I think you're giving way too much credit (heh... credit) to the sub prime meltdown in terms of the US military's operational outlook. True, the US can no longer engage in wars of choice (as in Iraq, and what is being proposed with Iran); but military action on account of instability or collapse of a beleaguered nation with nuclear arms and a significant radical set up is one of necessity for which I assure you there are ample funds.
Also, history completely negates your assertion of the entire global economy crashing on account of Pakistan's hypothetical attacks on a couple of tankers. Over 500 merchant ships including mega-tankers were attacked in the strait of Hormuz during the "Tanker Wars" of the Iran-Iraq conflict. The global economy did just fine. Remember every nation with a sizable navy will dedicate each available vessel to ensure complete safety for any tanker or merchant vessel through the entire Persian gulf and the Arabian Sea. The waters will be swarming with US and NATO taskforce ships not to mention the entire western fleet of the Indian navy. It will be practically impossible for Pakistan to approach anything in those waters by air or sea.
The reason the USA won't all-out attack Pakistan is because it isn't worth it. The military is still in control of the nuclear arsenal and the majority of Eastern Pakistan is still stable. It is highly unlikely that radical militias can usurp power from the PA. And even if these militias start recording major victories over the PA, the US military will directly intervene before resorting to taking out the entire governmental structure. The USA will never invade and occupy Pakistan as it did Iraq because unlike the latter, Pakistan does not have the natural resources to make an occupation economically feasible.
Astra
BANNED
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2007
- Messages
- 153
- Reaction score
- 0
They why are you fighting Taliban- your own child organization, which you wanted to deploy in Afganistan.
AgNoStiC MuSliM
ADVISORS
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,259
- Reaction score
- 87
- Country
- Location
That is a complete misrepresentation of the facts and dynamics behind the rise of the Taliban.
AgNoStiC MuSliM
ADVISORS
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,259
- Reaction score
- 87
- Country
- Location
Energon,
Attacking Pakistan is not "worth it" for the US, but I think what MK was trying to point out is that even if the US thought it could achieve some major gains in the WoT by attacking Pakistan (hypothetical), the current global, and domestic US, economic situation does not lend itself to making any such action feasible.
While you are correct that nothing happened from the "tanker Wars" the Global economy is much more dependent at this point, energy supply and demand is extremely tight, and the weapons available to the sides doing any damage are far more accurate, destructive and numerous. Again this is all hypothetical, but to suggest that the Global Economy will just continue chugging along regardless of the potential fallout from the destruction resulting from an attack/invasion on Pakistan is not correct.
Attacking Pakistan is not "worth it" for the US, but I think what MK was trying to point out is that even if the US thought it could achieve some major gains in the WoT by attacking Pakistan (hypothetical), the current global, and domestic US, economic situation does not lend itself to making any such action feasible.
While you are correct that nothing happened from the "tanker Wars" the Global economy is much more dependent at this point, energy supply and demand is extremely tight, and the weapons available to the sides doing any damage are far more accurate, destructive and numerous. Again this is all hypothetical, but to suggest that the Global Economy will just continue chugging along regardless of the potential fallout from the destruction resulting from an attack/invasion on Pakistan is not correct.
Energon
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 1,077
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't think the USA has ever actively sought out to invade Pakistan as a prophylactic measure. This is more so a contingency plan on account of the perceived inability of the PA to "do the job" or the GoP's inability to get it's act together. If the USA did in fact think that invading Pakistan would bring about a victory in the WoT they would have done it a lot time ago and certainly refrained from dishing out billions of dollars in aid. As far as military action in the unlikely event of a complete meltdown is concerned, IMO it's very much a possibility and entirely feasible given that nobody actually intends to occupy Pakistan. However, I highly doubt if it will ever actually come to that.
Agnostic Muslim said:
I think it's a big mistake to assume that for the 'sake of the world', nobody can go to war with Pakistan, or that doing so would have 'disastrous global economic consequences'. This is highly unlikely. I don't think anybody really cares about Pakistan or any nation devoid of economic importance in the developing world; likewise nobody will really care much if it needs to be mowed down and the global economy will in fact keep chugging along because Pakistan isn't really a significant contributor in the first place (this point is essentially the core of my argument)
I can understand why Musharraf or the military high brass have to publicly issue such warnings. But in reality these threats are empty and should be taken with a grain of salt. Likewise, the scenario of a showdown in the Straits of Hormuz, or the Gulf of Oman are highly unlikely because of the overwhelming advantages of Western military technology and the basic lack of value placed upon human life in South Asia (my second point).
The problem is that since the 50s, the Pakistani leadership itself has fallen into this trap by overestimating the nations "strategic importance" and military capabilities which has led to transient ad hoc relationships with influential nations in the west or the Islamic world without it leading to anything substantial; subsequently this has brought about decades of discontent, stagnation and frustration, all at the price of human development.
I do strongly agree that an invasion or decapitation plan would be inadvisable; but not because of a potential risk of a robust military retribution or large scale economic consequences... Pakistan isn't in a position to dictate any of those. However, the destruction of Pakistan would bring about a colossal humanitarian disaster that would resonate through a region that is home to over a third of humanity.
MastanKhan
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2005
- Messages
- 21,269
- Reaction score
- 166
- Country
- Location
Energon,
You have an american flag, but you not are thinking like an american but rather like some of my conservative neighbours---no disrespect to others----. Americans know very well that two big tankers in the narrow parts of the strait are going to block the strait---that has always been their biggest fear and concern against any confrontation with iran in the recent past.
If there was an attack on pakistan---it will be at a lightening speed---there will be no time to have enough ships dispatched to the area to offer protection or for a build up.
I really think you are clueless to what you are saying. Barrel of oil has gone upto $100---speculation is that any hostilities with iran can jump it upto $200 a barrel. A super tanker sunk in the narrow straits----speculation has it that the barrel of oil would jump to $500---I don't know which world or wich part of the u s you are living in---there are news agency known as CNN---FOXNEWS---MSNBC---if you just put the rabbit ear antenas on the tv you won't get the reception---but if you do then listen to the analyst who had been talking about that scenario of $500 a barrel---but you maynot hear that now---that was the bad news of 30 to 60 days ago----the now bad news is the back breaking sub-prime collapse and reccession.
The 80's war was a different time period---speculators still had some conscience left in them--it will be an all out panic scenario today---there is already a talk of $500 a barrel of oil in case of any major incidence in the high seas---different weapon systems today---there will be no super tankers going into the straits anymore. Not a very intelligent comment about 'why would anbody care about pakistan---devoid of ---. That is the reason behind the stupidity of the west that pakistan is a 50 nuclear plus weapons power---nobody cared about pakistan in the 70's, 80's and 90's---there were so many like you at that time saying the same thing---guess where we are today---we had sanctions on us---yesterday we have started the production of our own fighter aircraft---we have our own weapon delivery systems in place---your president Clinton didnot want to shake the hands of our president---he shook hands with him 3 years later---time is a great equalizer.
The problem with pakistan is that it has not portrayed its importance properly in the past. But now we have found the crown jewel. It was just laying there---a barren stretch of dry land on the beach---who could have known 20 years ago that our salvation would be lying on these salt crusted plains.
Guess what---gwadar port has changed all that. Central asia here we come. Now, can america complete and finish the job that it started in afghanistan. I don't think it will. The u s will stretch its stay as long as possible in afghanistan by keeping the rift alive between the NA and taliban---that is the only way it can keep a watch on the pakistani, russian and chincese influence in central asia.
Musharraf is not known to make empty threats---would you want to bet your life on it. You have belittled my country and bashed my nation---at this stage---that is all you can do. We are not living in your shadows anymore. Didn't you get our message. It was delivered a few days ago.
You have an american flag, but you not are thinking like an american but rather like some of my conservative neighbours---no disrespect to others----. Americans know very well that two big tankers in the narrow parts of the strait are going to block the strait---that has always been their biggest fear and concern against any confrontation with iran in the recent past.
If there was an attack on pakistan---it will be at a lightening speed---there will be no time to have enough ships dispatched to the area to offer protection or for a build up.
I really think you are clueless to what you are saying. Barrel of oil has gone upto $100---speculation is that any hostilities with iran can jump it upto $200 a barrel. A super tanker sunk in the narrow straits----speculation has it that the barrel of oil would jump to $500---I don't know which world or wich part of the u s you are living in---there are news agency known as CNN---FOXNEWS---MSNBC---if you just put the rabbit ear antenas on the tv you won't get the reception---but if you do then listen to the analyst who had been talking about that scenario of $500 a barrel---but you maynot hear that now---that was the bad news of 30 to 60 days ago----the now bad news is the back breaking sub-prime collapse and reccession.
The 80's war was a different time period---speculators still had some conscience left in them--it will be an all out panic scenario today---there is already a talk of $500 a barrel of oil in case of any major incidence in the high seas---different weapon systems today---there will be no super tankers going into the straits anymore. Not a very intelligent comment about 'why would anbody care about pakistan---devoid of ---. That is the reason behind the stupidity of the west that pakistan is a 50 nuclear plus weapons power---nobody cared about pakistan in the 70's, 80's and 90's---there were so many like you at that time saying the same thing---guess where we are today---we had sanctions on us---yesterday we have started the production of our own fighter aircraft---we have our own weapon delivery systems in place---your president Clinton didnot want to shake the hands of our president---he shook hands with him 3 years later---time is a great equalizer.
The problem with pakistan is that it has not portrayed its importance properly in the past. But now we have found the crown jewel. It was just laying there---a barren stretch of dry land on the beach---who could have known 20 years ago that our salvation would be lying on these salt crusted plains.
Guess what---gwadar port has changed all that. Central asia here we come. Now, can america complete and finish the job that it started in afghanistan. I don't think it will. The u s will stretch its stay as long as possible in afghanistan by keeping the rift alive between the NA and taliban---that is the only way it can keep a watch on the pakistani, russian and chincese influence in central asia.
Musharraf is not known to make empty threats---would you want to bet your life on it. You have belittled my country and bashed my nation---at this stage---that is all you can do. We are not living in your shadows anymore. Didn't you get our message. It was delivered a few days ago.
Cheetah786
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2006
- Messages
- 9,002
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Any body that thinks Americans need out side oil to make there economy go are sadly mistaken.Canada provides 70% of there need and Americans have lots of untapped oil on there own territory.
America economy is been designed to self sustain simply put it they don't need much to export to keep there economy going.
In Pakistan's case all they have to do is economic sanctions no need to fire even a bullet.most of Pakistan's exports goes to Western nations As so called umah nations buy nothing from Pakistan.Pakistan's well being depends on the west yet some in Pakistan consider them there enemies and love umah nations iam so confused.
putting that a side i don't remember reading any where where Pakistan was threatened by the Americans.
America economy is been designed to self sustain simply put it they don't need much to export to keep there economy going.
In Pakistan's case all they have to do is economic sanctions no need to fire even a bullet.most of Pakistan's exports goes to Western nations As so called umah nations buy nothing from Pakistan.Pakistan's well being depends on the west yet some in Pakistan consider them there enemies and love umah nations iam so confused.
putting that a side i don't remember reading any where where Pakistan was threatened by the Americans.
MastanKhan
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2005
- Messages
- 21,269
- Reaction score
- 166
- Country
- Location
Hi Cheetah,
America cannot use its oil. America has no new refineries---that is the biggest problem that america is facing from inside----all the refineries were built before or in the 70's. 5 to 6 years ago, they used to be shut down twice a year for repairs and switch from winter grade to summer grade fuels. Now they hardly have time enough to shut down and do the repairs. They are running at 110% capacity all year long. Truly---america is still sleeping. Any suggestion of a new refinery is met with a lots of resistence from the activist groups. America will have to import its fuel from abroad. No state in the country wants to give land for an oil refinery. Alsaka is untapped---it will stay as such---just the fear of a spill will keep it that way. Cannot do off shore drilling off the coast of california----fear and speculation of a disaster---oil spill.
Even the saudi oil minister being grilled by an interviewer on cnn made the same statement---that shut the interviewer up. He said that we can give you as much oil as you want---but you have nowhere to refine it. Don't blame us of your problems.
What I have been trying to say is that---today--we are so interdependent upon each others welfare and integrity. During the 80's iraq iran war, we were like walking on a twelve foot wide wall---today the width has shrunk to razors thin edge.
America cannot use its oil. America has no new refineries---that is the biggest problem that america is facing from inside----all the refineries were built before or in the 70's. 5 to 6 years ago, they used to be shut down twice a year for repairs and switch from winter grade to summer grade fuels. Now they hardly have time enough to shut down and do the repairs. They are running at 110% capacity all year long. Truly---america is still sleeping. Any suggestion of a new refinery is met with a lots of resistence from the activist groups. America will have to import its fuel from abroad. No state in the country wants to give land for an oil refinery. Alsaka is untapped---it will stay as such---just the fear of a spill will keep it that way. Cannot do off shore drilling off the coast of california----fear and speculation of a disaster---oil spill.
Even the saudi oil minister being grilled by an interviewer on cnn made the same statement---that shut the interviewer up. He said that we can give you as much oil as you want---but you have nowhere to refine it. Don't blame us of your problems.
What I have been trying to say is that---today--we are so interdependent upon each others welfare and integrity. During the 80's iraq iran war, we were like walking on a twelve foot wide wall---today the width has shrunk to razors thin edge.
Energon
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 1,077
- Reaction score
- 0
Mastan, the strait of Hormuz isn't nearly as narrow as you make it seem. I've never been to the Iranian side, but I've certainly seen it from the tip of the Musandam peninsula and I assure you, it would need a lot more than just knocking out a couple of tankers to completely incapacitate it.
Another thing on the Musandam Peninsula is a rather large NATO base (off limits of course). There are enough air assets there to ensure a clear airspace and keep a strong command of the sea space as well. A large portion of the American defense industry is built around keeping that little strait open for transit.
Your doomsday outlook is bit of an overstatement. And Gwadar isn't nearly a militarily strategic "crown Jewel" as you make it seem... certainly not enough to really bring about a panic as far as the USAs ability to protect the Persian Gulf is concerned. The 5th fleet even at its basic 1 CBG along with all the other bases in the area (particularly Musandam and Masirah) are enough to ensure this.
Also, I have no personal stake in "belittling or bashing" Pakistan. If that were the case I wouldn't be actively involved in its matters. But I am not impressed in any way by its overestimated strategic prowess or any empty threat that Musharraff can issue, this is not an insult, just a personal opinion.
Another thing on the Musandam Peninsula is a rather large NATO base (off limits of course). There are enough air assets there to ensure a clear airspace and keep a strong command of the sea space as well. A large portion of the American defense industry is built around keeping that little strait open for transit.
Your doomsday outlook is bit of an overstatement. And Gwadar isn't nearly a militarily strategic "crown Jewel" as you make it seem... certainly not enough to really bring about a panic as far as the USAs ability to protect the Persian Gulf is concerned. The 5th fleet even at its basic 1 CBG along with all the other bases in the area (particularly Musandam and Masirah) are enough to ensure this.
Also, I have no personal stake in "belittling or bashing" Pakistan. If that were the case I wouldn't be actively involved in its matters. But I am not impressed in any way by its overestimated strategic prowess or any empty threat that Musharraff can issue, this is not an insult, just a personal opinion.
peacelover
BANNED
New Recruit
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2008
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 0
No one will attack Pakistan. Though US can missuse the current internal situation of Pakistan for her own benefit.
MastanKhan
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2005
- Messages
- 21,269
- Reaction score
- 166
- Country
- Location
Hi,
Wide does not mean that it is navigable for deep draft vessels like the super tankers. Super tankers have a very narrow drive through the hormuz---more so at the tip of oman and the iranian port on the other side.
A little effort on the search engine and this information is available to the novice as well. For us, Gwadar is a crown jewel---just discovered. Naysayers are always going to be there to down play our assets. What are you going to say to a person who discovered a source of water in the dry desert---no big deal if you live in the tropics or in the snow country
I don't want to get any further into the war scenarios---the response to my original post has been blown out of proportions---the gist of the post was that from a threat level 4, we have come down to threat level 1. God bless america---God bless pakistan.
Wide does not mean that it is navigable for deep draft vessels like the super tankers. Super tankers have a very narrow drive through the hormuz---more so at the tip of oman and the iranian port on the other side.
A little effort on the search engine and this information is available to the novice as well. For us, Gwadar is a crown jewel---just discovered. Naysayers are always going to be there to down play our assets. What are you going to say to a person who discovered a source of water in the dry desert---no big deal if you live in the tropics or in the snow country
I don't want to get any further into the war scenarios---the response to my original post has been blown out of proportions---the gist of the post was that from a threat level 4, we have come down to threat level 1. God bless america---God bless pakistan.
khanz
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,514
- Reaction score
- 1
we don't need to worry about pak being attacked I can guarantee there will be not another war involving the USA atleast for a very very long time their forces are already in deep sh!t in iraq and afghanistan they're not so foolish to fight 3 countries at once.It is just fearmongering and talk from armchair generals they've even been saying the same thing about iran for years now who they have even more to gain from and nothing has happened.
MOSABJA
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2007
- Messages
- 323
- Reaction score
- 0
I still say they cannot attack pakistan.But let me tell you they are after us .
The disturbance in Balochistan is an eye opener .NISAR MEMON said today that India is interfering in Balochistan .Who is allowing the Indians OBVIOUSLY NATO AND AMERICANS.
You dont know how the situation unfolds.it is highly unlikely that US attacks Pakistan.But let me tell you where the whole situation is going.
*If the NATO INDIAN AMERICAN ISRAELI NEXUS in Afghanistan goes too far in Balochistan and hampers all the dev projects in Balochistan and threaten pakistans integrity then PAK WILL SAY WE R NO MORE AN ALLY DESPERATELY.
*If Pakistan says that it does not want to be a FRONT LINE ALLY or suppose a new gov after MUSH changes its policy.THEN?????????
*First thing US would do is deploy 300,000 troops in Afghanistan .HILLARY AND OBAMA have already said that they would take out troops from IRAQ and put them in AFGHANISTAN.IN SUCH A SITUATION IF PAKISTAN IS FORCED TO SUPPURT AFGHAN TALIBAN THEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WILL THE US ALLOW PAKISTAN TO KICK IT OUT FROM SILK ROUTE.
OR
WILL PAKISTAN ALLOW THEM TO CREATE DISTRBANCE .
THe temperature is rising daily.All of U are looking at the scenario from a military point of view.YEAH FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW PAKISTAN CANT BE ATTACKED.But look at the STRATEGIC POINT OF VIEW the Balochistan,Cent asia,oil,gas,gold,Trad route.Then there is a threat.
I am looking from strategic point of view.ANY WAY ITS UPTO OUR LEADERS AND MOST IMPRTANTLY ARMY AND THE PEOPLE TO LOOK AFTER PAKISTANS SECURITY.
The disturbance in Balochistan is an eye opener .NISAR MEMON said today that India is interfering in Balochistan .Who is allowing the Indians OBVIOUSLY NATO AND AMERICANS.
You dont know how the situation unfolds.it is highly unlikely that US attacks Pakistan.But let me tell you where the whole situation is going.
*If the NATO INDIAN AMERICAN ISRAELI NEXUS in Afghanistan goes too far in Balochistan and hampers all the dev projects in Balochistan and threaten pakistans integrity then PAK WILL SAY WE R NO MORE AN ALLY DESPERATELY.
*If Pakistan says that it does not want to be a FRONT LINE ALLY or suppose a new gov after MUSH changes its policy.THEN?????????
*First thing US would do is deploy 300,000 troops in Afghanistan .HILLARY AND OBAMA have already said that they would take out troops from IRAQ and put them in AFGHANISTAN.IN SUCH A SITUATION IF PAKISTAN IS FORCED TO SUPPURT AFGHAN TALIBAN THEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WILL THE US ALLOW PAKISTAN TO KICK IT OUT FROM SILK ROUTE.
OR
WILL PAKISTAN ALLOW THEM TO CREATE DISTRBANCE .
THe temperature is rising daily.All of U are looking at the scenario from a military point of view.YEAH FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW PAKISTAN CANT BE ATTACKED.But look at the STRATEGIC POINT OF VIEW the Balochistan,Cent asia,oil,gas,gold,Trad route.Then there is a threat.
I am looking from strategic point of view.ANY WAY ITS UPTO OUR LEADERS AND MOST IMPRTANTLY ARMY AND THE PEOPLE TO LOOK AFTER PAKISTANS SECURITY.
Similar threads
