Viper0011.
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2011
- Messages
- 7,253
- Reaction score
- 26
- Country
- Location
Hi,
The saudis would have paid a hefty sum if pakistan had agreed to send force in yemen and so would have the emiratis and qataris and bahrain--etc etc etc---.
Attacks on civilians in france and in san bernardino has changed the war scenario. Those who were sitting back and keeping quite have stood up and are pointing fingers---.
This is election year coming---and the war drums are already sounding very loud---. The republicans will sell whatever to get back into the white house---they are desperate---they sound angry---and they have a further desire for blood.
And the way the U S reacts---it won't take it a moment to cartwheel into action against pakistan directly or indirectly.
The threshold of war is one major terrorist attack in india----and under these circumstance---pakistan is between a rock and a hard place.
Truthfully----I do not like the silence from india for the last two months----it has the knell of death written over it.
Then some very aggressive and provocative flying by the U S and australia over south china seas---trying to pull china into acting stupid----.
All this unpredictability points towards one thing---some kind of a clash. The U S has the next 5 years to contain china---it would be extremely difficult after that and next to impossible after 10 years..
1) Joining the Yemen war: Hefty sum from Saudi's at the cost of what? Another armed militia and a civil war in Pakistan between Shiite's and Sunni's? And you can bet all you've got, that India will be supporting Shiite's through Iran all the way to cut Pakistan off. And you would never be able to point fingers because this was would be taking place WELL inside Pakistani cities, between Shiite and Sunni Pakistanis. Consider the outcome of it before just thinking about $$$$.
A country getting divided into pieces having a ton of money, is papers in a locker room. Once the divide is done, the paper will become $$$$ for its respective government, be it in the Shiite Pakistan, Pashtunistan or whatever the new names might come out.
2) What's the purpose of the entire Zarb-Azb when you want to go back to fighting yet another Shiite vs. Sunni militia, on both ends for the next 15 years? A messy, 1980's Beirut may sound relevant 5 years from now if that actually happened!!
3) India is too eager to join the CPEC and get to Afghanistan through the road. Their industrialists are pressurizing Modi and he'll do whatever for the opportunity. You need to learn your neighbor before dealing with them. They are smart people and they seek opportunity. The cost of getting to Afghanistan and beat the Chinese influence is much better than fighting Pakistan in a way. In their mind, they can defeat Pakistan (conventionally) whenever they want to. They want to connect with Afghanistan and on the other hand with the CPEC, reap benefits both ways that way. Slowly, they'll invest crazy around the CPEC area inside and outside of Pakistan, and will try to cause issues for the Chinese. I think Modi's senior advisers have already mentioned it.
4) The US is busy with ISIL, I think you should expect boots on the ground if Trump wins. I don't think they'll go as far as to attack Pakistan as their isn't a need for it, not the US considers Pakistan a terrorist country. We all know Pakistan has issues they are trying to fix. In fact, I'd think that the US would want to use Pakistan as a partner and to make sure that ISIS doesn't take roots in Pakistan, Afghanistan and India. I think that can ONLY happen if the country is economically stronger, tolerant and peaceful, which its inching towards. So I think the conspiracy theories should stop.
5) The US and the Chinese are in a whole different league, the SCS is a heavily contested area, with the Chinese building islands that never existed before and claiming their land that never belong to them. The US has allies around with relationships going back to 1945!! So its natural for the world's top military to make sure the Chinese know we are watching and we will support our allies if the Chinese decided to go aggressive. These spratley and other SCS islands aren't being build for honey moon resorts, or to sell beach coconuts. They are building as military bases and the international laws allow the US to monitor and track all activity, and provide defense to our allies if need be....
Any military strenght against USA is irrelevant. The only sure shot insurance against that was through political clout and support of GCC after joining Yemen war
But only if our leadership didn't sell itself cheap to Saudis. Knowing our helplessly pathetic negotiation skills we might have been made to live with some leftovers instead of a feast
Interesting logic.....so "who" avoided you to have the "feast"???? The "Civilian Leaders" of course? But wait, don't you people very proudly tell on every other post that the foreign countries related decisions are made by the Pak military as NS and his buddies are useless ?? But here, you are saying the opposite that NS made this decision without military's backing and you lost your feast?
So when there is a good decision made, its ALWAYS the military of course, who else would have the brain to run Pakistan for 50+ years with so much growth and global influence?? But....if there is a bad decision or something that doesn't fit the need, you conveniently blame the Civilians? How convenient? Why don't you entertain us who really makes the calls on decisions impacting the foreign policy? Is it the military or is it NS? You can't just make up stuff and shift blame or success as you see convenient!!