US & Pakistan Dispute and Tensions over Haqqani group

[VCheng]

Far likely to be worse than better, unless Pakistan changes its policies.

 

[Zizou]

Far likely to be worse than better, unless Pakistan changes its policies.

and so should USA ..

 

[VCheng]

and so should USA ..

"Should" is a very different concept than "must".

 

[53fd]

Far likely to be worse than better, unless Pakistan changes its policies.

Instead of resorting to your one-liners, it'd be appreciated if you could actually discuss the topic at hand by giving substantive arguments supporting your claims. Thanks.

 

[VCheng]

Instead of resorting to your one-liners, it'd be appreciated if you could actually discuss the topic at hand by giving substantive arguments supporting your claims. Thanks.

Well, I write details and get accused of verbosity. I write briefly, and get accused of one-liners. Wonderful.

 

[r3alist]

You never write details

 

[53fd]

Well, I write details and get accused of verbosity. I write briefly, and get accused of one-liners. Wonderful.

Your 'detailed' posts don't get criticized for verbosity, they get criticized for the lack of substance in them. Please read my opening post again, this thread is about the Pakistan's ISI, & the relationship it has with the US, & where this relationship will go post US embassy attacks. I don't want to talk about anything else but the topic at hand.

 

[VCheng]

Your 'detailed' posts don't get criticized for verbosity, they get criticized for the lack of substance in them. Please read my opening post again, this thread is about the Pakistan's ISI, & the relationship it has with the US, & where this relationship will go post US embassy attacks. I don't want to talk about anything else but the topic at hand.

Yes, I get that, and my original comments still applies directly to your topic of "Pakistan's ISI, & the relationship it has with the US, & where this relationship will go post US embassy attacks":

Things are far likely to be worse than better, unless Pakistan changes its policies.

It is a clear, substantial and robust statement.

 

[53fd]

Yes, I get that, and my original comments still applies directly to your topic of "Pakistan's ISI, & the relationship it has with the US, & where this relationship will go post US embassy attacks":

Things are far likely to be worse than better, unless Pakistan changes its policies.

It is a clear, substantial and robust statement.

Again, instead of resorting to your one-liners, it'd be appreciated if you could talk about specifics in the ISI-US relationship & where it's headed, instead of coming up with a general statement.

 

[SpArK]

Pakistan army top brass meets amid U.S. tensions | Reuters

 

[VCheng]

Again, instead of resorting to your one-liners, it'd be appreciated if you could talk about specifics in the ISI-US relationship.

The ISI supported the Haqqani Network which carried out the recent attacks.

The US has publicly called the ISI out.

Now Pakistan needs to respond by either changing its policies, or get ready for consequences.

Let's see what the emergency meetings decide.

Is that specific enough for you?

 

[SpArK]

Pakistan Sees

 

[53fd]

The ISI supported the Haqqani Network which carried out the recent attacks.

Again, where is the proof for that? Will the US be able to provide this proof or not? What will happen when this proof is provided, if it exists? Or will it be a 'dead deal' like the OBL raid, who all top officials admitted was not harbored by the Pakistan government? How will they be able to pressurize Islamabad if they can't come up with irrefutable proof that there was direct involvement of the ISI in the Kabul attacks?

Is that specific enough for you?

See above.

The US has publicly called the ISI out.

They've called out their frustrations with the ISI in public, sure.

 

[53fd]

The ISI supported the Haqqani Network which carried out the recent attacks.

The US has publicly called the ISI out.

Now Pakistan needs to respond by either changing its policies, or get ready for consequences.

Let's see what the emergency meetings decide.

Is that specific enough for you?

I guess you're done talking specifics then?

 

[VCheng]

Again, where is the proof for that? Will the US be able to provide this proof or not? What will happen when this proof is provided, if it exists? Or will it be a 'dead deal' like the OBL raid, who all top officials admitted was not harbored by the Pakistan government? How will they be able to pressurize Islamabad if they can't come up with irrefutable proof that there was direct involvement of the ISI in the Kabul attacks?
....................

The reason Kayani was forced to admit the contacts was the irrefutability of the evidence shown to him, and led to all these emergent meetings. Let's see what response emerges.

I guess you're done talking specifics then?

You guess wrong.