Wesley Clark ( US 4 Star General ) US will attack 7 countries in 5 years.

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Me, think? Now why ever would I do that?

do you act on whims and instincts buddy?

 

[techdiver]

...and 1 million West-trained army (with global role that goes back 200 years)...

HUH ? Global ? Two hundred years ? Pakistan ?

 

[Solomon2]

Sir,

What a piece of bull crap----there was no 3rd ww----russia had already written those soldiers off if the americans had taken them out and nothing else would have happened except for some sabre wrattling.

Yes, the Russians, by abandoning their assigned positions and careening dozens of miles to capture the airport, were out of order. But President Yeltsin personally thanked them for the deed: link Maybe WWIII wouldn't have happened, but blood spilled between Russians and Americans in a tricky peacekeeping situation? I couldn't see any good outcome to that.

 

[arushbhai]

My question is, what is Russia doing as the opposing Super Power or even China.

As much as I hate to say this but in this game, Pakistan is the rat. They not only took billions of dollars to fill their bank accounts but they also sold the dignity of South asia by letting americans come into afghanistan. Without the help of pak, US wouldve been out of afg in 2002 or 03 MAX. Pakistan made a fool out of china and Russia. Russia and China kept US away from south asia using their economy and foreign policy but pakistan on the other hand quickly sold itself for couple of dollars and brought US back in asia. Pakistan is the rat and they are starting to pay the price. US basically hit a jackpot. They are now in afg near Iran, China and Russia, thanks to pakistan. Do you think China or Russia would ever allow US come near their countries? No. Get rid of the rats guys. Get rid of pakistan

 

[MastanKhan]

As much as I hate to say this but in this game, Pakistan is the rat. They not only took billions of dollars to fill their bank accounts but they also sold the dignity of South asia by letting americans come into afghanistan. Without the help of pak, US wouldve been out of afg in 2002 or 03 MAX. Pakistan made a fool out of china and Russia. Russia and China kept US away from south asia using their economy and foreign policy but pakistan on the other hand quickly sold itself for couple of dollars and brought US back in asia. Pakistan is the rat and they are starting to pay the price. US basically hit a jackpot. They are now in afg near Iran, China and Russia, thanks to pakistan. Do you think China or Russia would ever allow US come near their countries? No. Get rid of the rats guys. Get rid of pakistan

Sir

This post is not enough. You need to share some tactical reason why you are saying what you are saying.

 

[arushbhai]

Sir

This post is not enough. You need to share some tactical reason why you are saying what you are saying.

Ill give you an example of India-Pak rivalry. India wanted to send its forces in afghanistan after establishing its embassies there but Pakistan objected because Pakistan knew about the dangers if India is to send its forces in afg. Now imagine, if Iran asks india "Hey afghanistan is very unstable and we think you should send put around 130,000 indian soldiers near pak border IN afghanistan to tackle terrorism". What do you think what kind of opinion will Pakistan have of iran? Do you think Pakistan will say "hey good idea Mr Iran, this will surely decrease terrorism". OR Will pakistan say "Thats a bad idea, because Indians are our enemies and we dont want them to surround us from Afghan side PLUS we dont trust them". I think Pakistan will choose the 2nd reply.

The same thing applies to US/NATO and pakistan. Pakistan allowed them to survive in afg by giving them a safe passage and a free hand to do whatever they want. Whereas Russia and China are pissed at Pakistan for being a slave to US. Hope this helps

 

[Haseebullah]

Scary, isn't it? Just remember that the U.S. president can always and instantly remove such people from their command - very unlike Pakistan, where Unit 101 stands by to remove, at the order of a general, any Pakistani president who tries to do the same.

Firstly it's 111 Brigade,secondly just like your Generals your distorted our politicians are.
You might want to read the situations before martial laws and you might just decide to shut up.

 

[MastanKhan]

Ill give you an example of India-Pak rivalry. India wanted to send its forces in afghanistan after establishing its embassies there but Pakistan objected because Pakistan knew about the dangers if India is to send its forces in afg. Now imagine, if Iran asks india "Hey afghanistan is very unstable and we think you should send put around 130,000 indian soldiers near pak border IN afghanistan to tackle terrorism". What do you think what kind of opinion will Pakistan have of iran? Do you think Pakistan will say "hey good idea Mr Iran, this will surely decrease terrorism". OR Will pakistan say "Thats a bad idea, because Indians are our enemies and we dont want them to surround us from Afghan side PLUS we dont trust them". I think Pakistan will choose the 2nd reply.

The same thing applies to US/NATO and pakistan. Pakistan allowed them to survive in afg by giving them a safe passage and a free hand to do whatever they want. Whereas Russia and China are pissed at Pakistan for being a slave to US. Hope this helps

Hi,

That is a funny----why would russia and china be pis-sed off at pakistan---they are laughing at america getting thrashed in afg---.

So I am right---pak military should have gone in and killed al qaeda and Bin laden---that was the only way of stopping the u s invasion---other than that---everything is an illusion.

Pakistan stopping military invasion of afg by not giving right of way in 2001-------it is just a dream---.

Any one who believes that pak could have put a dent in the invasion of afg in 2001 by not allowing passage of goods is just an illusion.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Bravo!

So nice to see a mature post based on real-politic.

Pakistan with its 200 million population and 1 million West-trained army (with global role that goes back 200 years) could have played a great part in bringing peace in the region. You are correct. our army could have been a huge help in saving masses in Iraq, Afghanistan, and close to home in Pakistan.

Unfortunately they did not. However we cannot just blame the generals.

Remember very few generals are "thinkers" and long term planners. They are not supposed to. It is not part of their training. Generals are trained to respond to calamities, wars, floods, earth quakes etc. Only a handful generals truly become thinkers and planners but then they are usually retired and had had time for introspection. They then sit down, write books, interact with other thinkers, civilians etc and develop their long term strategic views.

So the question is. if Generals cannot be long term thinkers then who would? The answer is "civilian" AND "pro-military" think tanks. These are mostly civilians strategic thinkers who provide vision to a military.

In Pakistan however we never had that partnership between academia and military.

Our academia remained Islamist and leftist, so did our bureaucracy, while military remained the only institution that was pro-West. Few civilians who did write about Pakistan and military turned out to be rabid dogs barking and yelling at the army instead of providing them a comforting longer term vision (I won't name names here as the thread will become derailed).

This created two opposing forces in Pakistan where 99.99% civilian thinkers went leftie, commie pro-Russia and pro-China, and our military went pro-USA.

This deprived our military from civilian apolitical intellectual leadership, and our generals went from crisis to crisis not too different from a chicken with its head cut off.

In other words civilian intellectual leadership was supposed to provide the thinking head, and without that our generals and our army remains a fine fighting force but unfortunately headless.

Even you Sir are yelling at generals even though your heart and mind is in the right place. How will our army get the right intellectual leadership then?


peace

Don't mind mind me bumping in

I agree, military people are never really great politicians or diplomats (apart from anything military-related). Smart politics that is

They are not supposed to be or not trained that way. It's just sending and receiving orders throughout their entire career lives.

See, these matters should ultimately be in the hands of a strong government with a shared national vision, ethics, honor, principles and leadership.

However, from my observation, a strong and a formidable military under the control of a weak government can and will always be a dangerous thing. A very fatal thing.

A general should always know when to act in light of that. He is the nation's shield after all.

Something tells me that Pakistan's generals didn't think through and act at the right time. Time, is a precious resource and a critical one.