We pay, they don't play...

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
For some time now, $5.6 billion worth of time, the US has been paying Pakistan some $1 billion annually in "coalition support funds". This is to reimburse Pakistan for the costs incurred for conducting counter-terrorism operations along the border with Afghanistan.

The problem is this...For the last eight months, or so, Pakistan hasn't so much been doing any anti-terrorism, especially in areas where al Qaeda and the Taliban are active. US military commanders ON THE GROUND in Afghanistan have suggested that these payments be tied to Pakistani performance, especially since the Pakistani military often ignores Taliban fighters crossing the border and ignores calls to intercept Taliban and al Qaeda fighters as they flee back into Pakistan.

But the suggestions of the US military commanders are falling on deaf ears at the White House. Big surprise that. The White House contends that any cuts to the payments would only further destabilize Pervez Musharaff's government. And we're worried about Iran getting nukes why? Seems the greatest opportunity for radical Muslims to get ahold of nukes is for them to over-throw Musharaff. But that very real possibility doesn't seem to be generating as much attention as the nascent nuclear program in Iran that has all the neo-cons in the administration atwitter.

But then, this administration, since it first came to office, has been loathe to pay attention to the real threats and content to attend to the ones they've made up and/or inflated beyond reason.

For the full story, go here:

<center><a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/world/asia/20pakistan.html?_r=1&th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print>U.S. Pays Pakistan to Fight Terror, but Patrols Ebb</a></center>
 
OP
Bullypulpit

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
You care what military commanders want in Afghanistan but not Iraq?
Meaning no disrespect Gunny, but from the earliest stages of th invasion and occupation of Iraq, it is apparent the Bush listened to no one but the voices in his head. General Shinseki was forced into retirement because he dared suggest the invasion and occupation could not be done on the cheap, as the Administration wanted.

Maj. Gen. John Batiste (Ret.) and Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton (Ret.) are both publicly repudiating Bush's strategy or, more appropriately, lack thereof regarding Iraq. Other retired generals from the National Security Network in Washington have also taken Bush to task for his policies in Iraq. And that is only the public face of the military's frustration with this administration and its policies. The the behind the scenes frustration is no less in its magnitude.

The fact of the matter is that Bush and his administration have never listened to the commanders on the ground. The troops Bush claims to support are little more than props for his photo ops and they continue to die in iraq as a salve to his ego
 

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
You care what military commanders want in Afghanistan but not Iraq?

Did Bush care what the military leaders in Iraq wanted?

No he fired them when he didnt like what they said they would need to win.
 

actsnoblemartin

I love Andrea & April
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
4,039
Reaction score
412
Points
98
Location
La Mesa, CA
evidence is NOT, everybody knows, or what are you smoking or any other personal attacks.

If you cant make your point without name calling you suck, that goes for anyone and everyone who engages in it on this board.
 

actsnoblemartin

I love Andrea & April
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
4,039
Reaction score
412
Points
98
Location
La Mesa, CA
im sorry my friend, but what is your point?

For some time now, $5.6 billion worth of time, the US has been paying Pakistan some $1 billion annually in "coalition support funds". This is to reimburse Pakistan for the costs incurred for conducting counter-terrorism operations along the border with Afghanistan.

The problem is this...For the last eight months, or so, Pakistan hasn't so much been doing any anti-terrorism, especially in areas where al Qaeda and the Taliban are active. US military commanders ON THE GROUND in Afghanistan have suggested that these payments be tied to Pakistani performance, especially since the Pakistani military often ignores Taliban fighters crossing the border and ignores calls to intercept Taliban and al Qaeda fighters as they flee back into Pakistan.

But the suggestions of the US military commanders are falling on deaf ears at the White House. Big surprise that. The White House contends that any cuts to the payments would only further destabilize Pervez Musharaff's government. And we're worried about Iran getting nukes why? Seems the greatest opportunity for radical Muslims to get ahold of nukes is for them to over-throw Musharaff. But that very real possibility doesn't seem to be generating as much attention as the nascent nuclear program in Iran that has all the neo-cons in the administration atwitter.

But then, this administration, since it first came to office, has been loathe to pay attention to the real threats and content to attend to the ones they've made up and/or inflated beyond reason.

For the full story, go here:

<center><a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/world/asia/20pakistan.html?_r=1&th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print>U.S. Pays Pakistan to Fight Terror, but Patrols Ebb</a></center>
 

Psychoblues

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
2,701
Reaction score
142
Points
48
Location
North Missisippi
You are soooooo tender, martin.


evidence is NOT, everybody knows, or what are you smoking or any other personal attacks.

If you cant make your point without name calling you suck, that goes for anyone and everyone who engages in it on this board.
Are you accusing me of name-calling? You just said that I suck. What do you call yourself doing? I think maybe you are sucking but I would not speak that out loud unless I knew for sure. What is the name that I called anybody?
 

Stephanie

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2004
Messages
70,230
Reaction score
10,859
Points
2,040
You are soooooo tender, martin.




Are you accusing me of name-calling? You just said that I suck. What do you call yourself doing? I think maybe you are sucking but I would not speak that out loud unless I knew for sure. What is the name that I called anybody?
And..
What was this thread about??

Oh yeah....we pay, they don't play...:eusa_whistle:
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top