Comments on: Americans vote for Afghan troop surge, but Afghans differ http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/ Perspectives on Pakistan Thu, 01 Oct 2015 19:31:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Aamir Ali http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/comment-page-1/#comment-15522 Thu, 02 Apr 2009 04:23:23 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2044#comment-15522 @mauryan

well I guess its Pakistan good fortune that Mr Bush blew a trillion bucks in Iraq and postponed any “Operation Pakistani Freedom” forever! Weep Indians!

]]>
By: Tahir http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/comment-page-1/#comment-14824 Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:22:06 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2044#comment-14824 its sounds like that you guyz just dont want to see pakistan as a country . when USA help israil that not wrong,when indin army kill ppl in kashmir that not wrong but when few bad ppl from pakitan do any thing bad you guyz talk about there shouldnt be any pakistan. what is india doing in kashmir what is that killing ppl that not terror . when israil army kill women and childern that no terror i just want to know what is that called. why not then any body look at it even they do look at it. They just close there eyes . why its like that ?

]]>
By: Mauryan http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/comment-page-1/#comment-13577 Sat, 28 Feb 2009 06:23:26 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2044#comment-13577 The first thing everyone has to worry about is the nuclear weapons in Pakistan. The 5 billion dollar aid and all future economic trade agreements must be tied to a controlled denuclearization. The audacity shown by Pakistani establishment in even standing up to the US comes from this false sense of security provided by their nuclear weapons and missiles. These weapons of mass destruction can only be handled by countries that have stability and responsibility. Pakistan has neither. With the disintegration of Pakistan a strong possibility today, the US and other world powers must meet and come up with a plan to remove all nuclear infrastructure from this country. That must be the highest priority. I am not saying this because I am an Indian. Pakistan does not need these weapons. India will never use its nuclear weapons against anyone as a first strike. India’s nuclear program is directed towards China. Both countries are comparable in size, population and compete economically. They are also regional powers. Pakistan should not compare itself with a big country like India and waste all its money and resources on achieving parity with India.

The US was so adamant about going into Iraq for WMDs. Yet I am surprised that they do not have a similar view towards a much more dangerous nation like Pakistan. I do not understand why they are still nice to them. Pakistan stage managed the Mumbai attacks and I am sure the CIA and FBI are fully aware of it. But they are only offering limited support to India and allowing Pakistan to get away with their act. It makes no sense.

]]>
By: Anup http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/comment-page-1/#comment-13561 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:13:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2044#comment-13561 Anitha

— America rejects economic support to pakistan, which would improve the standard of living & elevate the light of the needy & deserving folks & on then handsover $5billion to the army(a large chunk of which would find it’s way to the terrorists), whatever be it’s claim but america’s actions speak louder than it’s words…

]]>
By: rajeev http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/comment-page-1/#comment-13560 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:04:45 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2044#comment-13560 Sanjeev:

Incidently I posted this today under Myra’s article also and did not know your this message at that time. But I think we are thinking along the same lines.

Pakistan is at a stage where only those whose real/permanent interests lie can help. US/NATO are guest actors—but useful since they have technology, needed for military operations. It is easier said than done that Pakistan will die silently. China has $billions of investment in Pakistan and will be concerned as they have indicated by the deal also. Chinese don’t do anything for nothing. So the question is would Chinese let Pakistan crumble? No, I don’t think so. They will keep on medicating Pak to save it for their own interests. Situation is much like the modern day medicine—average life span is increasing-not necessarily the quality of life. The result is patient does not die, but nor is happy. If Pakistan is true to its people, they must ask India for help (asking for moon?)—sometimes one has to swallow personal ego, which is ruining everything. There is no one better than India as a player if India fears collapse of nuclear-armed Pakistan. But will India trust the promise of Pak state/alone? Pakistanis stomping their boots at lowering-the-flag ceremony at the Wagah-Atari border is no more a symbol of stregth—it is comic under the situation. Any taker?

]]>
By: Anitha http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/comment-page-1/#comment-13559 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:55:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2044#comment-13559 I agree Anup.. but US is a great spoiler..i just read some brain retart in US has proposed a 5billion more aid to pakistan..and that would fund cross border terrorism for another decade or so..

]]>
By: anup http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/comment-page-1/#comment-13549 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 18:14:12 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2044#comment-13549 Anitha

— or else let pakistan run itself down & we’ll deal with the situation whence it arises…

]]>
By: Anitha http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/comment-page-1/#comment-13546 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 17:54:59 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2044#comment-13546 On the other hand Sanjeev, If at all pakistan needs help.. it should forget about India, kashmir and alike..that would be a great help for itself..

]]>
By: Anup http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/comment-page-1/#comment-13545 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 17:51:07 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2044#comment-13545 Sanjeev Miglani

—India is not pak-centric as is the case vice versa, it’s least interested in any sort of ‘calculations’ concerned with pakistan, someone who’ll know India with it’s – jaath-paath, votebank & other self-revolving nature would understand that India has a ‘who cares’ attitude towards pakistan, provided it’s not provoked…

]]>
By: Anitha http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/02/26/americans-vote-for-afghan-troop-surge-but-afghans-differ/comment-page-1/#comment-13541 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 17:16:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=2044#comment-13541 Sanjeev,

India has no other choice but to allow pakistan to run itself down.. How can India help pakistan with its internal political turbulence even if it wanted to ?? It will always be taken in a wrong sense..
Last time when India helped pakistan by sending a aid during earth quake, pakistan sent more militants in to kashmir, violated cease fire and more recently did it in Mumbai.
The well being of pakistan definately affect India..and that is if its doing well, it invests more and more into Kashmir seperatism and terror activities.

]]>