U.S. Confirms Attacks by Pakistan

[DashingAmerican]

U.S. confirms attacks by Pakistani military units | Sara A. Carter | Politics | Washington Examiner

 

[EagleAye]

Figures. I never believed that Pakistan was our friend, but I didn't realize it was quite this bad.

Here's more info I found:
Pakistan, Our "Friend," Uses Proxy Groups To Attack The U.S. - Forbes

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

A game of who stabbed the back, who will stab the back, who's stabbing the back, and who's bleeding right now...

 

[Jetboogieman]

Pakistan is not an ally and they were never going to be.

American money can only go so far in buying an ally, you can buy the top politicians, but you can't buy the loyalty of an entire people and an entire army. Or do I have to remind everyone here that Pakistan was one of three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan right up until you bought them out of it.

 

[EagleAye]

Pakistan is not an ally and they were never going to be.

American money can only go so far in buying an ally, you can buy the top politicians, but you can't buy the loyalty of an entire people and an entire army. Or do I have to remind everyone here that Pakistan was one of three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan right up until you bought them out of it.

We gotta stop doing stupid stuff like this. Getting in bed with these jerks is not working out for us. This habit of throwing money at problems is foolish.

 

[RoccoR]

Jetboogieman, EagleAye, et al,

Individually, both of you are correct. But this mistake is a result of a systematic cascade failure of the National Security Decision Making Process (NSDMP).

Pakistan is not an ally and they were never going to be.

American money can only go so far in buying an ally, you can buy the top politicians, but you can't buy the loyalty of an entire people and an entire army. Or do I have to remind everyone here that Pakistan was one of three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan right up until you bought them out of it.

We gotta stop doing stupid stuff like this. Getting in bed with these jerks is not working out for us. This habit of throwing money at problems is foolish.

(COMMENT)

For more than several decades, it has been an Open Policy for the USG to acquire control and influence over countries for which the Indigenous Political Support is required; via monetary reward. We use everything from direct monetary payments, to forms of military aid and political favors. The US is a political-military hegemony, and this is one methodology that we work around the world. Since 911, this has become one of the more heavily used techniques to solve (short-term) certain access, control, interdiction and activism problems. It was used to buy everything from the "Coalition of the Willing" to buying off the "insurgents" and bribing various foreign public officials.

In the NSDMP, when the intellectual genius and and operational imagination to solve problems gives-out, they throw more money at it. It is why allies are not something that the USG has in any quantity. We have short-term relationships that are utilitarian on the part of the party we call an ally. When the benefit derived from the arrangement no longer out weighs the US purchase price --- the alliance will shift. In the past, the USG had a sufficiently strong economy - and discretionary spending authority - that is could always up the ante and meet the threshold required to insure cooperation or the desired outcome. Now, in harder times, when the US can't meet the Machiavellian tendencies of the purchased alliance, --- it collapses.

Pakistan, as well as other, is an example of a purchased arrangement. The Pakistani have other (internal activities with) vested interests that the US could not manage.

This is just one symptom of a very flawed NSDMP; and a false sense of loyalty in leadership personalities.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[EagleAye]

Jetboogieman, EagleAye, et al,

Individually, both of you are correct. But this mistake is a result of a systematic cascade failure of the National Security Decision Making Process (NSDMP).

For more than several decades, it has been an Open Policy for the USG to acquire control and influence over countries for which the Indigenous Political Support is required; via monetary reward. We use everything from direct monetary payments, to forms of military aid and political favors. The US is a political-military hegemony, and this is one methodology that we work around the world. Since 911, this has become one of the more heavily used techniques to solve (short-term) certain access, control, interdiction and activism problems. It was used to buy everything from the "Coalition of the Willing" to buying off the "insurgents" and bribing various foreign public officials.

In the NSDMP, when the intellectual genius and and operational imagination to solve problems gives-out, they throw more money at it. It is why allies are not something that the USG has in any quantity. We have short-term relationships that are utilitarian on the part of the party we call an ally. When the benefit derived from the arrangement no longer out weighs the US purchase price --- the alliance will shift. In the past, the USG had a sufficiently strong economy - and discretionary spending authority - that is could always up the ante and meet the threshold required to insure cooperation or the desired outcome. Now, in harder times, when the US can't meet the Machiavellian tendencies of the purchased alliance, --- it collapses.

Pakistan, as well as other, is an example of a purchased arrangement. The Pakistani have other (internal activities with) vested interests that the US could not manage.

This is just one symptom of a very flawed NSDMP; and a false sense of loyalty in leadership personalities.

Most Respectfully,
R

It all makes a lot of sense. Thanks for sharing.

Somehow, I don't feel any better. Apparently, the "operational imagination" fails frequently and easily. I think we've gotten entirely too comfortable with throwing money at problems. Now the habit is biting us in the butt.

 

[A.Pearce]

It all makes a lot of sense. Thanks for sharing.

Somehow, I don't feel any better. Apparently, the "operational imagination" fails frequently and easily. I think we've gotten entirely too comfortable with throwing money at problems. Now the habit is biting us in the butt.

We should have just stopped trying to be their ally when we already knew that this stuff was going on. It's not as if the proper intelligence agencies didn't know about it.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

Meh.
Countries all over the world is already waging a full-blown world war, albeit in the cyber world, and probably some secret ops.

 

[stsburns]

I have never thought that Pakistan was our friends. Especially since they knew Bin Laden was there, and gave him refuge for years. In the long run I think that the "War on Terror" is really laying down grounds for a bigger war in the future.

 

[RoccoR]

stsburns, et al,

Pakistan is neither an enemy or ally. It is an armed neutral with ties to every faction.

I have never thought that Pakistan was our friends. Especially since they knew Bin Laden was there, and gave him refuge for years. In the long run I think that the "War on Terror" is really laying down grounds for a bigger war in the future.

(COMMENT)

Pakistan has its own problems, both internal and external, for which it must contend. It is unlike our government in that it is very possible for the various arms of the government to conduct programs that are beyond oversight. In the case of Osama bin Laden, one arm of the government believed that it was in the best interest of Pakistan to shield him from harm.

No one in that region actually wants the US to stick its nose in their business. They want us to stay out of their affairs and let them settle their own problems. The US does not enjoy a very good reputation for solving problems or intervention.

The fact that Pakistan has two-faces towards the US should be no surprise.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Frolicking Dinosaurs]

Most condemning and well-documented article I've seen on Pakistan's support of the Taliban: BBC News - Afghanistan: Pakistan accused of backing Taliban

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Pakistan has increased the use of its Afghan proxies to carry out terror operations in an effort to exhaust U.S. and European patience at home, knowing that President Obama has called for U.S. forces to withdraw by 2014. Pakistani military leaders believe "they can weather the blowback from Washington" because the U.S. needs Pakistan's logistical supply lines stretching from Karachi to Kabul, Riedel said.

Well - they're a bit stupid, don't you think?

I don't want this endless war to end over there because I don't want us to front any efforts against terrorism. I just think our 'boots on the ground' approach isn't quite doing the job - I think we should wage it in many other ways, instead. . . many of us have felt so since the beginning. It is not a war of attrition.

If they want us to bugger off and not twaddle - they need ot lay low and play nice. No fighting, no anger, no lash-backs, no attacks. Everyone - so happy and nice and getting along, wow - *our efforts really worked*

Imagine if Germany just stopped fighting WWII for a while in some areas :shrug:

So - the continuing attacks are just dragging things out. . . Pakistan is a few dull knifes in need of sharpening if you ask me. Or did they not notice that we haven't left, yet, and in many ways we've prolonged our stay.

 

[cpwill]

Well - they're a bit stupid, don't you think?

I don't want this endless war to end over there because I don't want us to front any efforts against terrorism. I just think our 'boots on the ground' approach isn't quite doing the job - I think we should wage it in many other ways, instead. . . many of us have felt so since the beginning. It is not a war of attrition.

well then you you will be no doubt pleased to learn that you are incorrect. where we are waging our "boots on the ground" campaign is precisely where we are seeing successes. counterinsurgency theory works. unfortunately, our guys are hampered by a lack of the necessary number of boots, and by the fact that their commander in chief was stupid enough to announce to the world that A) he had an artificial withdrawal timeline and B) what it was. Now every Afghan farmer knows if he sides with the Americans he is taking the side of the people who have chosen to lose - but that while they will go back to America and live safely he will be left behind to face a vengeful Taliban. :thumbs: good job, there, Captain Awesome.

So - the continuing attacks are just dragging things out. . . Pakistan is a few dull knifes in need of sharpening if you ask me. Or did they not notice that we haven't left, yet, and in many ways we've prolonged our stay.

yeah.... it's almost as if we were annually giving them large sums of money in connection with our still-ongoing efforts in the region.....


sorry if i come of as an asshole - that damn rum has me again.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Well yeah - presenting any deadline is ignorant, I think - just as it would be giving any of your war-strategy away . . . but I didn't think of how it would affect the locals in that way, that's a good point.

 

[coolwalker]

If we would simply stop trying to "buy our friends" we wouldn't be in this mess. It's time we realize, or admit, that no one likes us because they are jealous of us and hate anyone who is not Muslim.

 

[DashingAmerican]

If we would simply stop trying to "buy our friends" we wouldn't be in this mess. It's time we realize, or admit, that no one likes us because they are jealous of us and hate anyone who is not Muslim.

Well, it's certainly high time we quit giving money to everyone.

 

[Tashah]

Pakistan doesn't want an anti-Pakistani Karzai or Northern Alliance type (Tajik/Uzbek) government in Kabul. These governments would be far too close to India which Pakistan sees as its mortal enemy. What Pakistan really wants is a Pakistani-friendly Afghan Taliban type government, but one that is malleable and does not assist the Pakistani Taliban in Pakistan proper. This is pretty dicey, but Pakistan is willing to take the chance on an Afghan Taliban government in order to acquire strategic depth against India.

Pakistan views many terrorist groups as a low-cost/deniable asset in its campaigns against India in Kashmir and Afghanistan. But it never imagined that the thousands of Islamist madrassa's within Pakistan would begin to crank out radicals who wish to Talibanize Pakistan itself. After the Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) bloodbath in Islamabad, the Pakistani civilian/military leadership fears cracking down on the radical madrassa's in Punjab, Baluchastan, and the Seraiki belt. It keeps kicking this can down the road, but it is running out of road. The longer they wait, the more difficult things will be.

 

[DashingAmerican]

Pakistan doesn't want an anti-Pakistani Karzai or Northern Alliance type (Tajik/Uzbek) government in Kabul. These governments would be far too close to India which Pakistan sees as its mortal enemy. What Pakistan really wants is a Pakistani-friendly Afghan Taliban type government, but one that is malleable and does not assist the Pakistani Taliban in Pakistan proper. This is pretty dicey, but Pakistan is willing to take the chance on an Afghan Taliban government in order to acquire strategic depth against India.

Pakistan views many terrorist groups as a low-cost/deniable asset in its campaigns against India in Kashmir and Afghanistan. But it never imagined that the thousands of Islamist madrassa's within Pakistan would begin to crank out radicals who wish to Talibanize Pakistan itself. After the Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) bloodbath in Islamabad, the Pakistani civilian/military leadership fears cracking down on the radical madrassa's in Punjab, Baluchastan, and the Seraiki belt. It keeps kicking this can down the road, but it is running out of road. The longer they wait, the more difficult things will be.

Damn it. I can never think clearly with that avatar!!! MIND GAMES I SAY!!!!!!!! MINNNNND GAAAAAAAAAMMMESSSS!!!!!!!!!

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

I'm surprised that some people are surprised by this

 

[chris126]

Never were they our allies we simply bought them off.