Our "Ally" Pakistan Offers To trade Jailed Diplomat For Al Qaeda Terrorist

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by AAAintheBeltway, Feb 28, 2011.

  1. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/raymo...-trade-lady-al-qaeda/story?id=13018457&page=2

    This episode is beginning to clarify the absurdity of our relationship with Pakistan. It is a country whose leaders are happy to accept billions in US aid, even as they secretly work in concert with al qaeda and other terrorist groups. They are so utterly corrupt no agreement with them is worth the paper it is written on.

    The sooner we get out of Afghanistan and disentangle ourselves from these people, the better.
     
  2. Why shouldn't Pakistan take a page out of US corporations playbook?

    US corporations lobby for tax breaks to move jobs to foreign countries...or threaten to move jobs if they are not allowed to ignore regulations that provide for worker and public safety.

    This is not to say that we should continue to piss away money on Pakistan...I would rather all money to to India, which is our ally, and borders Pakistan. If we really want to invest in a strategy to protect America, then making India the real powerhouse in that part of the world makes the most sense...as they border both Pakistan, and Red China...and India has no great love for Pakistan or even Islam, as India was the victim of a brutal invasion by Muslims centuries ago.*--- See link to article below. Most don't know the history of Muslims and their brutalization of the Hindus in India.

    India is our "natural" ally, and strategically positioned to be a great economic partner, as well as a military partner.

    However, essentially Pakistan and US corporations hold our current government, both left and right...as hostages.

    Link to article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_in_the_Indian_subcontinent


     
  3. I agree, but we could have been out of Afghanistan long ago had the Bush administration actually wanted to catch Bin laden. We had him trapped early on. Now he's some kind of ghost that supposedly lives in caves. We'll never catch him, and I suspect that was the plan all along.
     
  4. The only value of Afghanistan to the US...we can forget about claiming that we care about human rights around the world or the bogus "war on terrorism"...we will never stand up to the Chinese violation of human rights...is their (Afghanistan's) rare earth metals, estimated to to be quite valuable: http://www.forbes.com/2010/06/16/ta...-asia-opinions-columnists-gordon-g-chang.html



     
  5. I say we execute Laqdy Al Quaeda and nuke Pakistan -- or give India the go ahead to nuke Pakistan
     
  6. This is a good thread.

    Pakistan must be finished off, since it supports terrorism.
     
  7. I don't see the analogy between US corporations and a country violating diplomatic immunity.

    I do agree with you that our policy should skew more heavily toward India. This phony even-handedness with Pakistan is getting old, as is our wasting billions on Egypt because that was what it took for Jimmy Carter to win a Nobel Prize. Cut them both to zero.

    As for companies outsourcing jobs, that is a broad topic. Personally, I feel that so-called free trade has been a disaster for this country. We have forfeited our national sovereignty, our industrial base, our middle class jobs, our tax base and our security. For what? So people can buy junk at Walmart? Free trade is one of the abstract theories that don't work in real life.

    We should return to a policy that puts our interests first, because no one else will. Let europe defend itself, let them bear the burden of protecting their oil supplies. We can get all we need form our own hemisphere. Get out of Afghanistan and Iraq. And Korea, Japan and the 87 other places we have military bases.

    The smaller our footprint, the fewer people we piss off and the fewer problems we have.


    Economically, if we abandon free trade, we free ourselves from the tyranny of the WTO and the unfair decisions that make our industries uncompetitive in even high cost areas like europe. As the world's largest market, we should be able to dictate terms of trade bilaterally. Why should a GATT or WTO be needed? Trade should be on a strictly reciprocal basis.
     
  8. "As the world's largest market, we should be able to dictate terms of trade bilaterally."

    I am not sure that is true, that America is the world's largest market.