Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lunachick · 06-25-2003, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dr Rick
Oh, how naive you are in that idyllic Pacific paradise; we covet your sheep, and our Caesar is a cowboy...

Ahhahahahaha! I always knew your Caesar was a sheep-shagging cowboy.

But beware our fine Air Force and it's 3 or 4 Cessna's (TM); our fine Army, which does the Haka (tm) before every game; and our bright Navy - you must've heard of them with their most seaworthy Rainbow Warrior, fighting injustice across the deep and wide Pacific Ocean! Beware ye American Empire-builders! We shall not tolerate you here!!

Dr Rick · 06-25-2003, 06:23 PM

U.S. Aid to Pakistan Has Political Payoff

Some excerpts:

Quote:

"ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) -- A U.S. pledge to give $3 billion in military and economic aid to Pakistan over the next five years is a financial boon to the country's recovering economy, and a political gold mine for its military leader.

The aid package -- which will be spread out over five years, roughly the time remaining in President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's term as head of state -- was a reward for Musharraf's strong support for the U.S.-led war on terrorism.

...Mohammed Sohail, the head of economic research at Investcap Securities, another brokerage based in Karachi said the aid demonstrates that the strong relationship between the two countries ``will remain on track for a longer term.''

It didn't always seem that way.

In one of the great political flips of recent history, Musharraf rescinded his government's support for the Taliban and backed the U.S. effort to destroy al-Qaida and oust the hardline Afghan regime in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.

Washington, in turn, went from keeping Musharraf -- an army general who seized power in a 1999 coup -- at arms length, to embracing him as an important ally. Ahead of Tuesday's meeting at Camp David, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the American president views Musharraf as ``a strong leader who is aggressively fighting terror.''

Pakistan has arrested more than 500 al-Qaida suspects -- including several big fish -- and turned them over to the United States. It has also recently moved troops into lawless tribal areas on its border with Afghanistan in an effort to block escape routes for al-Qaida leaders and prevent terrorists on this side of the border from crossing back into Afghanistan to carry out attacks.

The strong measures have put Musharraf into a bind at home, where a resurgent coalition of Islamic parties has won support by criticizing the president's close ties with the Americans. They and other opposition groups are pressing him to loosen his grip on power by agreeing to give up his post as armed forces chief, but Musharraf has refused..."

In a related article in the same paper today:

Quote:

"...in a lengthy meeting today with Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, here at the presidential retreat in the Maryland mountains, Mr. Bush said he would not provide the F-16 fighters that Pakistan has sought for 14 years. A senior administration official said that Mr. Bush had made clear that the new package of aid was dependent on continued cooperation in battling terrorism and a permanent end to assisting the North Korean nuclear program...American officials say that any agreement to sell planes would enrage India..."

Pakistan has wanted those planes for years, and they are not just a carrot, but also a not so subtle stick for India should it fall from Imperial grace. Pakistan has been rewarded for doing the bidding of the Empire rather than following the majority will of its populace, with more possible rewards in the offering. India is pressured with similar enticements and, if worse comes to worse, a possible punishment in the form of some fighter-jets shipped to its enemy.

This is how the Empire often works, not explicitly "forcing" either country to do anything, but instead making it costly for either one to not abide by its wishes. India may well resist doing what the US wants, but the hidden message is that it may pay a price if it does

lunachick · 06-25-2003, 06:47 PM

The games the Empire plays.

Ironically, America's anti-terror campaign is one that will eventually exacerbate terrorist activities and international dysfunction, as it plays one nation off against another, over and over again, around the globe. Bad karma, man. Very bad karma.

Add my cry to the "Death to America!" chorus.

ThinkDifferent · 06-25-2003, 10:22 PM

It is very naive to think that India is being Dragged into this. It is not possible to drag a big country like India into anything like this.
There are 3 reasons i can think of

1) It is a bargain. India seeks some favours in return. India wants US to
- Side with it rather than with pakistan. Put more pressure on pakistan to halt sponsoring terrorism.
- Make itself popular with the American public thus reducing the current resentment regarding job loss to india. Maybe increase work visas to indians.

2) During the cold war, india was closer to USSR than US. It was also in the lead of NAM(Non-Aligned Movement). Nowadays there is a sense of uselessness of idealistic stance and preference for something more pragmatic. US is the sole super power. This is not going to change in the near future. So its a good idea to be on their side and in their good books. "India First" u see.

3) Third reason is because pakistan is ready for this. India doesn't want pakistanis to grab the oppurtunity. http://www.dawn.com/2003/06/26/top6.htm

So what is preventing India then
1) Elections are close by. Ruling party doesn't want to take the risk of body bags returning home. There will be a public outcry.
2) The operations are not under the auspicies of the UN.
3) There is a large expatriate community of indians in the middle east. Reaction of the muslim world to Indian troop deployment could be unpredictable.

Why does the US want India troops.
1) India army has very few-christians. Most are hindus/sikhs and there are muslims also which is a bonus.
2) Iraqi's consider allied forces as a sort of occupying force. Indian/pakistani troops could be much more acceptable to them.
3) US will get some other army to do the dirty work. Only thing that can shake the US govt. is the increasing bodycount. Expense involved is not a problem. World opininon is not a big problem but US casualities are.

ThinkDifferent · 06-25-2003, 10:28 PM

Sometimes u guys really lose it and criticize america more than necessary. The possibility of US planning to assasinate some indian leader is really very very remote.

Superpowers by nature are like the way america is today. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Given a choice between the following countries being the sole superpower ............i would choose US anytime
1) US
2) Russia
3) China

However this is a rare and the maximum compliment i will probably ever come up with.

Darwin26 · 06-26-2003, 12:17 AM

Mr. Think, some auspicious and salient points, thank you...if not just outright pragmatic on ground level...BUT criticizing America is what keeps us FREE. It should be done 25/8 ... a heart felt vigilance... to be sure.
And for sure America is the Hallmark of Hegemony.

lunachick · 06-26-2003, 12:23 AM

It's no use, Darwin26.

ThinkDifferent appears to have already been assimilated. Resistance is futile.

Darwin26 · 06-26-2003, 12:34 AM

get the different opinions of folks around the world... especially of atheists in lands where religion is ubiquitous .( ie ThinkDifferent) Omar from Egypt is another... and some locals like Dr. Ricky ... anyway it's time for a little politcal sorbet...
i'll have some frozen Bing Cherries and spitting a few pits...

hinduwoman · 06-27-2003, 08:22 PM

Rick, I honestly don't think Indira Gandhi's assassination had anything to do with USA. Her Sikh bodyguard was posted long before the Golden Temple incident. Afterwards, Indian intelligence suggested that he be replaced. But Indira Gandhi was anxious to show that she still had the loyalty of Sikhs and so kept him on. It was shocking that no one monitored him closer .

Yes, Phaedrus I remember India's misadventure in Srilanka. It was Congress Party that encouraged the growth of LTTE. "Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword".

Thinkdifferent: what I am objecting to is Bush asking us in the first place!
The war on Iraq was carried out without asking India's opinion and in face of India passing a resolution condemning it. It was simple Imperial expansion --- what do India get out of it? As it is now we are in a difficult position.
On pragmatic level there are several problems:
World opinion is against it and we are not a Superpower that can ignore the world.
Indian troops go in under US control instead of UN sanction --- occupiers is how Iraqis will see them. so they will try to kill Indians and then our troops will have to open fire and it will get really messy.
Further escalation of Hindu-Muslim tensions.
It is obvious that Washington would continue to support Pakistan and supply it with aid to terrorize us better --- no amount of toadeating will stop that.

If we are looking out for India's best pragmatic interests then nothing less than total breaking of ties with Pakistan and allowing India to bomb the border a la Afghanistan would suffice before Indian soldiers die for American interests.

Gurdur · 06-27-2003, 08:39 PM

Peccavi.

06-26-2003, 12:17 AM	#46
Darwin26 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Encino, CA Posts: 806	Bhorpalesque Mr. Think, some auspicious and salient points, thank you...if not just outright pragmatic on ground level...BUT criticizing America is what keeps us FREE. It should be done 25/8 ... a heart felt vigilance... to be sure. And for sure America is the Hallmark of Hegemony.

06-26-2003, 12:34 AM	#48
Darwin26 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Encino, CA Posts: 806	It's great to get the different opinions of folks around the world... especially of atheists in lands where religion is ubiquitous .( ie ThinkDifferent) Omar from Egypt is another... and some locals like Dr. Ricky ... anyway it's time for a little politcal sorbet... i'll have some frozen Bing Cherries and spitting a few pits...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-25-2003, 06:47 PM	#43
lunachick Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: NZ Posts: 7,895	The games the Empire plays. Ironically, America's anti-terror campaign is one that will eventually exacerbate terrorist activities and international dysfunction, as it plays one nation off against another, over and over again, around the globe. Bad karma, man. Very bad karma. Add my cry to the "Death to America!" chorus.

06-25-2003, 10:22 PM	#44
ThinkDifferent Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: India Posts: 193	It is very naive to think that India is being Dragged into this. It is not possible to drag a big country like India into anything like this. There are 3 reasons i can think of 1) It is a bargain. India seeks some favours in return. India wants US to - Side with it rather than with pakistan. Put more pressure on pakistan to halt sponsoring terrorism. - Make itself popular with the American public thus reducing the current resentment regarding job loss to india. Maybe increase work visas to indians. 2) During the cold war, india was closer to USSR than US. It was also in the lead of NAM(Non-Aligned Movement). Nowadays there is a sense of uselessness of idealistic stance and preference for something more pragmatic. US is the sole super power. This is not going to change in the near future. So its a good idea to be on their side and in their good books. "India First" u see. 3) Third reason is because pakistan is ready for this. India doesn't want pakistanis to grab the oppurtunity. http://www.dawn.com/2003/06/26/top6.htm So what is preventing India then 1) Elections are close by. Ruling party doesn't want to take the risk of body bags returning home. There will be a public outcry. 2) The operations are not under the auspicies of the UN. 3) There is a large expatriate community of indians in the middle east. Reaction of the muslim world to Indian troop deployment could be unpredictable. Why does the US want India troops. 1) India army has very few-christians. Most are hindus/sikhs and there are muslims also which is a bonus. 2) Iraqi's consider allied forces as a sort of occupying force. Indian/pakistani troops could be much more acceptable to them. 3) US will get some other army to do the dirty work. Only thing that can shake the US govt. is the increasing bodycount. Expense involved is not a problem. World opininon is not a big problem but US casualities are.

06-25-2003, 10:28 PM	#45
ThinkDifferent Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: India Posts: 193	Sometimes u guys really lose it and criticize america more than necessary. The possibility of US planning to assasinate some indian leader is really very very remote. Superpowers by nature are like the way america is today. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Given a choice between the following countries being the sole superpower ............i would choose US anytime 1) US 2) Russia 3) China However this is a rare and the maximum compliment i will probably ever come up with.

06-26-2003, 12:23 AM	#47
lunachick Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: NZ Posts: 7,895	It's no use, Darwin26. ThinkDifferent appears to have already been assimilated. Resistance is futile.

06-27-2003, 08:22 PM	#49
hinduwoman Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: India Posts: 6,977	Rick, I honestly don't think Indira Gandhi's assassination had anything to do with USA. Her Sikh bodyguard was posted long before the Golden Temple incident. Afterwards, Indian intelligence suggested that he be replaced. But Indira Gandhi was anxious to show that she still had the loyalty of Sikhs and so kept him on. It was shocking that no one monitored him closer . Yes, Phaedrus I remember India's misadventure in Srilanka. It was Congress Party that encouraged the growth of LTTE. "Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword". Thinkdifferent: what I am objecting to is Bush asking us in the first place! The war on Iraq was carried out without asking India's opinion and in face of India passing a resolution condemning it. It was simple Imperial expansion --- what do India get out of it? As it is now we are in a difficult position. On pragmatic level there are several problems: World opinion is against it and we are not a Superpower that can ignore the world. Indian troops go in under US control instead of UN sanction --- occupiers is how Iraqis will see them. so they will try to kill Indians and then our troops will have to open fire and it will get really messy. Further escalation of Hindu-Muslim tensions. It is obvious that Washington would continue to support Pakistan and supply it with aid to terrorize us better --- no amount of toadeating will stop that. If we are looking out for India's best pragmatic interests then nothing less than total breaking of ties with Pakistan and allowing India to bomb the border a la Afghanistan would suffice before Indian soldiers die for American interests.

06-27-2003, 08:39 PM	#50
Gurdur Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Buggered if I know Posts: 12,410	Peccavi.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.