Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan?

1 Dubai Jobs .com The First Place to Find a Job in Dubai
  • Reply
Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
Huuuh while you continue to mumble about the times square bomber and its connection with religion..
I'll concentrate on the more serious staff exposed by my warrior 8) friends as progress takes place in their own lands. After reading all this the truth will stand out and you'll see it as to why it never hits the headlines like it's written here, in the west? huuuh again...

U.S. officials have pointed blame at Pakistan for the recent Times Square bomb scare. Examining these accusations in the context of drone attacks, use of Blackwater mercenaries, and increasing U.S. encroachment upon Pakistani sovereignty, we see ominous parallels to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Various media outlets reported on May 1st, the story of Faisal Shahzad who allegedly attempted to detonate a bomb-ladened SUV in New York's Times Square. The 30 year-old was arrested two days later at Kennedy Airport prior to boarding a plane heading to Dubai. The Associated Press reported that Federal investigators had told U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara that Shahzad had, "received weapons training in Pakistan." On May 12th, Reuters reported that, "U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said on Sunday evidence showed the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) helped direct the failed attack in New York's teeming Times Square and likely assisted in financing it." Secretary Hillary Clinton also spoke about the Times Square incident saying, "We've made it very clear that if, heaven forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan, were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences."

Since the Obama Administration has come to power, there has been a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy towards Pakistan. In order to understand the events unfolding in Pakistan, we need to revisit the events that led up to America's invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Afghanistan

Islam came to the region of Afghanistan in the year 654 and its inhabitants lived under the shade of Khilafah. From 1839 onwards, the occupation of Afghanistan changed hands from Britain to Russia, and today, to the United States.

Prior to the direct occupation of Afghanistan in 2001, America implemented indirect means to gain control of the region. In 1978, when Russia had inserted its puppet ruler as the President of Afghanistan, America responded by arranging a coup against him and installing their own puppet ruler. Russia's reply was the invasion of Afghanistan on December 27th, 1979. They killed the U.S. agent ruler and appointed a new Communist government. A violent resistance broke out throughout the country. In 1980, America began exploiting this new situation by supplying the Mujahideen with financial and military aid.

After the Soviet withdrawal in 1989 and with the defeat of the Communist government by the Mujahideen in 1992, Russian influence in the region ended completely. From 1992 to 1996, civil war ensued - with Iran and Tajikistan supporting Burhanuddin Rabbani who led the Islamic Association with funds, arms and political support, while Pakistan embraced Gulbuddin Hikmatyar, leader of Hezb-e-Islami.

In 1994, when Pakistan determined that Hikmatyar couldn't settle the struggle with Rabbani, Pakistani intelligence services, with approval of America, formed and supported the Taliban. In 1996, the Taliban successfully assumed control of Afghanistan. There were negotiations between the Taliban and Unocal -an American gas company- and Delta -a Saudi company- regarding a deal to build a pipeline through Afghanistan and Pakistan in order to transfer gas from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean.

However, some of the Muslims within the Taliban were against such co-operation with the United States and they prevented important oil and gas pipeline deals to go through. Consequently, the U.S. used the attacks of 9/11 as an excuse to invade Afghanistan which it continues to occupy until today.

Iraq

Muslims liberated Iraq at the time of Umar bin Al-Khattab (ra), in 634-644. Iraq is a country rich in vital resources necessary for any country that intends to extend its influence in the region. The Tigris and Euphrates cross its land, making its wide plains the most fertile and productive lands in the world. It is also a land endowed with the wealth of oil. Iraq remained a part of the Uthmani Khilafah until World War One. On October 8th, 1918 Iraq fell into the hands of the British and was placed under their dictatorship. America entered as a new player in the struggle over Iraq after World War Two and began competing with Britain for control of the Iraqi oil. Influence in Iraq fluctuated between the British and Americans until it finally settled for the advantage of the British by the coup of July 1968, where the Ba'thists loyal to the British took the reins of power. In ten years, Saddam Hussein managed to rally the Ba'th forces behind him to become President of Iraq.

In 1990, Saddam waged a new war against Kuwait, occupying it in the summer of that year. This war was a way to allow the British to fulfil their own agenda which was a means of pressure that would lead to negotiations over two matters: first, to promote its agent Saddam, the strong man in the region, which would strengthen its position in the region; second, for Britain to guarantee participation with America in the oil and influence in the Gulf. However, the U.S used the incident as an excuse to seize the Gulf, build military bases in it and gain control over its oil and rulers, under the pretext of liberating Kuwait. America considered this to be the opportunity that it had prepared for many years - which is to become the master of the Gulf. When Britain noticed U.S determination, it joined the war, but only agreeing to drive the Iraqi regime from Kuwait rather than dismantling it as this was the public reason for the war and both sides had agreed to this. Thus, the war started, where America led a coalition of thirty foreign and Arab countries to fight against Iraq and drive it out of Kuwait in 1991.

The American siege continued under a UN mandate until 2003, where American forces swept over Iraq to occupy it once again. Britain joined in the effort to overthrow the regime of Saddam as it had no other option if it still wanted a share of Iraq's oil reserves. In the build up to this invasion, the Bush Administration attempted to use the sale of uranium to Iraq, Saddam's connection to Al-Qaeda, and the allegation that it had weapons of mass destruction to persuade the public that their case for war was legitimate. However, all these claims have been proven false. Despite this the U.S. was able to invade Iraq and continues to occupy it up until today. As such, Iraq has fallen yet again to direct colonial rule under American hegemony.

Pakistan

Recently, Pakistan has been put under the microscope. Almost 10 years ago, the U.S. had very warm relations with Pakistan as Musharraf - the President of Pakistan at that time - was an agent for the U.S. and was willing to do her bidding. Today, however, the tune has changed. Pakistan is now seen as impeding American efforts to strengthen its control over Afghanistan despite the fact that the current tyrant, Asif Zardari, has stooped to a level even lower than Musharraf in his attempts to please his American masters. There are a number of policies that the U.S has established that indicate a shift in the way they want to deal with Pakistan:

Drone Attacks - unmanned aerial vehicles have been used since 2004 in FATA killing over 1,200 people - mostly civilians. The attacks are initiated from bases in Pakistan itself - one of many uses of Pakistan military bases by the U.S.

Mercenaries - private military company Xe (formally known as Blackwater) has been operating in Pakistan since 2007. Working for the CIA, Xe operatives conduct house raids and border interdictions in Pakistan not to mention the terrorist activities it organizes against civilians whether in the masajid or markets.

Permanent U.S. Presence - Last year, the U.S. initiated the construction of an embassy in Islamabad that will house 330 U.S. personnel. According to Kurshid Ahmad, Member of Parliament for Jamaat-e-Islami, "It's for the micro and macro management of Pakistan..."

Recently there have been discussions regarding U.S. military personnel assisting the Pakistani army. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, "We're willing to do as much ... as they are willing to accept. We are prepared to do training, and exercise with them. How big that operation becomes is really up to them." The U.S. views the tribal areas as a logistical base for the Muslims fighting the occupation in Afghanistan. It has tried to push the Pakistani army into a direct conflict with these tribes in order to try and stop their support for the resistance.

What is next for the U.S. if the Pakistani army is unable or unwilling to stop the tribes from helping the resistance in Afghanistan? Is the U.S. going to use the Times Square incident to put pressure on Pakistan and give the agent rulers of Pakistan an excuse to do more for their masters? Or is America going to simply occupy the tribal areas directly?


Learning from Afghanistan & Iraq

The Prophet made it very clear that the Muslim community should learn from mistakes made in the past:

"The believer is never stung from the same hole twice." [Bukhari]

What lessons can we learn from the events that have transpired in Afghanistan and Iraq? The U.S has a history of meddling in the affairs of Muslim countries. They do not invade and occupy the Muslim lands in a single move, but rather they do this in stages, as in Afghanistan and Iraq. The intended occupation begins with indirect involvement in Muslim affairs. Once this discrete interference is deemed no longer sufficient, they will shift from an indirect involvement to direct involvement. At this point, the rhetoric intensifies as a result of an event - either real or orchestrated - which is used to gain public opinion for direct involvement which can lead to a full-fledged invasion.

Muslims Responsibility to protect their Lands

As the rhetoric from Washington increases and America increases her incursion bit-by-bit onto Pakistani soil, what should the response of the Muslims be? The Muslim community must concern itself with the affairs of the muslims in Pakistan and the Muslim lands in general. It must account the Muslim rulers and the rulers of Pakistan for not implementing the Shariah, for spreading corruption in the land, and for giving the opportunity to Britain and the U.S. to interfere in the affairs of the Muslims. The Muslim communities should put pressure on the rulers of Pakistan to get rid of British, American and any other foreign influence in Pakistan. The Muslim community should express its displeasure of the agent rulers in Pakistan and expel these occupiers from our lands using the styles and means available to us in the Shariah.


Now over to you EH! Let's see how you will defend the occupiers?...

Berrin
Dubai Forums Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 1395

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
I can't see it myself ... but I do recall hearing someone say (I think it was George Galloway) that the US controlled something like 40% of Kuwaiti territory - and IIRC he called that an occupation too.

Historically, the US have been like house guests from hell, they arrive and never want to leave. I think the Phillipines managed to get rid of military bases a while back, and more recently Uzbekistan (well, it was a temporary ban there) - but everywhere else, from Japan to Germany, Diego Garcia (a sore point with Mauritians) once they come, you can't get rid of them! ;)

Cheers,
Shafique
shafique
Dubai Shadow Wolf
User avatar
Posts: 13533

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
That's news to me.

The Philippines is one of the most Pro-American countries in the world, so I guess the vast majority of Filipinos don't agree with your characterization of Americans being house guests from hell.

Although the Koreans aren't too happy about our presence. But something tells me that they'll change their tune if we suddenly got up and left.
event horizon
BANNED
User avatar
Posts: 5508

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
Most of the Phillipines would love to go and live in the US - i.e. they want to be house guests of the US! (A Filipino colleague once told me this - and he certainly was angling for a posting in the US - and he's the one who also told me about the bases)

Here's the entry from the US Gov website:
Until November 1992, pursuant to the 1947 Military Bases Agreement, the United States maintained and operated major facilities at Clark Air Base, Subic Bay Naval Complex, and several small subsidiary installations in the Philippines. In August 1991, negotiators from the two countries reached agreement on a draft treaty providing for use of Subic Bay Naval Base by U.S. forces for 10 years. The draft treaty did not include use of Clark Air Base, which had been so heavily damaged by the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo that the United States decided to abandon it.

In September 1991, the Philippine Senate rejected the bases treaty, and despite further efforts to salvage the situation, the two sides could not reach an agreement. As a result, the Philippine Government informed the United States on December 6, 1991, that it would have one year to complete withdrawal. That withdrawal went smoothly and was completed ahead of schedule, with the last U.S. forces departing on November 24, 1992. On departure, the U.S. Government turned over assets worth more than $1.3 billion to the Philippines, including an airport and ship-repair facility. Agencies formed by the Philippine Government have converted the former military bases for civilian commercial use, with Subic Bay serving as a flagship for that effort.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2794.htm


The Japanese people are not too keen on your presence either (as well as the Koreans). It seems to be a common theme around the world - the man on the street not happy with US military presence, but those in power are 'encouraged' to play ball - sometimes with carrots, sometimes with sticks.

Cheers,
Shafique
shafique
Dubai Shadow Wolf
User avatar
Posts: 13533

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
well indeed the cat is out of the bag chaps...

The former head of the British Army, General Richard Dannat told the BBC that the Afghan operation plan is a good one.

"This whole process of clearing areas, holding them securely with enough boots on the ground and then building a better life for the people, we can get it right," said the general. "It's got to be rolled out across the South of Afghanistan between the British army, the American Army and the U.S. Marine Corps."

General Dannatt adds that part of that roll out includes the impending offensive in Kandahar for obvious reasons.

"Kandahar is effectively the power base for the Taliban and the Taliban if they want to control the country, first of all they have to control Kandahar, and then they've opened up the access to Kabul." Confronting the Taliban is critical, he said.

"The fact of the matter is that the Taliban is effectively a front for al- Qaida, al-Qaida is the expression of the militant Islamist agenda which if we don't oppose it and face it off in Southern Afghanistan or Afghanistan or in South Asia, then frankly that influence will grow."At the heart of the strategy in Afghanistan is winning over the Afghan population. Andy Bearpark heads the British Association of Private Security Companies. Many of them work in Afghanistan. Bearpark believes carrying out a military operation without alienating the people is challenging


http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... -voa06.htm

Is your agenda any less or different than the "so called" militant islamist agenda guys?

So you think that if you don't oppose this Islamist agenda and don't face it off in Southern Afghanistan, or Afghanistan, or in South Asia, then frankly that influence will grow. , and you think this is an important point, It could so well grow that you could see it moving from South Asia to the Middle East to North Africa, and to the high water mark of the Islamic caliphate in the 14th, 15th century."

Woooow You are truely coward little men you are..Hands up cheering the big guys whom I thougt were the little ones in the first place.

wooooow indeed..

Over to you EH......
Berrin
Dubai Forums Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 1395

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
Uh-huh.

As I said, I doubt the Koreans are currently calling for us to leave.

And, in any event, about one-third of Koreans are the ones who actually want us to go. Another one third wants us to stay (they were the generation that was alive during the Korean war) and another third are undecided.

But hey, I'm all for not wasting tax payer money patrolling a border that the Koreans should have secured by now.

But, on a side note, it's interesting to compare the countries and territories that fell under US occupation since WWII and the countries that fell under Soviet or communist occupation.

East Germany vs West, South Korea vs North.

The differences are astounding, especially if you're aware of the fact that what is now North Korea used to be the more modernized region of Korea and the South was basically populated by farmers, etc.

-- Tue May 25, 2010 6:56 pm --

Berrin, I'm totally for the Taliban taking over Afghanistan and Pakistan.

I'm also rooting for al-Shabaab to take over Somalia, AQI to take over Diyala, Anbar and Salauddin provinces in Iraq and for al-Qaeda affiliated tribesmen to take over swathes of Yemen and a popular Islamist revolt toppling the Saudi regime.

What could be better than turning the Muslim world into a theocratic !@#$hole?

Oh, I mean more so than it is today.
event horizon
BANNED
User avatar
Posts: 5508

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
Well, going on past Empires - you guys will be wanting to leave your outposts due to the increasing costs and the fact you owe the world so much money. Happened to the Brits, will happen to you.

We can discuss the relative success of Imperial rules another time - but I would recommend reading Chomsky or John Pilger for the catalogue of injustices done at country levels - from South America to Asia. Ask RC about the latest instrument of mass destruction (financial in this case) - that of 'Washington Consensus' capitalism. ;)

I'll leave you and Berrin to battle this topic out - I just wanted to give small historical perspective of the US tendency to stay beyond their welcome. ;)

Cheers,
Shafique
shafique
Dubai Shadow Wolf
User avatar
Posts: 13533

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
Yes, Chomsky is a brilliant political scientist.

He expertly predicted the collapse of the US economy and that the Soviets would win the cold war.
event horizon
BANNED
User avatar
Posts: 5508

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
SU was responsible for the largest forced transfer of an ethnic group (ethnic cleaning). > 10 million ethnic Germans after WW II were expelled.

Better a yank in my garden than a commi in my kitchen. :)
Flying Dutchman
BANNED
Posts: 3821
Location: Dubai

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
It would make a lot of Pakistanis Happy. Most of them are dying to go to the USA anyways ! Would save them from the green card hassle and make immigration easy ! :D

I for one say either invade it and get it over with or bugger off. And invade it properly and not do a half peach job like Afghanistan and Iraq.

P.S : I think its a ploy by the pakistanis. If they can't go there thye will make America come there !
desertdudeshj
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 6287

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 25, 2010
What could be better than turning the Muslim world into a theocratic !@#$hole?

why do you try to bend islam and its followers then? If they wish turn their world into a theocratic one then that surely is their choice and is nothing new to the western world either,right?

Berrin, I'm totally for the Taliban taking over Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Rightly so, just as any other regional group of activists,they too were created by Americans, over God knows how many hopes and promises given in that respect..

I just feel sorry that it's the same western soldiers that have to take the western hyprocrisy on the chin to fight back and die over the mess their rulers left behind for them..whilst of course just as many and more of those innocent muslim men have to fight and die in an attempt to protect their countries and rights.

This stupid debacle is just no joke and doesn't give us the right to continue to disparage some nations while hopelessly glossing the others..

-- Tue May 25, 2010 10:01 pm --

EH see this is the man that you pester both individually and religiously...
I guess it will be a good reflection for those who wonder why muslims go extremists or shall we say fundamentalist..
Anyone knows What this old man has done to deserve this?

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xde8w5 ... ws?start=2



.
Berrin
Dubai Forums Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 1395

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
Berrin, I already told you that I wouldn't mind if radical Islamists and other types of tin pan dictators were in power of Muslim countries.

Muslims seem to need someone else to tell them what to do. Whether it's a legalistic religion or a nationalistic dictator, Muslims are a people in dire need of being controlled.

Allah/Government/moderator knows best, dontcha know?
event horizon
BANNED
User avatar
Posts: 5508

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
event horizon wrote:Uh-huh.

Berrin, I'm totally for the Taliban taking over Afghanistan and Pakistan.

I'm also rooting for al-Shabaab to take over Somalia, AQI to take over Diyala, Anbar and Salauddin provinces in Iraq and for al-Qaeda affiliated tribesmen to take over swathes of Yemen and a popular Islamist revolt toppling the Saudi regime.

What could be better than turning the Muslim world into a theocratic !@#$hole?

Oh, I mean more so than it is today.


Like FD said, better a yank in my garden than a commie in my kitchen. lol, good one FD ;)

But seriously Berrin, I agree that we should pull out of the Middle East and open trade. But the theocrats are sick as fcuk and want to control the masses. Besides, its not all war, the international community supplies troops and gives out money and tries to develop Afhanistan from the ground up. Remember the Dutch model in Kandahar? Even the American's praised it.

Look what the Talitubbi theocrats are doing nowadays:

Tribal elders have been killed by the Taliban across the south and east of the country; in recent months, elders in Kandahar Province have been especially hard hit. At least 13 have been shot since February.

In the mid-1990s the killings were common practice in Khost as well when the Taliban were seeking to take over Afghanistan, said Arsala Jamal, the former governor of Khost, who is now the acting minister of Borders and Tribal Affairs. By killing just a few elders, the Taliban were able to terrify the others and thus found it easier to gain dominance, he said.

The elders who were attacked earlier this week were from villages that had received grants worth just a few thousand dollars from Afghanistan’s National Solidarity program, which is one of the government’s most successful efforts to spur grass-roots development projects. The Taliban, hearing of the awards, demanded the money, said General Ishaqzai.

“The last time, the Taliban did the same thing in this place and they took all the money, which was given to the village elders,” General Ishaqzai said. “This time the elders did not want to give the Taliban the money. That is why they took them from their houses and killed them.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/26/world ... wt=nytimes

Is that the way to t(h)reat your own people? Common mate, those guys deserve to get droned properly.
Either way, the mission has failed, and by September the Dutch troops are out of Kandahar. The Americans are probably taking over our positions.

Its not all bombing and hurting thats going on. Rebuilding is a big part of the effort, even though the Taliban continues to sabotage every development and little progress the West makes, like schools for young (e.g. female) children. The Taliban savages prefer satanic rule inspired by an old 7th century textbook... :blackeye:

That book needs an update, and the people too! I'm telling you 8)
RobbyG
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5928
Location: ---

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
Like FD said, better a yank in my garden than a commie in my kitchen. lol, good one FD
Is that the way to t(h)reat your own people? Common mate, those guys deserve to get droned properly.

You too are a true a$$ole, aren't you Rob! If you didn't know, you know it now mate...
Yes that's the way they treat their people...But with a difference, only when they coward perpetrator crimanals put them on leash to slave them just as they like for a good servitude.

Good to see coward nations, being not able to utilise the technology they're so proud of without the need for slaves doing do the job on the ground instead..

See what I mean...

Kandahar Death Squads - Afghanistan
In a bold new offensive, US and NATO forces are turning to Afghan militias for help. More feared than the Taliban, and wearing the weapons and impunity of the US army - have they created a monster?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a2a_1274650619

Now I do hope these newly trained militias turn against them as much and that it all becomes a complete loss and sham..
Berrin
Dubai Forums Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 1395

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
Wait a minute. I don't agree with funding militia's. I was just saying, that some sick militia groups are raping the local village heads of the funding the West provides for their loyalty, information and to compensate them for reconstruction of villages.

So, don't talk as if its all fault to the West, as there are two operations going on. One of investment and reconstruction and one insurgency. The rebuilding process is undermined by theocratic islamic morons and the retaliation (funding of other militias) comes from theocratic Western morons. You know how this goes.

Image

But thats where the Libertarians comes into play:

Image

When will you become enlightened? :mrgreen:

:mrgreen:
RobbyG
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5928
Location: ---

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
Only shows the Mosque and Church need to stand untied to twart atempts by little dark evil doers ! :D
desertdudeshj
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 6287

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
Without eachother they can't fight their holy wars against eachother. So the hidden gem comes out to create a divide. The peacemakers who have identified the real culprit. Religion in the hands of the wrong people ;)

Image

Peaceful aint it... :P
RobbyG
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5928
Location: ---

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
The US occupying Pakistan??

Too remote!

Why??... Because Pakistan doesn’t have oil!! :) :)

No…no… seriously, the US really doesn’t need to, ..with such a cooperative Pakistani government!!

They can achieve all their objectives without the need for a messy and expensive full occupation.

Speaking of houseguests from hell. I currently have one!!!

He is just taking his sweet time looking for a place to move to. He changed jobs recently and had to leave his old place before he had a chance to find another one closer to his job.

Any suggestions on how to get rid of him are welcome!!!!!!!! :)


8) 8)
Tom Jones
Dubai Forums Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 1367

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
Take a dog, Jonesy! See him running for the hills that same precious day ;)

Might as well borrow the dog from the asylum for a day. :D
RobbyG
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5928
Location: ---

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
I was just saying, that some sick militia groups are raping the local village heads of the funding the West provides for their loyalty, information and to compensate them for reconstruction of villages.


The only funding the west provides for afghan loyalty and information is the militia funding in favour of American/Nato support in war..
Everyone knows about this!.If they did mean to reconstruct villages and the nation they would not make war but peace and the people to be supported for construction funding would not be the local village heads but the head of the goverment instead.....

Don't you dare to call theocratic islamic people morons, as my means of morons are the ones who dangle a carrot in the name of investment and reconstruction fallacy..

But hold on, maybe you mean the funding made to compensate the ugly side of destroying local people which I am sure would be too embarrassing for you to voice..

Afghan anger at US casualty payments

KABUL - An ad hoc system of payments by the United States military primarily to victims of its Helmand operations has enraged Afghans who feel a price has been put on their lives.

The existence of payment guidelines for commanders in the field regarding civilian casualties was first reported by Western media in February and quickly picked up by their Afghan counterparts.

According to the original Associated Press report, the death of a child or adult is worth US$1,500 to $2,500, loss of limb and other injuries $600 to $1,500, a damaged or destroyed vehicle $500 to $2,500, and damage to a farmer's fields $50 to $250.

While these are sizeable amounts in a country where the average daily wage is under $5, the reported measure has stirred outrage among politicians, rights groups and ordinary citizens, who view it as simple blood money.

"Afghans must seem like animals to the Americans if they can put prices on them," said Ismail, a 55-year-old Afghan businessman in Kabul, shaking with anger as he spoke.

"If someone killed an American and offered to pay $10,000, would they accept it? They destroy a complete village if one of their soldiers is killed, but set a price of $2,500 for an Afghan's life," he added.

"They do not respect the traditions, customs and laws of the Afghan people," a member of the Afghan parliament, Haidar Jan Nayimzoi, told the Institute for War and Peace Reporting. "An Afghan never sells his blood for money ... By paying money the Americans will not receive support but rather turn people against them."

The payment guidelines were reportedly used during recent operations in Helmand against the Taliban by the International Security Assistance Force, ISAF, which incorporates most US units deployed in southern Afghanistan.

Insisting that such "solatia" or "ex-gratia payments" are made from a unit's own funds on a purely discretionary basis, the ISAF says the spirit of the measure has been misinterpreted. It did not confirm the figures in the Associated Press report.

These are "payments of money or donations in kind made to a victim or victim's family as an expression of sympathy", ISAF joint command spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel Todd Vician, said in written comments to IWPR.

"There is no official 'price list' to cover payments to people or families who have suffered loss or injury as a result of action by ISAF forces."

Commanders are not legally obliged to make the payments, receipt of which does not prevent victims from making additional formal claims for compensation, Vician added.

The issue has intensified the debate around the rise in numbers of civilian casualties as foreign troop levels climb in Afghanistan. This year, 30,000 more US troops and several thousand from other North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries will bring the total to more than 150,000.

Last year, the United Nations estimated that 2,412 civilians died in the conflict, the highest number since the Taliban were driven from power in 2001. It attributed two-thirds of these deaths to insurgent actions and around a quarter to international forces.

Incidents that year prompted Afghan President Hamid Karzai to demand an end to aerial bombardments, the main cause of most of the casualties blamed on foreign forces. The ISAF rejected the demand.

Caught between the wrath of the Afghan people and the need to support its overseas partners, the Kabul government played down the controversy over the cash payments.

Presidential spokesman Siamak Herawi told IWPR that the money paid out was a form of humanitarian aid, and that the US and Afghan presidents recently discussed the need to better support victims of the conflict.

"President Barack Obama and President Karzai have accepted this issue in principle and hope action will be taken soon and that the assistance will be increased," Herawi said.

Critics said that even if well intentioned, the informal cash system sends the wrong message and clashes with traditional Afghan values.

But the ISAF insists that following an incident, payments are usually only made after consultation between the commander and local Afghan elders, and involve nominal amounts to cover victims' immediate needs.

As well as US forces, other countries with troops in Afghanistan have paid reparations through a combination of livestock, food products and money.

In 2007, Polish troops in Paktika province opened fire on the village of Nangarkhel, killing six civilians and wounding three. After conciliatory talks that also involved US forces, families of victims received $2,500, and some sheep and flour in accordance with the local Pashtunwali code of tribal conduct.

But direct donation of money by foreign troops for injury or loss of life and the low amounts by world standards make matters worse, critics say.

"If the Americans really want to provide such assistance they should do it through the Afghan government," said Lalgol, the head of the Afghan Human Rights Organization, who like many Afghans goes by one name.

"And if they really want to help the victims' families, it should be as much as the Americans pay for the lives of nationals of other countries."

Again, the ISAF notes that victims are entitled to file for greater sums if they feel this is justified.

"Guidelines on condolence or compensation payments vary from nation to nation, but the broad underlying principle is that, where death, injury or damage to property is caused by ISAF, affected persons may submit a claim for compensation which will be considered by the nation involved," ISAF spokesman Vician said.

Abdol Ghani, a 27-year-old resident of Kandahar, said his brother died in Wardak province while riding on a bus that came under US fire. He was neither an insurgent nor a criminal, just someone trying to get home to Kandahar from Kabul, Ghani says.

"The Americans came to our home three days later and wanted to pay us money but my father forced them out of the house with their dollars. Afghans don't sell the blood of their martyrs, they either take swift revenge or bide their time," he said.

Unsurprisingly, the sensitivity of the matter has not been lost on the Taliban, who say the payments are evidence of a broader failure.

"The Americans want to hide their defeat by resorting to such things. They will try anything," a Taliban spokesman, Zabiullah Mojahed, said.
Berrin
Dubai Forums Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 1395

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
Oh Berrin boy, you are so single minded.

Look at these efforts for a change:

Aussies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q92dCkp4 ... re=related
Brits: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPo-R0OS ... re=related
Dutch clip:

US:


And once you made a few steps forward in Afghanistan, you are forced to take a step back... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnDbtmDR ... re=related

Before moving forward again...gradually...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rv4up7oj ... re=related

And local entrepreneurs develop because of the Taliban being driven out...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgliUC14 ... re=related
RobbyG
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5928
Location: ---

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
Efforts by whom Rob?

When I look at those countries who make these so called efforts, then the following is what comes to my mind, therefore the rush for it..

BP -UK
Exxon/Chevron/USA
Shell/Dutch
Santos/Ampol/Aussies
and many more etc.

http://members.localnet.com/~jeflan/jfafghanpipe.htm

Of course they are forced to take a step back..
All the fund comes from IMF or Worldbank which they target failing economies and offer loans that cannot be repaid due to corruption of government officials or inability of capital to allow it. Both of those institutions are american based companies out to "help". It doesnt work that way, much of the help they have provided have resulted in countries selling their utility companies to those banks or an immense drop in employment and rise in national debt.. What a good way to crawl nations and their sovereignty..
Berrin
Dubai Forums Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 1395

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
And you think a few theocrats are going to benefit from opposion the capitalist military might? Only because their textbook is so ancient, can't we reason with them on proper footing.

The balance of power is a little out of our hands don't ya think? Try to be realistic. The West tries to help the Afghan people, but the Talitubbies (and terrorists) try to stop these efforts. They don't have the best interest for the people in mind, that should be clear.

We do, in exchange for a can of oil from the strategic neighbours, always being the mercantalist lol :D

Why not cooperate? 8)

(oops, I'm parting a bit here with my Libertarian roots, whoopsie daisy) :mrgreen:
RobbyG
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5928
Location: ---

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going to Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
and I just can see why you have to keep parroting when everthing else is so clearly evidenced here..
You too can't control your haughty self..can you?
Berrin
Dubai Forums Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 1395

  • Reply
Re: Is The US Going To Occupy Pakistan? Posted May 26, 2010
You sayin' I'm a radical, hm? :lol:

Image

-- 29 May 2010, 19:17 --

Update:
Military Readies Pakistan Strike Plan
Less than a month after it emerged that the alleged Times Square bomber had ties to the Pakistani Taliban, the U.S. military is dusting off its plans for a unilateral strike in Pakistan—just in case. If a successful terrorist attack were to take place on American soil, and it became clear that Pakistani Taliban elements were responsible, the United States wants to have its military retaliation options ready. “If, heaven forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had warned after the Times Square plot was foiled. Military officials stressed that a strike would be a last resort and that the president would only turn to it if he lost confidence in the CIA drone campaign.


-- 30 May 2010, 01:16 --

Berrin wrote:and I just can see why you have to keep parroting when everthing else is so clearly evidenced here..
You too can't control your haughty self..can you?


The evidence is claimed by the Talitubbie theocrats. Russia Today reports:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-bq64Rl ... QuN3PqyiuM
RobbyG
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5928
Location: ---

posting in Dubai Politics TalkForum Rules
1 Dubai Jobs .com The First Place to Find a Job in Dubai

Return to Dubai Politics Talk


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Last post
  • Join