Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (30999)	5/28/2002 10:17:18 PM
From: frankw1900	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Re: "Pakistan is becoming more kleptocratic, socialist, undemocratic, and anti american ..." This is untrue since September 11th. It's not run by a military junta? I missed the return to democracy? And the military classes are no longer stealing the country? Silly me! Re: "Pakistan supported the Afghan regime that harboured al Qaeda; significant parts of the Pakistan military establishment still support al Qaeda and its ilk." The current regime in Pakistan can give us more assistance against Al Qaeda than any regime in India. Of course thay can. They're intimate with al Qaeda. They give as little as possible, grudgingly, and much of their officer corps and security agencies energetically attempt to sabotage the help and would love to find an opportunity to back shoot US forces. I said Pakistan is an ambiguous ally. The Indians wanted to participate in the Afghanistan action but did not because of Pakistan objections. Re: "The US, I repeat, will not [refuses to] sell to Pakistan the weapons it does sell to India." This is untrue historically (i.e. over most of the last 50 years), and it's not true now. I don't know where you came up with it. Both nations were under a weapons embargo since setting off nukes. iansa.org hindustantimes.com motherjones.com dsca.osd.mil uga.edu msnbc.com cnn.com Dunno. Where did I come up with the idea? Re: "The raised temperature you mention between India and Pakistan was caused by an attack on the Indian parliament by folk based in Pakistan." This is true, but so what? The fact is that the WTC attack was caused by folks largely based in Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. Why don't you explain why it is that our relations with Saudi Arabia are cosy but not with Iraq. "this is true, but so what?"Umm...do you expect the US thinks the Indians are going to let it go? The rest is a smelly fish you dragged across the page. All this stuff you're listing is reasons for the American people, as individuals, to trust India more than Pakistan. If you'll look carefully at American diplomatic history, I think you'll find that the emotions of the American people don't mean much. No. I'm saying Pakistan is an unreliable ally. "...emotions of the American people don't mean much." Tell that to LBJ. ....... Questions from previous post of yours: How dangerous are the straights of Malacca? Why would the US need to repair ships in India when Afghanistan is hundreds of miles from the ocean? And what's this about naval port calls? google.ca Afghanistan is a ways from the ocean but an awful lot of coalition and US navy activity is happening off the coast of Pakistan. Where should the anti terrorism folk go for shoreleave, refit, repairs, etc? Karachi, or some Indian port? Ask the French. Ask Pearl. Ask any Christian or Shiite who is in Pakistan. news.bbc.co.uk The French nationals worked for a company which was carrying out a contract with the Pakistan navy. jang.com.pk .