PM Imran Khan at the UNGA: Incentivising Taliban will be win-win for all

[Napa]

I see you still couldn't answer my question, it's called the IMF, not Bank of America. Do you think there is a reason for that?

Your argument about nomenclature is superficial.

It is called "International" because the Western countries (the US, Europe and Japan mainly) fund it, and it lends to other countries in financial distress.

The countries who fund it have the maximum say in how it operates, and they are also the countries thousands of whose soldiers have been killed by the Pakistan backed Taliban.

 

[Napa]

It's wishful thinking if anyone thinks the west will engage with taliban or pakistan both countries go against their interest and their new lapdog is india.

India gets $50 billion surplus from its trade with the US which funds its purchases of essential imports like oil. India also refused to send troops to Iraq and Afghanistan when the US requested it to.

You should try being a similar "lapdog", it will stop the recurring IMF bailouts.

This pleading and begging by imran khan is getting ridiculous.

Instead of worrying of the gul khans and namak harams on our western border and gora sahibs in West when is he gonna.deal with pressing issues in pakistan hunger , poverty and lack of jobs for young people .

Indeed.

 

[Napa]

Whatever the forum, I am sick of this delusional man pretending that he cares about every human being on this planet except for the humans in his own country! Apri manji tellu dang phero!

For you information, he has talked about religion and God at the UN time and again. I do not see how that is related to foreign affairs! He likes to wear religion on his sleeves and his self-righteous attitude is nauseating.

He talks about religion because he has no clue how to improve Pakistan's economy other than begging the West for more money. He also abuses India and specifically Modi regularly. He needs something to get the people to vote for him, and religion and India are the two main issues he is pinning his hopes on.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Your argument about nomenclature is superficial.

It is called "International" because the Western countries (the US, Europe and Japan mainly) fund it, and it lends to other countries in financial distress.

The countries who fund it have the maximum say in how it operates, and they are also the countries thousands of whose soldiers have been killed by the Pakistan backed Taliban.

They wouldn't have been killed if they weren't invading countries far from their shores in the first place. Pakistan has lost far more soldiers than those countries combined, and that for a war in which they weren't taking part. If you damage someone's property, it is only right you pay reparations. Afghanistan has had it's infrastructure destroyed by wars inflicted by those nations mentioned, they have every right to ask for aid from world organisations whose proposed purpose is to provide it. If they don't want to provide it then that is up to them.

 

[Napa]

They wouldn't have been killed if they weren't invading countries far from their shores in the first place. Pakistan has lost far more soldiers than those countries combined, and that for a war in which they weren't taking part. If you damage someone's property, it is only right you pay reparations. Afghanistan has had it's infrastructure destroyed by wars inflicted by those nations mentioned, they have every right to ask for aid from world organisations whose proposed purpose is to provide it. If they don't want to provide it then that is up to them.

Whether the US was justified in attacking Afghanistan is a different discussion. It will of course claim that it was justified because the Taliban was harboring OBL who killed 3,000+ Americans on 9/11. Those on the other side will argue that 9/11 was an inside job and OBL was not responsible etc.

Reparations are paid by countries that face more damage otherwise, and of course neither Pakistan nor Afghanistan is in a position to threaten the US now that it has exited Afghanistan.

The discussion here is that Pakistan is asking for money for Afghanistan and itself from countries who had thousands of their soldiers killed by the Pakistan backed Taliban.

 

[OldWarHorse]

Pak should also have mention India sponsoring terrorism in Baluchistan as admitted by Gaurav Arya and Abhinandan. Ajit Doval is also on record admiiting to orchestrating terrorism in Pak. Pak has Kulbushan as we speak where as India has no one. The OBL capture in Pak is shrouded in accusations and counter accusations besides he never attacked India.

Well their statements were more like rants on the internet from an average poster from India or Pak. And thats who I think the real audience was as well. Dont think anyone else really cares outside of the keyboard warriors on either side.

 

[Napa]

Pak should also have mention India sponsoring terrorism in Baluchistan as admitted by Gaurav Arya and Abhinandan. Ajit Doval is also on record admiiting to orchestrating terrorism in Pak. <b>Pak has Kulbushan as we speak where as India has no one.</b>

There were 9 slain terrorists + Ajmal Kasab.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajmal_Kasab

The OBL capture in Pak is shrouded in accusations and counter accusations besides he never attacked India.

The audience that IK wants to impress is mainly the West (only which can pressure India). The West is quite sure that OBL was hiding in a Pakistani Army garrison town.

 

[Napa]

NEW YORK — Prime Minister Imran Khan sought to cast Pakistan as the victim of American ungratefulness and an international double standard in his address to the United Nations General Assembly on Friday.

In a prerecorded speech aired during the evening, the Pakistani prime minister touched on a range of topics that included climate change, global Islamophobia and “the plunder of the developing world by their corrupt elites” — the latter of which he likened to what the East India Company did to India.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...fcfa46-1d97-11ec-bea8-308ea134594f_story.html

The "most liked" comments give an idea about what the reading public thinks. The 3 most "liked comments" for the above article are:

1) Mr. Khan is right about one thing, we should have exited Afghanistan a long time ago. But his painting of Pakistan as some kind of paragon of virtue is laughable. They have been playing both sides for decades, taking money from the US for "anti-terrorism" while the ISI worked with the Taliban against American interests. And please remind me, where did Bin Laden know where he could hide to enjoy his retirement?

2) How dare you. Your corrupt country housed and protected Osama bin Laden for years. You continue to house and protect his sidekick, Ayman Zawahiri. The Madrid bombings were planned in your country. I could go on forever. Pakistan is nothing more than a nest for the most violent a$$h01e$ in the world. The best thing about the American withdrawal from Afghanistan is that we don't have to continue to pretend that Pakistan is anything more than a center of crazy-male violence and terrorism.

3) Pakistan’s duplicitous policy on Afghanistan for the last 20 years cost tens of thousands of lives, including the lives of American soldiers. The United States’ only national security interest with regard to Pakistan is managing the risks associated with a failed state possessing nuclear weapons. Any engagement with Pakistan beyond that is pointless.

 

[PakLFC]

Well their statements were more like rants on the internet from an average poster from India or Pak. And thats who I think the real audience was as well. Dont think anyone else really cares outside of the keyboard warriors on either side.

How do you want the oppressed people to show they care?

 

[PakLFC]

There were 9 slain terrorists + Ajmal Kasab.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajmal_Kasab



The audience that IK wants to impress is mainly the West (only which can pressure India). The West is quite sure that OBL was hiding in a Pakistani Army garrison town.

What as Ajmal who was Indian got to do with it. That is the man who was saying "bhagwan mujhe maaf nehi karega", right??

As for OBL you do realise that the west has killed him about ten times prior to the supposed event?. This is the same west that told us Iraq had WMD.

 

[Lego20]

Seems like the US heard Imran khan and planning to incentivize Pakistan:

 

[ahsan17]

The "most liked" comments give an idea about what the reading public thinks. The 3 most "liked comments" for the above article are:

1) Mr. Khan is right about one thing, we should have exited Afghanistan a long time ago. But his painting of Pakistan as some kind of paragon of virtue is laughable. They have been playing both sides for decades, taking money from the US for "anti-terrorism" while the ISI worked with the Taliban against American interests. And please remind me, where did Bin Laden know where he could hide to enjoy his retirement?

2) How dare you. Your corrupt country housed and protected Osama bin Laden for years. You continue to house and protect his sidekick, Ayman Zawahiri. The Madrid bombings were planned in your country. I could go on forever. Pakistan is nothing more than a nest for the most violent a$$h01e$ in the world. The best thing about the American withdrawal from Afghanistan is that we don't have to continue to pretend that Pakistan is anything more than a center of crazy-male violence and terrorism.

3) Pakistan’s duplicitous policy on Afghanistan for the last 20 years cost tens of thousands of lives, including the lives of American soldiers. The United States’ only national security interest with regard to Pakistan is managing the risks associated with a failed state possessing nuclear weapons. Any engagement with Pakistan beyond that is pointless.

LMAO, only Indians make a big deal of online comments and trying to draw inference from them. Literally anyone with a brain will tell you to ignore them. I mean with respect to the comments with likes, it's obvious which nationality that has a massive internet would like these comments. Most of the US public doesn't care or read Washington times or even finds it reliable. Can't believe this crap has to be explained.

 

[ahsan17]

Seems like the US heard Imran khan and planning to incentivize Pakistan:

You would think Indians on H1B in the US would be aware by now how bills in the US work, after lobbying for S386 for god knows how long. This bill doesn't even mention sanctioning Pakistan but just mentions producing a report.

 

[Lego20]

You would think Indians on H1B in the US would be aware by now how bills in the US work, after lobbying for S386 for god knows how long. This bill doesn't even mention sanctioning Pakistan but just mentions producing a report.

You will be surprised how fast uncle Sam can make this happen when they want to pull someone by their hair. Your example is completely out of context. They work slow when they are awarding something, super-fast when punishing.

 

[Napa]

LMAO, only Indians make a big deal of online comments and trying to draw inference from them. Literally anyone with a brain will tell you to ignore them. I mean with respect to the comments with likes, it's obvious which nationality that has a massive internet would like these comments. Most of the US public doesn't care or read Washington times or even finds it reliable. Can't believe this crap has to be explained.

Typical. When presented with something that goes against your worldview, you dismiss it. Washington Post is the most influential newspaper in Washington, and the third most influential after NYT and WSJ in the US.

There is also a big difference between "Washington Times" and "Washington Post".

 

[ahsan17]

You will be surprised how fast uncle Sam can make this happen when they want to pull someone by their hair. Your example is completely out of context. They work slow when they are awarding something, super-fast when punishing.

Again, do you realize the bill says nothing about sanctioning Pakistan?
How are they fast at punishing? What have they done to punish China? You do realize the democrats are in power, and they are under pressure to remove sanctions on Iran. The only time they are fast at punishing is when there's broad Democrat and republican support, or when a clown like Trump is in power.

The president can sanction without support from Congress. The fact that there's a republican bill (that again doesn't even mention sanctioning Pakistan) is quite a thread to hang by, if you follow US politics.

 

[Lego20]

Again, do you realize the bill says nothing about sanctioning Pakistan?
How are they fast at punishing? What have they done to punish China? You do realize the democrats are in power, and they are under pressure to remove sanctions on Iran. The only time they are fast at punishing is when there's broad Democrat and republican support, or when a clown like Trump is in power.

The president can sanction without support from Congress. The fact that there's a republican bill (that again doesn't even mention sanctioning Pakistan) is quite a thread to hang by, if you follow US politics.

The video link says explicit mention of Pakistan.

 

[ahsan17]

Typical. When presented with something that goes against your worldview, you dismiss it. Washington Post is the most influential newspaper in Washington, and the third most influential after NYT and WSJ in the US.

There is also a big difference between "Washington Times" and "Washington Post".

Let me give you an extreme analogy to prove my point, because you continue to argue like a child.

If you say the world is round, I will disagree. Then you present people online that I disagree with as well. Then you say I am dismissing it just because it goes against my worldview.

That's basically what you are doing here. You are not arguing why my arguments are wrong. You are just saying I am wrong without any substance. Online comments are irrelevant. Only the loudest people talk, and when you add Pakistan to the mix to have to contend with the fact that most people talking/liking will be Indian.

 

[ahsan17]

The video link says explicit mention of Pakistan.

The video is wrong. The bill doesn't mention it.

 

[Napa]

Let me give you an extreme analogy to prove my point, because you continue to argue like a child.

If you say the world is round, I will disagree. Then you present people online that I disagree with as well. Then you say I am dismissing it just because it goes against my worldview.

That's basically what you are doing here. You are not arguing why my arguments are wrong. You are just saying I am wrong without any substance. Online comments are irrelevant. Only the loudest people talk, and when you add Pakistan to the mix to have to contend with the fact that most people talking/liking will be Indian.

My argument is simple, you are wrong in dismissing WaPo's readers' comments.

Your basic position is that Pakistan's negative perception in the West will not cost Pakistan. That is demonstrably false, one simply has to look at the amount of Western FDI (which are essential for the development of modern industries) that Pakistan gets.

The tone of your posts is increasingly incivil, no more replies.

 

[OldWarHorse]

How do you want the oppressed people to show they care?

Fair enough if that was the intention. It turned into a mudslinging contest between the two sides though, with parties on each side celebrating the one-upmanship on show.

 

[ahsan17]

My argument is simple, you are wrong in dismissing WaPo's readers' comments.

Your basic position is that Pakistan's negative perception in the West will not cost Pakistan. That is demonstrably false, one simply has to look at the amount of Western FDI (which are essential for the development of modern industries) that Pakistan gets.

The tone of your posts is increasingly incivil, no more replies.

I would say just trying asking Americans if they think comments on a WaPo article matter. Ask a wide variety of Americans if you want to.

 

[Itachi]

I would say just trying asking Americans if they think comments on a WaPo article matter. Ask a wide variety of Americans if you want to.

If negative perception doesn't cost Pakistan, IK wouldn't have tried so hard to bring its image from the downfall.

You may claim but IKs action speaks otherwise.

Or are you saying IK is following a flawed policy?

 

[ahsan17]

If negative perception doesn't cost Pakistan, IK wouldn't have tried so hard to bring its image from the downfall.

You may claim but IKs action speaks otherwise.

Or are you saying IK is following a flawed policy?

IK is speaking to the US government/state. Napa Bhai is talking about Tom, Dick, and Prasads on the internet.

 

[saeedhk]

The West already knows that Pakistan is headed by an extremist man who is a well-known terrorist sympathiser and who holds repressive views about women. I am not surprised one bit if there is a talk about sanctions on Pakistan. In fact, no other PM has done this much harm to Pakistan’s international image than Imran Khan. These are his statements today:

‘Anti-domestic bills and anti-forced conversion bills are against Islam; I will not endorse them. There are attempts by NGOs in Pakistan to promote Westernisation. We need to take action to preserve our family system and values. Vulgarity on TV threatens our values. We need to counter vulgarity.’

Do the above statements seem to be from a level-headed leader?

 

[cricketjoshila]

What as Ajmal who was Indian got to do with it. That is the man who was saying "bhagwan mujhe maaf nehi karega", right??

As for OBL you do realise that the west has killed him about ten times prior to the supposed event?. This is the same west that told us Iraq had WMD.

Pakistan government has accepted that Ajmal was from pakistan.

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSTRE51B25820090212

The world says the same and UN banned pakistanis for the attack.

 

[sweep_shot]

Talibans are in charge of Afghanistan right now. They are the government. So, Imran Khan has a point.

I don't think hostility can do much (as Americans have found out). Incentivizing is the way to go.

 

[PakLFC]

Fair enough if that was the intention. It turned into a mudslinging contest between the two sides though, with parties on each side celebrating the one-upmanship on show.

Thing is people need to accept that it is up to Afghanistan what government they want. As long as no terrorism is not exported from Afghanistan that is good enough for me. It is simply about America and India wanting a permanent foot hole in Afghanistan that the Taliban will not allow.

As for Kashmir it can only be solved with a decisive war. The UN caused this problem so I don't understand why IK keeps begging them to intervene. Kashmir can only be decided by the shamshir that means sword.

 

[PakLFC]

Pakistan government has accepted that Ajmal was from pakistan.

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSTRE51B25820090212

The world says the same and UN banned pakistanis for the attack.

UN is obsolete, the world does not say anything at all. The UN says plenty on Kashmir too, remember?. Nawaz and Zardari were sell outs who don't matter today. IK has never admitted to anything at all. It is Indian's like Gaurav Arya and Indian security advisor Ajit Doval who have admitted to causing terrorism on Pak soil.

 

[Napa]

UN is obsolete, the world does not say anything at all. The UN says plenty on Kashmir too, remember?. Nawaz and Zardari were sell outs who don't matter today. IK has never admitted to anything at all. It is Indian's like Gaurav Arya and Indian security advisor Ajit Doval who have admitted to causing terrorism on Pak soil.

If you are going to claim that Ajmal Kasab wasn’t from Pakistan there isn’t any benefit of debating with you.

 

[Itachi]

UN is obsolete, the world does not say anything at all. The UN says plenty on Kashmir too, remember?. Nawaz and Zardari were sell outs who don't matter today. IK has never admitted to anything at all. It is Indian's like Gaurav Arya and Indian security advisor Ajit Doval who have admitted to causing terrorism on Pak soil.

But Google says Ajmal was from Pakistan.

 

[cricketjoshila]

UN is obsolete, the world does not say anything at all. The UN says plenty on Kashmir too, remember?. Nawaz and Zardari were sell outs who don't matter today. IK has never admitted to anything at all. It is Indian's like Gaurav Arya and Indian security advisor Ajit Doval who have admitted to causing terrorism on Pak soil.

UN is obsolete. Previous pak govt official statement mean nothing.

Lol.

 

[PakLFC]

If you are going to claim that Ajmal Kasab wasn’t from Pakistan there isn’t any benefit of debating with you.

Yes I am claiming that so don't debate on this anymore. Pakistanis don't say "bhagwan mujhe maaf nehi karega!".

 

[PakLFC]

UN is obsolete. Previous pak govt official statement mean nothing.

Lol.

What previous statement?. Yes all statements by and to the UN are irrelevant. There is no world problem that the UN has resolved. UN is a just an extension on the USA.

 

[PakLFC]

But Google says Ajmal was from Pakistan.

Google is often biased. Sundar Pachai an Indian is the CEO of Google.

 

[Walawalkar]

Google is often biased. Sundar Pachai an Indian is the CEO of Google.

You just being sarcastic right

 

[Technics 1210]

Google is often biased. Sundar Pachai an Indian is the CEO of Google.

He's not Indian, he is an American, with an American passport.

Indian government do not recognise overseas 'Indians'. No dual nationality and more importantly do not have the same rights as indians living in India. Rejected by their motherland.

 

[PakLFC]

You just being sarcastic right &#55357;&#56834;&#55357;&#56834;&#55357;&#56834;

No I am serious as sin. Google is just a search engine being controlled by certain people.

 

[PakLFC]

Ajmal Kasab, if it was his real name seems like a Muslim one to me. Pakistanis do not use the term "bhagwan" that is well known to everyone neither do we wear a saffron rubber band to express our faith. Obviously the man was an Indian Muslim. We know how fake news is rampant in India, never trust the Indian mainstream media.

 

[cricketjoshila]

What previous statement?. Yes all statements by and to the UN are irrelevant. There is no world problem that the UN has resolved. UN is a just an extension on the USA.

You are irrelevant. The pakistan government has accepted Kasab as pakistani and that the 26/11 attacks were planned in pakistan.

You saying anything doesn't change or supercede what the govt of pakistan has said.

 

[PakLFC]

No one including America and the UN cares about 26/11 at all. When nothing is gonna come out off it time that Indian's let it go as well. Seems as if their are no takers for the award placed on Hafiz Saeed's head by America either. Why don't Indian's ever answer the accusations on them that are supported by their own Gaurav and Ajit?.

 

[MenInG]

Pakistan on Monday raised alarms in the United Nations about the threat posed by India’s far-right Hindutva regime’s quest for regional hegemony to international peace and security, saying Pakistan would continue with its policy of Full Spectrum Deterrence (FSD) to counter any potential Indian aggression.

Speaking during the UNGA’s First Committee, which deals with disarmament and international security matters, Ambassador Munir Akram said that the actions of India’s fascist regimes were in violation of the UN Security Council resolutions that called for a plebiscite to enable the occupied Kashmiri people to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination.

“It (India) has unleashed the most brutal reign of terror and oppression on the Kashmiri people – youth, women and civilians – and against its own 200 million Muslim minority,” the Pakistani envoy said, adding that it has financed, facilitated and directed state-sponsored terrorism against Pakistan and other neighbours.

“To camouflage its crimes, it has resorted to the world’s most notorious disinformation campaign,” he added.

Noting that India’s oppressive policies are accompanied by the quest for regional hegemony and “great power” status, despite its domestic political and economic disarray, the top diplomat told the panel about its massive militarisation, spending $73 billion last year on the acquisition and development of new conventional and non-conventional land, air and sea weapons systems.

“India has also nuclearized the Indian Ocean; deployed anti-ballistic missile systems; acquired anti-satellite weapons; and increased the range and sophistication of all its delivery systems,” he said.

“Those states which so eagerly provide these advanced weapons systems and technologies to India must know that 70 per cent of India’s weaponry and forces are deployed against Pakistan, not to serve its promised role as a counter to the rising Asian great power in the so-called ‘Indo-Pacific’ region. And, India has operationalized its dangerous doctrines of pre-emptive aggression against Pakistan.”

“Pakistan will do whatever it takes to continue with the full spectrum deterrence to avert and defeat any potential Indian aggression,” the envoy declared.

"Peace and stability in South Asia can be achieved through the resolution of the disputes between Pakistan and India, first and foremost; the maintenance of a balance of conventional and strategic military forces between Pakistan and India and reciprocal measures for nuclear and missile and military restraint between the two countries.

“Pakistan’s proposal for a strategic restraint regime in South Asia remains on the table,” the Pakistani envoy added.

 

[PakLFC]

Forget Yadav. We will do to him what we did to Sarbjit Singh then you can also welcome him back in a box and make a film on him too. Beat your chests and cry to America how Pakistan has killed another terrorist of ours. It is also on video how Doval and Gaurav Arya admit to causing terrorism in Pak. You can't even get Zakir Naik from Malaysia nevermind Dawood, Hafiz or Lakhvi.

 

[PakLFC]

Have you heard of lt col habib zahir?

Well you can say hell to UN on a forum, your country runs to UN every year to whine about kashmir.

Your finance minister was crying because of the difficulties pakistan faces due to the FATF.

India has shut the door on pakistan and maintains just a token relationship via the embassy. Any action by Pakistan will be retaliated at the LoC and raise pakistan's economic costs. While India can absorb the financial costs, pakistan with its bailouts based economy will continue to face economic hardship.

China is already facing the US heat in SCS and the Aukus will further raise their problems.

Kashmir has been more peaceful these days then it has been in past some years.

Assam? They are doing what the indigenous Assamese want. Throwing out illegal immigrants. In a few years Assam will be so hostile to illegal immigrants that they will not even think about going to Assam.

What have pakistan done about LeT JeM and their founders?

Similarly you can keep crying like babies on Pak terrorism to the UN that falls on deaf ears. No one cares about 26/11 at all so just give up. The American's will continue to ignore your whining! Difference is the Kashmir issue is on the UN agenda so we have every right to bring it up.

Any activity by India or Pak soil we be returned with interest and a venomous and fierce reply. Now that we have thrown you out or Afghanistan our military can deal with you from one side We don't need to do anything in IoK where your not our soldiers are dying. The Kashmiris are killing your rapist soldiers whilst China keeps hammering you even harder! Now you gonna pretend that China is doing anything?

Your country brings up Pak at every UN session constantly crying about "terrorism". No one even cares about Modi's predictable speeches anymore. Your media are a bigger bunch of jokers who constantly embarrass themselves with complete lies that turns with so called evidence that turns out to be video games footage. They tell the world that the ISI is sitting on the 5th floor of a Kabul hotel when their are only two floors.

China will kick India's behind so hard that you'll forget who Gandhi is! Yeah sure keep dreaming that the American's will fight your war coz you can't do it yourselves. You are terrified of China and you know it so stop acting otherwise. In case it missed you we don't want any talks with you at all and have made our position crystal clear on the matter. It is your journalists who run after IK with their tail between their legs as was seen recently in Tashkent I believe.

Sure all is well in Assam where they are killing innocent people. I never knew a person can be an illegal immigrant in their own country! Such nonsense only happens in India! We ain't gonna do zilch about anything it is India who keeps crying about Pakistani terrorism at the UN. Pak mentions Kashmir that is an internationally recognised dispute but even then I have always maintained that only a final war will decide Kashmir. We don't cry over the like of Col Zahir like you do.

 

[Napa]

Similarly you can keep crying like babies on Pak terrorism to the UN that falls on deaf ears. No one cares about 26/11 at all so just give up. The American's will continue to ignore your whining!

If the world ignored Pakistan’s support for terrorism why do you think it is on a FATF list and gets zero Western FDI that is needed for developing modern industries?

 

[ahsan17]

If the world ignored Pakistan’s support for terrorism why do you think it is on a FATF list and gets zero Western FDI that is needed for developing modern industries?

What is Pakistan on FATF grey list for?

 

[Napa]

What is Pakistan on FATF grey list for?

Something for you to figure out if you don’t want to keep making these billion dollar losses.

Hint, unlike what some posters like [MENTION=142169]PakLFC[/MENTION] think, the Western countries do care about things like 26/11.

“Pakistan loses $38 billion from FATF”

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/In...grey-listing-costs-Pakistan-billions-annually

 

[PakLFC]

Something for you to figure out if you don’t want to keep making these billion dollar losses.

Hint, unlike what some posters like [MENTION=142169]PakLFC[/MENTION] think, the Western countries do care about things like 26/11.

“Pakistan loses $38 billion from FATF”

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/In...grey-listing-costs-Pakistan-billions-annually

No the west does not care about 26/11 at all. Yes Pak has lost loads of money but we will deal with it.

 

[PakLFC]

If the world ignored Pakistan’s support for terrorism why do you think it is on a FATF list and gets zero Western FDI that is needed for developing modern industries?

Ciz the west always wants to keep Pak in a quagmire. 26/11 is not the only problem the west has with Pak. Now they are saying Pak is responsible for America's defeat in Afghanistan. You see the west will never be happy with Pak being the only Pak nuke power. I am reading that according to them Pak nukes should be seized in case terrorists gain control of them.

 

[Napa]

Ciz the west always wants to keep Pak in a quagmire.

Victim mentality. You start by saying West doesn’t care about Pakistan’s support for terrorism and next post you say West wants to victimize Pakistan. Make up your mind.

26/11 is not the only problem the west has with Pak. Now they are saying Pak is responsible for America's defeat in Afghanistan.[/QUOTE]

I didn’t say 26/11 was the only event contributing to Pakistan’s negative image.

 

[PakLFC]

Victim mentality. You start by saying West doesn’t care about Pakistan’s support for terrorism and next post you say West wants to victimize Pakistan. Make up your mind.

26/11 is not the only problem the west has with Pak. Now they are saying Pak is responsible for America's defeat in Afghanistan.

What you on about? Well of course the west victimises against Pak so where is the contradiction? You are saying the west cares about 26/11 where as I disagree. I am telling you the reasons the west dislikes Pak as mentioned in my previous mail. Once more west does not care about 26/11, it cares about CPEC, Afghanistan and Pak becoming independent of western dependence.

 

[Napa]

What you on about? Well of course the west victimises against Pak so where is the contradiction? You are saying the west cares about 26/11 where as I disagree. I am telling you the reasons the west dislikes Pak as mentioned in my previous mail. Once more west does not care about 26/11, it cares about CPEC, Afghanistan and Pak becoming independent of western dependence.

You obviously have the ability to get inside the heads of Western leaders and figure out that they care about terrorism against the West, Afghanistan and nukes but not about terrorism against India and 26/11. You are a mind reader

 

[MenInG]

National Security Adviser (NSA) Moeed Yusuf has said that a "wait-and-see approach" on Afghanistan is tantamount to abandoning the war-torn country and has called for holding a donor conference to formulate immediate humanitarian and economic relief plans for averting the risks of instability and threat of terrorism faced by the entire world.

“A wait-and-see approach, although more politically tenable for many countries, would be tantamount to abandonment … A starting point could be a major donor conference where regional players and Western countries sit together and draw up specific plans for immediate humanitarian and economic relief,” he wrote in an article published in US-based journal Foreign Affairs on Thursday.

The NSA further stated that US President Joe Biden was right to end the US military mission in Afghanistan, and “today, Afghanistan faces a choice: it can either walk the arduous path of peace or revert to civil unrest. The latter will have catastrophic repercussions for the Afghan people and spillover effects for the neighbourhood and beyond.”

He also pointed out that the "spread of refugees, drugs, weapons, and transnational terrorism from a destabilised Afghanistan does not serve the interests of the Afghan people nor the rest of the world, most of all Pakistan".

While Yusuf affirmed that Pakistan had the ability and willingness to "assist in pushing Afghanistan in a positive direction, it alone cannot guarantee the outcomes we all desire".

"Pakistan does not wield any extraordinary influence over the new rulers in Kabul, as both monetary assistance and legitimacy for the Taliban can only come (or not) from the world’s major powers," he wrote. “History will judge us very poorly if we do not create the most conducive possible environment to push them in a healthy direction — for the collective benefit of Afghans and the world.”

The NSA expressed the concern that that failure to do so would result in Pakistan bearing the brunt of any negative spillover from Afghanistan.

“We have already carried more than our share of the burden,” he added, referring to Pakistan’s sacrifices in US-led in Afghanistan.

Commenting on former Afghan President Ashraf Ghani's regime, the NSA said it had been unable to sustain itself, and "propping it up with billions more dollars would only have delayed its inevitable collapse".

'Pakistan the greatest victim after Afghans'
Speaking of wars launched in Afghanistan, Yusuf said after the Afghan people, Pakistan had been the "greatest victim" of those conflicts.

"The Soviet invasion in 1979 and the subsequent US-led military campaign after 9/11 were not of Pakistan’s making. Yet our society, polity, and economy bore the brunt of the conflict over the last four decades."

In 2001, he recalled, Pakistan had joined America's war on terror "against the very same actors who were hailed as freedom fighters when Washington and Islamabad together trained and backed them to defeat the Soviets in the 1980s".

After the 9/11 attacks, the US issued an ultimatum to then-president General Pervez Musharraf that he was either “with us or against us”, the NSA added, saying that Musharraf, under pressure, provided the US "virtually unconditional support", including access to airbases and ground and air supply routes.

"The post-9/11 decision to launch a military campaign against Afghanistan’s erstwhile freedom fighters, many of whom had deep cultural and ethnic affiliation with tribesmen in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border regions, resulted in a massive insurgency against the Pakistani state," he explained.

“Over 50 militant groups sprang up, seeking to punish the Pakistani state for collaborating with the United States. They targeted our cities and massacred our children; 3.5 million civilians were displaced from their homes at the height of this onslaught," he said. " In the last 20 years, Pakistan has suffered over 80,000 casualties as a result of terrorist attacks, as well as over $150 billion in economic losses.”

Yusuf also discussed in the article how Pakistan had to host millions of Afghans refugees as a result of the war in their country.

"Furthermore, Afghanistan’s chaos brought a 'Kalashnikov culture' and narco-trafficking to Pakistan: our country’s addiction rates rose nearly 50 times," he added.

Yet, Western governments continued to accuse Pakistan of being "duplicitous and asked us to 'do more' ” he regretted.

"This disconnect colored the Pakistan-US partnership for the better part of the last two decades. At its core, it stemmed from a divergence of views on how to end the war and bring peace to Afghanistan," Yusuf explained.

US-Pakistan ties
Further elaborating on US-Pakistan ties, Yusuf wrote in the article that “The United States’ solution [in Afghanistan] was to achieve a total victory over the Taliban. Even when Washington began considering negotiations with the group, many American officials saw it as a means of creating internal fractures within the Taliban rather than negotiating an even-handed deal.”

The NSA said Pakistan, on the other hand, had been pointing out to the "the folly of its plans".

"Pakistan urged the United States and its Nato ( North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) allies to recognise that Al Qaeda had been dealt a severe blow and that, even as Western powers continued their mission against international terrorist groups, they needed to recognise that the Taliban were a political reality in Afghanistan."

He also claimed that Pakistan had urged the US a decade ago, when the number of its troops in Afghanistan was the highest, to use this "leverage to negotiate an acceptable political settlement to the war".

Washington, however, had "ignored this advice, and talks never became the principal pillar of US strategy,” he regretted.

He also criticrised Western governments for what he described as turning a blind eye to their and the Afghan government’s failures, which had helped resuscitate the Taliban.

"Nevertheless, Pakistan engaged with the government in Kabul with sincerity of purpose," he added.

'Blame shifted to Pakistan'
The NSA claimed that all of Pakistan’s requests regarding Afghanistan "were turned down, ignored, or actively resisted".

In this connection, he gave the example of Afghan authorities physically tearing down in 2007 border biometric systems Pakistan was installing , "under the flimsy pretext that Afghanistan did not recognise the international border and was therefore opposed to physical controls".

"It stands to reason that if the porousness of the border was really the Afghan government’s chief concern, it would have moved swiftly to help Pakistan monitor it effectively," he opined.

He said that since the government in Kabul was "unwilling or unable to fix these internal failures, so it shifted attention and blame onto Pakistan".

"This also suited countries that were pouring billions of dollars into Afghanistan, with little to show for it in terms of defeating the Taliban."

The advisor wrote that the focus on the border had also masked the reality that terrorists based in Afghanistan were collaborating with "our arch rival, India, and with elements in the Afghan intelligence services to regularly carry out attacks inside Pakistan".

He claimed that with Indian support, these groups conducted targeted killings across Pakistan and high-profile attacks on Pakistan’s largest stock exchange, a major university, and a luxury hotel in the port city of Gwadar, among many others.

"Simultaneously, India worked to taint Pakistan’s reputation through an orchestrated propaganda campaign, using fake news networks to perpetuate a diversionary narrative that sought to blame Pakistan for Afghanistan’s failings."

Meanwhile, he said, the US kept pressing for Pakistan to further escalate its own military campaign against the Afghan Taliban.

"The truth, however, is that the group had no organised presence in Pakistan and military action against a few dispersed individuals — who may, from time to time, have managed to melt away among the thousands of Afghan refugees — would not have changed the outcome in Afghanistan, but would have left thousands more Pakistanis martyred," he added.

Yusuf said: “An escalation was, therefore, unacceptable to us, as we repeatedly conveyed to the United States for over a decade. Our alternative of leading with a political dialogue that forced all sides to compromise, supplemented by military and other tools as needed, would have produced a naturally inclusive government while ending the conflict years earlier. And yet every time we raised this, we were seen as insincere.”

Yusuf stressed that the "rapid collapse" of the Ghani administration in Afghanistan "has left no doubt that the [Afghan] government’s failures were not of Pakistan’s making".

“Corruption, bad governance, refusal of Afghans to stand behind their government and state, and the 300,000-strong Afghan National Security Forces’ choice not to fight against a lightly armed insurgency lie at the heart of the return of the Taliban.”

Yet, some voices in Western capitals continued to scapegoat Pakistan for this failure, he regretted, adding that blaming Pakistan was not only factually incorrect, but it also "undermines the spirit of international cooperation necessary to end the cycle of violence that has devastated Afghanistan".

The way forward
Suggesting a way forward on this front, the NSA said, "Afghanistan deserves peace and prosperity, and a blame game among international actors will not get us there. Nor will a repeat of the mistakes of the 1990s, when the United States abandoned Afghanistan and sanctioned Pakistan."

He said the prudent way forward was for the international community to engage constructively with the new government in Kabul.

"The goal must be to create the conditions for Afghan civilians to earn a respectable livelihood and to live in peace. This will require the international community, especially the countries who were present in Afghanistan for two decades, to play a positive role in leveraging their influence to further the cause of peace and stability".

The adviser further said that Pakistan had been at the forefront of international humanitarian efforts since the fall of Kabul.

"It has helped evacuate approximately 20,000 foreign citizens and Afghans from the country, as well as creating an air and land bridge to channel emergency supplies to the country.

“These efforts are important, but diplomatic engagement with Afghanistan must go much further. Afghanistan does not have the resources or institutional capacity to stave off economic disaster on its own."

The NSA said that Pakistan, too, wanted an inclusive setup and protection of human rights in Afghanistan.

And the Taliban had repeatedly stated their interest in continued engagement with the world, he added.

“This is an opportunity for the international community — the leverage generated through assistance and the legitimacy Taliban will derive from it can be used to secure inclusive governance from the new government.”

He also stressed the need for the Western diplomacy "to be better connected with regional initiatives to forge a common agenda for [the] engagement and decide on the multilateral and bilateral avenues available to channel assistance".

Moreover, he called for an understanding on the terms of the release of the Afghan central bank’s reserves, most of which are held by the US.

"Such a forum could also be used to encourage countries that have unfinished development projects in Afghanistan to consider completing them for the benefit of the Afghan people. A coordinated global approach will reduce the risks of international divisions over how best to engage the Taliban."

Pak-Afghan ties
On Pakistan's relations with Afghanistan, Yusuf said the two countries shared a long border and cultural links that stretched back centuries.

"These geographical and societal connections compel Pakistan to advocate for peace in Afghanistan, as instability there risks spilling over into our country," he said, adding that “The Pakistani Taliban, the Islamic State, and other anti-Pakistan groups in Afghanistan cannot be allowed to harm Pakistan."

"Nor are we in a position to accept more Afghan refugees, who will inevitably be driven onto our soil by another spasm of violence in their home country,” Yusuf said.

He further noted that the livelihoods of millions of Afghans were linked to Pakistan, as Afghanistan was land-locked country and largely relied on Pakistan for trade.

"The country’s (Afghanistan's) geographical position could become an advantage if it transforms itself into a transit hub that connects Central Asia to Pakistan’s warm waters."

Vision for the region
He blamed the Ghani government for stalling these possibilities, "snubbing Pakistan’s offers for more streamlined trade and economic cooperation and fast-tracking of connectivity projects with Central Asia".

However, Yusuf said, “Such connectivity is not only key to Pakistan’s geoeconomic vision, but it also corresponds with the US-led regional vision of establishing economic linkages between Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.”

Yusuf said multiple such projects were already underway, including energy and electricity inflow from Central Asia, a trans-Afghanistan rail project from Uzbekistan, and projects to upgrade the road infrastructure to create a viable corridor of connectivity.

"The US investments in energy, minerals, and infrastructure could potentially herald a new era of cooperation in these regions and buttress peace efforts," he said, adding that "coordinated engagement involving Western powers, China, Russia, Middle Eastern countries, and Afghanistan’s immediate neighbours would maximise the chances of realising our common objectives in Afghanistan."

The NSA said Pakistan was committed to peace in Afghanistan and in the region.

"Today, Pakistan is seeking to foster economic interdependence through regional connectivity and development partnerships, while settling political disputes amicably," he said. And “Afghanistan could serve as a model for this regional vision, but the international community must also play its part. By engaging with the new Afghan authorities now, the United States and other global powers can avert a humanitarian crisis, help Afghans live in peace, and ensure that the threat of terrorism emanating from Afghan soil is ended once and for all."

"This is not only their collective responsibility, it is also in their self-interest.”

DAWN

 

[ahsan17]

Something for you to figure out if you don’t want to keep making these billion dollar losses.

Hint, unlike what some posters like [MENTION=142169]PakLFC[/MENTION] think, the Western countries do care about things like 26/11.

“Pakistan loses $38 billion from FATF”

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/In...grey-listing-costs-Pakistan-billions-annually

Hint: it's not because of what you think the reason is.

 

[PakLFC]

You obviously have the ability to get inside the heads of Western leaders and figure out that they care about terrorism against the West, Afghanistan and nukes but not about terrorism against India and 26/11. You are a mind reader

I have the ability to see behind lies thereby separating it from facts. I pity minds like yours that believe in everything they are spoon fed with by someone sitting behind a desk. What does "and figure out that they care about terrorism against the West mean?? I think you are losing your head here!

I am a smart man who can separate nonsense from basic commonsense. You most likely also believe 9/11 was the work of Al-Qaeda!

 

[Itachi]

I have the ability to see behind lies thereby separating it from facts. I pity minds like yours that believe in everything they are spoon fed with by someone sitting behind a desk. What does "and figure out that they care about terrorism against the West mean?? I think you are losing your head here!

I am a smart man who can separate nonsense from basic commonsense. You most likely also believe 9/11 was the work of Al-Qaeda!

How do you separate Google results though?

In some cases, you cite Google as the trusted source (when argument suits you) and call it biased (when argument doesn't suit you).

I am interested in the followed procedure where one can separate the two.

 

[Napa]

I have the ability to see behind lies thereby separating it from facts. I pity minds like yours that believe in everything they are spoon fed with by someone sitting behind a desk. What does "and figure out that they care about terrorism against the West mean?? I think you are losing your head here!

I am a smart man who can separate nonsense from basic commonsense. You most likely also believe 9/11 was the work of Al-Qaeda!

I am interested in the followed procedure where one can separate the two.

Mere mortals like us who can't separate commonsense from nonsense won't understand, just like we won't understand that 9/11 was an inside job.

He has commonsense, can read minds and has a hot line to the leaders of Western countries by which they have told him they care about 9/11 but don't care about 26/11.

 

[PakLFC]

How do you separate Google results though?

In some cases, you cite Google as the trusted source (when argument suits you) and call it biased (when argument doesn't suit you).

I am interested in the followed procedure where one can separate the two.

Google the search engine gives out links and websites. We have to determine the website and the people behind it. Independent news resources provide the most accurate information. If the website and journalists is from a particular country then most likely the content will be biased. This is why people are turning to independent sources now where the information is impartial.

 

[PakLFC]

Mere mortals like us who can't separate commonsense from nonsense won't understand, just like we won't understand that 9/11 was an inside job.

He has commonsense, can read minds and has a hot line to the leaders of Western countries by which they have told him they care about 9/11 but don't care about 26/11.

Well you should be able to understand the truth of 9/11 and how the Jews were celebrating! You can not see why Muslim's did not gain anything but destruction so no reason why they would want to attack America. The question is always "who gains"?

You have no idea of Bin Laden or 9/11 even 26/11 for that matter. This is to be expected when you have been brainwashed by the BBC and CNN. My information comes from intelligent sources where as you are spoon fed by someone sitting behind a desk who is told what to say.

 

[Technics 1210]

Hindutva apologists accept MSM as gospel truth when against Islam but when their leader was banned from the US and UK on grounds he was responsible for Gujrat riots/religious terrorism - the only human ever to be so - as reported by MSM at the time - all is forgotten!

 

[MenInG]

Prime Minister Imran Khan has urged the United States to deliver an aid package to Afghanistan to prevent the collapse of the Afghan state so that it does not turn into a safe haven for global terrorists, particularly the Islamic State.

In an interview with Middle East Eye, broadcasted on Monday, the premier said the US has no other option but to support the new Taliban regime because a failure to do so will result in a humanitarian disaster as well.

“It’s a really critical time and the US has to pull itself together because people in the United States are in a state of shock,” he said in reference to the fall of Kabul to the Taliban forces in August.

“They were imagining some sort of democracy, nation-building or liberated women, and suddenly they find the Taliban are back. There is so much anger and shock and surprise. Unless America takes the lead, we are worried that there will be chaos in Afghanistan and we will be most affected by that.”

Imran said the support to the Taliban will also keep in check the rise of the Islamic State in Afghanistan and the US should do everything to support a stable government in the country.

The premier added that, “The world must engage with Afghanistan because if it pushes it away, within the Taliban movement there are hardliners, and it could easily go back to the Taliban of 2000 and that would be a disaster.”

According to PM Imran, 75 per cent of the Afghan national budget depended on foreign aid which means imposing sanctions on the Taliban would result in a humanitarian crisis. He warned that abandoning Afghanistan as the US did in the 1990s would result in a civil war.

The PM told the media outlet that he had warned Joe Biden, John Kerry and Harry Reid – then all senators – in 2008 that they were creating a quagmire in Afghanistan for which there was no military solution.

Two years later, then Pakistan army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani delivered the same message to US President Barack Obama, but nobody listened.

Read Islamabad turns to Pakistani American for Biden-Imran call

“But unfortunately, they were led by their generals. And do you know what generals always say: give us more troops and more time.”

Speaking about the Kabul takeover, Imran said: “We have been so relieved, because we expected a bloodbath, but what happened was a peaceful transfer of power. But we also felt we were blamed for this. Three hundred thousand [Afghan army] troops surrendered without a fight, so clearly we did not tell them to surrender.”

In a response to a question on an inclusive government in Afghanistan, PM Imran said that the current set-up in Afghanistan was not inclusive, but he termed it a “transitional” government.

“They need an inclusive government because Afghanistan is a diverse society,” he said, adding that Pakistan was in contact with neighbouring states, notably Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, to encourage the Taliban to widen representation.

Fundamental rights

Speaking about the state of fundamental rights, Imran said the Taliban should be given incentives to make true on their promises.

“They have made the right statements and have no other option. What else are we going to do if we sanction them? The best way is to incentivise them to walk the talk.

“But if you force them, I would imagine the nature of the people is such that they will push back and it would be counterproductive.”

According to the PM, there were clearly different currents within the movement and a lack of clear leadership on some issues.

Talking about the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, the premier said that the TTP consisted of 50 groups and the government was interested in talks with factions that were willing to reconcile.

“Now we are trying to talk to those who can be reconciled because it’s from a position of strength. I always believed all insurgencies eventually end up on the dialogue table, like the IRA [Irish Republican Army] for instance,” he said, referring to the Northern Irish peace deal.

He said the Afghan Taliban gave assurance to Pakistan that the TTP won’t be allowed to use the Afghan soil against Pakistan, adding that the former regime in Kabul and Indian intelligence agencies facilitated TTP attacks.

Khan further condemned the continued use of drones by the US in Afghanistan.

“It is the most insane way of fighting terrorism. Doing a drone attack on a village mud hut and expecting there will not be casualties. And a lot of time the drones targeted the wrong people.”

Asked whether Pakistan would allow the US to launch strikes targeting IS in Afghanistan from Pakistan, Imran said: “They don’t need a base here because we do not need to be part of a conflict again.”

“No country paid such a heavy price as us. Eighty thousand Pakistanis died. The economy was devastated. $150bn was lost to the economy. It was called the most dangerous place on earth. Three-and-a-half million people were internally displaced.”

Imran said it was too early to comment on the regional effect of the US exit, but he said China, as an emerging power, would fill in the vacuum. He said China had stood by Pakistan during its darkest recent days.

Read more Peaceful Afghanistan vital for Pakistan and regional stability, Imran tells Putin

“Who was the country that came to help? We were going belly up. It was China that helped us. You always remember those who help you in difficult times.”

Modi copying Israeli tactics

During the interview, Imran said Indian PM Narendra Modi was using the tactics employed by Israel in Palestine to change the demography of Indian Occupied Kashmir. PM Imran said India breached the Geneva Convention by changing the Indian constitution to end Kashmiri autonomy.

According to the premier, India enjoys impunity in the international community because the West sees it as a “bulwark against China”.

But he said India had also benefited from a deepening strategic and military relationship with Israel, forged by Modi’s visit to the country in July 2017.

“[Israel has] built such a strong security apparatus and [they] just crush anything. They send people who kill and assassinate and they have total immunity,” he said.

“Whatever the UN General Assembly says, they have complete confidence in the veto the US has in the Security Council. So they get away with anything. And I feel that India feels [it has immunity] because they are being used… as a bulwark against China.”

Imran also talked about the volatile Line of Control. He said, “If you look at the flashpoints, probably the nuclear flashpoint right now in the world is Pakistan-India because nowhere else is there a situation where there are two nuclear-armed countries who have had three wars before they were nuclear-armed.”

He added: “We have not had a war since then because of the [nuclear] deterrent.” He, however, said the first few months of his premiership were “nervous and dangerous”. “Once two nuclear-armed countries get into the situation like we did, it can go anywhere.”

 

[Napa]

To summarize:

1. Give us money.
2. If you don’t give us money there will be terrorism.
3. Only China helped Pakistan, IMF bailout didn’t happen.
4. Modi was Hitler and now he is Israel.
5. If world doesn’t intervene in Kashmir there could be nuclear war.
6. And finally, Pakistan’s economic underdevelopment is someone else’s fault

 

[JaDed]

He is trying really hard , people used to take him seriously before but western nations are much more careful now.

Also if only China matters who are already investing in Afghanistan why does he want Western developed nations to invest or incentivize?

 

[saeedhk]

To summarize:

1. Give us money.
2. If you don’t give us money there will be terrorism.
3. Only China helped Pakistan, IMF bailout didn’t happen.
4. Modi was Hitler and now he is Israel.
5. If world doesn’t intervene in Kashmir there could be nuclear war.
6. And finally, Pakistan’s economic underdevelopment is someone else’s fault

Every week, this man makes the same speech. He has totally lost it! He should retire gracefully and put us out of this misery.

 

[Technics 1210]

Indians who sold their identity to live in the West (instead of ‘incredible’ India) for the sake of money have no footing in this debate.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

He is trying really hard , people used to take him seriously before but western nations are much more careful now.

Also if only China matters who are already investing in Afghanistan why does he want Western developed nations to invest or incentivize?

Muslim leaders tend to think globally, Islam is not culturally tied to a land or continent in the same way as a hindu leader might be.

 

[ahsan17]

To summarize:

1. Give us money.
2. If you don’t give us money there will be terrorism.
3. Only China helped Pakistan, IMF bailout didn’t happen.
4. Modi was Hitler and now he is Israel.
5. If world doesn’t intervene in Kashmir there could be nuclear war.
6. And finally, Pakistan’s economic underdevelopment is someone else’s fault ��

1. He's not asking for help for Pakistan, so your "us" comment is inaccurate.
2. Same as above.
3. Taking a nuanced point and highly simplifying it, basically a strawman argument. What China did was an investment that IMF did not.
4. Again taking a naunced argument and highly simplifying it.
5. I mean Modi was close to proving this right in 2019. He's saying India has a leader that might trigger a nuclear war.
6. Not sure where he said that. Also, doesn't India complain it's underdevelopment is British fault for their occupation pre-partition?

 

[Napa]

1. He's not asking for help for Pakistan, so your "us" comment is inaccurate.
2. Same as above.
3. Taking a nuanced point and highly simplifying it, basically a strawman argument. What China did was an investment that IMF did not.
4. Again taking a naunced argument and highly simplifying it.
5. I mean Modi was close to proving this right in 2019. He's saying India has a leader that might trigger a nuclear war.
6. Not sure where he said that. Also, doesn't India complain it's underdevelopment is British fault for their occupation pre-partition?

1. Pakistan was getting hundreds of millions of dollars a year from Western nations for providing transit and other goods and services. Now that this source of dollars has dried up, no doubt Pakistan expects to get some of aid dollars sent to Afghanistan. Also, Afghanistan has no dollars to pay for its imports from Pakistan, so aid dollars Afghanistan gets will help pay.

2. See above

3. IK specifically said “Who was the country that came to help? We were going belly up. It was China that helped us. You always remember those who help you in difficult times". This ignores the mostly Western taxpayers funded IMF bailout.

Not sure why you think China made an investment. They sold Pakistan a lot of Chinese infrastructure. If the infrastructure results in the development of export industries then the money Pakistan has spent buying Chinese infrastructure would be a positive. There are no signs as yet that CEPC has resulted in any significant increase in Pakistani exports. The current account of Pakistan is a disaster, and payments which Pakistan has to make to China makes the next bailout closer.

4. There is nothing deep in abusing the leader of your neighboring country, it is just childish. Especially when your economy sucks and trade would be a massive benefit.

5. Modi was close to triggering a nuclear war in 2019? What? No one other than IK keeps talking about a nuclear war starting in South Asia. This is just another cheap attempt at trying to scare people so that they pay more attention to the region.

6. Some Indians (mainly left academics) blame the British. Modi doesn't, he is a doer. He doesn't keep whining about how the world is unfair. Rather he takes action to make India a more attractive destination for investors. "India attracts FDI inflow of 27.37 billion dollar during first four months of this financial year". https://newsonair.com/2021/09/22/in...ng-first-four-months-of-this-financial-year/?

 

[ahsan17]

1. Pakistan was getting hundreds of millions of dollars a year from Western nations for providing transit and other goods and services. Now that this source of dollars has dried up, no doubt Pakistan expects to get some of aid dollars sent to Afghanistan. Also, Afghanistan has no dollars to pay for its imports from Pakistan, so aid dollars Afghanistan gets will help pay.

2. See above

3. IK specifically said “Who was the country that came to help? We were going belly up. It was China that helped us. You always remember those who help you in difficult times". This ignores the mostly Western taxpayers funded IMF bailout.

Not sure why you think China made an investment. They sold Pakistan a lot of Chinese infrastructure. If the infrastructure results in the development of export industries then the money Pakistan has spent buying Chinese infrastructure would be a positive. There are no signs as yet that CEPC has resulted in any significant increase in Pakistani exports. The current account of Pakistan is a disaster, and payments which Pakistan has to make to China makes the next bailout closer.

4. There is nothing deep in abusing the leader of your neighboring country, it is just childish. Especially when your economy sucks and trade would be a massive benefit.

5. Modi was close to triggering a nuclear war in 2019? What? No one other than IK keeps talking about a nuclear war starting in South Asia. This is just another cheap attempt at trying to scare people so that they pay more attention to the region.

6. Some Indians (mainly left academics) blame the British. Modi doesn't, he is a doer. He doesn't keep whining about how the world is unfair. Rather he takes action to make India a more attractive destination for investors. "India attracts FDI inflow of 27.37 billion dollar during first four months of this financial year". https://newsonair.com/2021/09/22/in...ng-first-four-months-of-this-financial-year/?

1. Your argument is odd and makes zero sense. What does transit money for Pakistan have to do with aid for Afghanistan? IK is asking for help for Afghanistan. You response doesn't answer your initial "us" comment.

2. Same as above.

3. IMG loans are not some generosity on Pakistan, and in fact are quite burdensome. Chinese loans have had far more positive effect.

4. Your comment does not address why IK is wrong.

5. Yes, Modi was close in 2019. In any case, it's not just Pakistani assessment that Kashmir might lead to nuclear war. Western governornments and think tanks have said so as well.

6.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...rses-britain-paying-damages-for-colonial-rule

 

[Napa]

1. Your argument is odd and makes zero sense. What does transit money for Pakistan have to do with aid for Afghanistan? IK is asking for help for Afghanistan. You response doesn't answer your initial "us" comment.

2. Same as above.

3. IMG loans are not some generosity on Pakistan, and in fact are quite burdensome. Chinese loans have had far more positive effect.

4. Your comment does not address why IK is wrong.

5. Yes, Modi was close in 2019. In any case, it's not just Pakistani assessment that Kashmir might lead to nuclear war. Western governornments and think tanks have said so as well.

6.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...rses-britain-paying-damages-for-colonial-rule

1. It isn't hard. The Western presence in Afghanistan was generating a dollar income for Pakistan. Now that income is gone, and a part of any dollar aid that goes to Afghanistan will be spent on Pakistani goods and services. No aid, no dollars for Afghanistan to purchase.

2.

3. The "burdensome" IMF loans saved Pakistan from default and related consequences. The fact that Pakistan was desperate for the IMF loans is easy to understand from the fact that the Pakistani PM had earlier said he would rather commit suicide than take an IMF bailout. What positive effect have Chinese loans had? Have the increased exports? Have they not worsened Pakistan's external debt payments?

4. It wasn't a question of right or wrong. I noted that IK regularly abuses Modi. If you feel that is a smart thing to do, go for it.

5. Modi was close to starting a nuclear war in 2019? Really? Just because India went and bombed Pakistan doesn't mean a nuclear war was going to start. The Indian calculation was that Pakistan would feel it is too weak to retaliate, which turned out to be true because they sent Abhi back in 2 days without a trial and "Pakistan army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa's "legs were shaking" during a meeting in February last year when that country's foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi told parliamentary leaders that India was about to attack".

Western think tanks are a dime a dozen, you will find they have said all sort of things. No leader other than IK keeps raising the possibility of a nuclear war in South Asia. The reality is that if Pakistan does not modernize its economy it doesn't have anything to offer the West, and will be ignored. IK is trying to keep Pakistan relevant by peddling the idea of a possible nuclear war.

6. Yeah, so Modi praised Tharoor's speech, so what? The difference is a one time appreciation of a speech (which noted the destructive impact of British colonialism) and every 2nd day saying that the "war on terror" has devastated Pakistan's economy, while ignoring the fundamental economic issues of military involvement in the economy and support for jihadis. Some people find excuses blaming others, other people take action to make themselves better. "Commerce and Industry Ministry said, FDI equity inflow also grew by 112 per cent in the first four months of this financial year compared to same period last year". Modi's focuses on results rather than finding excuses, hence Indian FDI is soaring.

Thanks for the posts, I am done for now

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

1. It isn't hard. The Western presence in Afghanistan was generating a dollar income for Pakistan. Now that income is gone, and a part of any dollar aid that goes to Afghanistan will be spent on Pakistani goods and services. No aid, no dollars for Afghanistan to purchase.

2.

3. The "burdensome" IMF loans saved Pakistan from default and related consequences. The fact that Pakistan was desperate for the IMF loans is easy to understand from the fact that the Pakistani PM had earlier said he would rather commit suicide than take an IMF bailout. What positive effect have Chinese loans had? Have the increased exports? Have they not worsened Pakistan's external debt payments?

4. It wasn't a question of right or wrong. I noted that IK regularly abuses Modi. If you feel that is a smart thing to do, go for it.

5. Modi was close to starting a nuclear war in 2019? Really? Just because India went and bombed Pakistan doesn't mean a nuclear war was going to start. The Indian calculation was that Pakistan would feel it is too weak to retaliate, which turned out to be true because they sent Abhi back in 2 days without a trial and "Pakistan army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa's "legs were shaking" during a meeting in February last year when that country's foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi told parliamentary leaders that India was about to attack".

Western think tanks are a dime a dozen, you will find they have said all sort of things. No leader other than IK keeps raising the possibility of a nuclear war in South Asia. The reality is that if Pakistan does not modernize its economy it doesn't have anything to offer the West, and will be ignored. IK is trying to keep Pakistan relevant by peddling the idea of a possible nuclear war.

6. Yeah, so Modi praised Tharoor's speech, so what? The difference is a one time appreciation of a speech (which noted the destructive impact of British colonialism) and every 2nd day saying that the "war on terror" has devastated Pakistan's economy, while ignoring the fundamental economic issues of military involvement in the economy and support for jihadis. Some people find excuses blaming others, other people take action to make themselves better. "Commerce and Industry Ministry said, FDI equity inflow also grew by 112 per cent in the first four months of this financial year compared to same period last year". Modi's focuses on results rather than finding excuses, hence Indian FDI is soaring.

Thanks for the posts, I am done for now

Pakistan was getting millions of dollars for providing transit routes for western forces, but that came at a massive cost in lives and Pakistan's own reputation when America used drones on Pakistani territory. USA's war with Afghanistan cost the country far more than it earned from transit routes.

IMF loans vs Chinese loans can't be looked at in such a narrow view. Chinese loans are going towards building Pakistan infrastructure with the aim of opening trade routes throughout Asia. I would imagine the the thought process would be the increase in trade will pay for the loans whereas the IMF loan repayments were just an ever increasing drain with no upside.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Pakistan was getting millions of dollars for providing transit routes for western forces, but that came at a massive cost in lives and Pakistan's own reputation when America used drones on Pakistani territory. USA's war with Afghanistan cost the country far more than it earned from transit routes.

IMF loans vs Chinese loans can't be looked at in such a narrow view. Chinese loans are going towards building Pakistan infrastructure with the aim of opening trade routes throughout Asia. I would imagine the the thought process would be the increase in trade will pay for the loans whereas the IMF loan repayments were just an ever increasing drain with no upside.

Not to mention Pakistan was blackmailed into taking that deal. Musharraf was told that Pakistan would be bombed into the stone age if they did not help the US.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

This is what IK wanted, and it seems other countries have the same idea.

The Taliban will hold talks with EU officials on Tuesday, the group's acting foreign minister said Monday, as the Islamists seek international aid and support. His announcement came the same day the UN chief accused the Islamist group of breaking the "promises made to Afghan women and girls".

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/...s-as-the-islamists-seek-international-support

The European Union has pledged a one-billion-euro ($1.15bn) aid package for Afghanistan, “to avert a major humanitarian and socioeconomic collapse”, the bloc’s chief Ursula von der Leyen has said.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/12/eu-announces-1-15bn-aid-package-for-afghanistan

 

[Itachi]

This is what IK wanted, and it seems other countries have the same idea.



https://www.france24.com/en/europe/...s-as-the-islamists-seek-international-support





https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/12/eu-announces-1-15bn-aid-package-for-afghanistan

"aid".... Probably favorite word for IK.

point to be noted, aid is proposed on the ground of humanity. NOT because the countries want anything to do with taliban which is different than what IK proposed.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

"aid".... Probably favorite word for IK.

point to be noted, aid is proposed on the ground of humanity. NOT because the countries want anything to do with taliban which is different than what IK proposed.

This is the start. Sooner or later these countries will realize that Taliban are not going anywhere, and if they dont want millions of refugees in their countries, and dont want Afghanistan to be a breeding ground for terrorist, that they will have to engage with the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

 

[Itachi]

This is the start. Sooner or later these countries will realize that Taliban are not going anywhere, and if they dont want millions of refugees in their countries, and dont want Afghanistan to be a breeding ground for terrorist, that they will have to engage with the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

So.... I should take care of you because otherwise, your inability to control your son will ultimately damage my home.....

May work for short period. But not a long term feasibility prospect.

Meanwhile Afghanistan is already in energy crisis.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

So.... I should take care of you because otherwise, your inability to control your son will ultimately damage my home.....

May work for short period. But not a long term feasibility prospect.

Meanwhile Afghanistan is already in energy crisis.

Its not like the previous government was feasible in the long term. They were living on handouts from the west, they did not have the ability to make Afghanistan into Switzerland. At least the Taliban will be better able to secure the country, and be able to offer the western countries some value. Besides from stopping terrorist, they can also curb the opium supply.

 

[ahsan17]

So.... I should take care of you because otherwise, your inability to control your son will ultimately damage my home.....

May work for short period. But not a long term feasibility prospect.

Meanwhile Afghanistan is already in energy crisis.

Who said anything about "taking care of you"? Or are you being the same as Napa Bhai, who said asking for aid for Afghanistan = asking for aid for Pakistan?

 

[Itachi]

Who said anything about "taking care of you"? Or are you being the same as Napa Bhai, who said asking for aid for Afghanistan = asking for aid for Pakistan?

Where in my post I talked anything about Pakistan?

 

[Itachi]

Its not like the previous government was feasible in the long term. They were living on handouts from the west, they did not have the ability to make Afghanistan into Switzerland. At least the Taliban will be better able to secure the country, and be able to offer the western countries some value. Besides from stopping terrorist, they can also curb the opium supply.

1. Taliban has the ability to "maintain" a country. Are you sure about that? It's easy to conquer than to keep an equilibrium.

2. Which fraction of groups you are referring as the terrorists?