A History of US- Pakistan Relations
Jamshed Nazar December 12, 2003
#46 Posted by zeejah on March 23, 2004 12:58:30 pm
can anyone give me the details about the F-16 deal between the US and Pakistan that was scrapped because of sanctions? i believe Pakistan paid for them, either in full or in part but wasnt able to receive the planes as in the contract?
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#45 Posted by mumbaikar on January 2, 2004 8:43:54 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#44 Posted by mumbaikar on December 26, 2003 7:47:56 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#43 Posted by mumbaikar on December 25, 2003 7:55:01 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#42 Posted by jang on December 16, 2003 11:40:54 am
Fuzair,
I guess support of taliban-NA is part of (near) history. India, Iran etc. definately supported NA due to the fact that they were against Pakistani interests. Indian support was wider than that.. manyt non-NA Pashtuns elits also sought diplomatic/educational refuge in India. It is instructive if someone can post a list of constructive and other kind of current activities that the meddeling coutries (pakistan, india, iran, tajik, uzbek) are upto in Afganistan. Constructive (i.e. roads, hospitals etc) should be easy to list, since they are more or less not denied.
I guess support of taliban-NA is part of (near) history. India, Iran etc. definately supported NA due to the fact that they were against Pakistani interests. Indian support was wider than that.. manyt non-NA Pashtuns elits also sought diplomatic/educational refuge in India. It is instructive if someone can post a list of constructive and other kind of current activities that the meddeling coutries (pakistan, india, iran, tajik, uzbek) are upto in Afganistan. Constructive (i.e. roads, hospitals etc) should be easy to list, since they are more or less not denied.
#41 Posted by arjun_m on December 16, 2003 7:25:25 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#40 Posted by arjun_m on December 16, 2003 7:25:25 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#39 Posted by anew on December 16, 2003 7:25:24 am
#36 by arjun_m on December 15, 2003 2:31pm PT
Ahem...
US to monitor remittances to Pakistan
KARACHI: The American banking authorities have slapped stringent conditions on remittances of more than $2,000 to Pakistan through the banking channels.
Now, Pakistani banks operating in western countries would obtain the following details, in writing, from the beneficiary before affecting remittances of more than $2,000:
1. Full name and address. 2. Nationality. 3. Date of birth. 4. Purpose of remittance.
American `dream` came so true so early. Long live Desi Americans and their `beneficiaries`.
Ahem...
US to monitor remittances to Pakistan
KARACHI: The American banking authorities have slapped stringent conditions on remittances of more than $2,000 to Pakistan through the banking channels.
Now, Pakistani banks operating in western countries would obtain the following details, in writing, from the beneficiary before affecting remittances of more than $2,000:
1. Full name and address. 2. Nationality. 3. Date of birth. 4. Purpose of remittance.
American `dream` came so true so early. Long live Desi Americans and their `beneficiaries`.
#38 Posted by arjun_m on December 15, 2003 8:42:14 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#37 Posted by fuzair on December 15, 2003 8:42:13 pm
Re: Arjunm #35
Come on! The NA`s track record the couple of years they ruled isn`t all that much better than the Taliban`s. In fact, it was the people`s disgust with the NA warlords and their infighting that led them to initially welcome the Taliban. In fact, weren`t there reports right after the ``liberation`` of Afghanistan that people were already lamenting the complete breakdown in law and order? The return of the warlords?
Glad to see that the Indians were backing such great men!
Come on! The NA`s track record the couple of years they ruled isn`t all that much better than the Taliban`s. In fact, it was the people`s disgust with the NA warlords and their infighting that led them to initially welcome the Taliban. In fact, weren`t there reports right after the ``liberation`` of Afghanistan that people were already lamenting the complete breakdown in law and order? The return of the warlords?
Glad to see that the Indians were backing such great men!
#36 Posted by arjun_m on December 15, 2003 2:31:31 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#35 Posted by arjun_m on December 15, 2003 7:07:00 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#34 Posted by ferozk on December 15, 2003 6:40:14 am
re: Jamshed Nazar
Pakistani politicans and leaders are not, repeat not, interested in seeking gains for Pakistan from interacting with the United States as much as they are interesting in seeking personal advantages, in the guise of political patronage, from the United States towards the perpetuation of their own political tenures in Pakistan. Whether they are elected or not, this rule holds true and any Pakistani leader will place their own political interests before the interests of Pakistan.
Ciao
Pakistani politicans and leaders are not, repeat not, interested in seeking gains for Pakistan from interacting with the United States as much as they are interesting in seeking personal advantages, in the guise of political patronage, from the United States towards the perpetuation of their own political tenures in Pakistan. Whether they are elected or not, this rule holds true and any Pakistani leader will place their own political interests before the interests of Pakistan.
Ciao
#33 Posted by anew on December 14, 2003 8:48:17 pm
#29 by sigalph235 on December 14, 2003 6:41pm PT
Re Author`s response to anew
``The issue of the occupation of Palestine and the advent of several million Jews in Palestinian lands is a phenomenon orchestrated by winners of the First / Second World Wars i.e US / UK / France. Once these people have encroached these lands, and are supported by the US, there is not much that the Middle Eastern countries can do about it.``
I am a little disappointed in this simplistic, if not inaccurate, analysis that seems to have gotten to you too. The fallacy that the US is the bedrock of Israeli strength has a soothing ring to it for Muslim states who cannot bring themselves to admit the obvious: they got beaten time and time and time again by a tiny country with a fraction of their manpower, economic power, and yes, firepower. While the Arabs and Muslims convene annually to find some Anglo-American-Jewish conspiracy in this, the reality is that Israel`s strength lies largely within: a robust democracy, a solid industrial base that is the 3rd biggest exporter of weaponry, a citizenry that is literate, and a service/IT sector that`s growing by leaps and bounds. No amount of sloganeering, Soviet/French weaponry in camel-jockey hands, or palaces with a thousand concubines can defeat such an adversary.
sigalph235
You are also over simplyfying the secret of Israel`s strength. The robust democracy? Is it same democracy for a Israeli Jew or an Israeli Arab christian or Israeli Palestinian Muslim? Why you forget the free transfer of technology and $5 billion annual aid by US? How many democracies in the world have these blessings. The Muslims have all the draw-backs and short-comings but I clearly see Zionist christians as the main strentgth of Israel.
Re Author`s response to anew
``The issue of the occupation of Palestine and the advent of several million Jews in Palestinian lands is a phenomenon orchestrated by winners of the First / Second World Wars i.e US / UK / France. Once these people have encroached these lands, and are supported by the US, there is not much that the Middle Eastern countries can do about it.``
I am a little disappointed in this simplistic, if not inaccurate, analysis that seems to have gotten to you too. The fallacy that the US is the bedrock of Israeli strength has a soothing ring to it for Muslim states who cannot bring themselves to admit the obvious: they got beaten time and time and time again by a tiny country with a fraction of their manpower, economic power, and yes, firepower. While the Arabs and Muslims convene annually to find some Anglo-American-Jewish conspiracy in this, the reality is that Israel`s strength lies largely within: a robust democracy, a solid industrial base that is the 3rd biggest exporter of weaponry, a citizenry that is literate, and a service/IT sector that`s growing by leaps and bounds. No amount of sloganeering, Soviet/French weaponry in camel-jockey hands, or palaces with a thousand concubines can defeat such an adversary.
sigalph235
You are also over simplyfying the secret of Israel`s strength. The robust democracy? Is it same democracy for a Israeli Jew or an Israeli Arab christian or Israeli Palestinian Muslim? Why you forget the free transfer of technology and $5 billion annual aid by US? How many democracies in the world have these blessings. The Muslims have all the draw-backs and short-comings but I clearly see Zionist christians as the main strentgth of Israel.
#32 Posted by mohar11 on December 14, 2003 6:41:50 pm
#27 by jamshednazar
//..societies on both sides of the border are very much similar - because they share the history and the land....//
No - they are not! The ``Shared history`` notwithstanding, 56 years is a long time - 3 generations. The differences are clear and growing.
//..The issue of Kashmir has got to be resolved sooner than later, otherwise, a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan is just a matter of time...//
Please stop it - We are already quaking in our boots. It is a pitiful sight - when you see yet another Paki brandizing the nuke sabre - solve kashmir or we will use nukes. Little did pakis know that Uncle Sam isn`t taking no chances as far as paki nukes are concerned.
//..societies on both sides of the border are very much similar - because they share the history and the land....//
No - they are not! The ``Shared history`` notwithstanding, 56 years is a long time - 3 generations. The differences are clear and growing.
//..The issue of Kashmir has got to be resolved sooner than later, otherwise, a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan is just a matter of time...//
Please stop it - We are already quaking in our boots. It is a pitiful sight - when you see yet another Paki brandizing the nuke sabre - solve kashmir or we will use nukes. Little did pakis know that Uncle Sam isn`t taking no chances as far as paki nukes are concerned.
#31 Posted by ironman on December 14, 2003 6:41:50 pm
Jamshed,
You have not answered any of jay`s #24/25 questions...other than a blanket `I disagree with you!!` I suggest you read those posts once again...carefully.
After that, if you don`t have any suitable answer...please say so.
``A complete nation cannot be jihadified by the americans to fight afghanistan. The seeds were always there.``
``Every real person is an exception from the typical average pakistani. The average pakistani is really an everage, created by the values of the social instituions in pakistans, beacuse at soime level one has to accept that the instituions will not survive if they are opposed to the generally accepted values. One can even talk of the broad trends, which are undoubtedly the producys of the trends the values are taking.``
- - - - -
``Kashmir, in the case of Pakistan, is the central problem...``
Arre bhai...WHY is kashmir a central problem for you. Does your dana-paani come from kashmir???
If not...why is kashmir a `central problem` for you?
But of course...kashmir IS indeed a central problem for you. The question is why. Why not an `ordinary problem`...why `central problem`. For this question, you provide no clue whatsoever.
Jay`s questions provide clues...but you`d rather run away than look at them. And you expect peace to magically sprout by itself.
Answer the man if you can.
You have not answered any of jay`s #24/25 questions...other than a blanket `I disagree with you!!` I suggest you read those posts once again...carefully.
After that, if you don`t have any suitable answer...please say so.
``A complete nation cannot be jihadified by the americans to fight afghanistan. The seeds were always there.``
``Every real person is an exception from the typical average pakistani. The average pakistani is really an everage, created by the values of the social instituions in pakistans, beacuse at soime level one has to accept that the instituions will not survive if they are opposed to the generally accepted values. One can even talk of the broad trends, which are undoubtedly the producys of the trends the values are taking.``
- - - - -
``Kashmir, in the case of Pakistan, is the central problem...``
Arre bhai...WHY is kashmir a central problem for you. Does your dana-paani come from kashmir???
If not...why is kashmir a `central problem` for you?
But of course...kashmir IS indeed a central problem for you. The question is why. Why not an `ordinary problem`...why `central problem`. For this question, you provide no clue whatsoever.
Jay`s questions provide clues...but you`d rather run away than look at them. And you expect peace to magically sprout by itself.
Answer the man if you can.
Interact Index
Similar Articles
- The Gin Game Naveen Qayyum
- The Unbearable Lightness of Seeing Wajahat Malik
- Yet Another Immigrant Story Madiha Qureshi
- Solving Amarnath: A New Hope in Kashmir Murtaza Shibli
- Diabetes: Wrestling with a Twenty-First Century Monster Mutaal Mooquin
US Elections 2008 Primaries
Get Chowk RSS FeedLatest Interacts
- tahmed32: aslam #119 "What I’m... Muslim Ghettoisation
- aslam644: Re: # 120 cheema sahib if... Muslim Ghettoisation
- akcheema: aslam sahib wrote: [["For... Muslim Ghettoisation
- aslam644: Re: # 117 I have... Muslim Ghettoisation
- tahmed32: that should be "British... Muslim Ghettoisation
- tahmed32: #116 and i am... Muslim Ghettoisation
- tahmed32: #115 aslam: if you... Muslim Ghettoisation
- aslam644: Re: # 111 tahmed There you... Muslim Ghettoisation
