Why is US throwing money to Pakistan??

[Old Mike]

Actually the partition of India was one of the last acts of the British Raj. It happened, to Ghandi's great distress, because Muslim and Hindu indians were unable to cooperate in the formation of an integrated Indian state.
Based on 1951 Census of displaced persons, 7,226,000 Muslims went to Pakistan from India while 7,249,000 Hindus and Sikhs moved to India from Pakistan immediately after partition. Violence and murder took place during this migration, with the number of people killed estimated to be between 200,000 and 1 million

OM, a small correction! The Partition happened because Indian Muslim League under Jinnah decided it wanted a seperate Islamic Nation and most of the mass migration was of Hindus from Pakistan and voulantry migration of muslims. Please note, India has the 2nd largest muslim population in the world after Indonesia

So the Indian Muslim League was not composed of Indians?
My figures for migration come from Wikipedia. If you have others and a verifiable source, I would be interested to see them.

[working_mom]

So the Indian Muslim League was not composed of Indians?
My figures for migration come from Wikipedia. If you have others and a verifiable source, I would be interested to see them.

The responsibility for the partition falls squarely on Indian Muslim League and no they chose not to be Indians so to term them as Indians is not desirable here. Stating generally that Indians are responsible for the partition just reiterates what So What posted. Regarding the figures, I dont dispute them they only re-confirm what I stated. On a different note, the muslims who migrated to Pakistan are termed Mohajirs are fighting for equal rights in today's Pakistan.

[TheWrathOfGrapes]

Well, If it was history I could have started with the Harrapan and Mohinjodaro Civilization but I was talking about mordern or rather relatively modern history.

In which case, there is nothing for China to fall from since it is still far from being a modern great power.

[so what]

"What we are asking is for the accountability of the money that is being spent on this war on terror..."

So how about the proposed USD 20Bn defence increase by the Indian government, whilst 25% of the population is still living below the poverty line?

No request for accountability there?

[working_mom]

"What we are asking is for the accountability of the money that is being spent on this war on terror..."

So how about the proposed USD 20Bn defence increase by the Indian government, whilst 25% of the population is still living below the poverty line?

No request for accountability there?

Yeah how dare a Third World country surrounded by hostile neighbours spend money on Defence? Right, in case of war (like the one with China or the Kargil war with Pakistan) they should run to West for help. Now, wont that be an ideal situation. 

Regarding the Indian spending, you seem to be more tuned in to Indian budget so tell me how much is being spent by India on poverty alleviation programs as well? Now dont tell me you only did research on the defence spending....

[Bagshot, Col]

So What wrote:

Lets not forget that Pakistan is a creation of the Indian government, and now it has become a "migraine" from which the whole world suffers.

Actually the partition of India was one of the last acts of the British Raj. It happened, to Ghandi's great distress, because Muslim and Hindu indians were unable to cooperate in the formation of an integrated Indian state.
Based on 1951 Census of displaced persons, 7,226,000 Muslims went to Pakistan from India while 7,249,000 Hindus and Sikhs moved to India from Pakistan immediately after partition. Violence and murder took place during this migration, with the number of people killed estimated to be between 200,000 and 1 million

What utter rot sir!
Must you blame everything on the British? The partition was at the insistence of the muslim league which rejected all generous concessions to retain a united India.
Damned Boer. What? 

 

[Old Mike]

Col,

Had you served in the region you may have been aware that, prior to 1947 there was no such thing as a "United India" The British, French and Portugese were able to colinise the subcontinent because, prior to their arrival, there were simply a number of warring states there. The imperialists followed the old maxim, Divise et Impera.
Even at the height of the Pax Britannica there were numerous Princely States in the subcontinent, which were annexed by the new India, some by force, after 1947.
France retained control of some 510 sq. Km of India until 1954 and Portugal retained its colnial possessions in India until the Army of India invaded invaded Goa, Daman and Diu, where they were faced with insufficient Portuguese resistance. Portuguese armed forces had been instructed to either defeat the invaders or die. Only meager resistance was offered due to the Portuguese army's poor firepower and size (only 3,300 men), against a fully-armed Indian force of over 30,000 with full Air and Naval support.The Governor of Portuguese India signed the Instrument of Surrender[9] on 19 December 1961. The territories were annexed by India.
India succeeded in Portugal where it is failing in Kashmir.

[sans]

With the advent of global media channels, it has become important for viewers to take a rationale view of things and apply analysis and logic to comprehend complex geo-political issues. There are conflicts going on presently in many parts of the world. Just because a super power is fighting a high profile war in countries linked by centuries of cultural and ethnic bond does not mean these are the only places of evil or suddenly the most critical to world security. We were told similar things about WMD a few years ago prior to another war. What happened afterwards obviously is not worth repeating.

[Dr. Phil]

I received this via email..

 
Written by a housewife in New Brunswick, to her local newspaper. This is one ticked off lady.
 
QUOTE
Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001 and have continually threatened to do so since?
 
Were people from all over the world, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan , across the Potomac from the nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania ?
 
Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they?
 
And I'm supposed to care that a few Taliban were claiming to be tortured by a justice system of the nation they come from and are fighting against in a brutal insurgency.
 
I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.
 
I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere belief of which is a crime punishable by beheading in Afghanistan ..
 
I'll care when these thugs tell the world they are sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling slashed throat.
 
I'll care when the cowardly so-called 'insurgents' in Afghanistan come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques and behind women and children.
 
I'll care when the mindless zealots who blows themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.
 
I'll care when the Canadian media stops pretending that their freedom of speech on stories is more important than the lives of the soldiers on the ground or their families waiting at home to hear about them when something happens.
 
In the meantime, when I hear a story about a CANADIAN soldier roughing up an Insurgent terrorist to obtain information, know this:
 
I don't care.
 
When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank:
 
I don't care.
 
When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and 'fed special' food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being 'mishandled,' you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts:
 
I don't care.
 
And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled 'Koran' and other times 'Quran.' Well, Jimmy Crack Corn you guessed it,
 
I don't care!!
 
If you agree, pass it on. Sooner or later, it'll get to the people responsible for this ridiculous behavior!
 
If you don't agree, then please don't complain when more atrocities committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great Country!  And may I add:
 
‘Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the Soldiers don't have that problem.'
 
I have another quote that I would like to add....
One last thought for the day:
 
Only five defining forces have ever offered to die for you:
 1. Jesus Christ
 2. The British Soldier.
 3. The Canadian Soldier.
 4. The US Soldier, and
 5. The Australian Soldier
 
 One died for your soul, the other 4 for your freedom.
 
UNQUOTE 
 

[Dr. Phil]

Returning to thread, President Obama's announcement that he is about to pour huge resources into Pakistan is worrying.

Firstly, Bush did this and received only lip-service from Pakistan.
The Pakistanis never did address Al Qaeda or Taliban. On the contrary, had Musharraf done so he would have been subjected to at least one assassination attempt. That should have raised a flag.

Pakistani military intelligence controls the nukes and also aides Al Qaeda and Taliban.

So all US investment has done is to create a modern Pakistani Army which one day, must be confronted and our men and women must die again by the stupidity of our politicians and the inventory gifted by them on and paid for by taxpayers.

The Pakistani population is further embittered towards USA because of radicalisation in schools and mosques, but and also because they have seen none of the billions invested.

So why give more? It is most certainly not an investment in our future or future peace.

The Taliban may be fighting for a strict Islamic state, but is it any less big-brotherly than a USA, 8 years under Bush, with a Homeland Department and all of the daily security checks?

At least Taliban are destroying the poppy fields which is the most insidious threat to the west.

And if the people of Pakistan want Shariah law, why not give it to them? Its their country, not ours. They surely would not ask twice. 

If Taliban were to be recognised and were to work against Al Qaeda, that would be the best solution.

[JJ Sporean]

I am really amazed by the way US is throwing money at Pakistan in the name of "War on Terror". Especially since, the audit on the money actually spent on this war is dubious at best and most of the money is actually being passed to Taliban in Swat valley to buy peace with the Tribals there.  Today there is a news that there has been an terrorist attack on Sri Lankan cricketers who were currently touring Pakistan (Are they crazy or is this some kind of human sacrifice by SL Cricket Board to win the 2011 World Cup?  ). Pakistan is not far from formenting trouble in the neighbourhood...recent example being Bangladesh with recent reports suggesting that Pakistan has a hand in formenting trouble in Bangladesh which lead to a mutiny by Border Gaurds against the democratically elected President and the release of AQ.Khan the nuclear salesman and not to forget the numerous terror attacks in India. Yes, an unstable Pakistan with notorious mix of nuclear weapons and terrorists is a migraine to the entire world especially its immediate neighbours India and Afghanistan. But, US is letting Pakistan hold its nuclear weapons as a blackmail to cave into all sorts of demands....This happened during the Afghan war to drive the Soviets out. They raised the Taliban and it came back to haunt them and its happening again. When will US ever learn???

Because the USD is going to be worthless soon anyway!

[Vulcanl]

I have to say that I agree with the majority of my fellow Americans at this point.  The USA never should have aimed for a global empire.  We should retrench Worldwide.  There are many problems to be fixed at home:

Americans want US to mind its own business
Associated Press 05:55 AM Dec 04, 2009

WASHINGTON - Americans are turning away from the world, showing a tendency toward isolationism in foreign affairs that has risen to the highest level in four decades, a poll found out yesterday.

Almost half of those polled, or 49 per cent, said that the United States should "mind its own business" internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own, the Pew Research Center survey found. That was up from 30 per cent who said that in December 2002.

Results of the survey appear to conflict with President Barack Obama's activist foreign policy, including a newly-announced buildup of 30,000 American troops in Afghanistan to fight Taliban and Al Qaeda extremists.

Headlined Isolationist Sentiment Surges to Four-decade High, the report found only 32 per cent of the poll respondents favoured increasing US troops in Afghanistan, while 40 per cent favoured decreasing them.

And fewer than half, or 46 per cent, of those polled said it was somewhat or very likely that Afghanistan would be able to withstand the radicals' threat.

Some 41 per cent of those surveyed said the US plays a less important and powerful role as a world leader than it did a decade ago, up from 25 per cent who said that just before the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the report said.

Pew Research Center President Andrew Kohut said in an interview that the "very bad economy" appeared most responsible for the growth of isolationist sentiment. He said the public was also "displeased with the two wars we are waging, in Iraq and Afghanistan".

While isolationism and unilateralism reached four-decade highs among the public, the stature of China increased.

Among Americans polled, 44 per cent said China was the world's leading economic power compared with 27 per cent who named the US. In February last year, 41 per cent said the US was the leading economic power, while 30 per cent said China.

A majority of Americans surveyed, or 53 per cent, see China's emerging power as a threat to the US.

The US is seen by a comfortable majority, 63 per cent, as the world's leading military power.

The findings come from two surveys conducted over the last two months and polled more than 3,000 people.

[working_mom]

US has to first clean up the mess it has created around the world in the form of arming Taleban to fight Soviet rule, Pakistan which is a law unto itself and the mess for oil in Middle East.

[Vulcanl]

PP,

This can be done in other ways that do not involve massive surges of troops on the ground:

*Diplomacy
*Reorientation of Western energy needs to non-petroleum based sources
*Use of technology (drones, satellites, tactical nukes)

[working_mom]

Diplomacy with gun-totting Taleban and a nuclear armed Pakistan importing terror world wide?  Lol! Good luck to your diplomats