Trump Withholds $255 Million in Aid To Pakistan

Why do you continue to spin what I say or put words in my mouth. When did I say anything about conspiracies. I told you, as did the gentlemen from the CFR in the piece I provided back at the beginning that Glaspie failed to deliver the clear and provide message that any invasion of Kuwait would draw a military response from the US. And that it appears that she was following a parsed message from her superiors who were either, sloppy, incompetent or deliberate, one.

 

OK, what exactly did you mean by this statement?
"This was another case of USFP intrigue to produce a desired result."

 

USFP transcends administrations. I think you know that. Or do you think that “US interests” change everytime a president cleans out hie desk in the Oval Office on his way out. If you look at our history in the Middle East, it’s fairly consistent, order out of chaos, not as a matter of conspiracy, but as a matter of policy. The US has been on a permanent war economy since the end of WW2. You’ve probably seen the pentagon paper that presents the seven countries of the Middle East that were planned for regime change. I believe that 3 or 4 of them have been completed during the last two administrations, one is stalled due to Russian intervention. Not conspiratorial, USFP.

 

In the hands of the everyday worker you actually mean. Democrat Charlie Wilson made funds available to the Afghan tribes and weapons as well to defeat the Soviets. I guess the Democrats never forgave him for trying to defeat the Soviets. Even lied by saying he paid Osama. Saddam was a two bit dictator. If you liked him, fine. I did not. Clinton hated him. Democrats in congress hated him. Bush took care of the problem of the Clinton Iraqi Freedom act. Signed into law to get rid of Saddam.

 

Charlie Wilson armed the Mujahideen which became the Taliban that we had to then fight when we followed all the former empires into that untamable country. Unfortunately USFP in the ME has never been sound.

 

That's your overview, but I want to know what you meant by "desired result" in your statement. Are you implying the US wanted Iraq to invade Kuwait? Why would they want that? They certainly didn't gain anything by it. All they did was drive Iraqi forces out of Kuwait.

 

Well, that’s part of understanding USFP in the Middle East. It’s not hard to figure out, it’s hiding in broad daylight, so it’s not a big conspiracy theory. Oil. The free flow of oil to the world is the leading motive of anything the US does in the ME. Iraq was considering removing from the petro dollar. Iraq’s invasion also saw Kuwait recognizing the usefulness of a greater US presence which would serve our needs as we eye Iran.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2002/12/...iraq-war.html?referer=https://www.google.com/

https://www.facebook.com-walmart.co...w.dailymail.co.uk&did=&1F6nO67c=536765511687#

 

My God, you need to get off the Kool-Ade.

If The US wanted a base in Kuwait I'm sure they would not have needed a war with Iraq to accomplish that.

Yes, oil is the big factor in the ME, but encouraging Iraq to take over Kuwait is certainly not going to lead to more stability of oil supply.

 

The US didn’t encourage Iraq to take over Kuwait. Iraq needed no encouragement. What the US failed to do was to tell Kuwait that there would be a swift US military response if Iraq was to invade Kuwait. I’ve shown you twice now that the state departments instruction to Glaspie was to tell Hussein that the US doesn’t have a policy where that’s concerned. And I’ve provided you with scholarly work from the CFR’s forum Foreign Policy, but it’s clear that you’re not interested in reading that or any of the links I’ve provided. Nor did you acknowledge the issue of Iraq removing from the petro dollar. Basically I don’t think you even care.

 

You seem to be of the cabal that feels america can choose leaders of other nations. Enjoy your endless wars of occupation and economic colonization, the hollowing out of your society at home, your partisanshithead perceptual reality, and the utter illusion that your foreign polocy is determined in the white house. All those meanies out there better be scared. We really go after those two bit dictators don't we.

 

With a little imagination and a few cherry-picked facts one can claim a conspiracy behind almost everything. And many people do just that. Its an industry. Elvis didn't really die, the moon landings were all fake, 911 was an inside job, Jimi Hendrix was actually murdered, and on and on. Enough people eat this stuff up to make it quite profitable. Its great click bate and it sells books.

 

Turns out it could be a lot more than $255 million in aid, apparently the US also reimbursed Pakistan for its counterterrorism operations ... which is amusing because you can imagine the actual effort that went into that. What's not amusing is that the amount came to about $1.3 billion.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/04/us/politics/trump-pakistan-aid.html

 

Elvis is dead?

That's terrible news. I was just beginning to like his music.

 

I think mexico may be next on the list

It gets $160 million a year that we can withold till the wall is finished

 

Pakistan says the obvious. They have no alliance with the US.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...f-treating-it-like-whipping-boy-terrorism-row

This is similar to him cutting off Palestinian and refugee aid. It will have consequences most of them no doubt unexpected.

 

Yes, I saw that too. Another old friend of the US jumps the sinking ship...

 

Well they were only the US's friend because they were given an offer after 9/11 - your choice go with us and get aid or do not and get attacked. They did not have terrorists in Pakistan before the US got started on its reaction to 9/11. Now some in this forum are looking forward to ISIS taking it over and don't seem to see this a problem what with them having nukes - apparently believing ISIS will take it over and not get it's hands on the button so just harm the civilians of Pakistan.

 

They had been allies well before that, in fact, as far back as 1947. But I take you point. It has been an on again off again bickering marriage for a long time.

As for those few members here who wish for ISIS to take over Pakistan, I note only that there are some truly infantile members here as in any forum. I accept it might be a prejudice on my part, but most of them - so far as I can see anyway - are more often than not domiciled across the "pond". I think food parcels of baby formulae and napkins wouldn't go amiss --- as an act charity obviously.

 

Nah.....the Palestinians. Then take away some more from the UN.





Trump said that Washington gives Palestinians “HUNDRED OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS a year and get no appreciation or respect. They don’t even want to negotiate a long overdue peace treaty with Israel ... with the Palestinians no longer willing to talk peace, why should we make any of these massive future payments to them?”

“The President has basically said he doesn’t want to give any additional funding, or stop funding, until the Palestinians agree to come back to the negotiation table,” Ambassador Nikki Haley told reporters when asked about future U.S. funding for the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian refugees.

The U.S. is the largest donor to the agency, with a pledge of nearly $370 million as of 2016, according to UNRWA’s website......snip~

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...thhold-aid-cash-to-palestinians-idUSKBN1ER1WT

The President’s tweets follow plans disclosed by his U.N. ambassador earlier on Tuesday to stop funding a United Nations agency that provides humanitarian aid to Palestinian refugees.

 

If the US stops funding the UN it will have both positive and negative consequences

The positive is that we have more money to spend in America

The negative is thst the UN is a whore who wont put out if we dont pay

 

Well we will be dealing with some Negative from Pakistan.....now we might have to find some alternate routes for supplies into Afghanistan.



U.S. suspends at least $900 million in security aid to Pakistan.....

The United States said on Thursday it was suspending at least $900 million in security assistance to Pakistan until it takes action against the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani network militant groups.

On Friday, Pakistan criticized what it called “shifting goalposts” and said the U.S. suspension of aid was counter-productive.

U.S. officials said two main categories of aid are affected: foreign military financing (FMF), which funds purchases of U.S. military hardware, training and services, and coalition support funds (CSF), which reimburse Pakistan for counter-terrorism operations. They said they could make exceptions to fund critical U.S. national security priorities.

CSF funds, which fall under Defense Department authority, are covered by the freeze, said Pentagon spokesman Commander Patrick Evans, saying Congress authorized up to $900 million in such money for Pakistan for fiscal year 2017, which ended Sept. 30. None of that money has yet been disbursed.

The freeze also covers $255 million in FMF for fiscal year 2016, which falls under State Department authority and whose suspension has already been announced, as well as unspecified amounts of FMF that went unspent in earlier fiscal years......snip~

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ion-in-security-aid-to-pakistan-idUSKBN1ET2DX

 

So giving a 'tepid response' to a national leader means they have US permission to invade their neighbors? There should be no debate whatsoever because the idea itself is ludicrous, and only another excuse to justify anti-Americanism by Leftists and Islamists.

 

She's not putting out a hell of a lot, especially not for us.

 

Trumps such a liar and hypocrite. He claims to be the first president to cut funding to Pakistan.

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1110AQ

American civilian and military aid to Pakistan, once the third-largest recipient of U.S. foreign assistance, is expected to total less than $1 billion in 2016, down from a recent peak of more than $3.5 billion in 2011, according to U.S. government data. The United States has not appropriated less than $1 billion to Pakistan since at least 2007.

The long-standing U.S. frustration with Pakistan's refusal to stop supporting the Taliban, especially within the U.S. military and intelligence community, is now overriding President Barack Obama's administration's desire to avoid renewed military involvement in Afghanistan, as well as concerns that China could capitalize on fraying ties between Washington and Islamabad, the U.S. officials said.