It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WAIT, the US has given Pakistan 33 BILLION dollars since 2002? That could have payed for THE WALL

page: 1
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Quoting from Two different articles here, first is the failing New York Times.
Headline:

Frustrated U.S. Might Withhold $255 Million in Aid From Pakistan

www.nytimes.com...

The United States, which has provided Pakistan more than $33 billion in aid since 2002, said in August that it was withholding the $255 million until Pakistan did more to crack down on internal terrorist groups. Senior administration officials met this month to decide what to do about the money, and American officials said a final decision could be made in the coming weeks.


Then to another source that indicates there is no Might about it.
Hindustan Times
Headline:

Is Trump admin giving up on Pakistan? US to deny military aid worth $255 million

www.hindustantimes.com...

The Trump administration on Friday announced the United States will deny Pakistan military aid amounting to $255 million as it expects Islamabad to take decisive action “against terrorists and militants on its soil”.

“The United States does not plan to spend the $255 million in FY 2016 in Foreign Military Financing for Pakistan at this time,” said a spokesperson of the President’s National Security Council in a statement to Hindustan Times.


First reported by The New York Times, the move to withhold the money, which may not be large but would have signaled US backing, is reported to have come shortly after Pakistan refused to hand over to the Americans an operative of the Haqqani Network apprehended during the rescue of an American-Canadian family in October.

The Haqqani Network is an affiliate of Afghan Taliban and works out of Pakistan, inflicting massive casualties on US-led international coalition in Afghanistan. Frustrated by Islamabad’s reluctance to give them, the United States has tied large portions of military aid payments to Pakistan to its actions aimed at debilitating the network.




Ha ha, yesss, screw Pakistan! Bring India back to the table! Pakistan has been screwing with us for decades, and the Awan thing is just a sliver of it.
Good God in heaven, I love this timeline.

I am predicting the following kind of headlines from the MSM:
"Terrorist trump cuts off all aide to glorious nation of Pakistan. Millions of children will starve by 2018" - cnn


edit on 30-12-2017 by EvidenceNibbler because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 03:58 AM
link   
It's about time these one-sided deals were ended. How in the world has the US continued to fund the Pakistani military whilst accepting Pakistans refusals to cooperating to help bring terrorists to justice?

Money should only be given with very clear agreed upon expectations of the return.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 04:02 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

We give them money to help fight terrorism in the region, but the problem is that the incentives are all wrong. If they really did make a significant effort to fight terrorism then eventually there wouldn't be a reason for us to keep giving them money. No more terrorists? Okay, no more money!

I'm sure a lot of that money probably goes to keep their President's essential supporters happy.

If their President did something to cause that money to stop flowing his supporters probably wouldn't be to happy, and he might find himself replaced. So, to keep the money flowing they're incentivized to actually harbor terrorists. We make this same mistake over and over in countries all around the world.

Instead of giving them money unconditionally, maybe we should put money in escrow. So many dead terrorists for so much money. Show some results if they want to get the money.

(These aren't my original ideas. Read "The Dictator's Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics")



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 04:08 AM
link   
Well, if we really do need to pay countries just to be our friend then that makes us John’s and them the whores. I am not sure how Allah feels about that arrangement.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

All those money US pump out to middle east ends up in corrupt politicians and terrorists anyway.
Recently there have been a case about that here in Denmark.. so we stopped sending aid, until we know who was getting it.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 04:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
Well, if we really do need to pay countries just to be our friend then that makes us John’s and them the whores. I am not sure how Allah feels about that arrangement.


And how does "Jezuz Christ" Superstar feel about "his" people? I mean, some of them are even proud of being the exploiters of whores...



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 05:40 AM
link   
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Well it's elementary, Dear America, Trump is $h!t scared of China and India.

If Trump wants to make America great again he can't afford to alienate the two of the greatest growing economies in the world. It's time to offer an olive branch and end this pointless bickering because his isolationist beliefs will turn him into a one term wonder and will hurt the lower class, but screw them and their concerns.


edit on 30-12-2017 by Thecakeisalie because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-12-2017 by Thecakeisalie because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 05:50 AM
link   
A lot of internet thieves too, order something, send payment, by-by money.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 07:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: UKTruth

We give them money to help fight terrorism in the region, but the problem is that the incentives are all wrong. If they really did make a significant effort to fight terrorism then eventually there wouldn't be a reason for us to keep giving them money. No more terrorists? Okay, no more money!

I'm sure a lot of that money probably goes to keep their President's essential supporters happy.

If their President did something to cause that money to stop flowing his supporters probably wouldn't be to happy, and he might find himself replaced. So, to keep the money flowing they're incentivized to actually harbor terrorists. We make this same mistake over and over in countries all around the world.

Instead of giving them money unconditionally, maybe we should put money in escrow. So many dead terrorists for so much money. Show some results if they want to get the money.

(These aren't my original ideas. Read "The Dictator's Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics")


I've seen how people from this area work. They'll tell you "Oh, we know where he is, we've got the troops, but our helicopters are out of spare parts, a few hundred million will put that right." Send over some money. "Oh, yes, our helicopters did the job, but their defenses are buried deep underground, we'll need to put troops on the ground, but the terrain really knocks hell out of our vehicles, a few billions will fix that." More money is sent over. "We've pummeled
their mountain caves, they've fled in small groups, we'll need some drones to pick them off. A few billion will fix
that. And it goes on and on. They'll probably be sending the money over to the fighters to pay them not to do any attacks.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 07:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
Well, if we really do need to pay countries just to be our friend then that makes us John’s and them the whores. I am not sure how Allah feels about that arrangement.


Its more like Frat brothers to pay for friends.

Unless its with benefits, then its prostitution. We arent getting any benefits though



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

India isnt reqlly growing right now. In fact....looks like they are having some real issues


“It was a terrible scene for me,” said Mr. Choudhari, 41, who had been with the company for 11 years and most recently maintained software for a British client. As the manager spoke, he thought: “I have an 11-year-old child. My wife is not working. How to pay the home loans?”

Mr. Choudhari is one of a number of Indian technology workers who have lost their jobs in recent months as many in India debate whether an industry that has long served as a gateway to the middle class is preparing to shed jobs en masse.


www.nytimes.com...



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 08:01 AM
link   
The wall is a fantasy. A talking point. A campaign slogan. Kind of like lock her up.
Ain't ever gonna happen. Lol



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 08:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
The wall is a fantasy. A talking point. A campaign slogan. Kind of like lock her up.
Ain't ever gonna happen. Lol

We'll see.
There's already physical barriers in place, it just needs to be completed.

As of January 2009, U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported that it had more than 580 miles (930 km) of barriers in place.[3] The total length of the continental border is 1,989 miles (3,201 km).

edit on 30-12-2017 by EvidenceNibbler because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 08:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
The wall is a fantasy. A talking point. A campaign slogan. Kind of like lock her up.
Ain't ever gonna happen. Lol


Don't forget "Mexico will pay for it".



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
The wall is a fantasy. A talking point. A campaign slogan. Kind of like lock her up.
Ain't ever gonna happen. Lol


of course its not going to happen.

what trips me out are all the people that are all giddy about the wall.
they want them some wall



now comes the post where i am told i want illegal murderers coming across our borders and the law is the law and maga



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Ummm. We give far more to Israel on a yearly basis.


I'm gonna just leave this here...


edit on 30-12-2017 by AgarthaSeed because: (no reason given)


(post by fiverx313 removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: UKTruth

We give them money to help fight terrorism in the region, but the problem is that the incentives are all wrong. If they really did make a significant effort to fight terrorism then eventually there wouldn't be a reason for us to keep giving them money. No more terrorists? Okay, no more money!

I'm sure a lot of that money probably goes to keep their President's essential supporters happy.

If their President did something to cause that money to stop flowing his supporters probably wouldn't be to happy, and he might find himself replaced. So, to keep the money flowing they're incentivized to actually harbor terrorists. We make this same mistake over and over in countries all around the world.

Instead of giving them money unconditionally, maybe we should put money in escrow. So many dead terrorists for so much money. Show some results if they want to get the money.

(These aren't my original ideas. Read "The Dictator's Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics")


Any money given to Pakistan you can bet is being done to benefit us.
Spreading our dollars around exports inflation and benefits the military industrial complex.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Oh this is very funny. And in this global game the country of Pakistan has the high card, while the US at a loss. And here is why:

If one recalls what happened in 2001, that is what started the entire operation in Afghanistan, which has continued onto this day. In order to get into Afghanistan, it requires the cooperation of the neighboring countries of Afghanistan, to do such. Now here is the real crux of the problem, there are really only 4 countries that could support and get the military into Afghanistan, is only 4. There is Russia, China, Iran and Pakistan. Now China is not going to allow a large force of military persons and equipment through its territory, nor will Russia. Iran does not trust and despises the USA, so that only leaves Pakistan. And the USA has been paying for the right to move man, equipment and supplies into the country of Afghanistan and back again.

So while Trump is grumbling and threatening to withhold payment, here is how this will play out, as it has happened before:

The US withholds money from Pakistan. Ok, so now Pakistan, stops all convoy’s, and denies the USA from crossing its boarders or airspace into and out of Afghanistan. Now the USA has around 11,000 US military personnel left in Afghanistan, with no incoming supplies coming in, and with its supplies slowly dwindling down fully. Then the ambassadors go into conference and discuss. Now Pakistan can continue to say no, and all the while increasing the amount of money required for them to reconsider and finally allow for the US to move through its territories again.

If the USA tries to move into Pakistan with its military, then it would have to deal with other countries moving assets in to stop the USA and backing Pakistan. India is not going to get involved, as it does not need to increase the tension with Pakistan, as they are neighbors, and are currently engaged in a cold war with Pakistan and dealing with China. And then there are all of the different countries that Pakistan has alliances with, including several major Nato allies.

Now the question to ask is this: Is it worth it? We start a war with Pakistan, and it would be a game changer with the USA, that here again it would be one that we can ill afford and could possibly lose in the long run, in more than one way.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: UKTruth

We give them money to help fight terrorism in the region,


So, in other words, the US gives Pakistan the "incentive" to support terror.

By secretly supporting terrorism with one hand, they can continue to collect funds from the US with the other hand.

But, if terrorism was defeated, the flow of funds to fight it would cease.

Hence giving Pak money to fight terror, just creates more terrorism.




top topics



 
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join