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.

 

Trump slams Pakistan for 'lies & deceit' in New Year's tweet

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Blender5L

Only if you just say cap that isn't true I guess.

My basis is on the life of pope Francis in Argentina as a Jesuit.

But yes I agree with trump here. 100 percent. Saudia Arabia being worse but he probably doesn't want to play with that fire unless he is terminal.




posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Blender5L

Your current POTUS is a royal #up you just haven't noticed it yet.
edit on 1-1-2018 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 11:00 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Yeah yeah yeah blah blah blah.



posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 11:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Oh Trump needs them, as I stated before they are in a strategic position. If you look at a map of the world, there are very few ways to get into Afghanistan. Now the US could try to go through China and come from the North, but I do not think that China will allow the US to move military equipment or persons through its country to get to Afghanistan. And do you honestly think Iran, will? So that leaves Pakistan, as the only rout.

But more importantly, Pakistan is at where the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea meets, and where the Straits of Hormuz happens to start when going from the Arabian Sea into the Persian Gulf. Now if the US fully insults and cuts off the money to Pakistan, what do you think that Pakistan may or could do?

Well first would be to strengthen diplomatic channels and ties with 2 of its neighbors, namely China to the North and Iran to the West. And would it not be interesting if say both Iran and Pakistan decide to allow for China to put say a naval base in their countries along with say strengthening ties between all three countries, including military interests? After all how much oil does the US really need or want coming from that part of the world? If they were to say block the Straits, and say not allow ships carrying crude leaving and going to the USA, that would really put pressure on the USA.



Lots of what if's.

Let them block the oil, that would mean war and not only the USA. Blocking won't happen.

Pakistan, Iran and China are not stupid.

Bagram is still open anyway. Why would we need bases in Pakistan? How many are there now?









posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 11:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blender5L
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Yeah yeah yeah blah blah blah.





I use that line when I have nothing else to offer too....



posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 11:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Blender5L
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Yeah yeah yeah blah blah blah.





I use that line when I have nothing else to offer too....


You still have nothing to offer....



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 12:09 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

From what I can tell, there is over 70+ us military camps/bases in that region, though some of them are joint operations.

Oh it is not a matter of stupidity but of managing resources. The USA is no where near the region, and thus has to travel there, means that their supply lines stretch out. There is more than one way to interfere with a resource production like oil, and Iran has the tools and means to do such, beyond putting a blockade with the Straits of Hormuz.



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 12:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Yeah, I am pretty sure. The bases are suppose to be temporary, to support operations that are currently going. However, they do need supplies, and reinforcements.

Now if Pakistan cuts off that supply line, then what do you think will happen to the 11,000 US military personnel present in Afghanistan? While they should be able to hold out for a month, not barring anything major, but a coordinated attack, hitting key points, like say an ammo dump, or more IED's to take out vehicles and then what? No replacements, means that the operating capacity of those troops starts to dwindle down.



pakistan will get regime change if they dont chill.






Well you're going to have your hands full with all this regime change, so Pakistan, Iran and nth Korea.... Good luck with that.


Won't be as difficult as you think.



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

It is simple math: The USA produces 4.9 million barrels of oil a day. However, the USA also consumes 19.69 barrels of oil a day. So that means we end up being about -15 million barrels short in the event of an oil shortage, or where the supply is interrupted.

So how strategic of a oil route would it be to the USA? And how much damage could be done to the USA if all of the sudden the oil was stopped for say a day or a week or more?



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 12:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheGOAT

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Yeah, I am pretty sure. The bases are suppose to be temporary, to support operations that are currently going. However, they do need supplies, and reinforcements.

Now if Pakistan cuts off that supply line, then what do you think will happen to the 11,000 US military personnel present in Afghanistan? While they should be able to hold out for a month, not barring anything major, but a coordinated attack, hitting key points, like say an ammo dump, or more IED's to take out vehicles and then what? No replacements, means that the operating capacity of those troops starts to dwindle down.



pakistan will get regime change if they dont chill.






Well you're going to have your hands full with all this regime change, so Pakistan, Iran and nth Korea.... Good luck with that.


Won't be as difficult as you think.





You're right it's likely far harder than I imagine it to be.



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 12:23 AM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

With alot of these Islamic countries, there is always a danger that a regime change is that you could get a leader who has a far worse point of view, and right now there are rumblings towards that way, with the elections there.



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 05:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Yeah, I am pretty sure. The bases are suppose to be temporary, to support operations that are currently going. However, they do need supplies, and reinforcements.

Now if Pakistan cuts off that supply line, then what do you think will happen to the 11,000 US military personnel present in Afghanistan? While they should be able to hold out for a month, not barring anything major, but a coordinated attack, hitting key points, like say an ammo dump, or more IED's to take out vehicles and then what? No replacements, means that the operating capacity of those troops starts to dwindle down.



Ummm. No.

Link



The following military bases in Pakistan have been accessible to the United States, mainly for logistics, relief efforts or as launching bases for drone operations.[3] Pakistan comes under the United States Central Command (USCENTCOM) theatre of operations.[4][5] The Afghanistan-Pakistan Center of Excellence is a division of USCENTCOM, focusing on analysis of operations in Pakistan and Afghanistan (formerly known as the AfPak theatre).[6] Currently, there are no U.S. bases in Pakistan.[7]


Read that last sentence again.

And compare that list of bases in Pakistan with ISAF bases within the provinces of Afghanistan:

ISAF

Even when we did make use of bases in Pak, it was mostly drones, recon, intel intercepts (radio mostly), "as and when" use, aid missions (mostly TO Pakistan; flood/earthquake relief). There was some limited logistical support but none that couldn't be handled elsewhere in afpak/centcom.
edit on 2/1/18 by 35Foxtrot because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 05:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Blender5L

A response to let the world know the truth, huh?

That is an interesting choice of words. It occurs to me that you could help drain the swamp by getting other nations to rat out the underhanded stuff we did over the prior 2 administrations.

Now i want to see the pakistani response.



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 05:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Oh Trump needs them, as I stated before they are in a strategic position. If you look at a map of the world, there are very few ways to get into Afghanistan. Now the US could try to go through China and come from the North, but I do not think that China will allow the US to move military equipment or persons through its country to get to Afghanistan. And do you honestly think Iran, will? So that leaves Pakistan, as the only rout.

But more importantly, Pakistan is at where the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea meets, and where the Straits of Hormuz happens to start when going from the Arabian Sea into the Persian Gulf. Now if the US fully insults and cuts off the money to Pakistan, what do you think that Pakistan may or could do?

Well first would be to strengthen diplomatic channels and ties with 2 of its neighbors, namely China to the North and Iran to the West. And would it not be interesting if say both Iran and Pakistan decide to allow for China to put say a naval base in their countries along with say strengthening ties between all three countries, including military interests? After all how much oil does the US really need or want coming from that part of the world? If they were to say block the Straits, and say not allow ships carrying crude leaving and going to the USA, that would really put pressure on the USA.


Do you really believe that China is the only northern route into Afghanistan?

Maybe look at that "map" of yours again.

Here's centcom:

Centcom AOR

You'll notice China doesn't even share a contiguous border with Afghanistan.



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 06:00 AM
link   
Pakistan is a very difficult situation.

We all know they supported the Taliban and I am sorry but there is no way that senior military offices didn't know that Bin Laden was in town.

Something like 80,000 Pakistani's have died in the war on terror, Pakistan is a very complex issue that I do not believe can be fully explored in a single thread or post.

All I will say is that Trump conducting diplomacy via Twitter like this is frankly retarded.



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 06:21 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

He isnt conducting diplomacy. He communicating with his base. At least, that is the story that is usually told regarding his twitter

If he were to somehow use his tweets to get another nation to provide evidence of criminal behavior on a prior admin, so much the better



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan




He isnt conducting diplomacy. He communicating with his base. At least, that is the story that is usually told regarding his twitter


True but it does not change the fact that Pakistan will also see it and have to respond accordingly.

This is not how a statesman should be acting in my view.

If you disagree thats fine, but in my view its stupid to go about tweeting this sort of stuff regardless of the reason behind it.

He is the President, not some b-list celebrity using twitter to communicate with his fans.....oh wait..



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I dont disagree with you.

But hope it gives pakistan the opportunity to spill some beans on bush and obama.



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: 35Foxtrot

Do you think Russia is going to let the US through with military forces? I don't think so, not through their air space, and certainly not via land. And like most other countries, they are going to demand money to allow the USA to pass through their country to get there. So the other countries in the area may not be either so willing to allow such.

Kazakhstan, Ubekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajkistan, and Kyrgystan, all separate Russia from Afghanistan, and they were all once part of the Soviet Union. And here again, to travel and hold such a large exercise and movement, means that they will all charge. So exactly how is the USA suppose to get into Afghanistan again? It is surrounded on all sides, does not have a deep water port, is in the mountains, surrounded by countries that either do not like or trust the USA or are somewhat friendly, though many are not wanting to have the US military go rolling on through. Those to the north saw that already and probably are not wanting a repeat of what they just got away from.



posted on Jan, 2 2018 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Blender5L

A response to let the world know the truth, huh?

That is an interesting choice of words. It occurs to me that you could help drain the swamp by getting other nations to rat out the underhanded stuff we did over the prior 2 administrations.

Now i want to see the pakistani response.


It's a very odd statement from pakistan yeah. I'll agree with the fact that Trump is opening up a whole new ball game here by openly interacting with the public on what he's actually saying and what the MSN media is falsely portraying. I think that's a solid plan and a smart one on his part. No room for misunderstandings about anything that way.

The pakistani's response to this will be interesting.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join