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

President Donald Trump slammed Pakistan for 'lies & deceit' in a New Year's Day tweet that said Islamabad had played U.S. leaders for 'fools.'
'No more,' Trump tweeted.
Trump in his tweet said the U.S. had given Pakistan $33 billion in the last 15 years, yet Afghanistan and the U.S. have long accused Pakistan of providing safe havens for militants.
Meanwhile, Pakistan had no official comment but Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif tweeted that his government was preparing a response that 'will let the world know the truth.'
"The United States has foolishly given Pakistan more than 33 billion dollars in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies & deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools," Trump tweeted.

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

It's starting to look like Trumps not only chasing the ratz in the USA but he's also homing in on the ones over seas too. He's on full throttle now and it don't look like the train is stopping any time soon.

First we've got him speaking up for those who can't in Iran, and now Pakistan with it's ground zero leadership if you can call it that. It's nice seeing a President that kicks azz all over the place. Is the Vatican next? Or maybe he already said something about that already, can't remember. But once the ratz are gone and the field is cleared, things will start improving for everyone.

a reply to: Blender5L

I'm all for stopping foreign aide, especially to Pakistan, but Trump and his tweets are odd because just this past October he sent out a very complimentary tweet about Pakistan.

twitter.com...

Starting to develop a much better relationship with Pakistan and its leaders. I want to thank them for their cooperation on many fronts.

He's always on both sides of every issue and you never know where he stands. I wouldn't be surprised if he compliments Pakistan in the coming months again.

a reply to: Blender5L

It's stuff like this that makes him tolerable for me. The Vatican? Are they funding terrorists?

a reply to: Swills

I would hazard a guess that something's changed.

a reply to: Blender5L

People are quick to dismiss our current president as a bubbling fool but in truth people don't get to his current standing by being so. Especially by becoming the president of the United States. He's 10 steps ahead playing 4d chess. Leaving the rats to wonder how they lost their grip

a reply to: luthier

That's kind of a funny question. The Vatican are a whole different species when it comes to being covert in their several century's long deception and intollerance.

a reply to: Blender5L

The Vatican isn't what it was before the reformation. They certainly aren't providing weapons to terrorists I am aware of.

I'm actually hysterical about this.

Every time Trump Tweet's 100,000 angel in heaven die, sad.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Blender5L

I'm all for stopping foreign aide, especially to Pakistan, but Trump and his tweets are odd because just this past October he sent out a very complimentary tweet about Pakistan.

twitter.com...

Starting to develop a much better relationship with Pakistan and its leaders. I want to thank them for their cooperation on many fronts.

He's always on both sides of every issue and you never know where he stands. I wouldn't be surprised if he compliments Pakistan in the coming months again.

It could be he came to an understanding with Pakistan in October but now they've lied about something, and are now in the dog house because of it.

a reply to: luthier

Yeah, no. I think they're definitely behind all the trauma and garbage we're seeing in the world today. What better cover than to claim the throne of religious control and laugh because everyone believes it.

If you think about it, there's a ton of royals, prime ministers, dignitaries and such who visit the vatican. What gives with that? Do they believe he's really god or something? Its a question no one's really given a valid answer to.

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

I would hazard a guess that something's changed.

Yep that would be Trump's mood.......

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Clearly but he doesn't express what changed, instead he just attacks via a tweet leaving most of us scratching our heads.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

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

I would hazard a guess that something's changed.

Yep that would be Trump's mood.......

Time will tell.

a reply to: Swills

Fair point. It is a bit trollish.

a reply to: gdkknxnqkc

In this case the man is a bumbling fool.

What will be the explanation to the families of over 11,000 service members who could end up stuck in a foreign country with no way to get reinforcements or supplies to do a mission?

What do you honestly think is going to happen if they cut the funding to Pakistan? The country of Pakistan will simply say no the US can no longer use its country as a staging ground in Afghanistan. That means no more military flights in or out of that country, no more supplies, in fact it would simply just let the US troops there remain or get killed. And who would be to blame for that little fiasco? That is right, it would hit hard on Trump.

Its always fun to antagonize those with nuclear weapons. It is not like those terrorist cells have tried to get their hands on them.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Are you sure about that? I'm pretty sure the US have bases in Afghanistan.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Don't you think he is fully aware of all that. I promise you President Trump is no fool.

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: sdcigarpig

Don't you think he is fully aware of all that. I promise you President Trump is no fool.

Unless you are his doctor your promise as empty as his.

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.