[mentalfloss]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

There were some complaints that the USA was being "racist" because we're not opening our wallets to aid the muslim Pakistanis. That got squashed right away when it was poined out that total US aid (government and charity) to muslim Indonesia topped $4 billion dollars after the 2004 tsunami. The difference is that the Pakistanis were recently polled and some 60% of them are openly hostile to the USA. It's really hard to want to care about people who want you dead. http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/Po ... 20719.html

Looks like this is a great opportunity to quash that hostility by showing them we are not the enemy.

Lead by example.

And if they bite the hand that feeds then we can use that as an excuse to go to war. Everybody wins!

[andyt]

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

There were some complaints that the USA was being "racist" because we're not opening our wallets to aid the muslim Pakistanis. That got squashed right away when it was poined out that total US aid (government and charity) to muslim Indonesia topped $4 billion dollars after the 2004 tsunami. The difference is that the Pakistanis were recently polled and some 60% of them are openly hostile to the USA. It's really hard to want to care about people who want you dead. http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/Po ... 20719.html

Looks like this is a great opportunity to quash that hostility by showing them we are not the enemy.

Lead by example.

And if they bite the hand that feeds then we can use that as an excuse to go to war. Everybody wins!

They've been biting the hand that feeds their military for years.

We tried being generous for the earthquake - did that help, did that buy us love? I'm not even sure the ignorant fucks that get the aid actually know it's from the west. And how much aid actually gets to the people who need it, how much disappears into the pockets of the elite?

[CommanderSock]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

CommanderSock CommanderSock:

The biggest nightmare for the west, would be a Pakistani government collapse.

Not really. If the Pakistani government collapses and the Pakistani nuclear weapons fall into the hands of the Taliban India has tacitly promised to nuke Pakistan from one end to the other to prevent the Taliban from nuking India, something they've sworn to do.

That's the #1 reason the US is there is to help avert a nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India. It'll be fun to see what happens when Obama pulls out the troops next year.

India will not exterminate 150m people. That's just pure fantasy.

[andyt]

CommanderSock CommanderSock:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

CommanderSock CommanderSock:

The biggest nightmare for the west, would be a Pakistani government collapse.

Not really. If the Pakistani government collapses and the Pakistani nuclear weapons fall into the hands of the Taliban India has tacitly promised to nuke Pakistan from one end to the other to prevent the Taliban from nuking India, something they've sworn to do.

That's the #1 reason the US is there is to help avert a nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India. It'll be fun to see what happens when Obama pulls out the troops next year.

India will not exterminate 150m people. That's just pure fantasy.

Right. China might have something to say about that too.

But how many nukes does Pakistan have. If anarchy reigns, wouldn't it be possible for the US to go in and just take them?

[mentalfloss]

andyt andyt:

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

There were some complaints that the USA was being "racist" because we're not opening our wallets to aid the muslim Pakistanis. That got squashed right away when it was poined out that total US aid (government and charity) to muslim Indonesia topped $4 billion dollars after the 2004 tsunami. The difference is that the Pakistanis were recently polled and some 60% of them are openly hostile to the USA. It's really hard to want to care about people who want you dead. http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/Po ... 20719.html

Looks like this is a great opportunity to quash that hostility by showing them we are not the enemy.

Lead by example.

And if they bite the hand that feeds then we can use that as an excuse to go to war. Everybody wins!

They've been biting the hand that feeds their military for years.

We tried being generous for the earthquake - did that help, did that buy us love? I'm not even sure the ignorant fucks that get the aid actually know it's from the west. And how much aid actually gets to the people who need it, how much disappears into the pockets of the elite?

This is more of a matter of quantum. The amount we would suffer to help would innocent civilians who were caught up in a natural disaster would not be a hindrance at all to our every day lives. We would not be fueling any terrorist movement or anything else that would bring us harm.

At least Ontarians can say they used those HST cheques for something useful.

The distribution of funds is another matter entirely. We can at least say we tried when we show the receipt.

[andyt]

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

This is more of a matter of quantum. The amount we would suffer to help would innocent civilians who were caught up in a natural disaster would not be a hindrance at all to our every day lives. We would not be fueling any terrorist movement or anything else that would bring us harm.

At least Ontarians can say they used those HST cheques for something useful.

The distribution of funds is another matter entirely. We can at least say we tried when we show the receipt.

Quantum Solace? Again, if the aid we sent for the earthquake wasn't appreciated, how will this help? Even the US, after all the help we offered during 9/11 didn't acknowledge us.

Who are you going to show that receipt to, that will make any difference?

[CommanderSock]

andyt andyt:

Right. China might have something to say about that too.

But how many nukes does Pakistan have. If anarchy reigns, wouldn't it be possible for the US to go in and just take them?

They could go and try and take them, whether they succeed will depend on many variables, both internal and external.

[mentalfloss]

andyt andyt:

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

This is more of a matter of quantum. The amount we would suffer to help would innocent civilians who were caught up in a natural disaster would not be a hindrance at all to our every day lives. We would not be fueling any terrorist movement or anything else that would bring us harm.

At least Ontarians can say they used those HST cheques for something useful.

The distribution of funds is another matter entirely. We can at least say we tried when we show the receipt.

Quantum Solace? Again, if the aid we sent for the earthquake wasn't appreciated, how will this help? Even the US, after all the help we offered during 9/11 didn't acknowledge us.

Who are you going to show that receipt to, that will make any difference?

Well, if there is some real malevolence from Pakistan toward the U.S. that actually fuels something significant, we can always document our humanitarian attempts. Other than that, it would be a gesture of good will - those things still exist, don't they? Not everything needs international acknowledgement in order to have merit, does it? If I were American, I would be proud to help others simply based on that capability alone.

[BartSimpson]

CommanderSock CommanderSock:

India will not exterminate 150m people. That's just pure fantasy.

Really? You think the Indian government will just take it in the shorts if the Taliban get their hands on the 100-150 nukes that Pakistan has and starts tossing them at the Hindu 'infidels'?

For that matter, should the rest of the world sit back and watch while a bunch of crazies take control of that many nukes?

http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/004647.html

[andyt]

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

Well, if there is some real malevolence from Pakistan toward the U.S. that actually fuels something significant, we can always document our humanitarian attempts. Other than that, it would be a gesture of good will - those things still exist, don't they? Not everything needs international acknowledgement in order to have merit, does it? If I were American, I would be proud to help others simply based on that capability alone.

Somebody on this forum posted that 60% of Pakistanis harbor illwill toward the west - that seems like a sufficient quantum to me.

The Pakis are already the reason the Talibs in Astan are so successful - they couldn't do it without Paki support. Our humanitarian gestures mean nothing to them.

It's not international acknowledgement I'm talking about. It's acknowledgement within Pakistan, and appreciation. Very little of that.

[EyeBrock]

andyt andyt:

QBall QBall:

If Pakistan has money for a nuclear weapons program then they have the money to help their own. If not then maybe they need to re-examine their priorities. Until they do they won't get a dime from me.

Many Canadians sent aid to the US after Katrina.

But I don't want to give Pakistan money because it just disappears into the maws of the rich. People make the argument that if we don't help, it will strengthen the Taliban. But the west really came thru in the Pakistani earth quake, and I didn't see any appreciation on the part of Pak or any lessening of Taliban activity, supported by the army.

andyt is bang on with this summation. Pretty good input on this thread andy.

[mentalfloss]

andyt andyt:

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

Well, if there is some real malevolence from Pakistan toward the U.S. that actually fuels something significant, we can always document our humanitarian attempts. Other than that, it would be a gesture of good will - those things still exist, don't they? Not everything needs international acknowledgement in order to have merit, does it? If I were American, I would be proud to help others simply based on that capability alone.

Somebody on this forum posted that 60% of Pakistanis harbor illwill toward the west - that seems like a sufficient quantum to me.

You forgot about the 64% of Pakistanis that actually want improved relations with the U.S. Up 53% from last year. Funny, they have the same desire to mend ties with India. Who woulda thunk it?

http://pewglobal.org/2010/07/29/concern ... -pakistan/

But I bet the parrot above me won't take that into consideration.

[BartSimpson]

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

You forgot about the 64% of Pakistanis that actually want improved relations with the U.S. Up 53% from last year.

http://pewglobal.org/2010/07/29/concern ... -pakistan/

But I bet the parrot above me won't take that into consideration.

MF, the following quote is from your link:

$1:

America’s overall image remains negative in Pakistan. Along with Turks and Egyptians, Pakistanis give the U.S. its lowest ratings among the 22 nations included in the spring 2010 Pew Global Attitudes survey – in all three countries, only 17% have a favorable view of the U.S. Roughly six-in-ten (59%) Pakistanis describe the U.S. as an enemy,

[EyeBrock]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

You forgot about the 64% of Pakistanis that actually want improved relations with the U.S. Up 53% from last year.

http://pewglobal.org/2010/07/29/concern ... -pakistan/

But I bet the parrot above me won't take that into consideration.

MF, the following quote is from your link:

$1:

America’s overall image remains negative in Pakistan. Along with Turks and Egyptians, Pakistanis give the U.S. its lowest ratings among the 22 nations included in the spring 2010 Pew Global Attitudes survey – in all three countries, only 17% have a favorable view of the U.S. Roughly six-in-ten (59%) Pakistanis describe the U.S. as an enemy,

Pretty Polly.....!

[mentalfloss]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

You forgot about the 64% of Pakistanis that actually want improved relations with the U.S. Up 53% from last year.

http://pewglobal.org/2010/07/29/concern ... -pakistan/

But I bet the parrot above me won't take that into consideration.

MF, the following quote is from your link:

$1:

America’s overall image remains negative in Pakistan. Along with Turks and Egyptians, Pakistanis give the U.S. its lowest ratings among the 22 nations included in the spring 2010 Pew Global Attitudes survey – in all three countries, only 17% have a favorable view of the U.S. Roughly six-in-ten (59%) Pakistanis describe the U.S. as an enemy,

Thank you captain obvious. I was responding to the same stat already. The point is that this can change and there is clearly a demand for it to change.

Hence the:

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

You forgot about the 64% of Pakistanis that actually want improved relations with the U.S. Up 53% from last year. Funny, they have the same desire to mend ties with India. Who woulda thunk it?

http://pewglobal.org/2010/07/29/concern ... -pakistan/

But I bet the parrot above me won't take that into consideration.

And the parrot still didn't get it.


Also of Note:

* There is no consensus among Pakistanis about the size of American assistance to their country – 23% believe the U.S. provides a lot of financial aid, 22% say it provides a little aid, 10% say hardly any, and 16% believe the U.S. gives Pakistan no aid.

* Over the last five years, Pakistani Muslims have become less likely to believe Islam plays a major role in the country’s politics. Currently, 47% say it has a large role, compared with 63% in 2005.

* The dispute over Kashmir remains a major issue. Roughly eight-in-ten say it is very important that Pakistan and India resolve this issue, and 71% rate it a very big problem.


Doesn't sound like a bad place to help out and make a name for ourselves now does it? Oh, but who am I to deny them of their inherently terrorist nature..