Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Most Pakistanis View US as Biggest Threat -Taliban a Distant Third

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by glynch, Aug 10, 2009.

Page 1 of 3

glynch Member

Joined:

Dec 1, 2000

Messages:

18,071

Likes Received:

3,601

It is sad that the US is seen as such a threat by so many people in the world.
It is sort of wierd to live in that type of country. Although I agree that we are the biggest threat to Pakistan, it is hard when you see a lot of good people around you to realize that is what we have become.

#1 glynch, Aug 10, 2009

Mr. Clutch Member

Joined:

Nov 8, 2002

Messages:

46,550

Likes Received:

6,132

Link?

And yet they would probably pick US as the #1 spot to emigrate to.

#2 Mr. Clutch, Aug 10, 2009
glynch Member

Joined:

Dec 1, 2000

Messages:

18,071

Likes Received:

3,601

Mr. Clutch said:

Link?

And yet they would probably pick US as the #1 spot to emigrate to.
Click to expand...

That may still be true, but it would not surprise me if it is declining.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Al-Jazeera_poll_shows_many_Pakistanis_identify_America_as_'biggest'_threat?curid=130441

#3 glynch, Aug 10, 2009
TheBigAristotle Member

Joined:

Jan 28, 2009

Messages:

1,590

Likes Received:

8

It's Pakistan.

#4 TheBigAristotle, Aug 10, 2009
Air Langhi Contributing Member

Joined:

Aug 26, 2000

Messages:

21,941

Likes Received:

6,695

It is like the lakers, yankees, and cowboys. Everybody hates them except their fans.

#5 Air Langhi, Aug 11, 2009
Mathloom Shameless Optimist

Joined:

Oct 4, 2008

Messages:

21,082

Likes Received:

22,527

Mr. Clutch said:

Link?

And yet they would probably pick US as the #1 spot to emigrate to.
Click to expand...

That's extremely annoying of you.

In any case, it would most likely be the UK rather than the US and I'd imagine that Canada has caught up as a destination for emigration by now as well.

#6 Mathloom, Aug 11, 2009
arno_ed Member

Joined:

Jan 14, 2002

Messages:

8,025

Likes Received:

2,132

I think this is logical for Pakistan, Who has invaded the most countries in the region in the last couple of years? Furthermore if the us attacks they are screwed, their army can handle the taliban, but not the US army. So If i were them I would see the US as the biggest thread.

The pakistanis I know would prefer to emigrate to the UK instead of the US. But that is a small sample size. However they do have a history with England, and usually that increases the chance of Pakistanis emigrating to the UK.

#7 arno_ed, Aug 11, 2009

meh Member

Joined:

Jun 16, 2002

Messages:

16,174

Likes Received:

3,387

Not surprising, since many believe that the Taliban attacks are part of a conspiracy brought by the US and India.

Mr. Clutch said:

And yet they would probably pick US as the #1 spot to emigrate to.
Click to expand...

Actually, they prefer middle eastern countries like Saudi Arabia or Egypt. And after that England. They prefer to avoid the US if possible.

I know, it's hard to imagine that there are places people prefer to live aside from the US. I mean, we are only the bestest, awesomest country in the world.

#8 meh, Aug 11, 2009
bigtexxx Member

Joined:

Jun 12, 2002

Messages:

26,971

Likes Received:

2,351

nice work, Obama

change?

#9 bigtexxx, Aug 11, 2009
glynch Member

Joined:

Dec 1, 2000

Messages:

18,071

Likes Received:

3,601

bigtexxx said:

nice work, Obama

change?
Click to expand...

lol Bush hurt our international image so much. Obama could be helping more but he kept many of the bad Bush policies.

#10 glynch, Aug 11, 2009
arno_ed Member

Joined:

Jan 14, 2002

Messages:

8,025

Likes Received:

2,132

glynch said:

lol Bush hurt our international image so much. Obama could be helping more but he kept many of the bad Bush policies.
Click to expand...

Why even bother responding. I mean even a child understands more logic than Bigtexxx showed in his post. It is clear Bush invaded both Iraq en Afghanistan, and started talking about war on terror and axis of evil, furthermore he ignored his allies and invaded Iraq. He did basically everything in his power to destroy the international Image. Furthermore you can also ask Bigtexxx why he suddenly cares about what other countries think. Obama really improved the international image of the US. However there is no room for logic in the D&D. It is clear that the sole reason for some posters on this board is to bash the other party (both Republicans and Democrats) there is no room for intelligent discussions when Obama is mentioned. Responding to him only rewards him.

#11 arno_ed, Aug 11, 2009

1 person likes this.
aghast Member

Joined:

Aug 7, 2003

Messages:

2,329

Likes Received:

169

Air Langhi said:

It is like the lakers, yankees, and cowboys. Everybody hates them except their fans.
Click to expand...

Do the Yankees use grainy footage from Predator drones to bomb suspected Red Sox fans in the Boston suburbs, as the US regularly does to Pakistani villages?

Many of those bombings have later proved to be in error. Even the successful ones (i.e. the suspected target turned out to have actually been there / was killed) involve a lot of collateral damage to the surrounding populace.

I don't necessarily disagree with US military policy on this issue; its efficacy is a complex matter. However, I find it completely understandable that Pakistan's citizenry would be upset with it, and us.

#12 aghast, Aug 11, 2009
conquistador#11 Member

Joined:

Jun 30, 2006

Messages:

39,140

Likes Received:

28,250

If the title of this thread read: " Most pakistanis view U.S as a non-threat", Bigtexx would have posted that obama is a bigger softie than dirk Nowitzki.

Because of a few greedy and power hungry 'righteous' leaders, our entire country gets a bad reputation. It sucks because we have every culture living together in peace. Righties who were purged by the extreme lefties in cuba, lefties who were purged by the extreme righties in the rest of the world, all can go to a football game and live in harmony. Where else does that happen? only in the u.s of a!

#13 conquistador#11, Aug 11, 2009

RedRedemption Member

Joined:

Jul 21, 2009

Messages:

32,542

Likes Received:

7,752

glynch said:

It is sad that the US is seen as such a threat by so many people in the world.
It is sort of wierd to live in that type of country. Although I agree that we are the biggest threat to Pakistan, it is hard when you see a lot of good people around you to realize that is what we have become.
Click to expand...

Well. We are the only threat. I think a unified organized military force is a lot more scarier than an unorganized band of terrorists.

#14 RedRedemption, Aug 11, 2009
justtxyank Member

Joined:

Jul 7, 2005

Messages:

42,895

Likes Received:

39,867

aghast said:

Do the Yankees use grainy footage from Predator drones to bomb suspected Red Sox fans in the Boston suburbs, as the US regularly does to Pakistani villages?
Click to expand...

No, but that's a good idea...

#15 justtxyank, Aug 11, 2009
MoonDogg Member

Joined:

Nov 12, 1999

Messages:

5,167

Likes Received:

495

Jihadis thrice attacked Pakistan nuclear sites

WASHINGTON: Pakistan's nuclear facilities have already been attacked at least thrice by its home-grown extremists and terrorists in little reported incidents over the last two years, even as the world remains divided over the safety and security of the nuclear weapons in the troubled country, according to western analysts.

The incidents, tracked by Shaun Gregory, a professor at Bradford University in UK, include an attack on the nuclear missile storage facility at Sargodha on November 1, 2007, an attack on Pakistan's nuclear airbase at Kamra by a suicide bomber on December 10, 2007, and perhaps most significantly the August 20, 2008 attack when Pakistani Taliban suicide bombers blew up several entry points to one of the armament complexes at the Wah cantonment, considered one of Pakistan's main nuclear weapons assembly.

These attacks have occurred even as Pakistan has taken several steps to secure and fortify its nuclear weapons against potential attacks, particularly by the United States and India, says Gregory.

In fact, the attacks have received so little attention that Peter Bergen, the eminent terrorism expert who reviewed Gregory's paper first published in West Point's Counter Terrorism Center Sentinel, said "he (Gregory) points out something that was news to me (and shouldn't have been) which is that a series of attacks on Pakistan's nuclear weapons facilities have already happened."

Pakistan insists that its nuclear weapons are fully secured and there is no chance of them falling into the hands of the extremists or terrorists.

But Gregory, while detailing the steps Islamabad has taken to protect them against Indian and US attacks, asks if the geographical location of Pakistan's principle nuclear weapons infrastructure, which is mainly in areas dominated by al-Qaida and Taliban, makes it more vulnerable to internal attacks.

Gregory points out that when Pakistan was developing its nuclear weapons infrastructure in the 1970s and 1980s, its
principal concern was the risk that India would overrun its nuclear weapons facilities in an armored offensive if the
facilities were placed close to the long Pakistan-India border.

As a result, Pakistan, with a few exceptions, chose to locate much of its nuclear weapons infrastructure to the
north and west of the country and to the region around Islamabad and Rawalpindi - sites such as Wah, Fatehjang,
Golra Sharif, Kahuta, Sihala, Isa Khel Charma, Tarwanah, and Taxila. The concern, however, is that most of Pakistan's nuclear sites are close to or even within areas dominated by Pakistani Taliban militants and home to al-Qaida.

Detailing the actions taken by Islamabad to safeguard its nuclear assets from external attacks, Gregory writes that
Pakistan has established a "robust set of measures to assure the security of its nuclear weapons." These have
been based on copying US practices, procedures and technologies, and comprise: a) physical security; b)
personnel reliability programs; c) technical and procedural safeguards; and d) deception and secrecy.

In terms of physical security, Pakistan operates a layered concept of concentric tiers of armed forces personnel to
guard nuclear weapons facilities, the use of physical barriers and intrusion detectors to secure nuclear weapons
facilities, the physical separation of warhead cores from their detonation components, and the storage of the
components in protected underground sites.

With respect to personnel reliability, Gregory says the Pakistan Army conducts a tight selection process drawing
almost exclusively on officers from Punjab Province who are considered to have fewer links with religious extremism (now increasingly a questionable premise) or with the Pashtun areas of Pakistan from which groups such as the Pakistani Taliban mainly garner their support.

Pakistan operates an analog to the US Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) that screens individuals for Islamist sympathies, personality problems, drug use, inappropriate external affiliations, and sexual deviancy.

The army uses staff rotation and also operates a "two-person" rule under which no action, decision, or
activity involving a nuclear weapon can be undertaken by fewer than two persons. In total, between 8,000 and 10,000 individuals from the SPD's security division and from Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI), Military Intelligence and Intelligence Bureau agencies are involved in the security clearance and monitoring of those with nuclear weapons duties.

Gregory says despite formal command authority structures that cede a role to Pakistan’s civilian leadership, in
practice the Pakistan Army has complete control over the country's nuclear weapons.

It imposes its executive authority over the weapons through the use of an authenticating code system down through the command chains that is deployment sites, aspects of the nuclear command and control arrangements, and many aspects of the arrangements for nuclear safety and security (such as the numbers of those removed under personnel reliability programs, the reasons for their removal, and how often authenticating and enabling (PAL-type) codes are changed).

In addition, Pakistan uses deception - such as dummy missiles - to complicate the calculus of adversaries and is
likely to have extended this practice to its nuclear weapons infrastructure.

Taken together, these measures provide confidence that the Pakistan Army can fully protect its nuclear weapons against the internal terrorist threat, against its main adversary India, and against the suggestion that its nuclear weapons could be either spirited out of the country by a third party (posited to be the United States) or destroyed in the event of a deteriorating situation or a state collapse in Pakistan, says Gregory.

However, at another point, he says "despite these elaborate safeguards, empirical evidence points to a clear
set of weaknesses and vulnerabilities in Pakistan's nuclear safety and security arrangements."
Click to expand...

#16 MoonDogg, Aug 11, 2009
desi tmac91 Member

Joined:

Jun 26, 2008

Messages:

3,206

Likes Received:

240

Does this include Pakistani Americans?

Lots of us here in the States hate the Taliban and patriotic (including myself).

Of course I've also met anti-American Pakis too.

#17 desi tmac91, Aug 11, 2009
desi tmac91 Member

Joined:

Jun 26, 2008

Messages:

3,206

Likes Received:

240

*Are patriotic.

Typo, its the morning.

#18 desi tmac91, Aug 11, 2009

Air Langhi Contributing Member

Joined:

Aug 26, 2000

Messages:

21,941

Likes Received:

6,695

aghast said:

Do the Yankees use grainy footage from Predator drones to bomb suspected Red Sox fans in the Boston suburbs, as the US regularly does to Pakistani villages?

Many of those bombings have later proved to be in error. Even the successful ones (i.e. the suspected target turned out to have actually been there / was killed) involve a lot of collateral damage to the surrounding populace.

I don't necessarily disagree with US military policy on this issue; its efficacy is a complex matter. However, I find it completely understandable that Pakistan's citizenry would be upset with it, and us.
Click to expand...

And if given a choice most of them would rather live in the US.

#19 Air Langhi, Aug 11, 2009
arno_ed Member

Joined:

Jan 14, 2002

Messages:

8,025

Likes Received:

2,132

Air Langhi said:

And if given a choice most of them would rather live in the US.
Click to expand...

Based on what? How do you know most Pakistanis want to live in the US?
Believe it or not but not everybody wants to be American. Many people are actually happy in their own country.

Most people I know do not want to live in the US. Not that the US is a bad place to live, but every area/country has it advanteges. And a lot of people are happy with the place they live in.

The fact that many people were not happy with the US is not caused by envy, it is caused by a questionable foreign policy.

#20 arno_ed, Aug 11, 2009

(You must log in or sign up to post here.)

Page 1 of 3

Share This Page