Elmo
Regular Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2009
- Messages
- 66
- Likes
- 17
"Strategic depth" - that's another debate altogether. Just one quick question, do you not believe that the US also gains from Pakistan having strategic depth versus India having the same?Who said the Americans are not cursed for their shortsighted policy? We still curse them for their short sighted policy in the 80s and it's short sighted policy post 9/11 vis a vis pakistan.
There is a difference between te war in the 80s to the one post 9/11.
In the 80s, a country was invaded by another. There were a few pro invasion and a few against. Those against got support to fight the invaders.
9/11, terror comes from the region and needs to be tackled. 9/11 and the terror preceding it and following it coming out from Pakistan was because of Pakistani policy of maintaining "strategic depth" read as keeping terror factory running.
I am not shifting the course of this ship to how the US is at fault - I agree Pakistan's policy have been less than flattering for many of its people, but as Muse, one of our members at def.pk, likes to bring up "narrative" aspect of it, the "narrative" here has been tunnelled. Read through the posts here, and besides the jingoism and extreme hatred for a country and it's people, what else is there? I don't even know which post you are referring to when it comes to proscribing blame on the US.
The Indian narrative (look at Tiki's recent post), solely puts the blame on Pakistan.
Lastly, pro-invasion or anti-invasion, giving arms to illiterate youth with little to no skills to survive in life otherwise (be it Afghanistan or Bosnia), that's criminal. The US was not justified in training those groups in the 80s. It's a monster that they actively helped create.