Thread: Cutting back aid to the Pakis

Originally Posted by DOMS

The US has cut the aid to Pakistan by $800 million. We were giving $2 billion. The $800 is a good start, but we need to stop it all.

And then move on to cutting aid to other countries.

I can't say I agree with your idea on cutting aid to all other countries (although we could scale some back on 2-3 countries...the ones receiving majority of the FMF dollars).

I do fully agree with cutting Paki's aid though. They been playing on both teams for quite some time now.

Good. Why we pay for those countries to arm themselves is beyond me, especially with the financial problems we have. There's no money for healthcare, but plenty to buy some pakis a bunch of weapons?

Originally Posted by danzik17

Good. Why we pay for those countries to arm themselves is beyond me, especially with the financial problems we have. There's no money for healthcare, but plenty to buy some pakis a bunch of weapons?

Originally Posted by danzik17

Good. Why we pay for those countries to arm themselves is beyond me, especially with the financial problems we have. There's no money for healthcare, but plenty to buy some pakis a bunch of weapons?

you can't just look at the numbers when looking at the budgets and economy's of countries, you always have to factor in inflation.

the US has been sending them aid in various forms since we helped arm them in the 80's to help defeat the Russian's in Afghanistan. the roots of the Taliban are in the refugee camps in Pakistan when many Afghans fled to Pakistan during the war with Russia.

the war on terror has but a beating on their economy. they receive aid from a variety of countries not just the US. the US trades heavily with Pakistan we are their largest export country. a decent portion of those monies ends up in the hands of US corporations, so don't expect it to go away complete, never going to happen. us military contractors have to keep their shareholders (themselves) happy.

once you understand the neo-liberal economic methodology all this stuff makes sense. you have to de-personalize views of all this countries and view them as independent businesses of sorts.

Originally Posted by lnvanry

I do fully agree with cutting Paki's aid though. They been playing on both teams for quite some time now.

and so has the US. remember we sent money and weapons in mass quantity to the middle east during the 80's so Saddam could invade Iran.

we also funded the mujahideen (Taliban) during the Afghan Russia war.

are are no more trustworthy than the rest...

Originally Posted by DOMS

The US has cut the aid to Pakistan by $800 million. We were giving $2 billion. The $800 is a good start, but we need to stop it all.

And then move on to cutting aid to other countries.

Pretty f*cking ridiculous working stiff tax payers have to pay for these countries (that hate us) when the people who need it more are here at home.

F*cked up values of the elites in DC.

Glad I have not filed for taxes in 10 years, and not paid a dime in taxes in ten years.

Good, that's what they get for hiding Osama.

Originally Posted by LAM

once you understand the neo-liberal economic methodology all this stuff makes sense.

No it doesn't. We're giving billions............TRILIONS of dollars to countries that are our enemies. Nothing about that makes sense. Just because it used to be right doesn't mean it still is.

I find it inexcusable that these funds are hidden under the veil of "aid". Don't tell me we're giving them "aid" when they use those funds to arm themselves and other terrorists for the sole purpose of attacking us. Here, let me load that gun for you so you can use it to shoot me. That's beyond stupid. If the funds were actually controlled and we could show that they were being used to help impoverished people I'd be able to better accept it. Otherwise, not another dime as far as I'm concerned.

Originally Posted by ALBOB

No it doesn't. We're giving billions............TRILIONS of dollars to countries that are our enemies. Nothing about that makes sense. Just because it used to be right doesn't mean it still is.

I find it inexcusable that these funds are hidden under the veil of "aid". Don't tell me we're giving them "aid" when they use those funds to arm themselves and other terrorists for the sole purpose of attacking us. Here, let me load that gun for you so you can use it to shoot me. That's beyond stupid. If the funds were actually controlled and we could show that they were being used to help impoverished people I'd be able to better accept it. Otherwise, not another dime as far as I'm concerned.

Getting off oil would probably be one of the best things we could do to no longer have to give money or start wars for the muslims. I'm not comfortable ramping up domestic production of oil considering BP and Exxon have been nice enough to pollute our water with about 5 million barrels of oil in the past year.

Sounds great. Let's get off oil next year. We'll start using that clean, renewable energy we keep hearing about. After that train wreck in Maine earlier today, we need to ban rail road travel also. It's just too risky.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

Getting off oil would probably be one of the best things we could do to no longer have to give money or start wars for the muslims. I'm not comfortable ramping up domestic production of oil considering BP and Exxon have been nice enough to pollute our water with about 5 million barrels of oil in the past year.

Why the hell is so hard to come up with a replacement for gas? It's the 21st century, for crying out loud.

If we can up with the technology, it would have to great benefits. One, we could license it to the rest of the world, making tones of money for the US. Second, it would reduce the Middle East back into the squalor they came from.

Originally Posted by ALBOB

No it doesn't. We're giving billions............TRILIONS of dollars to countries that are our enemies. Nothing about that makes sense. Just because it used to be right doesn't mean it still is.

I find it inexcusable that these funds are hidden under the veil of "aid". Don't tell me we're giving them "aid" when they use those funds to arm themselves and other terrorists for the sole purpose of attacking us. Here, let me load that gun for you so you can use it to shoot me. That's beyond stupid. If the funds were actually controlled and we could show that they were being used to help impoverished people I'd be able to better accept it. Otherwise, not another dime as far as I'm concerned.

Pakistan is not an enemy of the US they are just not an true ally of the US and for good reason. the US has done a decent amount of back-stabbing in the middle east so it should not be a surprise that many over there are not a fan. You guys are not looking at it from a business perspective and that is what it's all about. The US supplies the largest amount of FDI into Pakistan.

the US has been in the middle east since the fall of the ottoman empire, basically we took over when the British left but we have more at stake due to the brenttwoods agreement, the OPEC dollar and our relationship with Israel.

the US arms the country's on the eastern borders of Iran to contain it. the majority of labor in Saudi Arabia comes from Pakistan also. there are also US multinational corps located their such as Chevron Pakistan. and like I already stated a lot of the money in aid given to country's flows back to US corporations.

Below is a list of US Multinationals in Pakistan:

Abbott Laboratories

AES Pakistan

American Consultants

American President Lines

Bank of America

Brink's Pakistan

Caltex Oil Pakistan

Captain-PQ Chemical Industries

Carrier Service Company

Citibank

The Coca-Cola Export Corporation

Colgate-Palmolive Pakistan

Cornpak

Crescent Greenwood

Cyanamid Pakistan

Dawood Hercules Chemicals

DHL Pakistan

DuPont Far East Inc.

Eli Lilly Scientific Office

First International Investment Bank

The General Tyre & Rubber Company of Pakistan

Gillette Pakistan

IBM Semea

Intel Pakistan

International Laboratories

Johnson & Johnson Pakistan

Karachi International Container Terminal

Karam Ceramics

KFC

McDonalds

Merck Sharp & Dohme Pakistan

Morgan Stanley Pakistan Investment Fund

Muller & Phipps Pakistan

New Hampshire Insurance Company

Occidental Pakistan

Pakistan Mobile Communications

Parke, Davis & Company

Pepsi-Cola Pakistan

Pfizer Laboratories

Pizza Hut

Premier Tobacco Industries

Procter & Gamble Pakistan

Rafhan Maize Products Company

Sheraton Middle East Management Corp.

Singer Pakistan

Smith Kline Becham Pakistan

Squibb Pakistan

3M Pakistan

Union Texas Pakistan

Upjohn Pakistan

Originally Posted by DOMS

The US has cut the aid to Pakistan by $800 million. We were giving $2 billion. The $800 is a good start, but we need to stop it all.

And then move on to cutting aid to other countries.

F them, I could care less and half of the rest of the countries we pay to play nice even though they don't. Aid needs to be very selective and the countries should be in dire need, we are broke as a joke and in three wars, close the fucking wallet already and focus on our own problems. Any first or second world country getting aid needs to stop, immediately! All others need to be reviewed to determine the level of corruption and good the money goes towards and be voted on in the house/senate so the "people" have some form of a say where our tax dollars go. Then these countries can actually really be mad at America since it was voted on by us.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

Getting off oil would probably be one of the best things we could do to no longer have to give money or start wars for the muslims. I'm not comfortable ramping up domestic production of oil considering BP and Exxon have been nice enough to pollute our water with about 5 million barrels of oil in the past year.

That short sightedness is why the US has no growth in one of its most abundant resources, oil and gas. All industries have accidents, we don't stop using nuclear power because of an accident, we evaluate, find solutions to short coming and change regulations. That is what the government should do with oil and let the industry grow as it will create MILLIONS of job but with Barry in office, that will not happen. Whether you like it or not, people like me in the industry make it possible for you to drive to work. Here is a thought, my company has never spilled any oil in the pipe we lay or the wells we plug/abandon, not everyone is as stupid as BP/Halliburton (it was a multi-faceted fuck up, not one company).

Originally Posted by oufinny

That is what the government should do with oil and let the industry grow as it will create MILLIONS of job but with Barry in office, that will not happen. Whether you like it or not, people like me in the industry make it possible for you to drive to work. Here is a thought, my company has never spilled any oil in the pipe we lay or the wells we plug/abandon, not everyone is as stupid as BP/Halliburton (it was a multi-faceted fuck up, not one company).

What did Bush do in his 8 years in regards to the oil industry?

It has nothing to do with the POTUS it has to do with the OPEC dollar. that was 50% of the reason why the US went into Iraq, Saddam was going to change currency's just like Iran did. The 2nd part was the 75 year oil lease ended between the Iraq Gov and the US & UK.

what you are neglected is the tie between the OPEC dollar and the access to free capital it gives the US and economic power that the USD has over other countries. all of these things trump having greater energy independence.

once OPEC drops the dollar things will change but until then don't hold your breath.

since you work in the industry how many people are actually employees of company's vs contractors?

Pakistan said they don't need the aid, so we should just quit sending it to them. When they come begging and pleading for it tell them "No."

Originally Posted by oufinny

That short sightedness is why the US has no growth in one of its most abundant resources, oil and gas. All industries have accidents, we don't stop using nuclear power because of an accident, we evaluate, find solutions to short coming and change regulations. That is what the government should do with oil and let the industry grow as it will create MILLIONS of job but with Barry in office, that will not happen. Whether you like it or not, people like me in the industry make it possible for you to drive to work. Here is a thought, my company has never spilled any oil in the pipe we lay or the wells we plug/abandon, not everyone is as stupid as BP/Halliburton (it was a multi-faceted fuck up, not one company).

Not all companies fuck up, I'll agree with that. But, even if we tapped our affordable resources, we are still merely a drop in the bucket. 2% of the total oil in the world won't do anything. While we stay on oil, we are at the whim of the assholes in the middle east. I'm with DOMS, I don't see why we aren't developing an alternative fuel source that we have plenty of domestic resources to supply a majority of our own consumption with. Unless we do that we are going to continue to waste money aiding countries that will eventually attack us because they have what we want. There is a reason China is investing tons of money in energy, and kicking the can down the road for the past 20 years hasn't done anything for the US. Even if Exxon was given the green light to do whatever they wanted, the prices are fixed to OPEC, they will just drop production elsewhere. Considering Exxon didn't even really pay taxes last year after all the subsidies they were given, I don't imagine they are going to give us a hometown discount on the price.

Originally Posted by GearsMcGilf

Sounds great. Let's get off oil next year. We'll start using that clean, renewable energy we keep hearing about. After that train wreck in Maine earlier today, we need to ban rail road travel also. It's just too risky.

Yeah, like the solar hot water I enjoy everyday and the 60% of my house that is running on PV. PV made in a factory running on the massive PV array they mounted on their factory. And sitting here at work under the 300 PV modules that make 125% of the electricity needed to run our warehouse. The warehouse we have room to add triple that amount onto.

This message sent using converted star photon energy! That's right after it's 8 minute journey it got captured and tossed down the line to you....

Originally Posted by maniclion

Yeah, like the solar hot water I enjoy everyday and the 60% of my house that is running on PV. PV made in a factory running on the massive PV array they mounted on their factory. And sitting here at work under the 300 PV modules that make 125% of the electricity needed to run our warehouse. The warehouse we have room to add triple that amount onto.

Not familiar with PV modules. Solar and wind are fine, but you can't depend on it all the time. All I'm saying is that clean, renewable sources would be great, if the technology existed. Until then, we still need oil. I don't think the BP or Exxon oil spills, as catastrophic as they were at the time, are a reason to ban domestic drilling when it would create jobs for American and dramatically reduce the price of oil immediately. All the while, the search for an affordable, clean, and renewable source should continue.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

Not all companies fuck up, I'll agree with that. But, even if we tapped our affordable resources, we are still merely a drop in the bucket. 2% of the total oil in the world won't do anything. While we stay on oil, we are at the whim of the assholes in the middle east. I'm with DOMS, I don't see why we aren't developing an alternative fuel source that we have plenty of domestic resources to supply a majority of our own consumption with. Unless we do that we are going to continue to waste money aiding countries that will eventually attack us because they have what we want. There is a reason China is investing tons of money in energy, and kicking the can down the road for the past 20 years hasn't done anything for the US. Even if Exxon was given the green light to do whatever they wanted, the prices are fixed to OPEC, they will just drop production elsewhere. Considering Exxon didn't even really pay taxes last year after all the subsidies they were given, I don't imagine they are going to give us a hometown discount on the price.

If I wasn't at work, I would upload my favorite double facepalm picture for this... I am not going to argue with you as you are entitled to your opinion I just STRONGLY disagree. Why not bring back a huge industry since we lost so much?

Originally Posted by GearsMcGilf

Not familiar with PV modules. Solar and wind are fine, but you can't depend on it all the time. All I'm saying is that clean, renewable sources would be great, if the technology existed. Until then, we still need oil. I don't think the BP or Exxon oil spills, as catastrophic as they were at the time, are a reason to ban domestic drilling when it would create jobs for American and dramatically reduce the price of oil immediately. All the while, the search for an affordable, clean, and renewable source should continue.

This right here is exactly what needs to be done. A true, long term 50-75 year plan can be put in place to transition off of fossil fuels as much as possible, then once other countries are not onto alternative energy, the US will be a net exporter (I am thinking long term 50+ years). I am not against alternatives nor am I against nuclear (it is the answer as coal is so polluting and dangerous to mine), I just believe oil in the US is being way under-produced considering our known reserves. Also, drilling isn't like it once was, many have no clue what really goes into it or the technology that makes well with steerable drilling happen. There is a very good museum on an old rig in Galveston TX that really opens peoples eyes and one in Houston as well; if you are ever here, make a point to go and learn, it is eye opening for a non-industry person.

We could have all the energy we ever needed if the dumbasses in D.C. would tell the damn tree huggers to go piss up a rope. Check out the statistics for France and where 75% of it's energy comes from. Here, I'll give you a hint.


P.S. They recycle their nuclear waste...using OUR technology. The technology that the dumbasses in D.C. made it illegal for us to use.

Originally Posted by GearsMcGilf

Not familiar with PV modules. Solar and wind are fine, but you can't depend on it all the time. All I'm saying is that clean, renewable sources would be great, if the technology existed. Until then, we still need oil. I don't think the BP or Exxon oil spills, as catastrophic as they were at the time, are a reason to ban domestic drilling when it would create jobs for American and dramatically reduce the price of oil immediately. All the while, the search for an affordable, clean, and renewable source should continue.

PV = Photovoltaic = Solar Electric = pump water up a hill into a reservoir then when no sun release the water and run Hydro-generators. Also retro-fit Generator stations with Fly-Wheel energy storage on a smart-grid to ramp up traditional fossil-fuel generators when alternative energy production starts to fluctuate due to conditions such as cloud-cover or low wind......

There's also wave machines to transfer wave power into electricity, concentrated solar to store energy in molten salt for night time use. Conservation of power methods like varibale frequency pump drives for water supply so pumps are running at full tilt but instead ramp up as demand does. Way better LED lighting has been coming out much more energy conservative than CFL's.

That's our largest problem, we are energy pigs. If every home had light timers or occupancy detector light switches and used CFL's a huge amount of electricity use would be shaved. If we used smart plugs that detect if your ac-dc tranformers for all your electronic devices were in use or not would auto-magically shut-off we could save a lot of power there too.

People don't realize how much they can save until they get a power audit on their homes and see all the ways to save ass-loads of money. I dropped $100 a month off my bill by ventilating my roof with solar powered attic fans, now I only have to run my A/C half the time since the heat stored in my attic is vented out during the sunniest time of the day.

Originally Posted by ALBOB

We could have all the energy we ever needed if the dumbasses in D.C. would tell the damn tree huggers to go piss up a rope. Check out the statistics for France and where 75% of it's energy comes from. Here, I'll give you a hint.


P.S. They recycle their nuclear waste...using OUR technology. The technology that the dumbasses in D.C. made it illegal for us to use.

I like to use the nuke 93 million miles away, just seems a bit safer and comforting. For places like Montana where it can be located far from civilization and buried deep under ground I'm all for it, but somewhere like here in Hawaii just knowing the nuke subs in Pearl Harbor are there makes me worry a bit.....

Originally Posted by maniclion

I like to use the nuke 93 million miles away, just seems a bit safer and comforting.

I'd rather live by a nuclear power plant than a polycrystalline silicon plant. The process of turning raw materials into solar panels is very harsh.

What Are the Dangers of Solar Energy Plants? | eHow.com

The Dirty Side of a

Originally Posted by maniclion

That's our largest problem, we are energy pigs. If every home had light timers or occupancy detector light switches and used CFL's a huge amount of electricity use would be shaved. If we used smart plugs that detect if your ac-dc tranformers for all your electronic devices were in use or not would auto-magically shut-off we could save a lot of power there too.

People don't realize how much they can save until they get a power audit on their homes and see all the ways to save ass-loads of money. I dropped $100 a month off my bill by ventilating my roof with solar powered attic fans, now I only have to run my A/C half the time since the heat stored in my attic is vented out during the sunniest time of the day.

Yes, that's pretty to address if people would just use some common sense. Turn off the effin lights when you're not in the room. Turn down the heat and use an extra blanket in the winter. Turn on the TV when no one's watching it. Get your fat ass out of your car and go inside to get your Big Mac. A lot of that could be addressed without a new technology. I definitely don't want the govt regulating my thermostat though.

If for no other reason, it would make sense to be drilling for our own oil supply just in case all hell breaks loose in the ME over the next few years. With all the uprisings, and knowing that the only thing all those countries have in common is that they despise us, there's no way of knowing what the political landscape over there will look like when the dust settles or how they will deal with us. If a bunch of fundamentalist dictators end up in power, they could cut us off despite the effect it would have on their own economies.

Originally Posted by oufinny

If I wasn't at work, I would upload my favorite double facepalm picture for this... I am not going to argue with you as you are entitled to your opinion I just STRONGLY disagree. Why not bring back a huge industry since we lost so much?

1)Because safety is on the backburner for these companies. If they are going to institute stiff penalties and favor the people whose land these companies destroy I can look past that.

2)We are cutting government. That means less people to regulate these assholes. If banishing the EPA weren't seriously being batted around, I could look past this. My guess is we just let the market sort things out like oil spills? Or better yet, we let the oil industry regulate themselves?

3)I would be for the extraction of oil from within our borders if the companies who extracted it were forced to invest in alternative energy dollar for dollar. We are too comfortable with the status quo, and obviously need to force change. We've been trying for 40 years and all we have to show is an electric car that can't be charged anywhere because there is no infrastructure.

Remember, Pakistan let us wage our war on afganistan by stomping through their territory, their border with afganistan was our main supply line to our troops in afganistan ( surrounded by impassable mountains). Now that we will be withdrawing we wont need them as much, here is a snippet according to Stratfor why we still need each other, this is from the political view rather than the economic view.

The Endgame in Afghanistan

That game is now breaking down, not because the United States raided Pakistan and killed bin Laden but because it is becoming apparent to Pakistan that the United States will, sooner or later, be dramatically drawing down its forces in Afghanistan. This drawdown creates three facts. First, Pakistan will be facing the future on its western border with Afghanistan without an American force to support it. Pakistan does not want to alienate the Taliban, and not just for ideological reasons. It also expects the Taliban to govern Afghanistan in due course. India aside, Pakistan needs to maintain its ties to the Taliban in order to maintain its influence in Afghanistan and guard its western flank. Being cooperative with the United States is less important. Second, Pakistan is aware that as the United States draws down, it will need Pakistan to cover its withdrawal strategically. Afghanistan is not Iraq, and as the U.S. force draws down, it will be in greater danger. The U.S. needs Pakistani influence. Finally, there will be a negotiation with the Taliban, and elements of Pakistan, particularly the ISI, will be the intermediary.

The Pakistanis are preparing for the American drawdown. Publicly, it is important for them to appear as independent and even hostile to the Americans as possible in order to maintain their domestic credibility. Up to now, they have appeared to various factions in Pakistan as American lackeys. If the United States is leaving, the Pakistanis can’t afford to appear that way anymore. There are genuine issues separating the two countries, but in the end, the show is as important as the issues. U.S. accusations that the government has not cooperated with the United States in fighting Islamists are exactly what the Pakistani establishment needs in order to move to the next phase. Publicly arresting CIA sources who aided the United States in capturing bin Laden also enhances this new image.

From the American point of view, the war in Afghanistan — and elsewhere — has not been a failure. There have been no more attacks on the United States on the order of 9/11, and that has not been for al Qaeda’s lack of trying. U.S. intelligence and security services, fumbling in the early days, achieved a remarkable success, and that was aided by the massive disruption of al Qaeda by U.S. military operations. The measure of military success is simple. If the enemy was unable to strike, the military effort was a success. Obviously, there is no guarantee that al Qaeda will not regenerate or that another group will not emerge, but a continued presence in Afghanistan at this point doesn’t affect that. This is particularly true as franchise operations like the Yemen-based al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula begin to overtake the old apex leadership in terms of both operational innovation in transnational efforts and the ideological underpinnings of those attacks.

In the end, the United States will leave Afghanistan (with the possible exception of some residual special operations forces). Pakistan will draw Afghanistan back into its sphere of influence. Pakistan will need American support against India (since China does not have the force needed to support Pakistan over the Himalayas nor the navy to protect Pakistan’s coast). The United States will need Pakistan to do the basic work of preventing an intercontinental al Qaeda from forming again. Reflecting on the past 10 years, Pakistan will see that as being in its national interest. The United States will use Pakistan to balance India while retaining close ties to India.

A play will be acted out like the New Zealand Haka, with both sides making terrible sounds and frightening gestures at each other. But now that the counterinsurgency concept is being discarded, from all indications, and a fresh military analysis is under way, the script is being rewritten and we can begin to see the end shaping up. The United States is furious at Pakistan for its willingness to protect American enemies. Pakistan is furious at the United States for conducting attacks on its sovereign territory. In the end it doesn’t matter. They need each other. In the affairs of nations, like and dislike are not meaningful categories, and bullying and treachery are not blocks to cooperation. The two countries need each other more than they need to punish each other. Great friendships among nations are built on less.

Read more: U.S. and Pakistan: Afghan Strategies | STRATFOR

also americans dont realize the strong contigent of democratic secular pakistanis who support americans whose plight is made silent. The daughter of Punjab Governor Salman Taseer who is studying at Smith college tries to let everyone know about her dad a governor who was killed for protecting a christian woman against the extremists that tried to kill her for blasphemy. many rallied behind him, at the expense of their lives. THis doesnt make news here, I had to read it in my news from Taiwan.