'Nothing but lies and deceit': Trump launches attack on Pakistan

[Friends of Baloch]

Haha, ****ing pakis!

One of the few things Trump has got right.

Happy New Year!

Twitter

'Nothing but lies and deceit': Trump launches attack on Pakistan

US president tweets saying Pakistan is providing ‘safe haven to terrorists’ and America was ‘foolish’ to give $33bn in aid

Donald Trump has accused Pakistan of “lies and deceit”, saying America was foolish to have given Pakistan more than $33bn in aid.

Trump began the new year by launching an attack on Islamabad in his first tweet of 2018, saying Pakistan was providing “safe haven to the terrorists we hunt”.

“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,” he wrote. “They give safe haven to the terrorists we hunt in Afghanistan, with little help. No more!”

The tweet on Monday comes in the aftermath of heightened tensions between Washington and Islamabad since the summer, when the US president announced his administration’s national security strategy for Afghanistan.

As part of the “fight-to-win” strategy Trump called on Islamabad to cut support for militants who find a haven along the Afghan border and warned Pakistan would have “much to lose” if it did not comply.

“We can no longer be silent about Pakistan’s safe havens for terrorist organisations, the Taliban and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond,” he said in a speech.

In a surprise visit to Afghanistan last month, the US vice-president, Mike Pence, said the US administration was putting Pakistan on notice to end its support for Taliban insurgents, a comment that generated a chorus of criticism from the Pakistani civilian and military establishment, which has denied harbouring Afghan militants.

The New York Times reported last week that the Trump administration was considering withholding $255m in aid to Pakistan over Islamabad’s failure to confront terrorism in the country. Pakistan had refused to allow the US access to a captured militant from the Taliban-linked Haqqani network. The militant was arrested in October by Pakistani troops as they rescued a Canadian-American couple who had been held captive for five years, and the US believe he could provide important information of other American hostages in Afghanistan.

Pakistan’s foreign minister, Khawaja Asif, told Geo television on Monday that Pakistan has already refused to ‘do more’ for the United States. “We have already told the US that we will not do more, so Trump’s ‘no more’ does not hold any importance.

He tweeted: “We will respond to President Trump’s tweet shortly inshallah ... Will let the world know the truth … difference between facts & fiction.”

The prime minister of Pakistan, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, told the Guardian: “We have called a cabinet meeting on this issue tomorrow.”

Hamdullah Mohib, Afghanistan’s ambassador in Washington, said in a tweet on Monday that Trump’s tweet was a “promising message to Afghans who have suffered at the hands of terrorists based in Pakistan for far too long”.

Pakistan maintains that it has continued a military operation to push out terrorists from its territory and that 17,000 Pakistanis have lost their lives in fighting militants, target killings and suicide bombings since 2001.

“America’s stance is clear and it will deteriorate relations further, the US is shifting blame of its failures in Afghanistan on Pakistan,” Zahid Husain, an analyst based in Islamabad, said.

In November, the White House condemned Pakistan’s release of Hafiz Saeed, who was accused of masterminding the 2008 Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people in the Indian financial hub.

'Nothing but lies and deceit': Trump launches attack on Pakistan | World news | The Guardian

[زده کوونکی]

He says this now but wait a few months and they'll be sending more disposable income straight to the Punjabistani rahbaran's personal bank accounts.

[Friends of Baloch]

Background to today's Trump tweet on napakistan.

Frustrated U.S. Might Withhold $255 Million in Aid From Pakistan
By ADAM GOLDMAN, MARK LANDLER and ERIC SCHMITT DEC. 29, 2017

WASHINGTON — When Pakistani forces freed a Canadian-American family this fall held captive by militants, they also captured one of the abductors. United States officials saw a potential windfall: He was a member of the Taliban-linked Haqqani network who could perhaps provide valuable information about at least one other American hostage.

The Americans demanded access to the man, but Pakistani officials rejected those requests, the latest disagreement in the increasingly dysfunctional relationship between the countries. Now, the Trump administration is strongly considering whether to withhold $255 million in aid that it had delayed sending to Islamabad, according to American officials, as a show of dissatisfaction with Pakistan’s broader intransigence toward confronting the terrorist networks that operate there.

The administration’s internal debate over whether to deny Pakistan the money is a test of whether President Trump will deliver on his threat to punish Islamabad for failing to cooperate on counterterrorism operations. Relations between the United States and Pakistan, long vital for both, have chilled steadily since the president declared over the summer that Pakistan “gives safe haven to agents of chaos, violence and terror.”

The United States, which has provided Pakistan more than $33 billion in aid since 2002, said in August that it was withholding the $255 million until Pakistan did more to crack down on internal terrorist groups. Senior administration officials met this month to decide what to do about the money, and American officials said a final decision could be made in the coming weeks.

The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the sensitive discussions, did not detail what conditions Pakistan would have to meet to receive the aid. It was not clear how the United States found out about the militant’s arrest, but an American drone had been monitoring the kidnappers as they moved deeper into Pakistan.

Caitlan Coleman, an American, and her Canadian husband, Joshua Boyle, were freed along with their children in an October raid after five years in captivity. Pakistani troops confronted Haqqani militants as they ferried the family across the tribal lands of northwest Pakistan.

The Trump administration has foreshadowed a cutoff in recent days with harsher language. Last week, in announcing his national security strategy, Mr. Trump again singled out Pakistan for criticism. “We make massive payments every year to Pakistan,” he said. “They have to help.”

Vice President Mike Pence reinforced that message in a visit to Afghanistan just before Christmas, telling cheering American troops that “President Trump has put Pakistan on notice.” The reaction of his audience was notable, analysts said, since the Pentagon has historically been one of Pakistan’s defenders in Washington because of its longstanding ties to the Pakistani military.

Pakistan, however, has few friends in Mr. Trump’s National Security Council. Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, the national security adviser, served in Afghanistan, where he saw firsthand how Pakistan meddled in its neighbor’s affairs. Lisa Curtis, the council’s senior director for South and Central Asia, brought critical views about Pakistan from her previous post at the conservative Heritage Foundation.

In a report she wrote in February with Husain Haqqani, Pakistan’s former ambassador to Washington, the two called for the administration to “avoid viewing and portraying Pakistan as an ally.” If Pakistan did not take steps to show its commitment to America’s counterterrorism goals, they wrote, Mr. Trump should strip it of its status as a major non-NATO ally.

Such a step would be more punitive than withholding the $255 million in State Department assistance known as Foreign Military Financing, Mr. Haqqani said in an interview, because it would deprive Pakistan of access to military equipment. He said Pakistani officials were bracing for some kind of aid cutoff.

Pakistan’s military, he said, still views its accommodation of the Haqqani network as in its security interest. To overcome that, the Trump administration would have to pursue other, more punishing measures, either by imposing targeted sanctions on the government or removing it from the list of non-NATO allies.

“Pakistan can withstand a cutoff in American aid,” Mr. Haqqani said. “It would have to be followed by something else to make Pakistan believe that Mr. Trump means business.”

In July, the Pentagon said it would withhold $50 million in military reimbursements for Pakistan because the country had not taken “sufficient action” against the Haqqani network.

A State Department official said Pakistan’s actions will ultimately determine the course of “security assistance in the future.” The official said conversations with Pakistan are continuing and declined to provide further comment.

The Pakistani government did not respond to a message seeking comment.

After Ms. Coleman, Mr. Boyle and their children were freed, the Pakistani military made no mention of the captured Haqqani operative. Instead, the military released a statement saying the operation’s “success underscores the importance of timely intelligence sharing and Pakistan’s continued commitment towards fighting this menace through cooperation between two forces against a common enemy.”

Mr. Trump said it was “a positive moment for our country’s relationship with Pakistan.”

American officials are eager to learn what the militant knows about Kevin King, an American university professor who was kidnapped along with Timothy Weeks, an Australian citizen, in August 2016. Mr. King is believed to be alive but ill and American officials are hopeful that he and Mr. Weeks might be released.

Another American, Paul Overby, vanished in 2014 in Afghanistan. Mr. Overby was trying to interview the leader of the Haqqani network when he disappeared.

Gen. Joseph L. Votel, the head of the Pentagon’s Central Command, which oversees Pakistan and Afghanistan, declined to provide any details on the Haqqani operative who was seized other than to say he was “probably pretty important” and that any militants involved in hostage-taking were “significant.”

General Votel would not say whether the Trump administration is considering withholding aid from Pakistan to prod Islamabad to improve its counterterrorism cooperation.

“What we’re trying to do is to talk to Pakistan about this, and not try to communicate with them through public messaging,” General Votel said in an interview.

Frustrated U.S. Might Withhold $255 Million in Aid From Pakistan - The New York Times

[maneatinglizard]

The US withdrawing their funding probably won’t end Pakistan like it would’ve some years ago.

But they will take a hit, and after China stops propping them up (which will probably happen once they realize that Pakistan is incapable of securing Gwadar), that’ll be the real test for the country.

I think it’ll be the straw that breaks the camel’s back, but who knows. Their leadership has shown to be remarkably resilient, almost like cockroaches. Maybe they’ll figure out another contingency plan.

[Akbar]

Friends of baloch
How does this help anyone?
Trump doesn't like you as well.
Bosch nationalists are as much **** as Pakistani nationalists. You guys with another idiots the Kurdish nationalists think by provoking the Muslims by raising Israeli flags will help your cause you are mistaking. Kurds and balochs are both Muslims and nationalists are only cornering themselves.

[Friends of Baloch]

Friends of baloch
How does this help anyone?
Trump doesn't like you as well.
Bosch nationalists are as much **** as Pakistani nationalists. You guys with another idiots the Kurdish nationalists think by provoking the Muslims by raising Israeli flags will help your cause you are mistaking. Kurds and balochs are both Muslims and nationalists are only cornering themselves.

Fck pakiland and all the ****ing pakis.

The first thing of 2018 this orange head Trump said is the best thing he's ever said.

Salutations to Trump! Bomb the disgusting Bundjab to hell!

[زده کوونکی]

Fck pakiland and all the ****ing pakis.

The first thing of 2018 this orange head Trump said is the best thing he's ever said.

Salutations to Trump! Bomb the disgusting Bundjab to hell!

Be mal mani salonk tai mallage rochan
Mal mani urdal tai kandage rochan
Mubarek mani salonk tara ra washiaba
Mubarek alay jani mubarek
Mubarek mani salonk tara ra
Washiaba!!!

Dasta port kan

[Friends of Baloch]

Bro I am not taunting you are anything like that. But do you believe there is a chance of a Baluchistan? Pakistan has China's support and is sadly a nuclear power. Also I dont see much support for the movement except for Baluch and a few Indians. I dont see how it can happen.

But regardless I respect you guys since you have big balls like Kurds and ghairat like Pashtuns should. British puppet Zahir Shah should have brough Pashtunistan and Baluchistan to Afghanistan lol

Baloch will not militarily win this war for liberation on their own and everybody can see that. But they are prepared for a generations long struggle for however long it takes. That is why they have been fighting against Pakiland in one way or another since 1948.

[maneatinglizard]

Baloch will not militarily win this war for liberation on their own and everybody can see that. But they are prepared for a generations long struggle for however long it takes. That is why they have been fighting against Pakiland in one way or another since 1948.

Would the Baloch separatists be okay with becoming a part of Afghanistan instead of a completely separate state? Seems to me like that'd be a more viable overall nation, and the possibility of a border with the ocean might convince Afghan leaders to help out. Obviously Afghanistan is in no real condition to provide support today, but the country isn't particularly fond of Pakistan, and might be willing to support an insurgency if it ever gets its act together.

Actually, is there any cooperation between the TTP and the separatists? I know their goals aren't the same, and that the Baloch separatist groups are technically secular, but their enemy is the same, and I'd imagine that most of the Balochi fighters are pretty religious anyway.

Also, did the resistance start in full in 1948? I always thought the resistance movement was a product of the complete and utter failure of the Pakistani state to provide anything for Balochistan, not just a desire for independence.

[Friends of Baloch]

Would the Baloch separatists be okay with becoming a part of Afghanistan instead of a completely separate state? Seems to me like that'd be a more viable overall nation, and the possibility of a border with the ocean might convince Afghan leaders to help out. Obviously Afghanistan is in no real condition to provide support today, but the country isn't particularly fond of Pakistan, and might be willing to support an insurgency if it ever gets its act together.

None of the Baloch separatists on the ground, either political parties or armed groups, have talked about becoming part of Afghanistan. Actually they have said that the Pashtun districts would not be part of what they see as independent Balochistan because Pashtuns dont want to be. But the flash point between Pashtuns and Baloch is over Quetta. Baloch claim it but Pashtuns say it is originally Pashtun/Afghan.

But Baloch groups have good relations with Afghanistan clearly. Afghan leaders know already everything that is happening there more than you and me and anyone else, but have their own problems to deal with. Who knows about a future relationship.

Actually, is there any cooperation between the TTP and the separatists? I know their goals aren't the same, and that the Baloch separatist groups are technically secular, but their enemy is the same, and I'd imagine that most of the Balochi fighters are pretty religious anyway.

I do not think that the TTP has any presence in Baloch areas. Their attacks on paki forces are usually in Quetta or Pashtun areas. I dont think it likely that they even communicate with each other since both are fighting different wars and operating in places far from each other with the exception of Quetta and some nearby areas. Balochistan is a very large place and these two operational zones dont really overlap to my understanding.

Also, did the resistance start in full in 1948? I always thought the resistance movement was a product of the complete and utter failure of the Pakistani state to provide anything for Balochistan, not just a desire for independence.

Different tribes have rebelled at different times from 1948 onwards, not always for the same reasons. Non tribal based resistance has been more political than militant but now includes both. Coordination of the resistance is lacking on the ground. Slaying of Nawab Akbar Bugti Khan in 2006 and the paki kill and dump policy of Baloch activists, journalists, lawyers, politicians etc and general civilians inflamed the resistance against punjab to move towards separation from napakistan entirely.

[Friends of Baloch]

Haha! ***ing beggar pakiland!

How will the US move to cut aid affect Pakistan?

The Trump administration says it is cutting almost all security aid to Pakistan until it deals with terrorist networks operating on its soil. But will the cuts have any impact, asks the BBC's M Ilyas Khan.

The US has yet to announce exactly how much aid will be cut - but defence experts believe the total impact of the visible aid suspension may fall in the range of more than $900m (£660m).

This includes the suspension of $255m due to Pakistan for military equipment and training under the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) fund, and $700m under the Coalition Support Fund (CSF) - paid to Pakistan for conducting operations against militant groups.

Experts believe the total financial impact of an adverse US policy on Pakistan could be much higher than this though, especially as the US state department has said an unspecified amount of other security assistance managed by the department of defence could be cut.

How reliant is Pakistan on US security aid?

Security experts believe the cuts are likely to put a squeeze on the Pakistani military, at least in the short run.

"If the US pipeline dries up, the military's immediate plans for upgrading of materiel and manpower resources will be stalled," says Prof Hasan Askari Rizvi, a defence analyst and author of the book, Military, State and Society in Pakistan.

"It will also be a setback in the long term as China or any other friendly country cannot totally replace the resources that Pakistan needs to keep its military machine well oiled," he says.

This could explain the government's response to the cuts.

While Pakistani politicians have been quick to condemn the US in the media, with Foreign Minister Khwaja Asif calling the US a "friend-killer" whose attitude "matches neither that of a friend nor an ally" and Defence Minister Khurram Dastgir warning against "American mischief", other government reaction has been more cautious.

The foreign office talked of Pakistan's efforts to bring peace to the region, which it said was done mostly at its own cost - $120bn over 15 years - and argued that "arbitrary deadlines, unilateral pronouncements and shifting goalposts are counterproductive in addressing common threats".

Meanwhile, in a written reply to the BBC an army spokesman said Pakistan had "never fought for money but for peace".

Experts believe that, despite the verbal sparring on TV, the military will actually be tempted to put a squeeze on militant groups that are believed to have sanctuaries, recruitment and training facilities on Pakistani soil - just as the US has demanded.

"Though it may not be visible, there certainly will be some changes in Pakistan's approach to militants," says Prof Askari.

"At the very least, they may ask groups like the Haqqani network to go low-key for a while."

Will Pakistan try to retaliate?

Pakistan's main leverage with the US lies in its geographical location and its role in Afghanistan - the fact that it controls the only supply line into the landlocked country for international troops, and has influence over the militant groups that are fighting there.

The question is, will Pakistan try to press its advantage by shutting overland access of US supplies to Kabul?

It's happened before. Pakistan blocked this route for several months in 2011 and 2012 after a series of embarrassing events, including the killing of Osama Bin Laden in a secret operation by US Navy Seals, and the bombing of a Pakistani post by American jets that killed more than 20 soldiers.

But Prof Askari believes Pakistan may not take that route this time. In 2011, the US appeared more accommodating, following Pakistani anger at the US operation and the bombing of the post.

But this time, the anger is coming from the US side - and too drastic a move from Pakistan could aggravate the situation.

"Pakistanis may create hurdles or cause delays in the transit of such supplies, but they are unlikely to block it completely, because that could lead to suspension of all ties," Prof Askari says.

At the moment, the US is still providing Pakistan with non-military aid. And even in the case of military assistance, it is believed the US may follow a "condition and issue-based approach" where funds would be released for identified and measurable actions.

By contrast, a total cut-off of relations would mean that the US could remove Pakistan from its list of major non-Nato allies, designate it as a state sponsor of terrorism, or work with India and Afghanistan to more aggressively counter its interests in the region.

Neither side is likely to want such a drastic move.

Analysts have pointed out that the US does not want instability in Pakistan.

Pakistan has one of the world's fastest-growing nuclear programmes, as well as several Islamist terrorist organisations on its soil, so "America and its allies are rightly concerned that any instability in Pakistan may result in terrorists getting their hands on Pakistan's nuclear technology", Christine Fair, a US-based South Asia expert, says.

How will the US move to cut aid affect Pakistan? - BBC News

[PashtunClanMember]

salam friends of baloch are you a baloch or a pashtun if you aloud to ask?
it would be awesome if you are a baloch if yes salam from an pashtun

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

[MENTION=17351]Friends of Baloch[/MENTION]

Don't fall for the bait, PashtunClanMember is a new ID for Indic Troll Killzai