Guest Post: Furious At Latest U.S. Attack, Pakistan Shuts Down Resupply Routes To Afghanistan "Permanently"
Submitted by John C.K. Daly of OilPrice
Furious At Latest U.S. Attack, Pakistan Shuts Down Resupply Routes To Afghanistan "Permanently"
NATO recently literally shot itself in the foot, imperiling the resupply of International Assistance Forces (ISAF) in Afghanistan by shooting up two Pakistani border posts in a “hot pursuit’ raid.
Given that roughly 100 fuel tanker trucks along with 200 other trucks loaded with NATO supplies cross into Afghanistan each day from Pakistan, Pakistan’s closure of the border has ominous long-term consequences for the logistical resupply of ISAF forces, even as Pentagon officials downplay the issue and scramble for alternative resupply routes.
Pakistan, long angry about ISAF/NATO cross border raids, has apparently reached the end of its tether. Following the 26 November NATO aerial assault on two border posts in Mohmand Agency in Pakistan’s turbulent NorthWest Frontier Province, Islamabad promptly sealed its border with Afghanistan to NATO supplies after the allied strikes killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
The U.S. military insists a joint patrol with Afghan forces was fired upon first and only responded with return fire and calling in airstrikes on the posts, which a commander mistakenly identified as Taliban training camps, after reportedly checking that there were no Pakistani military forces nearby. Pakistan Major General Ishfaq Nadeem, director general of military operations, rebutted Washington’s assertions one by one, commenting, "The positions of the posts were already conveyed to the ISAF through map references and it was impossible that they did not know these to be our posts."
So, what does this mean for logistical support of ISAF forces? According to Nesar Ahmad Nasery, the deputy head of Torkham Customs, around 1,000 trucks cross into Afghanistan on a daily basis, nearly 300 of which are NATO contractors carrying NATO supplies in sealed containers. Khyber Transport Association chief Shakir Afridi said that each oil tanker has a capacity of 13,000-15,000 gallons. In October 2010 Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen said that fossil fuels are the number one import to Afghanistan.
Noting the obvious, as Afghanistan has no indigenous hydrocarbon supplies, every drop must be brought in, with transit greatly increasing the eventual cost. For 2001-2008, almost all U.S. and NATO supplies were trucked overland to Afghanistan through parts of Pakistan effectively controlled by the Taliban.
Ground supplies are shipped into Pakistan’s Arabian Sea Karachi port and offloaded onto trucks before being sent to one of five crossing points on the Afghan border, the most important being Torkham at the Khyber Pass and Baluchistan’s Chaman. The recent attack has put all these routes at risk, perhaps permanently. Pakistan, being the shortest and most economical route, has been used for nearly a decade to transit almost 75 percent of the ammunition, vehicles, foodstuff and around 50 percent of fuel for coalition forces fighting in Afghanistan.
On 27 November Interior Minister Rehman Malik, addressing journalists at the Ministry of the Interior’s National Crisis Management Cell, after strongly condemning the NATO attack on Pakistani forces, stated that the resupply routes for NATO via Pakistan have been stopped “permanently,” adding that the decisions of the Defense Cabinet Committee (DCC) on the NATO forces attack inside Pakistan would be implemented in letter and spirit, stressing that "The decisions of the DCC are final and would be implemented."
The major issue at stake here for ISAF and U.S. forces is fuel, all of which must be brought in from abroad at high cost. In October 2009 Pentagon officials testified before the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee that the "Fully Burdened Cost of Fuel" (FBCF) translates to about $400 per gallon by the time it arrives at a remote Forward Operating Base (FOB) in Afghanistan. Last year, the FBCF reached $800 in some FOBs following supply route bombings in Pakistan, while others have claimed the FBCF may be as high as $1,000 per gallon in some remote locations. For many remote locations, fuel supplies can only be provided by air - one of the most expensive ways being in helicopter fuel bladders.
The majority of U.S. tonnage transported into Afghanistan is fuel - 70 percent, according to Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Alan Haggerty. The Marines' calculate that 39 percent of their tonnage is fuel, and 90 percent is either fuel or water.
According to ISAF spokesman Colonel Wayne Shanks, there are currently nearly 400 U.S. and coalition bases in Afghanistan, ranging from the massive Bagram airbase outside Kabul down to camps, forward operating bases and combat outposts.
The Pakistani supply lines have come under increasing attack by militants. Baluchistan Home Secretary Akbar Hussain Durani noted that last year, 136 NATO tankers were destroyed in 56 attacks in the province, with 34 people killed and 23 wounded in the assaults.
But NATO and the Pentagon have a backup plan – since 2009 they have been shifting their logistics to the Northern Distribution Network (NDN), a railway link running from Latvia’s Riga Baltic port through Russia and Kazakhstan terminating in Uzbekistan’s Termez on the Afghan border.
The NDN is a joint initiative of multiple Department of Defense agencies, including the US Transportation Command, CENTCOM, the US European Command, the Defense Logistics Agency and the Department of State. The NDN’s first shipment was sent on 20 February 2009 from Riga 3,212 miles to Termez, with U.S. commanders stating that 100 containers daily would be transported via the NDN. The supply trains have been given preferential right-of-way to speed the trip to about nine days. According to Pentagon officials, its goal is eventually to be able to bring 75 percent of its equipment into Afghanistan from the north.
But the true number of forces to be resupplied is far higher. Last year the Pentagon's Central Command put the number of contractors for the U.S. military at 107,000.
According to ISAF spokesman Lieutenant Gregory Keeley in Kabul, the NDN now accounts for 52 percent of coalition cargo transport and 40 percent for the U.S., which also receives around 30 percent of its supplies by air.
Cost?
According to the FMN Logistics, the Washington DC-based logistics company that oversees the NDN and provides “full supply-chain management to ensure the smooth transit of(European Union) government cargo from various Ports of Entry including Riga, Latvia;
Poti, Georgia; Mersin, Turkey and Bandar Abbas, Iran, through to multiple NATO/ ISAF camps in North and South Afghanistan,” in January Russian Railways increased rail tariffs for freight by 10 percent and is suggesting an additional increase of 11.7 percent in 2011 to cover “operating costs.” Further east, Uzbekistan increased rail tariffs twice last year.
Bringing supplies overland on the NDN costs two or three times as much as shipping them by sea and moving them up through Pakistan.
And the NDN is not without problems of its own. On 16 November Uzbek media reported an explosion on an NDN railway line on a railway bridge on the Galaba-Amuzang section of track on Uzbekistan’s border with Afghanistan.
Besides the NDN, the Pentagon also uses a supply route through Georgia’s Black Sea Poti port via Azerbaijan’s capital Baku, where goods are transshipped across the Caspian Sea to Kazakhstan, where the goods are carried by truck into Uzbekistan to Afghanistan. While shorter than the NDN, it is also more expensive because of the constant on-and-off loading from trucks to ferries and back onto trucks. A third supply route, a spur of the NDN, bypasses Uzbekistan from Kazakhstan via Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, but poor road conditions in Tajikistan limit its usefulness.
So, given Pakistan’s shutdown, can the NDN absorb the increased railway traffic?
Probably, but it won’t be cheap, and will take some time to implement.
NATO’s investigation of the Mohmand attack, led by a one-star general, will release its findings on 23 December. What does Pakistan want to resolve the issue? A formal apology and resolute action taken against those responsible for the deadly cross border air strike.
The U.S. military's Transportation Command deputy commander Vice Adm. Mark Harnitchek said of resupplying Afghanistan, "This is the logistics challenge of our generation."
If the Pentagon does not issue an apology, then the U.S. military had better expect “the logistics challenge of our generation” to continue.
Or get out and push and push the HUMVEES and helicopters.
(12 votes)
»
- Login or register to post comments
- 11457 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
Anybody know how many nukes Pakistan actually has? I wonder how much they are really under control and how much of a hand the U.S. has on the trigger.
Aw heck.. Kennedy supplied Berlin with C-47 Gooney Birds..
Obama can supply Afghanistan and the Chinese mines with C-17 Globemasters.
NATO is a few more missteps from falling apart...
The North American Terrorist Organization seems to be encountering greater resistance.
well, we are kinda waging a war in Pukistan...I mean we send in military assets and conduct attacks on their sovereign territory. This shit doesn't sell well
NATO hasn't had a legit purpose since the Soviet Union ceased to exist. Now it's just imperialism.
NATO deserves to be ended, for the good of the world.
Kennedy? The Berlin airlift was 1948/49.
My bad.. of course.. jelly donut brain moment.
Ich bin ein Berliner
ich bin Frankfurter
ich bin Hamburger
Slight difference between a C-47 and 47 planes.
That was a shorter route, think Stalingrad.
100 warheads under the NPT, which means about as much as financial regulation now a days. I understand that there have been increasing bribery problems from senior US military staff in Afghanistan with the culling of their pensions. So take the official number and times it by four then put those warhead into the patriot missiles the US sold Pakistan for "defense" extend the range on them with retro fitting and extra capacity fuel, they in theory could turn Israel into a glass parking lot.
But if they wanted to do damage, they would target the southern naval yards of India to cut the knees off the US navy and air support, it would damage all oil refinement in the area. It would also starve India from toe to head unless someone sets up an endless stream of trucks, horses and men to haul cargo.
Modern armies need a lot of everything to keep their hands clean. Especially food. MRE supplies are one of the last things considered in the Navy. Mainly by design that your boat's job is to move bodies quickly and have as much firepower crammed into it along with repair gear. It was the Achilles heel of old long haul boat, it's still the Achilles heel today. You don't fight a boat, you starve the sailors.
India would annihilate Pukistan.
What planet are you on? Haven't you heard of the Kargill War?
Kargil was not a war, is was a protracted series of small but intense skirmishes over the control of a mountain ridgeline.
Pakistan was itching to fight a 'proxy' war, but all it could do was fake a terrorist infiltration of disputed Indian Territory. Pakistan used its own forces to pretend to be NON-Pakistan-military.
i.e. they had only a fraction of Pakistani forces and firepower options available in the subsequent battle.
India however was politically free to throw in a large and coordinated force (i.e heavy artillery and ground-attack fighters) to dislodge the lightly armed irregular forces on the peaks.
The Pakis were unable to do the same things because that would mean tacitly admitting that the attackers were in fact Pakistani military forces, that had pre-emptively attacked Indian border positions.
But soon after Kargil ended it became undeniable that this was indeed a Pakistani military operation ... and the Pakis knew this would be discovered and proven ... so could have jumped in fully, but they didn't want to escalate it into a war, at that time.
Thus India was always going to win that battle, if they threw their weight into the fight.
The Pakis were taking a gamble that thy wouldn't, or else would eventually give up.
They lost the gamble.
It could have escalated into a general war, but what subsequently occurred was not even close to a real war or even a real battle between the two military forces.
The one thing repeatedly shown by wars is that to underestimate an enemy, and how far they will go, can lead to defeats. Vietnam is a classic and stunning case of determined rice-farmers deciding they were not going to loose, no matter what it took.
Vietnam beat the crap out of greatest military power on earth when the USA was at the very peak of its financial, economic, political and technological power.
Don't forget this incredibly important lesson when asserting x can beat the crap out of y.
It simply isn't so.
The best guess is slightly under 100.
Somewhere around 55 at last count.
Poor Pakistan! Being subjected to cross-border raids by NATO and the US. Why, it's an outrage, I tell you! I mean, Pakistan is in complete control of their sovereign territory and all. And their military and intelligence agency--the ISI--have been such good allies to everybody in the region. What, with enabling the Taliban, enabling terrorists who attack India, and enabling the worst forms of Islamist craziness.
Fucking Pakistan will not settle down until they finally piss off India and get turned into nothing more than beautiful mountains--all glowing radioactive green. Motherfuckers.
Exactly. Fuck the pakis.
"Enabling terrorists who attack India"
You must mean David Headley, who scouted out all the targets for the Mumbai attack. Oh wait, nevermind, he was a CIA agent. Who's enabling attacks against India again?
Wow. Well I learn something new every day.
You mean Nov 26 was the first time Pakistan ever attacked India?
I realize you're probably historically illiterate like so many products of government schools, but if you had even the most basic knowledge of the history since 1948, you would know that Pakinstani terrorists have been killing Indians regularly for decades in Kashmir.
Jesus Christ. How is this country ever going to get a grip when there are so many people who are as ignorant as President Obama?
Yes, relish in all the innocent children and babies that would be killed by such action, fine gentlemen that you are!
You might recall that even China has a difficult time exerting sovereign control of their western border zone and security.
The same certainly applies to NATO-[un]controlled Afghanistan! How much or Afganistan does the NATO backed puppet in Kabul control, as a percentage of Afghan sovereign territory - on any given day?
Pakistan controls a much larger percentage of its sovereign territory.
In fact, why do we even believe that the Paki's don't control 100% of their territory all the time, and always have?
Have they not been playing both sides of the street all along? Doesn't that require a deniable myth of 'lawless' NW regions?
If it's so lawless and out of their control, why is this where Pakistan test-fired its a-bomb?
Similar consideration applies to disputed Indian-controlled Kashmiri sovereignty.
The country with the best sovereign territorial control in the area is Iran.
My big bet is that 'Hot Pursuit' by foreign powers raining asymmetrical death on summary suspects in your neighborhood is treated with a bit more empathy, cowboy.
well it's about time they grew some balls. what are they doing with those jf-17's anyway?
The next step, the US will cut off all aid to Pakistan. The Military/Industrial complex is still undecided wether Iran or Pakistan is the next war. Watch for a "Terrorist attack sponsored by..." attack as the selection process advances.
And the Chinese and the Russians will step right into the weapons and tech vacuum, and Pakistan will more than happily welcome their assistence and advisors.
Thus Pakistan then flips to their camp, and will be supplied and protected as a VERY WILLING, HIGHLY MOTIVATED AND ENDLESSLY AGGRESSIVE proxy-war fighting rook.
BTW: and I bet the USSA and NATO will not defeat them.
Well, I stopped reading midway through the first sentence ... "NATO recently literally shot itself in the foot, ..."
Do you know what the word literally means? FYI, NATO does not have a foot. /rant
One of my pet peeves also. But the article had some good information. We learn near the end that US supplies to troops in Afghanistan will now go through Russia.
We also learn that some will go through Bandar Abbas Iran?
Let me get this straight. NATO ISAF is running logistics through Iran? A country most of the EU is about to attack, if the Israeli's don't first.
What doesn't go through Iran, is going through Pakistan, home to Bin Laden, and the rest through Russia? A country NATO was meant to oppose?
Did FDR and Churchhill contract with Mussolini to run supplies against Hitler?
This looks very bullish for Russian Railways. Their bonds are BBB. I think this makes them a Strong Buy.
http://eng.rzd.ru/isvp/public/rzdeng?STRUCTURE_ID=157
Nothing good historically has come out of the area and it has been the one region of the world (Afghanistan mountain regions) if you follow your history. I won't say cursed, but anytime, any country wanders through the area and attempts to control it or possess it, the world power/country in question at the time runs the clock until it's obliterated and a shell of its former self.
Some people discuss the Bermuda triangle as a weird part of the world when things disappear. Afghanistan is one place on the planet where civilizations disappear.
Nothing good would come out of supporting a regime which forces a rape victim to marry the rapist.
Does that rule also apply to Soverign foreign powers refusing the oil exploration/pipelive/r-o-w deal that they can't refuse?
Resource rape your Mother Nature in your next-door neighbor's back yard. See how that works for you. Chat amongst yourselves if you think that might help.
Children know better.
Then the US should NEVER have armed trained and supported the Taliban against communist Russia. Communism is very civil compared to religious fundamentalism at least you were able to sit and talk with Russians at START treaty talks and communist China is a most favoured trade partner today.
You know the irony is the CIA wanted to prevent the Russians getting an Indian ocean Naval port in Pakistan.
But the way things are going now, they may get a Russian, AND a Chinese Naval port (or three) in Pakistan.
EEEEdiots!
Helen Thomas - Sensored/Career - Shut Down Permanently
"Afghanistan is the Graveyard for Empires"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Thomas
PS. while stopping over in mass. a couple years back i happened to stay at a hotel not to far from a military training base. the owner was an indian [no surprise in mass.] and i happened to notice that 75% of all the guest were pakistani air force pilots. they were being trained to fly american foreign aid military jets [f14's& Fi6's]. it was continuous training of hundreds of pilots [helicopter's also were part of traing] bused in and out in the morning and returning in late afternoon. i asked the indian proprietor how long this training has been going on [he chuckled, with a nervous kind of laugh],... taken by surprise by my off-the-cuff [direct] question, he said without hesitation for months.
thankyou i said,... while walking away from the front desk i couldn't help but notice the glaring disdain felt, from the leftover pakistani's in the lobby towards me - perhaps overhearing my query.
ps2. pakistan gets billions in foreign aid, and just perhaps they want to 'up-the-anti-abit', for much more money.
jmo
Come on now!? Next your going to tell me that the alleged 9/11 hijacker pilots were trained at U. S. Military bases. Come on now. Our government is honest, above board and beyond reproach.
You keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.
War on terror War for resources Bitchez
We still have Russian rail bonds personally guaranteed by the tsar.
Patb, you may recall Israel, the ones so worried about its motral enemy Iran, sold sophisticated antitank missles to Iran. And, Israeli banks held/hold billions of dollars
on hehalf of Yassar Arafat, the Palestinians, and other individuals and groups opposed to Israel.
That was part of the game of balancing Iran against Iraq, to ensure Bagdad did not become even stronger.
Same things occurred swapping weapons for western hostages.
Replace "held/hold" with froze
We also learn that some will go through Bandar Abbas Iran?
Let me get this straight. NATO ISAF is running logistics through Iran? A country most of the EU is about to attack, if the Israeli's don't first.
What doesn't go through Iran, is going through Pakistan, home to Bin Laden, and the rest through Russia? A country NATO was meant to oppose?
Did FDR and Churchhill contract with Mussolini to run supplies against Hitler?
Milo Minderbinder.
Yeah...
But Angela Merkel has a dick.
And so does Lady Gaga.
So all's well in Never Never Land
Justin Beiber and I miss Michael Jackson...
If you take it literally, the author is suggesting that Pakistan is NATO's foot. A corny metaphor maybe, but not complete nonsense.
I gotta say, good for them. And, "we want an apology"?!? Seems mind-blowingly forgiving to me.
I'm sure if Pakistani troops shot up 24 US soldiers, the Americans would be equally considerate.
That is the contrast people should be making. What would have happened?
At first I was thinking the answer involved somehow the word glass.
But then seeing how those SEALs go wacked, I must admit I have no idea anymore?
Ja Mein Fuhrer
I assure you, we can supply 6th Army from the air!
Herman Goerring
Geo-politics at its finest!
What do Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, and Syria have in common?
The are all Med States.
So why is the first move of the Military Industrial Complex to go after the Med States?
To control transportation routes.
http://www.rollintl.com/roll/euroasiamap.gif
Actually the first move in Libya was to take over their bank. Any banks not a part of the international banking syndicate are subject to kinetic action!
Patton: Strategy wins battles, but logistics wins wars.
He knew the Russian army made it's way to Berlin on what they could forage from the countryside, and he could have cut them off and starved them with a few divisions.
Looks like a Black Swan just flew up the Military Industrial Complex's ass.
Actually, I believe that is a Golden Goose, and they are pulling it out.
Oh look! I think I can see sunbeams now.
Indeed, they would kill (pardon the Pun) to get another Vietnam, they'd make squillions!
This just in: US Congress Declares President Obama A Vegetable.
Is this bullish for lithium?
How long will it take before the first idiot punctures a chunk of rolling lithium and tries urinating into the hole?
The urban legend was doing it on the third rail, before the alligators took over the sewers of NYC.
Science in action.
= BOOM!
This story has been going on since mid week already. In addition, they have refused to cooperate with NATO in the investigation. Perhaps more importantly, they've revoked US privilege to use the Shamsi Airbase which was a launch point for predator drone attacks. Pakistan is still fuming over two other huge events this year: Raymond Davis, a CIA operative who killed 2 Pakistanis, and the raid that took out Osama Bin Laden
They are mad about Bin Laden.
The Bin Laden thing really cut off their ability to fundraise from Al Qaeda and from NATO.
I'm sure a billion bucks or so passed out here and there will quickly solve this problem.
Not if Pakistani cooperation has failed to resolve the impasse with India, and the West is instead taking India's side, and courting them as a regional ally.
What's in it for Pakistan then, to keep NATO in the area?
Perhaps China will serve their interests better in dealing with Indian claims to retain Kashmir?
In which case a few billion mere benji's is not going to buy Pakistan back into the Axis f ... , er, sorry, the Alliance of the willing fold.
Pakistan probably set up Nato and sacrificed their own soldiers. They run the Taliban and want the US out but still want your money.
"Anybody know how many nukes Pakistan actually has? I wonder how much they are really under control and how much of a hand the U.S. has on the trigger."
hard to say. word on the street that the CIA has the nuke situation under control (according to stratfor)
libertarian86.blogspot.com
Wiki (aka CIA) says both Pakistan and Israel have around 100 each - enough to make a real mess. Iran sits in the middle. Everybody is on edge. Not a lot of fun.
This obviously means we need to ramp up agression versus Iran. I mean Iran is supposedly engaging in a nuclear weapons program. We need to eliminate their threat before we end up pissing off every other nuclear capable nation on the planet.
*You read that in McCain's voice*
I bet Pakistan could point every weapon they have at U.S forces and the only solution would be to attack Iran.
I foresee an mutual defence alliance between Pakistan, Iran, Afganistan, which brings with it Russia and China.
We should have left Afganistan 7 years ago.
McCain should be tried for treason!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And now that Iran and Paki interests are finally broadly aligning ... they will cooperate more to swap secrets, technology and weapons.
what the fuck are we there for anyways.let that cancer run its course and kill off its host. get out of there. NOW. and yes I agree with Barnaby.
its going to take everything we got to get in there and back out again and again
This is the beginning of the bleeding of NATO. A retreat will become necessary - unavoidable
come next spring and summer ... it's gone quiet because winter is here
Russia willbe next the close the gate and then well i guess Obama will have to "Have a victory in Afghanistan, and bring the troops home" because there will be no way to fight a war that way if you cant re supply, it is ofcourse almost an election year
Your comment, and the one before it, are right on the money. Should have declared victory and got out 7+ years ago.
Another rarely discussed option is going all-in with India against the Paki's. They hate the Paki's and would team up in a second if the US asked.
The trick would be keeping the nuclear war limited. How could they keep Russia and China calm when nukes are going off in their backyard?
We would have really won if potus 43 had the testosto-sack he seems to have now when he's out of fire zone and told Cheney and Rumsfeld to pound sand.
or we could just leave people alone and stay out of other people's business..........novel concept, no?
BINGO
Give the man a ceeee-gar, cupie doll and a gold star for common sense, raw intelligence, human insight and just a plain good old fucking idea.
Agreed. As I said, it would be best to declare victory and get out.
Short of inventing a time machine, I can't see the US never being there in the first place.
I tend to believe the MIC will escalate rather than get out.
Reality bites!
this could have been "solved" during the Kargill War, where India's naval superiority had Pukistan at the verge of resource starvation. Pukistan would have probably gone nuclear and that recognition is why the superior powers leaned on both sides for an end to the conflict.
Letting the forests continue to disease only invites an inevitably worse forest fire that cannot be controlled.
or we could just leave people alone and stay out of other people's business..........novel concept, no?
Not if your name is Ron Paul.
They can't.
Whoever fires a nuke at Pakistan will be considered a global rouge, a mass murderer, and will be blasted to soot by the remaining big nuclear powers, because no one can trust any nuclear power that starts a nuclear bombardment.
They can't afford to let that go unpunished in kind ... because they may be next to get attacked.
That's why 'the-bomb' is supposed to be a "Weapon of LAST resort".
Pakistan is a loose cannon and whole world including China is probably afraid of them. The only reason world tolerates Pakistan (it's military) is because Pakistan is perceived as Saudi sidekick (Pakistan has been murdering Shias, Ahmediayas, Sufis) to prove what radical Sunnis they are (just like Saudi Arabia). And Saudis are tolerated because of their oil. As for China and Russia throwing their weight behind Pakistan, I doubt it. Paksitan, as Saudi sidekick is anti-Shia, anti-Iran (Remember Iran calls Pakistan a 'military with a country'). Russia will always support Iran over Pakistan. And so will China. China needs their oil. And Iran has border conflicts and idealogical conflicts with Paksitan. So it's all very complicated. Pakistan should forget about playing with the big boys, abandon all these extremely expensive war games and concentrate on improving it's economy, before multi-nationals decide Asia has become too expensive and move to Africa to scout for labor. But then Paksitani military will never allow Pakistani economy to improve, because that would mean, populace will not be dependant on them to procure hand-outs from their arch enemy, the US.
Pakistan is a loose cannon and whole world including China is probably afraid of them. The only reason world tolerates Pakistan (it's military) is because Pakistan is perceived as Saudi sidekick (Pakistan has been murdering Shias, Ahmediayas, Sufis) to prove what radical Sunnis they are (just like Saudi Arabia). And Saudis are tolerated because of their oil. As for China and Russia throwing their weight behind Pakistan, I doubt it. Paksitan, as Saudi sidekick is anti-Shia, anti-Iran (Remember Iran calls Pakistan a 'military with a country'). Russia will always support Iran over Pakistan. And so will China. China needs their oil. And Iran has border conflicts and idealogical conflicts with Paksitan. So it's all very complicated. Pakistan should forget about playing with the big boys, abandon all these extremely expensive war games and concentrate on improving it's economy, before multi-nationals decide Asia has become too expensive and move to Africa to scout for labor. But then Paksitani military will never allow Pakistani economy to improve, because that would mean, populace will not be dependant on them to procure hand-outs from their arch enemy, the US.
raid that took out Osama Bin Laden
the raid that took out a patsy.. osama dies in 2002 of liver failure
just repeat the standard lies of the media , unemployment 8.6 but really 22%
inflation 2% but really 13% .. black is white . war is peace .. yadda
buried at sea lol
War will set you free.