Thursday, June 16, 2011


("Tone down Pakistan rhetoric" is an L.A. Times editorial 6/18/11 suggesting "...the fight against Islamic extremists" could be jeopardized. They raise important concerns in a complex situation.)

Unexpected news has been forthcoming about most recent Pakistani government actions. I hadn't intended to write more on this topic but Pakistan has arrested five men who assisted the U. S. CIA in locating Bin Laden, residing in a secret compound where he was eliminated. Pakistan officials are reportedly angry they had not been forewarned of the U.S. special operations.

One of the issues this blog's previous article, "Duplicity." questioned was Pakistan's duplicitous actions. Their jailing these men serves to increase my apprehension about that nation's true relationship with the United States, their attitude toward the Taliban and terrorism.

This CBS News World Watch account provides additional specific information including:

"U.S. officials have begun to question whether America should continue to send aid to Pakistan, which so far has amounted to $20 billion since 2001."

What could we do with those $$$ in the U.S.?

The news source quotes a statement by Sen. Dick Luger (R-Ind.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The Senator describes Pakistan's complex government as consisting of various civilian, military and security groups each of which may erratically control the country. Who is in control at any given time varies and the nation's position on issues can rapidly reverse just as does who's in charge.

Are our taxpayer billions helping bring stability to Pakistan's government, keeping their nuclear capability from becoming dangerously active, or do officials keep the monies?

Certainly Pakistan's behavior toward our nation often seems to be based on conflicting allegiances involving the countries surrounding their borders with actions contrary to U.S. efforts against terrorism.

This is just one of several nations accepting billions of our tax dollars. We need to pay attention to the amount each nation is receiving, how and where that money is used.


  1. Amen! My first thought after bin Laden's death was: Isn't Pakistan supposed to be our friend? Friends don't hide terrorists.

  2. With US military facilities all around the world 'rent' payments must be made in billions of dollors. Yes even to those who are suppose to be our friends. While I too question these payments there is a military reality.

  3. Kay: I've had similar questions wondering who are our nation's real friends.

    Bob: You make a good point since there are so many conflicting elements within any country, including our own. I think of Yemen.

  4. Good questions here. It's getting to be part time for a sober reassessment of the type and positioning of our military forces needed in these days. I believe most of the cash given to prop up Pakistan is in the form of military aid. That's true elsewhere as well. The huge sums going to support perhaps unneeded bases and develop Star Wars weaponry that surely is not needed must be questionned, whether we are able to soon get out of the unnecessary Middle East wars or not.

  5. We have no business being there. Before the invasion of Afghanistan, experts on the Middle East predicted exactly the mess that is happening over there now.

  6. Hattie: Yes! I agreed with those who counseled before the Iraq invasion that we had no business there. We know the history of Afghan. and the centuries old Taliban. Those who haven't learned the lessons of history, or don't even know history, are often doomed to repeat the mistakes.

  7. I agree...we should not have been there. You'd think we would have learned from the past...but that's what's so frightening. ~Joy

  8. Interestingly, the Congress voted to give Bush authorization to go to war with Iraq. No such permission has been given under the War Powers Act for our involvement in Libya. Bring all the boys and girls home, I say.