Email This Article
Your Name:
Your Email:
Email To:
6 + 4 = ?: (Required) Please type in the correct answer to the math question.

You are sending a link to...
Rethinking Pakistan

Since 9/11/2001, the American government has given to Pakistan, a country whose generals created, nurtured, trained, and then sent back into Afghanistan to take over that country, the Taliban (from "talib," or madrasa student, who attended those madrasas set up in Pakistan), $27.5 billion dollars in direct and indirect (including cancellation of debts) aid. Pakistan, where the I.S.I. paid for A. Q. Khan, "Dr." A. Q. Khan, to study in Western laboratories (in Holland, in Germany) and steal their nuclear secrets. Which he dutifully did. And while the American government got wind of this, yet it continued to look the other way, for decades after having seen that country as full of ramrod-postured, terry-thomas mustachioed rectitudinous generals, fine fellows all, what with their straight no-nonsense talk (so very different from those left-wing Indians), American generals and those of the John-Foster-Dulles school of geopolitical comprehension, were happy with anyone who was a "bulwark against Communism."

What have we got for that $27.5 billion? What does the Administration think it has gotten? What would it tell the public has been bought with that $27.5 billion? Bin Laden? Al-Zawahiri? Both captured or dead? What about the Taliban -- have what remained of them, having fled to Pakistan, been rounded up, or killed?

What did the $27.5 billion buy?

And what will happen to Pakistan -- is there the slightest chance that it will turn out all right, and those weapons the Western world, and especially the United States, allowed it to acquire will not be used, either by Pakistan or another Muslim country, or any number of groups who have sympathizers throughout the Pakistani military, against Infidels -- possibly India, possibly Israel, possibly other places even further from Pakistan.

Any rethinking of anything? Any reconsideration of the past and present folly, so future folly does not follow?