Debate:Should the United States attack Pakistan?

Considering the fact that they had a role in the 9/11 attacks and not to mention the 2,000+ U.S troops that have been killed in Afghanistan due to Pakistan's state sponsored terrorism, we should attack Pakistan and break it apart.Bytemsbu (talk) 00:31, 1 February 2021 (EST)

This will only drive them further into the hands of a CCP ally. The U.S. needs to strengthen its relationship with India first. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 21:40, 1 February 2021 (EST)

Building the Indo-Pacific version of a NATO military alliance to defend against CCP aggression, imperialism, and adventurism takes precedence, and Pakistan given the full opportunity to decide which alliance it wants to sign on to. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 22:38, 1 February 2021 (EST)

Rebuttal:: Pakistan is a vassal state of China. To say that Pakistan should be included in an Indo-Pacific military alliance is equivalent to saying Iran and North Korea should be included in an Indo-Pacific military alliance. Bytemsbu (talk) 21:05, 2 February 2021 (EST)

Pakistan has a longterm close relationship with the United States, going as far back as the U-2 incident of 1959 (see Francis Gary Powers) and throughout the Soviet-Afghan war. Only in recent decades has it been called into question. It's the principal reason U.S.-India relations have not been closer, a fear of offending Pakistan.

Coaxing Pakistan out of an alliance with China is the key to improving Indo-Paki relations, and not letting the Chinese communists exploit the situation and tensions.

All of this, of course, can only be thoughtfully discussed by a thorough examination and understanding of the Pakistani military/intelligence and its position in Pakistani politics and government. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 21:46, 2 February 2021 (EST)

1.The U.S support of the Mujahideen during the Soviet-Afghan war was a big blunder and led to the rise of Al-Qaeda.

2. China has had close relations with Pakistan going back to 1963, where Pakistan ceded the Shaksgam Valley to China.

3. All the Pakistani politicians have to do what the Pakistani ISI/Military tells them to do.Bytemsbu (talk) 11:25, 17 February 2021 (EST)

Let's start with No. 3. Yes, exactly. And that's what I mean by a "thorough examination and understanding of the Pakistani military/intelligence and its position in Pakistani politics and government." It's built upon a Western model, and while occupied by predominantly secular Muslims, it's hardly an al-Qaeda or Taliban-type institution. Additionally, it's nuclear-armed.

Point No.1 I'll address by saying that it was not a mistake to work with the Mujahideen to hasten the demise of the Soviet Union and end the Cold War, or at least the point is debatable. The falling out with jihadist veterans of the Soviet-Afghan war came about later, in the 1991 Gulf War.

Point No. 2 also needs closer scrutiny; a Pakistani-Sino alliance dating back to the 1963 Sino-Soviet split can also be seen more as an anti-Russian alliance than a pro-Chinese Communist relationship.

The U.S. has held India at arms length for a long time so as not to offend Pakistan, both during the Cold War when it needed a strong anti-Soviet ally, and in the early days of the War on Terror because of the ISI's unique position in the Muslim world. Even within the ISI there have been splits or divisions, or differing points of view on which jihadist entities may be of use to the ISI and its allies, and which groups cannot be relied upon or trusted. The ISI knew and had contact with virtually all these jihadi groups - something the U.S. was totally in the dark about. U.S. intelligence needed the ISI's understanding, expertise, and contacts with all these Islamic extremist groups.

So there are two big questions to examine: (1) the nature and influence of the ISI within and outside Pakistan's borders, and secondly, a true understanding of the depth of the Pakistan-Sino relationship. Is it an alliance of convenience? Russia plays a huge part here in determining this. Like the U.S., Russia itself also is hesitant to favor one side over the other in India-Pakistani relations. But China today is forcing a lot of people's hands. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 12:16, 17 February 2021 (EST)

Former Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mike Mullen testified to Congress in which he said the Haqqani Network is a "veritable arm" of the ISI. Furthermore Lt. Col. Ralph Peters has also clearly stated that "Pakistan is not our ally" and that the Pakistani generals are "scum sucking liars". [[1]]Bytemsbu (talk) 13:36, 17 February 2021 (EST)