digitalzygot
Senator (1k+ posts)
Significant number of former US intelligence officials, suggested that a criteria-based approach with Pakistan could be possible. The explicit criteria could be tied to access to A. Q. Khan, greater visibility into Pakistans programme, submission to safeguards (Meaning revealing all wherebouts of our N-arsenal hmmm).
The proposed deal could have elements that are much more restrictive than the one the US made with India five years ago. For example, it could be based on an exclusive relationship with the United States, rather than seeking broad accommodation with the Nuclear Suppliers Group.
Pakistan would have to provide the kind of access and cooperation on nuclear suppliers networks identified in the Kerry-Lugar-Berman legislation(All Pakistanis know KL Bill and its agenda, we knew how sincere US is and this statement proves their hidden agenda). Pakistan would also have to demonstrate sustained and verifiable commitment(Thery still want to see our committment?? Retards, we have lost thousands civilians, soilders and lost billions in trade and tourism, we have been fighting their war and everyone caught seem to have been trained in Afghanistan by Raw/Mosad/CIA, it shows their double standards and secret agenda and they say that we playing double game or are not sincere..) in combating all terrorist groups on its soil.
The authors warned that some US economic initiatives were unlikely to be useful. For example, setting up Reconstruction Economic Zones in Fata, Kashmir, and the earthquake-affected areas is unlikely to have an appreciable effect on local economic activity even if it would have some public-relations value (Again stupid policy makers doesn't know facts on the ground, they just sitting in their rooms and coming up with stupid suggestions which will harm US interests and will prove that US isn't sincere in helping Pakistan).
The proposed deal could have elements that are much more restrictive than the one the US made with India five years ago. For example, it could be based on an exclusive relationship with the United States, rather than seeking broad accommodation with the Nuclear Suppliers Group.
Pakistan would have to provide the kind of access and cooperation on nuclear suppliers networks identified in the Kerry-Lugar-Berman legislation(All Pakistanis know KL Bill and its agenda, we knew how sincere US is and this statement proves their hidden agenda). Pakistan would also have to demonstrate sustained and verifiable commitment(Thery still want to see our committment?? Retards, we have lost thousands civilians, soilders and lost billions in trade and tourism, we have been fighting their war and everyone caught seem to have been trained in Afghanistan by Raw/Mosad/CIA, it shows their double standards and secret agenda and they say that we playing double game or are not sincere..) in combating all terrorist groups on its soil.
The authors warned that some US economic initiatives were unlikely to be useful. For example, setting up Reconstruction Economic Zones in Fata, Kashmir, and the earthquake-affected areas is unlikely to have an appreciable effect on local economic activity even if it would have some public-relations value (Again stupid policy makers doesn't know facts on the ground, they just sitting in their rooms and coming up with stupid suggestions which will harm US interests and will prove that US isn't sincere in helping Pakistan).
