Iran, Geopolitics and the Bomb

#126, Tahmed Sahib,
LOL.
That is the best that Michael Jackson has looked since he was a little boy. :)

Inbred retard Behram is the perfect example of the paki education system...and explains why Indians in the US, on an average, make 40% more than Pakis..and why a bunch of pakis have been busted for jihad in the US..and why pakis are analy probed everytime they land at a US airport..

#135 by behram1 on January 27, 2006 5:46am PT

cost of labor in Pakiland is lower than that in India...you`re BEGGING american companies like Microsoft to come to PAkiland but they won`t because 1) The poor quality of labour as a direct result of the madrassah education 2) Pakiland`s reputation as a jihadi hotbed...

Cost of labor in India, to code-coolies is less than American babies diaper costs, yet factoid junkie is proud of what MNC has brought to India. It is hard for turd brains to understand the destructive forces of MNC`s, since all he is used to is cut & paste technology.

Why indians why,why don`t you accept your true identity, amrica is coming to your country because you invented kamasutra

Reality Pakis


US-India strategic alliance


By Ghayoor Ahmed

HISTORY bears witness to the fact that the United States focused its efforts on building a close relationship with Pakistan only when it deemed it necessary to do so to achieve its limited aims in the region. It did not consider Pakistan important enough to develop long-time relations with.

In contrast, American policymakers have made sustained efforts to develop a cordial and durable relationship with India for the promotion of major US interests in South Asia. This illustrates the dichotomy in America’s attitude towards Pakistan and India.

However, being one of the principal exponents of the non-aligned movement, India preferred to remain politically neutral and in order to attain great power status in the international system it endeavoured to maintain a non-aligned posture. Yet, American policymakers continued to feverishly work to woo India which was seen by them to have strategic possibilities of interest to the United States.

The end of the Cold War, however, brought about a perceptible change in the strategic outlook of India. To all intent and purposes it abandoned its hoary commitments to non-alignment. President Bill Clinton’s visit to India in March 2000 not only opened a new chapter in US-India relations, it was also heralded as a blueprint for future ties between the two countries. Based on the conviction that US interests required strong links with New Delhi, the Bush administration has been exploring ways of creating a strategic partnership with India since 2001.

Consequently, in 2004, the United Sates and India embarked upon a bilateral programme referred to as the Next Steps in the Strategic Partnership (NSSP). Under the aegis of this programme the United States and India agreed to work on a quartet of security issues that included civilian nuclear technology, civilian space technology, high technology trade, and missile defence.

On July 18, 2005, both, the United States and India formally established their strategic partnership in the furtherance of cooperation in a number of areas of mutual interests, including the nuclear field. Many considerations underlay this “new relationship” between the United States and India, which is, however, predicated on their common desire of containing China’s growing military might and its emergence as a political/economic power. China is perceived by both countries as a potential threat to their long-term interests in the region and beyond.

It is generally believed that President Bush, aiming to boost India as a counterbalance against China, has moved closer to accepting it as a nuclear weapon state notwithstanding his rhetoric of a vigorous non-proliferation policy.

It is important to note in this context that while welcoming Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, to the White House on July 18 last year, President Bush described India as a responsible state with advanced nuclear technology, and said that it should acquire the same benefits and advantages as other such states were entitled to. The president also said that he would ask Congress and US allies to revise American laws and international laws to allow nuclear trade with India.

One should not, however, be surprised at Washington’s nuclear cooperation with India which, in fact, dates back to the 1950s when, apart from building the Tarapur nuclear reactor and providing heavy water for its reactors, it also allowed Indian nuclear scientists to study at US nuclear laboratories. Declassified American papers also revealed that, in 1961, the United States had contemplated making India a nuclear power as a counterweight to China. That idea, however, had to be shelved at the time because of some problems in its implementation.

It is difficult to believe that while making a decision about a strategic partnership with India that would facilitate its emergence as a powerful entity with considerable political and military clout conferring upon it the status of a regional hegemon, US policymakers would not have taken into account Pakistan’s sensitivities.

Washington is well aware of Pakistan’s serious concerns about the threat to its security, particularly from its eastern neighbour, which leads one to believe that it deliberately ignored this important aspect.

However, it is equally intriguing that policymakers in Pakistan for many years did not know which way the wind was blowing in US corridors of power and, therefore, could not persuade Washington to adopt an even-handed policy towards Pakistan and India. There no point in making hollow noises against the US-India strategic alliance at this stage as it is now a fait accompli.

The US-India strategic partnership may be in consonance with America’s interests but will, however, create serious problems for all countries in the region as they have disputes with their bigger neighbour. It will particularly hurt Pakistan. Political analysts believe that the existing cordial Pakistan-US relationship might come under severe strain and place the present pro-US regime in Pakistan in a quandary if Pakistan’s legitimate concerns about its security are not addressed by the United States in a satisfactory manner.

Having been on the wrong side of history in Afghanistan and Iraq, the containment of China has now commanded President Bush’s attention. He has decided to use India as a conduit for this purpose. He has entered into a long-term strategic partnership with that country, ostensibly, to build closer ties between the two countries in different fields. The scepticism that this ominous development would upset the delicate balance of power between Pakistan and India and undermine the security of the former is well-founded.

A wide body of opinion in Pakistan is of the view that the United States cannot be relied upon as a dependable ally which underlines the need and urgency of evolving a new strategy that would particularly address the security concerns of their country. For obvious reasons, Pakistan cannot abdicate its responsibility for the preservation of its security and national integrity in the aftermath of the recent overtures the United States has made to India.

Unfortunately, however, Pakistan is also suffering from a number of serious political, economic and social problems. Ethnic and regional conflicts have particularly assumed critical proportions and might impinge upon its national security and territorial integrity.

It is, therefore, equally important to put our own house in order by creating national harmony and reconciliation. The need for pragmatism has never been so acutely felt as today.

The writer is a former ambassador.

inbred retard tells us MNCs are bad and the reason so few of them are investing in Pakiland is because Pakiland doesn`t want the evil MNCs...yet El-Presidente is begging Microsoft(MNC) to invest in Pakiland..inbred retard tells us MNCs exploit cheap labor and yet El-Presidente offers his countries cheap labor(fact that nobody is interested is another issue)..

Musharraf invites foreign investors


DAVOS, Jan 26: President Pervez Musharraf on Thursday invited the global entrepreneurs to invest in Pakistan, saying its geo-strategic location, booming economy, lucrative incentives and market of 156 million people makes the country an ideal destination for foreign investment.

The country’s cheap but skilled manpower and low cost of doing business are the other ingredients of Pakistan’s investor-friendly climate, he added.

The president also pointed to the high profitability and said most of the foreign companies in Pakistan were earning profits between 30 to 60 per cent.

He identified telecom, IT, agro-based industry, engineering, construction, power, oil and gas exploration, fisheries and food-processing as some of the areas which offer vast opportunities for investment with good returns.

Speaking to William H. Gates, chairman software giant Microsoft, who called on him on the margins of the World Economic Forum (WEF) on Thursday, President Musharraf said effective use of information technology was fundamental to Pakistan achieving its strategic economic objectives.

“With its large domestic market and strategic location, Pakistan could be used as a hub for Microsoft initiatives in Central Asia and Afghanistan”, the president said.

William Gates discussed possible areas of Microsoft-Pakistan collaboration and investment in the country’s promising IT sector. —APP

Paqkistan`s supreme leader is very good manager.
He is in Europe for economic meeting and has become center of attention. He knows how to squeeze good financial arrangement. He put usa in dilemma. He said he will go for Iran gas pipe project and said bluntly it is necessary for economic survival. He said to usa directly if usa does not want to have that then then they should compensate. Egypt and Israel has similar deal to sign peace treaty. USA will have to accept pipeline or will have to compensate pakistan for not building. Great Tactician of practcal economics as economics is concentrated economics. Pakistan has proper man at proper place. Great managerial skills for sure.

Paqkistan`s supreme leader is very good manager.
He is in Europe for economic meeting and has become center of attention. He knows how to squeeze good financial arrangement. He put usa in dilemma. He said he will go for Iran gas pipe project and said bluntly it is necessary for economic survival. He said to usa directly if usa does not want to have that then then they should compensate. Egypt and Israel has similar deal to sign peace treaty. USA will have to accept pipeline or will have to compensate pakistan for not building. Great Tactician of practcal economics as economics is concentrated economics. Pakistan has proper man at proper place. Great managerial skills for sure.

#125 by Netizen on January 26, 2006 9:28am PT

Obviously, it is very difficult for a capitalist society to make a clear distinction between MNC`s and capitalism. I will try it, albeit in a different way. And this apples mainly to the American companies more so than Europeans because of public financing.

For an MNC, the inter-company pricing is where they could easily conceal real cost of their products and avoid paying taxes. They avoid taxes to the host countries because they claim that these are goods-in-progress. Then, when those goods are brought to the US, to be made into finished product, MNCs generally tend to use high figures as cost of supplies, from the foreign land. As such their actual profit on finished goods is decreased considerably. Hence, they pay very little taxes.

Now, all this applies mostly to the physical goods that are being shipped. With IT technologies, etc. since there are no finished goods, this may not apply. So the host country gets mostly nothing from the MNC, except maybe some jobs for their unemployed people. Of course, something is better than nothing. However, the resources of this labor pool could have been well spent in other areas of the economy where the taxing body could collect taxes for the betterment of the country.

Loosing taxes due to the shenanigans of the MNC`s should be a major concern of enlightened developing economies. And it seems that they are not.

However, a mom and pop capitalist pays all the domestic taxes, and are not able to employ the shenanigans of the MNC. A true capitalist must always play within the boundaries of the law. Unfortunately, politicians who make laws are bought out by the MNCs. And those who work for MNCs are better off not understanding the law. In this way, people who have jobs cannot cut the hands that feed them. The rest of the Joe Blows of the society, who know that MNC`s are screwing the country are unable to voice their opinion.

{why is creating jobs an evil?} That is the whole crux of inviting an MNC into the host economy. It is always promoted as let us give them tax holiday`s because they create jobs. And that is what is hogwash.

{almost every country in the world is a signatory of WTO, how are you going to prevent some particular company from coming in?} Yes, being signatories is just the beginning, but disagreements keep popping up and the WTO court has been very active lately.

{if the people of the country doesn`t want what the mnc has to offer, they will reject it by themselves.} Correct, if the people are given free choice. But, most of them are not free to choose. Most developing countries have their political structure so messed up that MNCs can litterally walk in with completed agreements for the despotic rule to sign on the dotted line.

{you can add daewoo, hyundia to that list too. but that happened in a capitalist environment.} That is exactly what I claimed in my argument. South Korean companies did not need MNC`s from the US to grow.

{but behram, who is the chairman of ms board of director?????} Yes, maybe one vote. Whereas, there are many other votes by the other board members who are mostly stooges of other huge share holders such as the mutual funds, etc.

How can these so-called corporatists create wealth? That is what the genesis of this discussion was.

{well if they don`t create wealth} Do you remember Aol buying Time Warner out? What happened to Steve Case? That is exactly what I am saying. Corporatists do not create wealth for any society. They may create wealth for themselves. But the whole society is not well served.

{behram, no one starts a company for charity.} Yes, correct, and that is why I believe in true capitalism.

{you have to make money to stay afloat.} Yes, correct. But, then the management takes over, who are mostly office politicians, (nothing to do with the individual enterprising person who started the business entity), and then they go out for public money to grow. And shortly a MNC is born.

And that is the evil in Corporatism.

{ atleast some families are paying bills due to their GE job.} Of course, but should we whore away the whole country on the whims of an MNC?

#124, Kulharee Sahib states: <<< Asadi Sahib, I didn’t mean you as person, but those who hold views such as yours (e.g., the Imam of Pilsbury mosque in London) who would rather live in the West than in their own country.

Do you in all honesty believe that you can express your leftist views in the countries you see so “victimized”? #1, you are not a leftist, but a hate-monger >>>

Something is very apparent in Kulharee`s posts. Once he is caught in a lie, he covers that up with more lies.

Here is what he had states in his post #94 <<< Tahmed32 Sahib is making a very valid point. All these so called lefty commie terrorists sympathizers, like Asadi Sahib and Naqshbandi Sahib, would never want to live any of the countries they see so victimized by the ``west >>>

Seems very PERSONAL to me and ``lefty commie terrorist sympathizers`` tells me that he is talking about ``leftys``. Kulharee instead of jumping all over the board why don`t you stick to what you want to state. Proving yourself a hypocrite with your lips firmly planted on George Bush`s a$$ leaves you in no moral position to point fingers at anyone. And since you know ZIP about me, don`t try to imagine my biography, comprendey??

Because Israel does not threaten to wipe Iran (or any other country) off the map- publically at least.

salim: I knew you would agree once you understood what I was trying to say, and what kulharee then made crystal clear. These ``west-hating islam pasandas`` are as big fakes as the latest ``islam pasand``....drum roll puhlease!!.....he-e-e-e-e-r-e`s wacko ben jacko

(no kidding. here is the link Jackson`s veiled attempt at shopping in Bahrain (cnn)

#122 behram:

the 100000 new jobs/year I attributed were just new jobs, the creation could have been through MNC`s or indian companies like Wipro, Infosys, reddys, other bpo services.

it seems you are targetting MNC`s in particular. no where i have just promoted mnc`s.

these jobs could come by relaxing labor policies within the country or divesting huge state monopolies which are run by bureacrats eg. vsnl, since relaxation of policies so many indian and foreign players are competing in the indian market and has resulted in a huge market.

nevertheless, mnc`s end up having more resources and capital to invest for growth.

``the MNC hardly pays any US taxes, because the company says that the product is made in a foreign country. ``

i think mnc`s do have to pay taxes on money earned abroad. just last year bush relaxed that policy so that pharma industry could bring billions of it at a low tax.

``And Nasser was the one who screwed up Ford, and who is paying for with job cuts. You guessed it, the workers who had absolutely no part in the decison making process. ``

there are several eg. which will prove otherwise. but i am not trying to talk about the the workings of a mnc or the pay of a ceo. thats another topic by itself.

``replacing an evil with another set of evil does not make any sense. ``

why is creating jobs an evil?

``Governments should leave individuals free to develop its economy. However, it should protect their country from the invasion of MNC`s. There is no quick fix for economic well being of a country. You can not marry your country into wealth. ``

almost every country in the world is a signatory of WTO, how are you going to prevent some particular company from coming in? if the people of the country doesn`t want what the mnc has to offer, they will reject it by themselves. kellogs took a long time to enter indian homes.


``Look at South Korea. Samsung is home grown, and not because of some MNC from the west. ``

you can add daewoo, hyundia to that list too. but that happened in a capitalist environment. there may have been many other korean companies who didn`t make it. also do you think samsung grew under gov. protection? i would be surprised if it was given subsidies.

``But, when they became huge MNC`s it is now run by the Board of Directors, a cadre of screw ball politicians, who are no different from the other government bureaucrats. ``

but behram, who is the chairman of ms board of director?????

``Now the management who takes over Pixar will continue moving forward with this investment. How would they know how to create wealth? ``

well if they don`t create wealth (by making movies) then the stock will fall and management replaced. also, jobs is not going anywhere he is in the board of director.


``Do you honestly think that GE has done that to India? Why do we not see every Indian household having GE light bulbs? or refrigerator. I have always heard about Godrej`s refrigerator in India. ``

behram, no one starts a company for charity. you have to make money to stay afloat. is not as if there were no GE, GoI would have put bulbs in every indian homes. atleast some families are paying bills due to their GE job.

anyway, nice chatting. i will continue talking to you on this issue.

Re # 112
Asadi Sahib, I didn’t mean you as person, but those who hold views such as yours (e.g., the Imam of Pilsbury mosque in London) who would rather live in the West than in their own country.

Do you in all honesty believe that you can express your leftist views in the countries you see so “victimized”? #1, you are not a leftist, but a hate-monger. If you were a leftist, you would advise your muslim brothers to take their heads out of the Allah’s ass and get with the program. A leftist will stand up for human rights for everyone regardless of sexual orientation, gender, color or religious beliefs. Can you stand up for the rights of Muslim Homosexuals? They are persecuted in Egypt and frowned upon all over the muslim world. Can you?

#120, don`t spam this forum. Your questions asked on the other thread were answered already. When some evidence doesn`t fit in with your predetermined conclusion you reject the evidence instead of questioning your conclusion. The Russian public was better off under communism on all social indicators than they are under their capitalistic experiment. Clean up does not mean that you become worse off. Is that how you plan to clean up India? Some time back I had posted an article that documented data stating that only those countries that practiced protectionism were the ones whose growth rates did not decline in the 1980s at the rates that the decline in the Neo-libralized countries occurred. Economists today recognize that protectionism, by which the Western economic powers developed themselves, even when it sacrifices short term gain develops a base for long term sustainable development.

Please post your claims in appropriate threads and don`t spam.

#117, behram1, it is no longer possible to make a distinction between mom and pop style capitalism and corporate capitalism because, as you allude to as well, the latter has destroyed the former. Instead of culture there is marketing and the personality market that has whored everything human and placed a price tag on it.

I share your sentiments on how MNCs are destroying the world and I have tried here long enough, now it is time to return. My article ``declarations of independance`` might be handy in your toolbox as you oppose the MNCs, it can be read here
http://www.selvesandothers.org/article12202.html

The Indian government will of course be on the wrong side of the forums, the tide seems to be changing in Pakistan and hopefully during the next decade it will unalign itself from the US MNC dominated world economic system.