Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clinton's S. Asia trip a 'costly failure'

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Clinton's S. Asia trip a 'costly failure'

    And this is what the American's themselves think of Clinton's tour of South Asia:-

    President Clinton's trip late last month to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Switzerland was the most expensive and, critics charge, the least productive foreign trip ever taken by a US Chief Executive, influential Washington Times said on Wednesday.
    Referring to a recent characterization of the trip by ABC News as "days of protected sightseeing", the paper quoted a senior Republican leader Sen. John McCain as saying: "I don't think there has been a time in recent history where a president has embarked on a foreign tour in the extensive way that he did and come up totally empty-handed." McCain recently gave up his bid for party nomination as presidential candidate. Time's story on cost of the trip noted that the President failed to obtain a fresh understanding on the CTBT from both India and Pakistan. On way back he met Syrian President Hafez Assad in Geneva in an unsuccessful attempt to restart Middle East peace talks.
    The White House on Monday reported the Air Force has estimated that Clinton's travels to the Asian Subcontinent will cost between $50 million and $75 million, although precise figures will not be available for months. Much of that expense came from the use of an aerial armada that, according to news reports, included 26 huge C-5 and C-17 cargo planes and more than 50 other support aircraft needed to transport the President's security and political entourages.
    The Secret Service took unprecedented security measures because of the tensions between Pakistan and India that the White House fears could erupt into nuclear war. Clinton played a shell game with multiple jet aircraft when shuttling from Bombay to Islamabad. He first pretended to board a C-17, then slipped aboard one of two waiting Gulfstream executive jets parked behind the cavernous transport. Air Force officials said they are under orders not to discuss costs of the operation. Presidential travel abroad is coordinated by the National Security Council.
    Officials at the General Accounting Office, a congressional agency that audits federal programmes, and other watchdog groups report that specific figures on the cost of presidential travel are difficult to obtain, but also assure that a trip totaling at least $50 million would certainly set a new mark for presidential travel expenses.
    Clinton's detractors in the Republican Party assailed him for undertaking an expensive and largely unproductive trip.
    The President hit back last week saying: ˘What they didnĂt point out is that I lost all the leverage I had when the Republican Senate defeated the ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty,Clinton said. Some of (the Republicans) great strengths is (that) they have no guilt and no shame. I mean, they'll say anything.




    #2
    I disagree!

    For first time I detect softening of attitude in General & CE Musharaf!

    For example, during his recent visit to SE Asia that took place after Clinton's visit; the General made some ground breaking statements:

    1) "Kashmir is ruining Pakistan.."
    2) "We are prepared to meet and open dialogue with India..."
    3) "During my visit to Afghanistan, we will discuss the extradition of Osama..."

    The General knows that Pakistan is on the brink with the Chinese having informed the Pakistanis that they prefer Pakistan negotiate with India rather than look for Chinese intervention if a War breaks out.

    The General knows that with the current blocade of loans & aid, Pakistan will get pushed over the edge.

    Every epochal events take time to register its effects - it wont be any different for the Clinton visit that I consider as beneficial; Pakistan needed to hear in clear & concise words that it stands isolated in its support of terrorism and in the escalation of its conflicts with India.

    Comment


      #3
      it is just pretending to listen. old habits die hard and few morte shocks are needed to wake up pak.

      Comment


        #4
        ABDUL - DUD MUSHARRAF:-

        1) PROMISE TO SIGN THE CTBT? - NO !
        2) DID HE SAY THAT PAKISTAN WOULD RESPECT THE LOC? - NO!
        3) DID HE SAY THAT PAKISTAN WOUL CLOSE DOWN MADRASSAS/ BAN ANY RELIGIOUS MOVEMEMNTS ? - NO !
        4) DID HE AGREE TO STOP SUPPORTING THE TALIBAN? - NO !
        5) DID HE GIVE CLINTON ANY TIMETABLE FOR ELECTIONS? - NO!

        You seem to mistaken conciliatory words for actions. Musharraf has only made comments that he knows will please international opinion, he has certainly not changed his policies. Remember he did not beg Clinton to come to Pakistan, like the Indian's begged him to stay away!

        Musharraf is more of diplomat than any recent Pakistani leader, and he is liberal AND a true patriot by heart. As a diplomat he knows you have to compromise, and as a patriot he knows you cannot sacrifice national sovereignty.

        Indeed I believe that Clinton's visit has done Pakistan good and India harm, because India without admitting is actually involving third party mediation in Kasj=hmir by default?

        Clinton's comments towards Pakistan believe will change in a few months, after he has been leaned on by various lobbies and vested interests. As a life long student of American politics I know that American foreign policy has a habit of swinging from one extreme to another - look at the USA now making up with Libya and Iran.

        Anyway Clinton no longer counts, he is a lame duck president, and lets hope the Republican candidate Bush wins the election, and the Democrat Hilaray wins in New York - they would be major defeats for the Jew-Hindu lobby.

        Let me give you a few facts about huge Jewish influence in Clinton's government:-

        1) SENATE (total 100 members) - of the 11 Jewish members, 10 are Democrat !

        2) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (total 435 members) - of the 23 Jewish members, 21 are Democrats.

        3) Head of the CIA, FBI, The Federal Reserve are Jewish.

        4) Clinton's cabinet - Albright (Sec of State), Cohen (Defence Secretary), the Treasury secretary, Agriculture secretary, Sandy Berger (US National Secretary advisor), Charlene Barshelfsky (US Trade representative) are all Jews!!!!

        5) Monica Lewinsky, and her lawyers and key backers are all Jewish.

        SO MY POINT IS WHEN JEWISH INFLUENCE IS LESS - USUALLY DURING A REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION, THEN PAKISTAN'S CASE WILL LOOK BETTER.

        OH AND BY THE WAY I WANT HILIRAY TO WIN, BEACUSE THE JES ARE DISPLEASED WITH HER.

        Comment


          #5
          kmailik wrote:
          >> Remember he did not beg Clinton to come to Pakistan, like the Indian's begged him to stay away! <<

          Friend, you seem to know a hell lot of things unknown to common public!!!!!!!!!!
          Musharraf did not beg Clinton to visit Pak?

          Don't tell this to anybody else!


          As for the outcomes of Clinton's visit,
          you forget the case of Nawaz.
          Clinton has to do something about Nawaz not getting the death penalty.

          Comment

          Working...
          X