You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
Yes, the US gave money to each of the 174 MPs that voted against him and the military leadership that failed to support him and each of the judges that overturned the election.
That would mean one of the most expensive coups by the US in history.
It’s one thing to say the US has influence in Pakistani politics, esp in anti-Imran Khan circles, but a completely other thing to claim they had puppet strings in the current situation.
Anyone that claims this with a straight face comes across looking incredibly stupid.
I don't think Washington would literally have to bribe each and every single MP; the United States could achieve regime change by simply threatening extensive and terribly damaging sanctions behind the scenes.
sanctions dont bring down regimes. but they hamper or cripple the economy. iran cuba north korea are still standing. iraq was overthrown by invasion not sanctions. when the economy is forcefully made smaller they spend less on military etc.I don't think Washington would literally have to bribe each and every single MP; the United States could achieve regime change by simply threatening extensive and terribly damaging sanctions behind the scenes.
And would this information be privvy to everyone?
The judges that dismissed the case, the leaders of each parliamentary party or the military leaders that refused to back Imran Khan?
Even then, Pakistan is not a country that the US loses sleep over. Whenever Pakistan acts up, the US supports India more. India is a Quad ally and more important. That is how they operate.
I haven't the foggiest idea of how the Pakistani political system works, but it's a corrupt 3rd world Nation and I imagine that the United States has identified the powerful, feared and influential individuals that it would need to get on side in order to pressure all those different parties you listed.
India is more important, but that's only an issue when there's an issue between India and Pakistan.
The United States routinely involves itself in the affairs of seemingly insignificant States, so Pakistan's apparent non-importance is really not a convincing argument.
To be fair, I don't know if Washington had a hand in this or not.
sanctions dont bring down regimes. but they hamper or cripple the economy. iran cuba north korea are still standing. iraq was overthrown by invasion not sanctions. when the economy is forcefully made smaller they spend less on military etc.
As I said on another thread to another user, if what you’re claiming is the case then this action was independent of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
This would’ve required a few months preparation as it had numerous cogs as opposed to your simple military coup.
India and Pakistan are counterbalances of each other. Generally, the US is happy if it holds the support of one of the two, preferably India.
However, since the war on terror, the US needed a friendly Pakistani government for the war in Afghanistan but since that’s over, it’s not of importance.
All they required was intel on the inner workings that regulate the formal official political movements; have effective networks of powerful players that shape relevant tendencies; and data about friction points that are there to enlarge and exploit to turn the tables; the practical know-how of accumulated experience and resources of meddling with foreign domestic processes.I admittedly have zero evidence to back this up, but I imagine that the United States already has pre-arranged regime change packages that could be implemented when the need arises.
All NATO countries are supportive of the Kurds. They should petition to kick US and UK out of NATO, too. Or threaten to leave the alliance.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
Walle America won, they're grinding down Russians with Ukrainians.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.