| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| US delivers four F-16s to Pakistan |
| 2008-07-29 |
| ISLAMABAD: United States Central Command Acting Commander Lt Gen Martin E Dempsey on Monday handed over four F-16 jet aircraft to Pakistan Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed in a ceremony at the Pakistan Air Force Base Mushaf, Sargodha. With the handing over of the four jets, the delivery of 14 upgraded F-16 aircraft has been completed. Earlier the US had agreed to give Pakistan these aircrafts under the Foreign Military Sales Programme, which was singed in 2005. The air chief said the Pakistan Air Force would remain vigilant for the defence of the nation by ensuring the highest level of combat readiness. The US embassy said in a statement that the US government provided the aircraft to Pakistan at no cost except for transportation expenses. “The four aircraft presented on Monday are valued at approximately $6.4 million each,” it said. The PAF said the newly delivered aircraft would significantly augment its operational and combat capabilities. |
| Posted by:john frum |
| #6 From Pakistan's Addiction in the Opinion Section: Here we have yet another case of an addict trying to fulfil its decadent addiction - in this case weapons - through any sort of manipulation and extortion it can think up. In fact, the truth is that the military's claims that F-16s are essential the war on terror is an outright lie. First of all, Pakistan's military doesn't very much directly engage with Taliban warlords. When military action does take place, it is usually the poor kids from the paramilitary (which means: not fully military) Frontier Corps that do the dying. F-16s don't enter the picture. Second, Pakistan doesn't fight the Taliban militants the way the US in Afghanistan does. The Americans like to surround the militants with armoured vehicles, then hit them with airstrikes, then follow this up with a ground assault and helicopter gunships. Pakistan usually foregoes the use of airstrikes and gunships. F-16s don't enter the picture. Third, dropping bombs from up high on the Taliban would be a self-defeating exercise because it would further increase the impression that Pakistan's war on warlords is a job outsourced from Washington DC, when in fact it must be something the Pakistanis want. F-16s shouldn't enter the picture. In other words, F-16s have nothing to do with the most pressing national security issue afflicting the Pakistani nation, yet here I am, thousands of miles from Pakistan, listening to the pre-eminent news station in the world, and the lead story about Pakistan isn't the oil-food-currency crisis in the country or the economic development in NWFP or the issue of Pashtun nationalism, it is a squadron of airplanes. What for? The Neo-Cons New World Order?(See Soviet/Indian Plan for dismemberment of Pakwakiland article) |
| Posted by: Danielle 2008-07-29 16:04 |
| #5 WTF? Free of charge. Why doesn't Bush just get down on his knees and do some bone gargling while he's at it? Consider it a bribe to the Pak military. We still have to use Pakistan as a cost-effective logistics route into Afghanistan. There aren't a lot of other options unless you really want to put stress on an already heavily-loaded airlift capability. But I suspect that with your knowledge of the strategic and tactical situation in Southwest Asia, you'd already taken that into consideration. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2008-07-29 12:35 |
| #4 With the special X-Box remote-control system installed? |
| Posted by: mojo 2008-07-29 11:33 |
| #3 I think these are the 28 F-16A and Bs that were embargoed after the Paki nuke tests and are therefore are not free. The Paks had already paid for them. The US tried to sell them to a third nation w/o success and refunded the Paks only about 1/2 the money. The F-16s were stored at the boneyard and then used by the aggressor squadrons (hard flying hours) and as Edwards chase planes. These F-16s just got the MLU upgrades which the Paks also paid for (with aid money). |
| Posted by: ed 2008-07-29 11:29 |
| #2 WTF? Free of charge. Why doesn't Bush just get down on his knees and do some bone gargling while he's at it? |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-07-29 10:38 |
| #1 Thank you. Cao Gangchuan |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2008-07-29 10:30 |