Equipping Pakistan at Whose Expense?

If you don't read the text and fine print of GW's speechifying, you miss things. Let me point out a small sentence amidst the propaganda catapulted as the W, Rove and Co Flying Propaganda Circus gallivants about the globe:

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, what would you like to see President Musharraf do in the war on terrorism that he's not doing now? Is the United States getting the access and the help that it needs to go after al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden?

PRESIDENT BUSH: There's a lot of work to be done in defeating al Qaeda. The President and I know that. We spent a good while this morning talking about the work that needs to be done. The best way to defeat al Qaeda is to find -- is to share good intelligence to locate them, and then to be prepared to bring them to justice. So, one, the first question that I always ask is whether or not our intelligence-sharing is good enough, and we're working on it to make sure it's good enough. Intelligence is gathered by -- in a lot of different ways, but the key thing is that, one, it be actionable, and two, it be shared on a real-time basis.

Secondly, in order for Pakistan to defend herself from al Qaeda, she must have equipment necessary to move quickly, without tipping off the enemy. The President is training up special forces teams to do just that. And so while we do have a lot of work to be done, it's important that we stay on the hunt. Part of my mission today was to determine whether or not the President is as committed as he has been in the past to bringing these terrorists to justice, and he is. He understands the stakes; he understands the responsibility; and he understands the need to make sure our strategy is able to defeat the enemy.

It is difficult to know exactly what that means. Are we as American taxpayers fronting some of Pakistan's costs to "equip themeselves?" Well, if you don't bother to look a bit further, you would miss this answer to that very question:

Pakistan is one of the largest recipients of U.S. security assistance.

• The United States has pledged $1.5 billion of Foreign Military Financing to Pakistan from 2005-2009.
• The United States supports Pakistan's defense needs through sales of advanced systems.
• Last year, the President also announced the United States' intention to move forward with the possible sale of F-16 fighter aircraft to Pakistan.

In June 2004, President Bush designated Pakistan as a Major Non-NATO Ally, making Pakistan one of a select group of nations outside of NATO that have the benefit of a variety of military and financial advantages conferred by the United States.

Is this use of US Taxpayer dollars or tax on future generations in the form of accrued debt worth the outlay? Could this money been earmarked differently to come to a better resolution to the "War" on Terror? Are we merely feeding the war-time-profiteers that are pals to the W, Rove and Co one more time (more likely, many times over, really)? Does this sound like it reflects the conservative value of smaller over bigger government? Is OBL still alive (and probably recieving safe harbor in Pakistan)?