Pakistan reserves right of retaliation against US
Following a couple of very high-profile attacks on suspected terrorists into Pakistan in recent days - both of which the Pakistanis say hit civilians instead - the Pakistani military has said it reserves the right to strike back.
General Tariq Majid, chairman of Pakistan's Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, said cross-border strikes such as the one on Wednesday would alienate ethnic Pashtuns, who live on both sides of the border, and be counter-productive. "Pakistan reserves the right to appropriately retaliate," he told visiting German Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung.
Growing Pakistani hostility to their nation's role in the US-led "war on terror" isn't just confined to the military, and may well be the reason behind a hurried top-level conference aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Indian Ocean on Tuesday. Participants included Admiral Mullen, General Petraeus and Pakistan's military chief, General Kiyani.
“The meeting was mainly to continue to discuss ongoing operations against extremists in the border region and to work together to find better ways to solve those problems,” said one American military official who was briefed on the talks. Admiral Mullen met with General Kayani just a month ago in Islamabad, Pakistan. It was then that this week’s meeting was scheduled, the military official said. In Islamabad, he said, Admiral Mullen had bluntly warned General Kayani that Pakistan had to do more to combat militants in the restive tribal areas. The gathering aboard the Abraham Lincoln was less confrontational in tone, aides said. “It was one of those meetings to help clear up the situation, get an understanding of the issues, and look for a way forward,” said a senior Pakistani officer briefed on the discussions. Military officials from both countries declined to say whether commanders had reached any new agreement to allow American Special Operations forces greater access to Pakistan’s tribal areas to conduct missions to kill or capture top leaders of Al Qaeda who have found sanctuary there.
I find myself wondering if the threat to retaliate caused that new, less confrontational, tone. The Pakistani threat to take up arms against it's allies - and that really is a shocking development - should change everyone's gameplan, and it will be interesting to see if that filters through to the policy statements of the presidential candidates.
(Meanwhile, Condi Rice is hailing the election of a mad, corrupt politician with with no previous executive experience as the new Pakistani president. She told reporters "I'm looking forward to working with him". Go figure.)
CNN's Becky Anderson leads a roundtable discussion about security on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
i can see this one coming ... pakistan is going to do something, mccain and palin get elected, mccain keels over and palin is in charge of the end times.
i can't wait.
The Neocons know they are going to lose this election. They will attempt to start a war to nullify or postpone the election. Pakistan, Georgia/Russia, Iran, take your pick ... they are working on all fronts ...
Hang on kids, here come the events the repukes can't control. It would appear the seed that has been sown is just about ready for the harvest. If this thing blows up, short of invoking martial law the neocreeps are done. Man this sh*t is getting spooky.
Boy am I glad we decided to invade Iraq instead of focusing on Afghanistan and shutting down the Taliban and/or Al Qaeda. Real heads up move there.
Well folks you just knew something like this was bound to happen. Here's hoping Obama wins in Nov. McCain and Palin are just crazy enough to start another war that more than likely can be avoided
No one noticed last week the U.S. sent special forces into the village of Jalal Khei in South Waziristan at around 3 a.m. and immediately targeted three houses? The engagement lasted for about 30 minutes and left between 15 and 20 people dead, including women and children.
We are so like . . . ASLEEP at the WHEEL
L.A. Confidential @ 6:
Now if this had been the Russians we'd be drowning-gasping for air from a blitzkrieg of coverage from the MSM right to this exact moment.
Also, Pakistan temporarily blocked a resupply road from Peshawar to Western Afghanistan via the Torkham border crossing :
"The suspension of supplies to NATO forces in Afghanistan shows Pakistan is serious about safeguarding its territorial integrity, Defence Minister Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar told Dawn News on Saturday... Pakistani authorities had suspended the supplies on Friday and stopped over 30 NATO trucks at the Torkham border due to security concerns."
Wheh! Thank God Bush is helping India with it's nuke program! That's good, right? Right? NO? Fuck.....
God help us to GET RID of these Republican in charge!
Of course Condi is looking forward to working with him. She is just as crazy as he is. Add to that all of the other nutjobs running the countries surrounding Pakistan and we have a perfect combination of trouble. Big-time trouble. And is Cheney still in Georgia?
This world gets scarier by the day.
Hey, warmongering right-wing cock-buckets: I'm laughing at the "New American Century".
calgarylady @ 11:
Racist mysogynist!
Loonie @ 12:
Their motto is ‘Look Backward,’ and their watchword is. ‘That which has never been, cannot be.”
Well it may save our butts while kicking the sh*t out of the economy for while but the folks we owe lots of money to may just shut us down if the neocreeps keep this nonsense up.
Remember we're not in the driver's seat anymore in terms of our own economy. The neoclowns think they're running the show but when they turned us into the largest debtor nation in history they gave up control. Hunker down my brothers and sisters. Put some food in the pantry and be prepared to help your family, friends and neighbors if we hit a speed bump during the run up to the election.
'Dumb is as dumb does'
So which dumbfuck in the US gov decided that upsetting nuklear bomb armed Pakistan was a good idea.
Is this Chimpy's attempt at a legacy, war with Pakistan (pop 200million and various bombs missiles).
Can they really be that stupid !!!!
karen marie @ 1:
The End Times she seems fully qualified for.
Little else tho.
Chicken "Hussein" Little - Not! @ 15:
And if all else fails keeping lowering your standards. Problem there is one may as well jump off a cliff to reach the con standard.
It should also be pointed out that besides escalating the so-called "good war" in Afghanistan, Obama has also reserved the right, is he is elected president, to emulate the example of George W. Bush by also sending troops into Pakistan in order to pursue the "war on terrorism." This is the basic choice that Americans will be facing this November, between two hawks who are quite eager to shed more blood for what they view as the good of the cause.
L.A. Confidential @ 6:
Thats an outright act of war, nothing could excuse armed aggression by one gov's forces against targets in another country.
Let's see, how many enemies can the US make? Have we ever had a more inept SOS than Condi?
Erroll @ 19:
US troops have been in Pakistan helping their forces fight regional forces in the past,
I read a news article which mentioned US Rangers or similar doing something, circa 2000/2001
L.A. Confidential @ 18:
Ya lost me there LA, I understand the reference to cliff jumping but don't get where it fits into my looking for something that might put the brakes on these maniacs before we go over the cliff of limited or all out nuclear engagement. Help me out here, my back is in full spasm and it's wearing me out today.
calgarylady @ 11:
Nope, Italy, doing what he can to stir up trouble.
(Ha'aretz) Cheney to Peres: Russia supplies terrorist arms
Just imagine Palin as VP ..
This is proof positive that democracies have no USE for the US and it's faux 'War on Terror' which is a euphanism for 'kill the darkies and steal their oil'.
Just how many nuclear armed countries can Bush piss off in the time that is left?
We better start memorizing those old Vera Lynn lyrics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-L2cv6_Gc8
US forces in Pakistan?
October surprise. They want to show Bin Laden just before the elections.
kdoug @ 2:
I have no doubt their only saving grace from the guillotine (yes, I mean it) is Martial Law and a real war.
Chicken "Hussein" Little - Not! @ 23:
I don't know what to do to reign in these maniacs.
jesus, what a fucking mess...
ferrofluid (Obama + Biden = 2008) @ 22:
I am not in dispute with what you had written. Does the fact that U.S. forces were in Pakistan make it right? As many as 20 Pakistani civilians were killed in this attack, many of them women and children. Cernig is shocked, shocked! that the Pakistanis are considering "taking up arms against its allies." When foreign troops invade another country and begin to covertly kill its citizens, it then should come as little surprise if that attacked country should decide to lash out against its attacker. The point is that Obama is painting himself as this [alleged] agent of change and yet he is proposing to do the same exact thing as Bush is doing now and as the U.S. has done, [as you write], in the past. Who weeps for those dead Pakistanis? Certainly not Barack Obama. The depressing thing is that so many Americans continue to cling to the idea that Obama will somehow be so different than the current administration while his words and the past deeds of his foreign advisers say otherwise.
Winning new allies everywhere.
Thanks, MountainMan. Cheney's in Italy, eh? Pissing them off, too, no doubt.
I agree, the thought of Dick Cheney being replaced by Sarah Palin is absolutely terrifying.
What has Bush done in the last 8 years that he hasn't F**ked up? Scandals, wars, foreign policy, the list goes on and on.
Peter S. @ 4:
heads up their arses, yes.
nuke us till we glow? ouch
yes this is just great. bush & co are wasting billions overseas on stupid adventures and rescuing their pals in Wall Street. McSame will keep doing the same.
Erroll @ 31:
The point is that in the past, joint operations between US and Pakistani forces did whatever , picked off or up Gitmo types.
This one is different, as in US just went in and did something for itself, angering the Pakistanis, and freaking out their population.
Arrogance, and maybe thinking that overlords dont have to ask permission inside client countries.
Wow, this sounds serious.
Has President McShitstain dispatcched his ambassadors, Sen Limpsey Graham, and Sen. Holy Joe Loserman to pacify the situation?
Erroll @ 31:
can we just assume they are being duped?
€Punk @ 27:
Ding Ding Ding We have a winner!
Putting country first means recklessly trying to kill Bin Ladin regardless of any serious repercussions from collateral damage or possibly provoking a military response from
Pakistan.
MacDaKnife @ 21:
Maybe Madeleine "It's worth it if half-a-million Iraqi children die" Albright?
The shipboard meeting was less confrontational only because Cheney was occupied elsewhere, being a Dick in Georgia.
Anybody remember, less than a week before she was assassinated, Benazir Bhutto let it slip that Bin laden had been dead for three years???
woody@44, I didn't hear that.
P.D. @ 45:
Here
"I am not sure who will win World War III, but I do know that World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones". Unknown
Northwest Washington @ 47:
I think it was Herman Kahn of the RAND Corp in an unguarded moment...
woody, tokin librul @ 44:
I don't remember hearing this
calgarylady @ 33:
How about this one. John McCain stepping down for "health reasons" and Sarah Palin selecting Dick Cheney as a VP running mate?
woody@46, Holy crap! I'm pissed! This was buried! I'm a political junky and I never knew about this.
How's that "Project for a New American 2/25th of Century" going for ya, chimpboy?
Thanks for nothing, you miserable piece of shit.
woody, tokin librul @ 48:
I thought it was Albert Einstein, but I could be wrong.
fastfeat@52, I couldn't put it better myself.
Mary S @ 49:
Check it out.
fastfeat @ 53:
I was just guessing...i din't look it up...
woody@55, My Lord, I'm trying to asorb this. Where was MSM? This is so shocking, I'm stunned. Even a C-span junkie like me had no idea. This is going to haunt me.
woody, tokin librul @ 44:
Yes, seen the video.
The assassin that she claimed to have supposedly taken out OBL, was also the killer of the journalist Daniel Perle.
And as he was arrested and taken into custody February 12, 2002, this puts a definite timeline on OBL's supposed death.
Only in America has OBL's death been ignored, esp with all those joke videos released year after year for GOP advantage.
The world's media reported it in various forms.
We are living in scary times my friends. I can't believe what Bush has reduced us too.
Northwest Washington @ 50, something like that could happen so easily. Chilling, isn't it?
Northwest@50, That sent chills down my spine!
calgarylady @ 60:
Cheney has to be in almost as bad a shape as WcCain, pacemaker and related health issues.
Theres a good reason for all the talk of his undisclosed location, they prob mean hospital or a rest recuperation clinic.
Only in America has OBL’s death been ignored, esp with all those joke videos released year after year for GOP advantage.
The world’s media reported it in various forms.
That's cuz the State/Crisis Corporations require a continuous state of anxiety, worry, fear, and dislocation among the citizens to enact those measures it couldn't otherwise force pasat the legislature without such stimuli...Naomi Klein formalized the analysis, but lots of folks have been saying the like, since Ivan Illich, probably...
That would be one of them rhetorical questions...
Seriously though, it's so tragic. If the US and it's allies had thrown their full weight into Afghanistan, the Taliban could have been routed, and Bin Laden captured. Instead, they are regrouping, gathering strength, and Bin Laden is nowhere to be found. And now, 'closing the deal' on the Taliban may require a dangerous game of brinksmanship with an unstable regime in Pakistan. Great.
woody, tokin librul @ 56:
Here it is:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080330182854AASV7LH
Nicholas @ 64:
You're mistake is thinking he 'fucked up' everything he touched. It's only fucked up if you're a citizen. If you're a corporation, or a member of the Oiligarchy or the Pollutocracy, he did EVERYTHING right! He did exactly what he was installed to do: to damage, disable, or destroy any and every instrument or institution of public, popular sovereignty which might impede the transfer of the loyalties of 'consumers' from the "State" to the "Corporation" (Thing "BRAND")... At that, the fathermuckers have been goddamn near flawless...
Nicholas@64, You're right, it is tragic. The fact McCain might win this thing, is down right terrifying! Are Americans this dumb? I'm afraid the answer is yes. We are doomed because he didn't learn the lessons from our past, and now we may repeat them. Isn't that a famous saying?
When one lays down with dogs, he gets up with fleas. Which one is the dog?
P.D. @ 59:
Just what he has reduced the good name of the US to, not us! We MUST take back this country in November.
Red Headed StepChild @ 9:
g-damit wheres my mangos ,answer me that?
Yes, before reading the comments all I could think of when reading about the meetings with the our military high-ups and the Pakistanis is that Bush is pushing the military to move heaven and earth to find and/or kill Osama bin Laden before the election in November.
Pretty scary thought... not only would Bush be driven to remove the main taunt he's endured for years about not taking out OBL, but McCain would almost be guaranteed the White House, and we would be doomed.
That is unless OBL has already checked out... let's hope he has.
Middle East experts or even anyone who knew thing one about the Middle East knew this would be the result of going into Afghanistan.
we will be at war with Afghanistan and Pakistan and Iraq. After what we've accomplished so far, we have no excuse to attack Iran.
Maybe we should let blackwater handle it from now on so we can deal with the russians.
Hattie @ 72:
thie is not because of going into afghanistan. it is the result of thinking that we are some mythical unipolar power. the doctring of od hoc bombing 'enemies' no matter where they are is not going to be tolerated any longer.
they killed 90 people, 60 children and think it's ok. If I were Pakistani, I'd think I had just about enough of americas right to kill people in my country.
CoIntelPro for Pronktastic Victory Over SCLM, DIEBOLD, ESS and SEQUOIA! @ 74:
spellchecked
Northwest Washington @ 47:
it will be fought by creatures other than man.
Chicken "Hussein" Little - Not! @ 3:
Declaring martial laws is just what they have in mind
karen marie @ 1:
Or some pro-life extremist tries to put VP Palin in charge, which I am also worried about.
Mary S @ 49:
I remember. It was in an interview in GB, I believe with david frost.
tyree @ 70:
Ha!!
Red Headed StepChild @ 9:
Inaccurate. India has had a nuke program for ages (first Nuke test in 1970's).
Bush has been helping them with nuclear energy technology.
Well it was bound to happen since we've been shooting rockets from high altitude recon birds and killing civilians on the ground. Can't say I can blame the Pakistani's for getting a bit uptight about the blatant disregard for their country and citizens. Not that they are exactly innocent of supporting the enemy, but BushCo has been claiming what a great ally they are!
Does this mean they are going to toss the family atomic's into the air at Afghanistan? I'd have to say there is a strong possibility of a major escalation on this turn of events. Kiss all those troops on the ground goodbye when that happens.
We should could use some good leadership about now, shame the Repukes aren't qualified to wipe their ass without making a pass at the fellow next door.
Meanwhile, Condi Rice is hailing the election of a mad, corrupt politician with with no previous executive experience as the new
PakistaniAmerican president.McCain and Mr. 10% are two peas.
Am I missing something here? Why would ANY country give up their "right to retaliation"!?! I'm sure we haven't given up OUR right to retaliation, have we!?!
Since our current foreign policy seems to include our "right to carry out unprovoked attacks", claiming a "right to retaliation" doesn't seem all that unreasonable, per se, but largely unnecessary, right!?! The idea IS still cooperation, isn't it!?! To steer clear of all that aggression/retaliation stuff!?!
woody, tokin librul @ 66:
This would be correct - although I'd give the major credit to Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al - Bush is just the lying sock puppet out front.
They also have managed to pass copious legislation and issued executive orders and Presidential directives, which I have listed on C&L many times before, that provide the
"unitary executive" with dictatorial powers in the event of a national emergency. And, by the way, the President is the one who gets to determine what constitutes a natianal emergency.
This is why I think they just let McCain have the run at the Presidency - let him have his fun, put Palin on the ticket and give everybody a laugh. They, Cheney/Bush don't care, 'cause they're not planning on leaving the scene just yet.
The real threat from Pakistani hostility
The real problem isn't what the Pakistani military could do directly to our folks in Afghanistan. The real problem is that our folks in Afghanistan are hundreds of miles and a mountain range or two from an ocean dominated by the US Navy. As long as that distance lies through a friendly Pakistan, this is not a problem. But if Pakistan turns on us, then the former Central Asian Republics of the Soviet Union (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tadjikistan, and all them 'stans) come under pressure from a resurgent Russia to deny us airbases in their countries, and then they and Russia deny us use of their airspace for resupply and evacuation... The NATO forces in Afghanistan would be well and truly fucked. A couple of weeks without resupply and the Taliban would be able to police the whole lot of them up.
There's a very practical reason we should respect the Geneva Convention, and not blindly and arrogantly assume that we can treat our captured adversaries like shit because the other side will never capture any of our own. This is one of the lessons that you would have hoped that McCain would have learned from his captivity. Horrrible as was his treatment at the hands of our adversaries, had they treated him as we treated them when we captured them, handing them over to the South Vietnamese and certain death, McCain would never have made it home alive.
We are not invincible. This news from Pakistan should be treated as a warning that there is an excellent chance that tens of thousands of our troops could end up as EPWs. Should they receive Guantanamo treatment, or Abu Ghraib treatment, we would have no one to blame but ourselves. We will have no one to blame but ourselves until we bring those guilty of the crimes of our gulag to justice.
Condi also said that now isn't the right time for a nuclear non-proliferation agreement with Russia. Not the right time for peace? This from our top diplomat?
I was in Pakistan for three weeks last month. In fact I was at the ordnance factory in Wah only hours before it was bombed. While there I spoke to many people and in one conversation I was told that there is a growing amount of anti -Americanism in this country and not just at our government but at the American people as well.
The person who told me this said that he's never seen it this high or directed at the people of America before and it scares him.
Pakistan is only doing now what a rising tide of Pakistanis want and demand.
Glen Tomkins @ 86:
While I was in Pakistan I noticed lines of petroleum trucks gathered at refineries every night. I was told the most if not all these trucks, when full, were headed to Afghanistan to our troops.
All Pakistan has to do really is hold those trucks at the border.
We haven't repected Pakistan and these people aren't dumb. They know they have been used and are used as pawns and frankly they are tired of it.
Uhhhhhh, did anybody tell Obama because he's determined to kill Bin Laden in Pakistan. I'm with him, but he better have some GREAT intelligence.
clytemnestra @ 89:
Exactly.
Sustaining an army the size of the NATO forces in Afghanistan, just in the basic functions of the ability to "shoot, move and communicate", requires huge amounts of materiale daily. You can, if you're the US, get a lot of stuff moved by air, but that capacity is not large enough even at top efficiency. If you take away on-ground refueling at bases in nearby countries (the Central Asian Republics), and your supply airbridge has to use in-air refueling to get cargo all the way from Europe or even the US to Afghanistan, you won't get even that already insufficient capacity. And that's not even accounting for the Russians or Pakistanis being able to interfere at all with overflights, especially in-flight refueling, over their airspace.
The bottom line is that you can't sustain a big army in Afghanistan without shipping a lot of the materiale it needs to ports in Pakistan, and then overland through that country. Our forces are good, but they aren't Superman and Batman all rolled into one. I don't think that even our forces would be able to fight their way from such a trap in Afghanistan, after they have had their supply lines cut, through Pakistan all the way to the Indian Ocean and evacuation by the Navy. No matter how good they were, they would run out of fuel and ammunition, and worst of all, become burdened with casualties they wouldn't be able to evacuate to safety. And we wouldn't be able to get a relief force to the Indian Ocean fast enough to fight through from the other direction, even if we weren't tied down in Iraq.
They have us by the gonads. Only the difficulty of cooperating (Russia, Iran and Pakistan would have to be in on it), and fear of the wider and long-term consequences keep them from screwing us. And you have to figure that holding tens of thousands of US EPWs would go far to protect them from a lot of at least the consequences the US might administer directly.
Of course Pakistan has the right to retaliate.
Heck, thanks to the Bush policy, they have the right to strike first if they have reasonable fear that they will be attacked.
Thanks W. Way to make the world safer.
CoIntelPro for Pronktastic Victory Over SCLM, DIEBOLD, ESS and SEQUOIA! @ 79:
It was. You can find the video online. David Frost didn't bat an eyelid at the revelation.
But even more bizarrely, the transcript at the BBC website had that section of the interview removed.
There was an online commentary for this transcript, and many people like myself complained at the excision, wondering if it was censorship. The BBC eventually admitted that they excised it for editorial reasons (never made sense to me, but there you go) and never fixed the transcript. The issue is now officially "closed" by the BBC.
Pakistan has always been a reluctant friend anyways. Armitage went over there and told Mushareff they were gonna get bombed back to the stoneage if they failed to get with the Neo Con program.
woody, tokin librul @ 55:
I am speechless ,very interesting the the U.S. media did not cover this story. Thanks for the link
Mary S @ 95:
Check it out.
I am speechless ,very interesting the the U.S. media did not cover this story. Thanks for the link
Practically nobody covered this story.
It is a good example (if not actual proof exactly) that no matter what side of the so-called political divide your news media sits on, they all basically serve the same agenda. That of the powerful, against the weak. And there are some things the powerful just don't want you to know.
Not to worry, Fundamentalist Barbie will keep us all safe with her mad, uh, "executive experience" skills. Did you know she was once the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska? That'll sure scare those evil Mooslems.
/sarcasm off
ferrofluid (Obama + Biden = 2008) @ 16:
Ron White the comedian says it best,,,,
"You can't fix stupid"
He even admits his own limited thoughts being he is from Texas and aligns his shtick to the folks that don't need nail clippers.
I hate to say it, but as an outside observer both your presidential nominees scare me with their sabre rattling. Obama talks the same line of American Imperialism that has devastated countries, his advisers on foreign policy do not give me any confidence, and Joe Biden as a VP pick gives me even more concern. He talks the very same line as McCain on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Obama's acceptance speech he said along the lines of you are in Iraq for the wrong reasons and he would focus where the real war on terrorism is - Afghanistan and Pakistan. Sorry but the message sounds very similar to my ears, even if Obama is padding it with his earlier statements about engaging Iran through diplomacy. Pakistan has bent over backwards in the past decade for the US, suffered a great internal cost, and have followed through with strategies of American imperialism that have left Pakistan more divided. One would have thought the 1980s and the first rise of the Taleban would have been enough for American imperialists, but it appears for both the "neo-cons" and the liberal-imperialists (who self brand themselves as do-gooding internationalists who make up many advisers at the top level for the Democratic Party) there is no curb to the rhetoric that the "War on Terror" exists in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The candidates' policies in Latin America are much of the same old USian "our backyard" manifest destany. Wake Up [US]America! You have been an imperialist country for well over 200 years and both your candidates, yes Barack Obama too!, are talking the same line - they just disagree where USian interests lie and how best to project them onto the world.
We need a draft. We must fight these terrorist Pakistanis that inhabit the U.S. Commomwealth of Pakistan.
McCain/Palin '08
Just read this article, pretty scary. Can't say as I'd blame Pakistan for retaliating under some circumstances. But what do you do if you are chasing enemy patrols in areas close to the border, I hope nobody calls for cessation of engagement just because the bad guys crossed some imaginary line drawn by western countries.
Wasn't this entire region part of the British empire at least until the Kabul retreat of the early-mid 19th century. What little I've learned about this area says that: 1st as much as these tribes hate each other, they hate outsiders worse. Also, they readily make alliances with age old rivals in order to eliminate their perceived invaders.
Lastly, these groups, after having granted "refuge " to someone will willingly go to war against anyone who threatens their guest. I Realize the extremest "guests" don't always become guests at the by your leave of the residents of any particular village, kind of like what we used to hear about in Viet Nam, and the coalition forces in some cases haven't been successful in separating civilian from enemy leading to the tragedies we're hearing about.
All this leads up to the realization that these gentleman Mullen, and Kiyani ET AL have to do more than pay lip service to the concept of working together to eliminate the only real threat (I feel) by terrorism to the U.S. However in doing so both forces need to overcome centuries of tradition and culture along with the intelligence infrastructure created in part by the Reagan administration in the sole purpose of defeating the Soviet Union in Afghanistan during the '80's.
For me these are frightening times, my son just enlisted in the Marine Corps I know that won't cut much ice with some folks who comment here, but reading articles like the one above makes me very frightened about the coalition forces ability to finish the job we never should have slacked on in the first place. Lastly I know someone must have made the comparison between Pakistan's real nuclear capabilities and Iran's nonexistent ability.
I haven't seen much comment on the new Woodford book. Some of the things I've read and heard are pretty scathing in displaying the administrations ineptitude.
Strange enough, is the administrations silence on one of the reported real reason for reduced hostilities in Iraq; the improved intelligence gathering, and targeting of dangerous people and the elimination of same. I can only hope we and others are beginning to do equally effective work in this regard in Afghanistan, to really solve that issue once and for all.
lecanadien @ 99:
Very well stated. My comments at #31 echo what you have written.
I thought this sentence was heading towards a reference to Palin.
Americans fear about a terrorist strike on U.S. soil is at its lowest level since 9/11/2001. Bush is doing in Pakistan what the Pakistanis won't do themselves - killing terrorists hiding in the mountains. Bush has kept this country safe for the past 7 years so all you pussy liberals can stop your whining about it. If it was up to Obama we would all be wearing turbans.
Sandy @ 104:
Bingo !!!! Thank God for President Bush !
You dont stop going after the bad guys cause you might get hurt, If pakistan wants to retaliate we can send the Marines in.(currently serving i wouldnt mind getting some terrorist aholes in any part of the world if you are harboring terrorist move out the way or start or turning them over)
- Vote McCain 2008
Do you really believe Pakistan sayin As many as 20 Pakistani civilians were killed in this attack, many of them women and children.
They are the biggest liar and cheat on this planet. We sud have taken out Pakistan then Iraq. They use civilians as a shield, basically the so call civilians are non other then Militants. They need American money so they gimmick fighting Taliban. we all know this. Bush doesn't call them anymore when he is firing missile at Militants. He finally learn not to trust Pakistani BASTARDS.
Does anyone really think the US fears Pakistan in any way? Its a joke that you mention the very thought of Pakistan retaliating. What a joke.
Comments are closed on this entry