Obama I'll Hunt Down Terrorists In Pakistan

[JLB]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/8/1/81926.shtml?s=ic

[Green Lantern]

Is he actually going there?

[sukie]

So he'll defy Pakistani refusal to allow foreign forces to conduct business in Pakistan... And this would be received how by the lefties?

[JLB]

more bad news for the bad guys go get em Barack!! :rockon:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6926663.stm

[JimKelly12203]

Not sure how i feel about this.

If you accept the premise that Al Qaeda is a truly independant global menace hell bent on killing americans (and i have MANY doubts regarding that) then you must go to Pakistan in order to address it. I'm not so sure...

Then you have the danger of dethroaning Musharaff. Like it or not, Pakistan has Nukes and adequate delivery capabilities. They can't hit the US, but they're not too far off from having ICBMs. If his military coup fails, those weapons and capabilities will fall into the hands of far more unsavory people.

Regardless, the situation there is a ticking time-bomb. He can't lead forever. Some day, Pakistan will be ruled by Religious radicals.

[Green Lantern]

Not sure how i feel about this.

If you accept the premise that Al Qaeda is a truly independant global menace hell bent on killing americans (and i have MANY doubts regarding that) then you must go to Pakistan in order to address it. I'm not so sure...

Then you have the danger of dethroaning Musharaff. Like it or not, Pakistan has Nukes and adequate delivery capabilities. They can't hit the US, but they're not too far off from having ICBMs. If his military coup fails, those weapons and capabilities will fall into the hands of far more unsavory people.

Regardless, the situation there is a ticking time-bomb. He can't lead forever. Some day, Pakistan will be ruled by Religious radicals.

I fail to see how the highlighted is inevitable.

[JimKelly12203]

My understanding aqua, is that Musharaff is very un-popular over there. If he allows us into the tribal mountain regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan, his rule is over. If we go in there against his wishes, his rule is over.

Pakistan is not a very progressive place. It's pretty backwards actually. Their version of Thomas Jefferson isn't going to stand up if Musharaff stands down. It's going to be a religious cleric (at least in title). In actuality, it will be just another despot.

This is the most likely scenario. Not a definite.

Admitedly, i've never been to Pakistan. But my sister dated a guy that grew up there for a long time. Great kid. The religious differences couldn't be reconciled in the end. However, he's still very much cared for by my whole family (and my sister) and we see him often.

The Pakistan he speaks of is a pretty scary place.

[shiva2999]

My understanding aqua, is that Musharaff is very un-popular over there. If he allows us into the tribal mountain regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan, his rule is over. If we go in there against his wishes, his rule is over.

Pakistan is not a very progressive place. It's pretty backwards actually. Their version of Thomas Jefferson isn't going to stand up if Musharaff stands down. It's going to be a religious cleric (at least in title). In actuality, it will be just another despot.

This is the most likely scenario. Not a definite.

Admitedly, i've never been to Pakistan. But my sister dated a guy that grew up there for a long time. Great kid. The religious differences couldn't be reconciled in the end. However, he's still very much cared for by my whole family (and my sister) and we see him often.

The Pakistan he speaks of is a pretty scary place.

All this stuff about Pakistan being in turmoil is just smoke and mirrors.

Musharref is a Bushco partner and is doing Dubya a favor by going along with this baloney.

[shiva2999]

Pakistan borders on THE WORLD'S LARGEST DEMOCRACY.

India.

When India starts to worry about Pakistan, then I'll start to worry.

[JLB]

All this stuff about Pakistan being in turmoil is just smoke and mirrors.

Musharref is a Bushco partner and is doing Dubya a favor by going along with this baloney.

Obama takes a big risk here no?

[JimKelly12203]

Shivva i woudl say that the Pakistani ISI is a CIA puppet for sure (We made it afterall). I'm not sure i could go that far on Musharaff just yet though. Based on what i know - which is most likely an incomplete set of information - the guy went with us after 9/11 when Bushco threatened his regeime.

He said as much on the Daily Show and in his book. Is he full of it? Maybe. But i suspect things aren't so simple as "all of Pakistan is a puppet member of Bushco". I think Musharaff has many enemies in his own intelligence apparatus. Mostly because "his" intelligence apparatus is really ours.

Regardless, i'd rather not have any new state control nuclear weapons. And if Musharaff goes down, we're talking about a very new state in Pakistan. What that state would look like is anybody's guess. Democracy? Theocracy? Who knows?

But i know where i'd put my money.

[shiva2999]

Obama takes a big risk here no?

No big Obama fan here.

I don't think he's the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Al Sharpton could run rings around him.

[Green Lantern]

My understanding aqua, is that Musharaff is very un-popular over there. If he allows us into the tribal mountain regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan, his rule is over. If we go in there against his wishes, his rule is over.

Pakistan is not a very progressive place. It's pretty backwards actually. Their version of Thomas Jefferson isn't going to stand up if Musharaff stands down. It's going to be a religious cleric (at least in title). In actuality, it will be just another despot.

This is the most likely scenario. Not a definite.

Admitedly, i've never been to Pakistan. But my sister dated a guy that grew up there for a long time. Great kid. The religious differences couldn't be reconciled in the end. However, he's still very much cared for by my whole family (and my sister) and we see him often.

The Pakistan he speaks of is a pretty scary place.


I understand all of your post. I just don't understand why it would be inevitable that some day some religious fundamentalist will run that country.

[JimKelly12203]

Pakistan borders on THE WORLD'S LARGEST DEMOCRACY.

India.

When India starts to worry about Pakistan, then I'll start to worry.

India has no greater worry than Pakistan. No?

Furthermore, India is a democracy in name, but not in practice. Sort of like the USA.

[JLB]

No big Obama fan here.

I don't think he's the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Al Sharpton could run rings around him.

Understood but do you agree he takes a big risk with this position?

Does it seem a little desperate?

[JimKelly12203]

I understand all of your post. I just don't understand why it would be inevitable that some day some religious fundamentalist will run that country.

I guess inevitable is a poor choice of words. Nothing is impossible, afterall.

I do think it is likely, however, that some type of theocracy would take root in a post-musharaff pakistan. It's what most of the people over there want (or think they want).

Your point is well taken though. Nothing is inevitable.

[Green Lantern]

I guess inevitable is a poor choice of words. Nothing is impossible, afterall.

I do think it is likely, however, that some type of theocracy would take root in a post-musharaff pakistan. It's what most of the people over there want (or think they want).

Your point is well taken though. Nothing is inevitable.

I did not think theocracy is what most people there wanted. That would make sense though since Muhammed said the state should be bent to the will of religion.

[shiva2999]

Shivva i woudl say that the Pakistani ISI is a CIA puppet for sure (We made it afterall). I'm not sure i could go that far on Musharaff just yet though. Based on what i know - which is most likely an incomplete set of information - the guy went with us after 9/11 when Bushco threatened his regeime.

He said as much on the Daily Show and in his book. Is he full of it? Maybe. But i suspect things aren't so simple as "all of Pakistan is a puppet member of Bushco". I think Musharaff has many enemies in his own intelligence apparatus. Mostly because "his" intelligence apparatus is really ours.

Regardless, i'd rather not have any new state control nuclear weapons. And if Musharaff goes down, we're talking about a very new state in Pakistan. What that state would look like is anybody's guess. Democracy? Theocracy? Who knows?

But i know where i'd put my money.

Musharref and the ISI were in on 9/11.

This "Bush threatened Pakistan" stuff is baloney.

Check who made the claim.

Musharref could certainly be outed by the military (that's how he got in in the first place) but if he is he will certainly be killed. Dead men tell no tales.

But India, with it's 100 million muslims, will not stand by and see a theocracy take over.

The little back and forth about Osama is just to deflect anyone thinking about how Bushco is not even mounting a serious attempt to find Osama.

In fact they never have.

[Green Lantern]

I thought we couldn't find Osama because Musharref does not really control all the area within his lines on the map.

[shiva2999]

Furthermore, India is a democracy in name, but not in practice. Sort of like the USA.

Not true in the slightest.

India hand counts it's ballots and since they have more than two parties involved, rigging elections is very difficult to do.

Not like the US with the electronic voting machines.

India's democracy is MUCH more vibrant than America's.

[JimKelly12203]

I did not think theocracy is what most people there wanted. That would make sense though since Muhammed said the state should be bent to the will of religion.

The capital is Islamabad afterall :)

[shiva2999]

I thought we couldn't find Osama because Musharref does not really control all the area within his lines on the map.

Only Americans buy the "we're stupid and it's hard work" excuse.

[JimKelly12203]

Musharref and the ISI were in on 9/11.

This "Bush threatened Pakistan" stuff is baloney.

Check who made the claim.

Musharref could certainly be outed by the military (that's how he got in in the first place) but if he is he will certainly be killed. Dead men tell no tales.

But India, with it's 100 million muslims, will not stand by and see a theocracy take over.

The little back and forth about Osama is just to deflect anyone thinking about how Bushco is not even mounting a serious attempt to find Osama.

In fact they never have.


I think we are in agreement on much here. And your point about how dead men tell no tales is very good.

As for Indian Democracy, in the rural regions of the country, landlords still swoop down from their villas and slaughter villagers every now and then when they aren't paying their rent. Culturally, they're still bogged down in the caste system.

Perhaps their electoral infastructure is superior to ours and more fool proof. But the place is still backwards.

[shiva2999]

I thought we couldn't find Osama because Musharref does not really control all the area within his lines on the map.

This is the first link I found but I guarantee you all the info is supported by mainstream sources...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO308C.html


In late August 2001, barely a couple of weeks before September 11, Senator Bob Graham, Representative Porter Goss and Senator Jon Kyl were on a top level mission in Islamabad, which was barely mentioned by the US media.

Meetings were held with President Pervez Musharraf and with Pakistan's military and intelligence brass including the head of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) General Mahmoud Ahmad. Amply documented, the ISI is known to support a number of Islamic terrorist organizations. (See Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) at http://www.cfrterrorism.org/coalition/pakistan2.html )

According to the FBI, Indian Intelligence and several press reports, the ISI Head was instrumental in providing financial support to the 9/11 terrorists. General Mahmoud Ahmad had allegedly ordered the transfer of $100.000 to the presumed 9/11 ring-leader Mohamed Atta.

On the morning of September 11, the three lawmakers Bob Graham, Porter Goss and Jon Kyl (who were part of the Congressional delegation to Pakistan) were having breakfast on Capitol Hill with General Ahmad, the alleged "money-man" (to use the FBI expression) behind the 9/11 hijackers. Also present at this meeting were Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S. Maleeha Lodhi and several members of the Senate and House Intelligence committees. This meeting was described by one press report as a "follow-up meeting" to that held in Pakistan in late August.

When the twin towers were attacked, General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s intelligence service, was, in Senator Graham's own words, "very empathetic, sympathetic to the people of the United States," (Stuart News Company Press Journal (Vero Beach, FL), September 12, 2001).

Bob Graham's description of the General Ahmad, contrasts with that of the Washington Post:

"On the morning of Sept. 11, Goss and Graham were having breakfast with a Pakistani general named Mahmud Ahmed — the soon-to-be-sacked head of Pakistan’s intelligence service. Ahmed ran a spy agency notoriously close to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban." (Washington Post, 18 May 2002).

[Green Lantern]

Only Americans buy the "we're stupid and it's hard work" excuse.

What I meant was that the mountainous regions are supposedly controlled by warlords or tribal chieftains and Musharref, though technically president, cannot just point his finger and have things done in those regions. He has, I've heard, a difficult dance to know what he can and cannot ask for in order to avoid having some subordinate saying no to an order.

[mikgaes]

So he'll defy Pakistani refusal to allow foreign forces to conduct business in Pakistan... And this would be received how by the lefties?

I'm not a lefty, nor do I think I'll I'll vote for Obama, but it is nice to hear this kind of talk come from the left. Finally.

[Green Lantern]

I'm not a lefty, nor do I think I'll I'll vote for Obama, but it is nice to hear this kind of talk come from the left. Finally.


LOL.

Bush said he doesn't care where Osama is.

[shiva2999]

As for Indian Democracy, in the rural regions of the country, landlords still swoop down from their villas and slaughter villagers every now and then when they aren't paying their rent. Culturally, they're still bogged down in the caste system.

Perhaps their electoral infastructure is superior to ours and more fool proof. But the place is still backwards.

BTW, I spent 6 months in India working with the rich and poor, Hindus and Muslims.

They are the first people to admit the have massive problems from over population.

However to characterize them as a backward country is foolish.

Oh, and about the caste system.

When I was there, I had two assistants.

One was a Brahman and the other was from the warrior caste.

They told me the caste system had gotten a bad rap. It was initially devised as the first forms of trade unionism, to give people a sense of solidarity and meaning in their lives.

Of course, like a lot of good intentioned endevours, it was corrupted over time.

Don't sell India short.

It is a spectacular country with an enormous upper and middle class and millions of very clever and highly educated people.

[mikgaes]

LOL.

Bush said he doesn't care where Osama is.

Well why did I know that on 9/12/2001 as well? Everything out of his mouth is a lie he's been told to deliver by either Cheney or Rumsfeld.

[shiva2999]

What I meant was that the mountainous regions are supposedly controlled by warlords or tribal chieftains and Musharref, though technically president, cannot just point his finger and have things done in those regions. He has, I've heard, a difficult dance to know what he can and cannot ask for in order to avoid having some subordinate saying no to an order.

You have definitely heard that.

And it's definitely bs.

That's like Bush saying America has no control over Appalachia.

[sukie]

BTW, I spent 6 months in India working with the rich and poor, Hindus and Muslims.

They are the first people to admit the have massive problems from over population.

However to characterize them as a backward country is foolish.

Oh, and about the caste system.

When I was there, I had two assistants.

One was a Brahman and the other was from the warrior caste.

They told me the caste system had gotten a bad rap. It was initially devised as the first forms of trade unionism, to give people a sense of solidarity and meaning in their lives.

Of course, like a lot of good intentioned endevours, it was corrupted over time.

Don't sell India short.

It is a spectacular country with an enormous upper and middle class and millions of very clever and highly educated people.
They seem to handle my BELLSOUTH issues pretty damn well.

[mikgaes]

They seem to handle my BEllSOUTH issues pretty damn well.

Yes. Yes. My Gateway and RealPlayer troubles too. :D

[uppy]

Not true in the slightest.

India hand counts it's ballots and since they have more than two parties involved, rigging elections is very difficult to do.

Not like the US with the electronic voting machines.



That is a matter of opinion. From where I'm sitting it was a brilliantly successful campaign that blew a total dipshit right out of the water.

[35Pete]

Of course, like a lot of good intentioned endeavours, it was corrupted over time.

These are words that everyone should burn into their brains.

[shiva2999]

These are words that everyone should burn into their brains.

Just because good people have the good things they try to do corrupted by bad people is no reason to stop trying to do good things.

[Green Lantern]

Just because good people have the good things they try to do corrupted by bad people is no reason to stop trying to do good things.

Hear, hear.

[shiva2999]

Hear, hear.

India can't be too hellish and backward a place.

A BILLION people are living there.

[sukie]

Shiva... by that rationale alone... Canada must be hellish.

[35Pete]

Just because good people have the good things they try to do corrupted by bad people is no reason to stop trying to do good things.

Try undoing or reforming the monster that you leave behind.

[shiva2999]

Shiva... by that rationale alone... Canada must be hellish.

Stop being irrational or I'll torture you with some videos.

[shiva2999]

Try undoing or reforming the monster that you leave behind.

People do that all the time.

Doing the right thing has always been a struggle.

This is where I have a problem with Libertarians.

Because things have gone awry from the efforts of unscrupulous people, they think the answer is to stop trying to do things rather than put a rein on the unscrupulous.

[Green Lantern]

People do that all the time.

Doing the right thing has always been a struggle.

This is where I have a problem with Libertarians.

Because things have gone awry from the efforts of unscrupulous people, they think the answer is to stop trying to do things rather than put a rein on the unscrupulous.

Damn, you're on a roll.

[Meathead]

whatever slim chance there was for obama getting my vote is gone with this stunt. this is nothing more than grandstanding, and dangerous grandstanding at that. another desperate candidate trying to tug at the patriotic strings of short attention span voters. hillary should jump on this and beat him over his nappy head with it

according to musharref himself and confirmed with other studies ive seen pakistan is generally a reasonable (either secular or peaceful religious folks) population, but still a large number of extremists and even a larger number of moderates who sit on the fence to various degrees

if the us steps foot on prominent portions of pakistan (not the short term border raids already conducted) the extremist and moderate segments will become inflamed risking a large uprising of the population against not only the us but the pakistan government itself. even though the population is generally peaceful there are enough of the rest that would create a major catastrophe in that country, potentially putting the control of the nukes at risk

other studies ive seen indicate if the us does NOT enter pakistan it is very unlikely that extremists could gain control of the government and thus the nukes. but if the us does enter the country all bets are off

this is a calculated gamble by obama that not enough americans pay attention to these details that he will actually get rah rah amurika kicks ass morons to support him. its a completely disingenuous and in fact immoral lie that actually would endanger the world should he do it

what a freakin putz

[Green Lantern]

whatever slim chance there was for obama getting my vote is gone with this stunt. this is nothing more than grandstanding, and dangerous grandstanding at that. another desperate candidate trying to tug at the patriotic strings of short attention span voters. hillary should jump on this and beat him over his nappy head with it

according to musharref himself and confirmed with other studies ive seen pakistan is generally a reasonable (either secular or peaceful religious folks) population, but still a large number of extremists and even a larger number of moderates who sit on the fence to various degrees

if the us steps foot on prominent portions of pakistan (not the short term border raids already conducted) the extremist and moderate segments will become inflamed risking a large uprising of the population against not only the us but the pakistan government itself. even though the population is generally peaceful there are enough of the rest that would create a major catastrophe in that country, potentially putting the control of the nukes at risk

other studies ive seen indicate if the us does NOT enter pakistan it is very unlikely that extremists could gain control of the government and thus the nukes. but if the us does enter the country all bets are off

this is a calculated gamble by obama that not enough americans pay attention to these details that he will actually get rah rah amurika kicks ass morons to support him. its a completely disingenuous and in fact immoral lie that actually would endanger the world should he do it

what a freakin putz


You are a shameless grandstander...

[sukie]

Why?

[Green Lantern]

The shortest complete sentence in the English language is: I am.

[Meathead]

im pretty sure youre just teasing but for the education of others, if someone were to have an issue with my use of nappy headed they would also have to have the same problem with putz

both are colloquial terms used as relatively mild insults that originated in specific subsegments of the population. the use of either does not automatically connote racial or religious bigotry

anyone who feels it does has an irrational fixation and illogical imbalance regarding their own view of these terms and the groups they originated from

so back to the point, obama is a limey kike dorkmeister

[JLB]

whatever slim chance there was for obama getting my vote is gone with this stunt. this is nothing more than grandstanding, and dangerous grandstanding at that. another desperate candidate trying to tug at the patriotic strings of short attention span voters. hillary should jump on this and beat him over his nappy head with it

according to musharref himself and confirmed with other studies ive seen pakistan is generally a reasonable (either secular or peaceful religious folks) population, but still a large number of extremists and even a larger number of moderates who sit on the fence to various degrees

if the us steps foot on prominent portions of pakistan (not the short term border raids already conducted) the extremist and moderate segments will become inflamed risking a large uprising of the population against not only the us but the pakistan government itself. even though the population is generally peaceful there are enough of the rest that would create a major catastrophe in that country, potentially putting the control of the nukes at risk

other studies ive seen indicate if the us does NOT enter pakistan it is very unlikely that extremists could gain control of the government and thus the nukes. but if the us does enter the country all bets are off

this is a calculated gamble by obama that not enough americans pay attention to these details that he will actually get rah rah amurika kicks ass morons to support him. its a completely disingenuous and in fact immoral lie that actually would endanger the world should he do it

what a freakin putz

An honest man here folks this was as close to Hawkish by Obama as he could ever have gotten.

Thanks for your honesty and for answering the question I posed another fine poster here who declined the opportunity.


:rockon:

[JimKelly12203]

BTW, I spent 6 months in India working with the rich and poor, Hindus and Muslims.

They are the first people to admit the have massive problems from over population.

However to characterize them as a backward country is foolish.

Oh, and about the caste system.

When I was there, I had two assistants.

One was a Brahman and the other was from the warrior caste.

They told me the caste system had gotten a bad rap. It was initially devised as the first forms of trade unionism, to give people a sense of solidarity and meaning in their lives.

Of course, like a lot of good intentioned endevours, it was corrupted over time.

Don't sell India short.

It is a spectacular country with an enormous upper and middle class and millions of very clever and highly educated people.

I'm sure it is a great place. But it has its share do civil righlts problems. each contry could use the other's strennghths imo.

[sahlensguy]

If Obama is threatening to invade Pakistan due to terrorists there, he should be willing to invade much of the rest of the region.

I'd have to agree with Hillary - He is naive.

[shiva2999]

I'm sure it is a great place. But it has its share do civil righlts problems. each contry could use the other's strennghths imo.

It is a great place.

And it has more than it's share of problems.

As for your last point, I'm not sure what you're saying.

[pmoon6]

whatever slim chance there was for obama getting my vote is gone with this stunt. this is nothing more than grandstanding, and dangerous grandstanding at that. another desperate candidate trying to tug at the patriotic strings of short attention span voters. hillary should jump on this and beat him over his nappy head with it

according to musharref himself and confirmed with other studies ive seen pakistan is generally a reasonable (either secular or peaceful religious folks) population, but still a large number of extremists and even a larger number of moderates who sit on the fence to various degrees

if the us steps foot on prominent portions of pakistan (not the short term border raids already conducted) the extremist and moderate segments will become inflamed risking a large uprising of the population against not only the us but the pakistan government itself. even though the population is generally peaceful there are enough of the rest that would create a major catastrophe in that country, potentially putting the control of the nukes at risk

other studies ive seen indicate if the us does NOT enter pakistan it is very unlikely that extremists could gain control of the government and thus the nukes. but if the us does enter the country all bets are off

this is a calculated gamble by obama that not enough americans pay attention to these details that he will actually get rah rah amurika kicks ass morons to support him. its a completely disingenuous and in fact immoral lie that actually would endanger the world should he do it

what a freakin putzAgreed. Obama was seen as soft on terror, so he throws this out there. Like you said, grandstanding and bullshit.

[JLB]

Agreed. Obama was seen as soft on terror, so he throws this out there. Like you said, grandstanding and bullshit.

He's the anti-Hillary! :rockon:

[JLB]

If Obama is threatening to invade Pakistan due to terrorists there, he should be willing to invade much of the rest of the region.

I'd have to agree with Hillary - He is naive.

Well he's lost your vote.

If he is nominated will you support him 100%?