Neo-Liberal Democrat Obama wants to send troops into nuclear Pakistan

[TheDanold]

All this is simply reteric. Osama (the real one) will never be captured because he is long dead, but that will likely never be proven either. He is far more valuable as a flitting spirit. Any Osama that is captured or found will turn out to be a double.

It's a possibility.

 

[uscitizen]

Can't have those mushroom clouds coming after us out of Pakistan now can we ?
They have safe haven to OBL and AQ

And their leader is a bad guy....What more do we need to invade ?

We will after all be welcomed with open arms and spreading democracy.
Also India will probably help us.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

So because the country has Nuclear capabilites, we should be pussies? Seriously, if someone commits an act of war against the United States, and a country harbors those people that commited the act, we should just tell that country "Can you pretty pretty pretty please help us and get these guys?"

Yes, DD. Life is not that simple, whether or not we "are" or "aren't" pussies. It's better to let a murderer go free than to murder half the worlds population trying to catch him and do vengeance.

 

[TheDanold]

Yes, DD. Life is not that simple, whether or not we "are" or "aren't" pussies. It's better to let a murderer go free than to murder half the worlds population trying to catch him and do vengeance.

It's even worse than that, there is no guarantee he is even alive or even in Pakistan and if he wasn't there, the Pakistanis would be screaming for blood a lot louder.

 

[uscitizen]

Yes, DD. Life is not that simple, whether or not we "are" or "aren't" pussies. It's better to let a murderer go free than to murder half the worlds population trying to catch him and do vengeance.

yeah kinda like burning down your house to get rid of mice.

 

[Cypress]

Wow Obama is off his rocker, even Bush isn't this dumb. Pakistan is nuclear and has 8 times the population of Afghanistan or Iraq, not to mention they are at least an ally to us (albeit a not very effective one).

"Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Wednesday that he would possibly send troops into Pakistan to hunt down terrorists, an attempt to show strength when his chief rival has described his foreign policy skills as naive.

The Illinois senator warned Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf that he must do more to shut down terrorist operations in his country and evict foreign fighters under an Obama presidency, or Pakistan will risk a U.S. troop invasion."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070801/ap_on_el_pr/obama_terrorism_7

I actually think Obama is probably right about Pakistan having some terrorists hiding there, but the country is somewhat of an ally, has a huge population and is NUCLEAR. Sorry it would be insane to invade them, Obama is nuts.

Obama is not talking about a ground invasion of pakistan. Here's the actual transcipt:

As President, I would make the hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional, and I would make our conditions clear: Pakistan must make substantial progress in closing down the training camps, evicting foreign fighters, and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks in Afghanistan.

I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges. But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will.

Key words: "Actionable intelligence" and "high-value terrorist targets" and "take out".

He's talking about surgical strikes with cruise missles, or covert special ops units, taking out high value targets. That doesn't strike me as a any sort of ground invasion or occupation force.

Pakistan is tricky. And there are risks, even in using stealthy special ops forces or cruise missles. But, there's not a presidential candidate in the field that will unilaterally rule out the possibility of using special forces to kill high value al qaeda targets anywhere in the world. In fact, that's probably current US policy now. I'm sure we have, and are, pursuing stealthy, tactical covert missions that target cells of high value terrorists.

One thing I'll give Obama: he had the good judgement to see invading and occupying Iraq was a foolish and counterproductive thing to do, from the very beginning. As such, he doesn't strike me as the type to just invade and occupy a country on a whim, and without sober deliberation. In short, he's the opposite of Bush, on that count.