Unbelievable: US Might Strike Pakistan

blackascoal

The Force is With Me
As if there aren't enough people against US forces, now the Bush Administration is considering going to kill more innocent people, this time in Pakistan.

US might strike in Pakistan: White House
July 19, 2007
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070719/pl_afp/usattackspakistan_070719165714

The White House on Thursday refused to rule out striking at suspected terrorist targets inside Pakistan and would not say whether US forces would first seek permission from Islamabad.

Asked whether US President George W. Bush had ruled out US military action inside Pakistan, spokesman Tony Snow replied: "We never rule out any options, including striking actionable targets."

Asked whether Bush would first seek authorization from Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, Snow told reporters: "Those are matters that are best not discussed publicly."

Washington in recent days has sharply criticized Musharraf's truce with leaders in Pakistan's tribal areas, where Al-Qaeda and Taliban militants were believed hiding, calling on him to take aggressive military action.

And Bush's top counter-terrorism adviser at the White House recently suggested that the United States did not get all of the cooperation it hoped for from Pakistan in the global war on terrorism.

At the same time, the White House has been praising Musharraf personally.

"President Musharraf has put his life on the line and has been a very important ally in the war on terror," Snow said as Bush traveled here to make remarks on the federal budget.

"It's also clear that Taliban and al Qaeda, in the northwest territories and the federally administered tribal areas, have begun to put on operations that threaten the government of Pakistan itself," he added.

"President Musharraf, having tried one approach, in terms of dealing with the tribal leaders, is now going to have to be more aggressive and is being more aggressive moving forces into the region to deal with the security problems there," he said.
 
Jeez.

I just heard on the radio that we're arming sunnis in iraq. Bill Facist Bennet thinks it's a good idea. when will we learn that these people are just telling us what we want to hear, because we can kill them easily. I guess we expect Musharaff to just deliver his people smoothly into the nwo, by force if necessary. They sell us out so easily, i guess they figure all leaders should be evil elitist fucktards.
 
Al Qaeda has established safe zones and training camps in pakistan. I think we have every right to try to capture or kill members of al qaeda and their leadership. With either covert ops special forces, or law enforcment. Of course, the Pakistani police won't dare go into these tribal areas, so I don't know how realistic the law enforcement option is here.

The problem is, I don't trust Bush.
 
Musharraf is already on very shaky ground there. It looks like that country is on the verge of imploding. If he falls, well, the next guy ain't getting friendlier that's for sure. And this won't exactly shore up support for Musharraf with his people.

Also, bombing them is going to cause plenty of civillian casualities, and that's going to be it for us. If they need to go in and clean out the actual Al Qaeda members, they have to do that with special forces, in my opinion. Enough with these bombs. Bombs kill children, and when you kill someone's child, they hate you and want to kill you and your children. I'd feel the same way.
 
Musharraf is already on very shaky ground there. It looks like that country is on the verge of imploding. If he falls, well, the next guy ain't getting friendlier that's for sure. And this won't exactly shore up support for Musharraf with his people.

Also, bombing them is going to cause plenty of civillian casualities, and that's going to be it for us. If they need to go in and clean out the actual Al Qaeda members, they have to do that with special forces, in my opinion. Enough with these bombs. Bombs kill children, and when you kill someone's child, they hate you and want to kill you and your children. I'd feel the same way.


I agree. Bombs would be counterproductive and immoral.

Special forces was also what I was thinking
 
As if there aren't enough people against US forces, now the Bush Administration is considering going to kill more innocent people, this time in Pakistan.

US might strike in Pakistan: White House
July 19, 2007
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070719/pl_afp/usattackspakistan_070719165714

The Democrats you say you will vote for President, Hillary, Obama and Edwards have all said we need to leave Iraq and focus on capturing and killing those in Al Queda. Well here we have Al Queda in Pakistan. Do you recommend we not pursue Al Queda or would you just feel better about it if it was a Democrat doing it?
 
I agree. Bombs would be counterproductive and immoral.

Special forces was also what I was thinking

Bombs would be immoral? Was it immoral when we dropped bombs on perceived Al-Queda training targets during the '90's? Why would it be immoral now?
 
The Democrats you say you will vote for President, Hillary, Obama and Edwards have all said we need to leave Iraq and focus on capturing and killing those in Al Queda. Well here we have Al Queda in Pakistan. Do you recommend we not pursue Al Queda or would you just feel better about it if it was a Democrat doing it?


BAC isn't a democrat
 
Bombs would be immoral? Was it immoral when we dropped bombs on perceived Al-Queda training targets during the '90's? Why would it be immoral now?

Yeah, in today's day and age, with the kind of weapons man had developed, bombing is always immoral. That's quite correct.
 
Musharraf is already on very shaky ground there. It looks like that country is on the verge of imploding. If he falls, well, the next guy ain't getting friendlier that's for sure. And this won't exactly shore up support for Musharraf with his people.

Also, bombing them is going to cause plenty of civillian casualities, and that's going to be it for us. If they need to go in and clean out the actual Al Qaeda members, they have to do that with special forces, in my opinion. Enough with these bombs. Bombs kill children, and when you kill someone's child, they hate you and want to kill you and your children. I'd feel the same way.

There is my point.

We aren't going to go walking into these areas no more than the Pakistani police are. We're going to bomb and in the process kill lots of innocent people which will only set off more waves of those against us.

Then, there is the BIG ASS ELEPHANT sitting right next to you.

Why are we in Afghanistan? .. to hunt Bin Laden? .. to go after the Taliban who attacked us on 9/11? .. to stop terrorism?

NONE OF THE ABOVE.

We are in Afghanistan because the neocons wanted to build the Central Asia Pipeline .. all the rest is bullshit .. so says that big ass elephant sitting next to you. There is a long and obvious trail of evidence that clearly demonstrates this truth. 9/11 was just the impetus, contrived impetus, "New Pearl Harbor" the neocons desired to allow them to attack Afghanistan, then Iraq.

Most of the hijackers on 9/11 were from Saudia Arabia.

Many of the insurgents in Iraq are from Saudia Arabia.

Have you heard any plans of attacking Saudia Arabia?

Cognitive dissonance notwithstanding, at some point Americans are going to have to deal with the elephant.
 
The Democrats you say you will vote for President, Hillary, Obama and Edwards have all said we need to leave Iraq and focus on capturing and killing those in Al Queda. Well here we have Al Queda in Pakistan. Do you recommend we not pursue Al Queda or would you just feel better about it if it was a Democrat doing it?

This article appears to be about "striking" as in airstrikes.

I am not disputing our right to find members of Al Qaeda plotting attacks, via legal, law enforcement, or, if need be, special forces.

But not with air strikes.
 
I am not even for special forces going in without permission from Pakistan.
What if Iran had sent special forces here to retrieve or kill the Shaw ?

Put pressure on pakistan thru diplomatic channels, the UN, sanctions, etc if necessary. But commit no act of war againstr a sovern nation.
Unless of course we declare war.
 
Bombs would be immoral? Was it immoral when we dropped bombs on perceived Al-Queda training targets during the '90's? Why would it be immoral now?

I'm not saying that there can never again, in the history of the united states, be a surgical strike on enemies of our nation with a cruise missle.

what I'm saying is that bombing pakistan - or any country for that matter, that we are not at war with - is counterproductive, and immoral in the sense of collateral damage. Your a republican, so just forget the human element: its not in our strategic interests to cause collateral damage in pakistan. It will lead to a revolution in pakistan that could put extremist theocrats in charge of the nations nukes.
 
I'm not saying that there can never again, in the history of the united states, be a surgical strike on enemies of our nation with a cruise missle.

what I'm saying is that bombing pakistan - or any country for that matter, that we are not at war with - is counterproductive, and immoral in the sense of collateral damage. Your a republican, so just forget the human element: its not in our strategic interests to cause collateral damage in pakistan. It will lead to a revolution in pakistan that could put extremist theocrats in charge of the nations nukes.

You are correct on the result Cypress. Assrats hold on power is tenuous at best.
 
I'm didn't say he was a Democrat. He has said in other posts that he would vote for Hllary, Obama or Edwards for President thus my comment that the Democrats he would vote for.

I'm not a democrat .. but I'm going to run, run, run as fast as I can to the polls to vote for any of the above to defeat pro-war, pro-torture republicans who would soon be attacking Iran.

I disagree with going into Pakistan, but I'm sure that when a democrat is elected, she will seek the cooperation and assistance of the UN and Nato in that effort if it is decided to do so.
 
I'm not saying that there can never again, in the history of the united states, be a surgical strike on enemies of our nation with a cruise missle.

what I'm saying is that bombing pakistan - or any country for that matter, that we are not at war with - is counterproductive, and immoral in the sense of collateral damage. Your a republican, so just forget the human element: its not in our strategic interests to cause collateral damage in pakistan. It will lead to a revolution in pakistan that could put extremist theocrats in charge of the nations nukes.

Which makes it extremely important that we not enflame revolution with a mass-murder of innocent people.
 
I'm not saying that there can never again, in the history of the united states, be a surgical strike on enemies of our nation with a cruise missle.

what I'm saying is that bombing pakistan - or any country for that matter, that we are not at war with - is counterproductive, and immoral in the sense of collateral damage. Your a republican, so just forget the human element: its not in our strategic interests to cause collateral damage in pakistan. It will lead to a revolution in pakistan that could put extremist theocrats in charge of the nations nukes.

I may have grown up and gone to school in Oakland but I did not spend my youth out on the streets smoking people in drive-bys, starting fights and violence for fun and jumping for joy at carnage in the street so please don't tell me I have no concern for human life or no compassion. That's bullshit.
 
Back
Top