Pakistan orders troops to open if US Raids.

[Dr Grump]

As a result, the idiots that have taken to governing Pakistan have failed to maintain control of the area along its border with Afghanistan; as such US forces have in recent months pursued terrorists BACK into Pakistan as they fled after executing attacks on Afghan security, US and or NATO forces...

If Pakistan fires on US troops, those Pakistani Soldiers will suffer the consequences of their foolish decision.

See, this is what scares me about neocon righties, their ignorance. Then again, if you were educated on the region we wouldn't have this conversation.

Just so you know. Since the Partition (just to educate yourself, this is the term used when Pakistan/East Pakistan and India split in 1948), the Pakistani government NEVER had control of huge tracts of the border area, even under Mushariff (who BTW, only recently left power). There has been a long-term agreement with the Pushtan tribes along the border that the government controls the roads, the tribes control everything else. Occasionally the tribes and govt forces get in a shit fight, but not that often.

However being totally uneducated on the subject, you do what is known as spinning. You are saying that since the new government came into power all of a sudden there a problems with terrorists crossing the border? Guess what Sparkie, they've been crossing the border since Adam. Not just since the Taliban were kicked out of Afghanistan. However, now that the US pawn Mushareff is out of office, suddenly there is a border 'problem'.

This is exactly the type of ignorance that chickenhawks in Bush's admin have relied on over the past five years for gulliable Yanks to fall for. Shame on you...

 

[dilloduck]

See, this is what scares me about neocon righties, their ignorance. Then again, if you were educated on the region we wouldn't have this conversation.

Just so you know. Since the Partition (just to educate yourself, this is the term used when Pakistan/East Pakistan and India split in 1948), the Pakistani government NEVER had control of huge tracts of the border area, even under Mushariff (who BTW, only recently left power). There has been a long-term agreement with the Pushtan tribes along the border that the government controls the roads, the tribes control everything else. Occasionally the tribes and govt forces get in a shit fight, but not that often.

However being totally uneducated on the subject, you do what is known as spinning. You are saying that since the new government came into power all of a sudden there a problems with terrorists crossing the border? Guess what Sparkie, they've been crossing the border since Adam. Not just since the Taliban were kicked out of Afghanistan. However, now that the US pawn Mushareff is out of office, suddenly there is a border 'problem'.

This is exactly the type of ignorance that chickenhawks in Bush's admin have relied on over the past five years for gulliable Yanks to fall for. Shame on you...

Which brings up a good point---Palin will really put a wet blanket on the chickhawk shit won't it ?

 

[Dr Grump]

Which brings up a good point---Palin will really put a wet blanket on the chickhawk shit won't it ?

Who knows what she's going to do. Nobody does, neither does she it seems...

 

[dilloduck]

Who knows what she's going to do. Nobody does, neither does she it seems...

Hint hint--her kid is in Iraq !

 

[Modbert]

Hint hint--her kid is in Iraq !

How To Understand Sarah Palin: The Issues, Not Biography

On Iraq: In 2006, Palin said, "I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq. I heard on the news about the new deployments, and while I support our president, Condoleezza Rice and the administration, I want to know that we have an exit plan in place; I want assurances that we are doing all we can to keep our troops safe." Earlier this year, she said she hoped the Iraq war was "a task that is from God."

If I was a soldier, that'd make me feel safe at night if the next Vice President said that.

 

[Dr Grump]

Hint hint--her kid is in Iraq !

I don't even know if she comes under the term chickenhawk. To me chickenhawks are the pillow biters in the Bush admin who sent others off to do their dirty work for them, but never served themselves, or worse got half a dozen deferments (in Cheney's case) during Viet Nam...

 

[dilloduck]

I don't even know if she comes under the term chickenhawk. To me chickenhawks are the pillow biters in the Bush admin who sent others off to do their dirty work for them, but never served themselves, or worse got half a dozen deferments (in Cheney's case) during Viet Nam...

as I said--A McCain/Palin ticket sort of take one of your favorite insults off the table.

 

[Dr Grump]

as I said--A McCain/Palin ticket sort of take one of your favorite insults off the table.

Does it? What part of the Fed govt did Palin serve in when those decisions were made? And McCain has been there, done that, so that certainly gives him some credibility....

 

[dilloduck]

Does it? What part of the Fed govt did Palin serve in when those decisions were made? And McCain has been there, done that, so that certainly gives him some credibility....

gump--her son is in Iraq. Are you really going to call her a chickenhawk ?

bad choice but go for it.

 

[del]

Which brings up a good point---Palin will really put a wet blanket on the chickhawk shit won't it ?

so will mccain.
or biden to be fair. i guess JAGs count.

 

[del]

Does it? What part of the Fed govt did Palin serve in when those decisions were made?

the same part Obama served in.
lol

 

[Epsilon Delta]

It's not surprise that Pakistan is making it clear it won't tolerate raids, and it's a pretty bad time to be threatening to do so considering that they just became a democracy. Those currently in power have a vested interest in keeping that democracy alive, and if they were to show 'weakness' now, there'd be no doubt that a strong-man would depose them with the backing of the people. To put it in perspective, imagine if ANY country's leadership was discussing raids inside the US on TV. They'd be lucky to get just a "We'll fire if you do come in" from the leadership.

In either case, I think Obama is lying on this one. I doubt he actually plans to "engage" Pakistan in any way. Just the impression I get; the 'threats' are just posturing. Or I hope so anyway.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

In either case, I think Obama is lying on this one. I doubt he actually plans to "engage" Pakistan in any way. Just the impression I get; the 'threats' are just posturing. Or I hope so anyway.

So in other words: you like al Qaeda having a safe haven.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

No, I'd like it if Pakistan could get it's shit together and police itself properly, but the consequences of any US-Pakistani "war" would probably have much more disastrous effects in the long run.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

Pakistan CAN'T get it's shit together. It lacks the politicl and material strength. There's a reason its northern provinces are called the "lawless" region...and no, it has nothing to do with that Xena chick.

You'll be waiting at least another half-century and in the meantime granting safe haven to AQ to plot international strikes as well as raid Afghanistan (trying to get ITS shit together) and retreat across the border with impunity.

Likewise we've already stated: if you give safe haven to AQ we will not draw a distinction between you and AQ. Pakistan is asking for a thumping. I presume their just woofing for domestic consumption. If not we should continue our raids...they can lead, follow, get out of the way or get shot as per their choosing.

BTW - If you think Pakistan could nuke us...

1) they don't have that kind of range

2) if Pakistan ever lost positive control of its nukes India would jump far sooner than the US and steam-roller them.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

Pakistan CAN'T get it's shit together. It lacks the politicl and material strength. There's a reason its northern provinces are called the "lawless" region...and no, it has nothing to do with that Xena chick.

You'll be waiting at least another half-century and in the meantime granting safe haven to AQ to plot international strikes as well as raid Afghanistan (trying to get ITS shit together) and retreat across the border with impunity.

Likewise we've already stated: if you give safe haven to AQ we will not draw a distinction between you and AQ. Pakistan is asking for a thumping. I presume their just woofing for domestic consumption. If not we should continue our raids...they can lead, follow, get out of the way or get shot as per their choosing.

BTW - If you think Pakistan could nuke us...

1) they don't have that kind of range

2) if Pakistan ever lost positive control of its nukes India would jump far sooner than the US and steam-roller them.

I hadn't thought of the Nukes at all, what I'm concerned about is the fact that if the US begins to raid Pakistan, and Pakistan fires back, that the prospects on an escalation increase, and if hostilities do break out into something major, then it's not going to be two countries with 60 million people the US will have to deal with, but 3 countries and 230 million people. US action in Pakistan would be the most helpful thing you could do for Al-Qaeda, because their enrollment numbers would go over the roof. And if it undermines the fledgling democratic order, it would be increasingly likely that either you will cause Pakistan to become either an Iran or Saddam-era Iraq. I mean, it should be pretty obvious, Americans should be the first to know that nothing unites people into supporting militarism and/or extremism than foreign aggression.

EDIT: And on the other hand, the complexity is explained on your post- Pakistan really can't effectively police it's borders at this moment. So threatening if they don't do it it's useless- you know it can't be done effectively. But the leadership in Pakistan (you also know) can't allow US intervention because the population would be violently against it (as it would be anywhere). Obviously the leadership doesn't WANT conflict, but they're kinda stuck between a rock and a hard place. hiuhoua.

 

[Dr Grump]

gump--her son is in Iraq. Are you really going to call her a chickenhawk ?

bad choice but go for it.

Where did I call her a chickenhawk?

 

[Dr Grump]

Likewise we've already stated: if you give safe haven to AQ we will not draw a distinction between you and AQ. Pakistan is asking for a thumping. I presume their just woofing for domestic consumption. If not we should continue our raids...they can lead, follow, get out of the way or get shot as per their choosing.

The sovereign state of Pakistan is not giving safe haven to anyone. If Pakistani security forces knew were AQ is/was they'd bomb the shit out of them.

That aside, AQ have been hiding in those regions of Pakistan the moment they got booted from Afghanistan. Why is it now, when US puppet Mushareff leaves office, is it a problem?

 

[Gunny]

The sovereign state of Pakistan is not giving safe haven to anyone. If Pakistani security forces knew were AQ is/was they'd bomb the shit out of them.

That aside, AQ have been hiding in those regions of Pakistan the moment they got booted from Afghanistan. Why is it now, when US puppet Mushareff leaves office, is it a problem?

I disagree. IMO, Pakistan is doing the liberal thing in regard to the Taliban/AQ -- turning a blind eye and pretending they aren't there. Simple enough since the region they occupy is isolated.

 

[Dr Grump]

I disagree. IMO, Pakistan is doing the liberal thing in regard to the Taliban/AQ -- turning a blind eye and pretending they aren't there. Simple enough since the region they occupy is isolated.

They have been doing that since the Taliban were kicked out. Why is it s a problem now?

That aside, you ever been to the Pushtan? Do you know how remote and rugged it is?