Pakistan orders troops to open if US Raids.

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?

It's been a problem since the VC was allowed to do it using Cambodia and Laos. No difference here. People ignoring the obvious for nothing more than political partisanship and nations ignoring the problem so they don't have to deal with it but not allowing anyone else to is the problem.

I've never been there, but have a general understanding of how remote and rugged it is. If Pakistan doesn't want to go, then let us do it.

Odd that it's too remote and rugged for them to find the Taliban/AQ, but they know the second we step foot in it ... isn't it?:eusa_whistle:
 
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?

This isn't new. We've been zotting sand-rats with Predator strikes since the beginning and Musharraf was fairly cooperative but as with the the elections in Gaza the "extremists" were given the upper hand.*

But when you allow AQ to hide behind your nation's military because you'd rather shoot at the US instead of them you are in fact hiding them.




* This may come as a shock to commie-symps but rights do not come from gov't they come from above government. But since commies think gov't runs/owns everything--as opposed to merely protect that which pre-exists itself--they think so long as the mob votes for it it must be good...even though mobs tend to violate rights for the non-mob they tend to disagree with.
 
* This may come as a shock to commie-symps but rights do not come from gov't they come from above government. But since commies think gov't runs/owns everything--as opposed to merely protect that which pre-exists itself--they think so long as the mob votes for it it must be good...even though mobs tend to violate rights for the non-mob they tend to disagree with.


No shock to me. Everybody knows that bible thumpers et al think the rights come from above. Had many a conversation with gun nuts about the second being an enumerated right yadda, yadda, yadda...and boy do I have an argument for that...
 
This development surprises you, does it?

It doesn't me.

Not at all. We tie our own hands and our enemies take notes. It worked before and we'll let it work again.

Neither Obama nor McCain impress me as the Nixon-type who'll blow in there for two weeks and clean house regardless the wailing and gnashing of teeth.
 
It's been a problem since the VC was allowed to do it using Cambodia and Laos. No difference here. People ignoring the obvious for nothing more than political partisanship and nations ignoring the problem so they don't have to deal with it but not allowing anyone else to is the problem.

I've never been there, but have a general understanding of how remote and rugged it is. If Pakistan doesn't want to go, then let us do it.

Odd that it's too remote and rugged for them to find the Taliban/AQ, but they know the second we step foot in it ... isn't it?:eusa_whistle:

Not odd at all. Pakistan is not a close ally.

If the Paki government gets too cozy with America it will be toppled by those who simply hate our guts.
 
Not odd at all. Pakistan is not a close ally.

If the Paki government gets too cozy with America it will be toppled by those who simply hate our guts.

The new government of Pakitan has no chance NOT to be toppled by terrorists... They're idealistic leftists and as such, they'll avoid making the tough decisions necessary to crush them, out of desire to understand them, to bring them into the government, to give them a voice... which will cost them their lives.

But hey, that's nature calling and she doesn't have much patience for idiots.

The news had one of Pakistan's newest government members speaking to the international press the other day; he looked and sounded precisely like one of the all too common Berkely activists types; so very sure of himself... Of course such people people can exists just fine in nations where they're opposition aren't more radical than they are... but in this case, the people this kid and his friends are up against aren't into mass protests and work stoppages; they're heavily armed, ruthless and they fully believe that the only reason that you're still alive is that God has sent them to kill you and they just haven't gotten there yet...
 
The new government of Pakitan has no chance NOT to be toppled by terrorists... They're idealistic leftists and as such, they'll avoid making the tough decisions necessary to crush them, out of desire to understand them, to bring them into the government, to give them a voice... which will cost them their lives.

You conservatives gotta make your mind up about Muslims. You bitch and moan about the fundie side of that religion, yet when leftie (read liberal) Muslims come to power like the Bhutto's, you guys see them as weak.

However, a history lesson for you. 1) Bhutto inspired govts have always been toppled..by the military, not fundie Muslims. 2) The Pakistani military have held the power in the country most of the time since Bhutto senior was hanged in 1977..and they've done what about fundie Islam in that country (hint: Not a damn thing)....

Ignorance is bliss...
 
Last edited:
Odd that it's too remote and rugged for them to find the Taliban/AQ, but they know the second we step foot in it ... isn't it?:eusa_whistle:

I remember seeing a US docomentary on Vietnam in 1995 (it was actually a TV series from the late 70s early 80s I think). They interviewed some reasonably high-ranking NVA commanders (not generals, but I think it was a either a major or colonel). He was asked which troops he feared the most. The least feared were the South Vietnamese, the most feared were the Aussies. When asked about the Yanks, he said when they first started fighting them, they could hear them coming a mile away because they came into the jungle with music blaring etc. he stated that that didn't last long.
My point being, if a couple of helicopters or f18s fly across the Pakistani border, they are likely to be noticed. Some dude with an Ak47 on a donkey problaby isn't...:O)
 
Last edited:
We should order our troops to open fire if they Pakistani soldiers. If they don't follow the rules of engagement, why should we?
 
Er, because it's their country???

But doesn't give anyone the right to fire first. You don't see border patrols (very small cases) opening fire on illegal immigrants. If Pakistani are allowed to open fire at us, what gives them that right (they don't have to follow rules like the terrorists who dress up as civilians). Remember, Pakistan isn't clearing their nation of the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Because of those two groups, we are wasting trillions fighting them. It is time to finish the job and go into that country with all the might and power and finish them off. So we can get our troops back home. If we did this in 2003 (instead of going to Iraq) and went into Pakistan to finish the job, Afgan would be cleared of any danger (at least for Taliban and al-Qaeda).
 
Er, because it's their country???

The US said quite plainly Sept 18, 2001 via the AUMF passed by both houses that the US is at liberty to engage terrorists--particularly those responsible for 9/11--and ANY nation or organization that gets in our way.

Of course L'il 'O said he'd outright invade Pakistan. Do you find fault with that or is he just lying to get the bitter-clingers to vote for him (I presume the latter)?
 

Forum List

Back
Top