Al Qaeda is reconstituting in the NW Territories of Pakistan and the Government Accountably Office says that the US lacks any plan to counteract the buildup. Administration officials are worried that cross-border attacks into Pakistan from Afghanistan will alienate the new government in Islamabad that seeks to negotiate with tribal leaders in the NW Territories. Should the US attack Al Qaeda in Pakistan despite objection or even resistance from the Pakistani government?


3D Landstat image looking west through Waziristan toward Afghanistan

image source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...istan/wana.htm

I don't know if we are doing any covert infiltration, but this is what should be happening along with the battlefield operations.

In the 6 years since we have been there, we could probably have done some level of infiltration into their ranks. If you achieve a level of success where you can inflict damage on them through this covert information, you will aid greatly in defeating them on the battlefield.

Attacking into Pakistan would increase the hatred for US and decrease any assistance they might be giving US.

It's a screwed up situation since we let them off the hook to reconstitute their strength.

We are in a political war which will not be won militarily. This is the reason that Bush-Cheney have failed. Bush is the best recruiter Al Quaeda ever had.

A political war? With flying lead and shrapnel. Let's hold a referendum on homicide bombing. We need a little political understanding of Taliban and Al Qaeda objectives. How could I have missed that perspective? All this time I just thought they were trying to kill us.

Did you think long and hard before you made this response?

You sound exactly like the type that would be condemning Bush and calling for his head if he so much as deployed US troops within 3 ft of the Pakisatan border.

Now, unless you are willing to commit to a military invasion or Pakistan, or be willing to support US troops pursuing Taliban and al Qaeda operatives wherever they find them, shut up, huh?

Islamic jihadists are the best recruiters al Qaeda and the Taliban have, and people like YOU do nothing but enable them.

__________________
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing” - Edmund Burke

Yeah, we've been hearing that for years now. But thanks for perpetuating the fear.

__________________
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is."

-Ronald Reagan

Thanks for proving my point. Bush can't invade Pakistan because it would be political suicide. It would drive a nuclear armed Pakistan right into the extremist camp.

No terrorist group has ever been destroyed militarily. The British fought the IRA for eighty years until a political solution was reached.

Bin Laden said his goal was to bankrupt America. Bush is helping him accomplish his goal. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

Try to get your head out of the isolationist sand long enough to actually read the post that started this thread, Paulite. What am I saying? According to Ron Paul we brought the war on ourselves. That's all we need to know. The report of Al Qaeda's reconstitution in NW Pakistan is not from me, it is from the GAO. I suppose they are just "perpetuating the fear." Here, I'll get the quote for you: "However, GAO found broad agreement, as documented in the National Intelligence Estimate, State, and embassy documents, as well as Defense officials in Pakistan, that Al Qaeda had regenerated its ability to attack the United States and had succeeded in establishing a safe haven in Pakistan's FATA." U.S. GAO - Summary. Now let's see your investigation that refutes the GAO's perpetuation of fear. Of course you will be simultaneously refuting the NIE and the State Department. Have your own independent intelligence agency, do you? We are eager for your report.

False. The US is far from bankrupt. The Defense Dept Budget as a percent of GDP is several hundred percent less now, and during the course of the War on Terror, than it was in WW2, and that did not "bankrupt the country." If that's Bin Laden's goal, he's got a long way to go.

$700 billion dollars and counting....

What if instead of wasting $700 billion dollars on a hole in the desert, we had spent that money on a project for American Energy Independence? The technology is there. The Danes and the Israelis already get 20% of their energy from solar and wind power. Why can't we? Because we don't have any leadership, that's why. AQ is a minor threat that was blown out of proportion by Bush-Cheney. A bunch of guys in a cave in Afganistan with no army, no navy, and no air force are not a threat to a country of 300 million people. We need new leadership and a new direction in America.

Not a threat? Where were you on 911? AQ is trying to kill Americans. And they have murdered thousands of us in the past. They would do it again in a heartbeat if they had the chance. Not even someone as extreme Left as Obama would deny that. Now AQ is reconstituted in Pakistan, a country with a significant radical Islamist population, and a country with nuclear weapons that AQ would love to gets its hands on. Do you think that those who guard Paki nukes are immune to radical Islam? If you do not see AQ as a threat, you are not using much imagination. But be assured, they are.

Incorrect. My point is that would be political suicide only with folks of YOUR obvious stripe. Normal thinking people that have even a basic understanding of strategy and tactics would applaud a cross-border strike and Pakistan wouldn't do shit but rattle it's saber.

A terrorist group can be destroyed militarily IF the military is allowed to run them to ground.

By political solution you mean appeasing terrorists and not holding them accountable for their crimes. Why don't you just cut to the chase and hand them the keys to the White House while you're at it?

No society ever survived that didn't have the balls to even defend itself.

__________________
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing” - Edmund Burke

AQ is a minor threat. Here are some major threats....

China, thousands of nuclear weapons, modern military, population of 1.1 billion people.

Russia, thousands of nuclear weapons, modern military, ruled by a dictator.

Cancer, it killed 500,000 Americans last year. How many Americans were killed by terrorists?

Solar and wind power are inefficient, and irrelevant to this topic. It doesn't require leadership to sell you on putting corn in your gas tank. Just a salesman.

Perhaps you can explain this "no threat to a country of 300 million people" to that big fucking hole in the ground in NYC?

We might need new leadership, but it sure as Hell isn't anyone that thinks like YOU.

__________________
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing” - Edmund Burke

A certain type of American always needs somebody to fight. Why? Who knows...a need to enforce their superiority? Every indicator points to AQ and similar being nothing but blips on a radar in the political world. They get far more press than they deserve, and at the end of the day are just a niche group. Groups like them will never die, no matter how much military might you put behind the effort. These guys currently have one of arguably the most modern military in the world hunting them down and in five years STILL haven't been able to kill them.

That aside, Kirk is on the money. Bush and his puppet masters have done nothing but create a whole generation of ME Ameri-haters due to their myopic view of the world. Idiots...

__________________
"I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence." Richard Dawkins