ANALYSIS-US plays for high stakes on Pakistan-Afghan border

Reuters ^ | Sat Jul 19, 2008 11:36pm EDT | Zeeshan Haider

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

PESHAWAR, Pakistan, July 20 (Reuters) - Former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld may not have been shy about projecting U.S. military power, but even he didn't dare send American troops into Pakistan's tribal lands to snatch or kill al Qaeda leaders.

But now Pakistanis fear the U.S. presidential campaign has heated up the foreign policy debate over how to handle the Taliban and al Qaeda threat to a point where American leaders could throw caution to the wind by taking unilateral action.

"If this was a possibility in the past, it's a high possibility now," said a senior security official in the northwestern city of Peshawar, shuddering at the statements coming from the United States.

In 2005, Rumsfeld reportedly aborted a mission to eliminate Ayman al-Zawahri, al Qaeda's second-in-command, because it involved too many troops, chances of success were too uncertain, and the danger of riling the situation in Pakistan was too great.

The risks today may be even greater, with Pakistan going through a precarious transition to civilian-led democracy and tribesmen across the northwest reaching for their guns.

"If Americans hit the Pakistani side, they will make more enemies for themselves," Ayaz Wazir, a former Pakistani ambassador to Kabul, said.

TALIBAN PROTECTION

Mounting casualties among Western troops across the border in Afghanistan have fuelled alarm, as have intelligence assessments that al Qaeda could organise strikes on Western soil having regrouped in the tribal areas under Taliban protection.

The United States is now piling resources into Afghanistan, where the Taliban insurgency is stronger than ever 6-½ years after U.S.-backed forces drove the Islamist militia and its al Qaeda guests into the mountains......

[NormsRevenge]

ya got to go where the rats nest.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

H/T to the Strata Sphere Blog:

Rueters: Rumsfeld More Sane Than Obama Regarding Pakistan

************************EXCERPT**********************

Published by AJStrata at 12:11 pm under All General Discussions, Bin Laden/GWOT, Pakistan

The border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan is heating up. I have a slew of interesting articles on activities there as a continuation of my recent posts on the area (see here, here and here) which I will get to in a moment, but one article truly struck me and it was from Reuters:

Former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld may not have been shy about projecting U.S. military power, but even he didn’t dare send American troops into Pakistan’s tribal lands to snatch or kill al Qaeda leaders.

[Berlin_Freeper]

McCain says he will follow bin Laden to the gates of hell.(YouTube)

[RightWhale]

Two days to expiration of Taliban ultimatum on Pakistan.

[johnnycap]

Pakistan has been playing us for far too long. The US needs to wrap up Iraq over the next year as much as possible and then drop our commando forces between Islamabad and the Pashtun. Then drive those a**holes out of the hills and into southern Afghanistan like clearing deer out of a forest. Then our army regulars should be sitting there waiting to mow them down as they cross. Bin Laden included. If Pakistan doesn’t like it, why don’t we invite our friends from India to accompany us on our next high level trip to Islamabad. As far as the US having more enemies in Pakistan, in all reality, how do you get higher than 100%. The Paki goverment over the past 30 years has been working us by counseling patience while lining their pockets with US Foreign Aid for far too long.

Let’s face it, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan are the battle field to break the spine of this duplicitous Islamo-facist movement. Until we exert western dominance and break the will of duplicity across the entire arc (cresent if you will), the war will not truly be over. From North India to the Mediterranean, the entire crescent must be freed, cleaned and reconstituted.

We have always known it was at least a 30 year war and until the democrats figure that out, we will be just taking breaks in between time so the enemy can re-fortify. Practical clearheadedness seems to be in short supply among our spoiled Americans. World peace and a Prius for everyone doesn’t just happen...sometimes you have to fight for it...long and hard.

[Saberwielder]

This is probably hard to accept but Bush completely blew it when it came to Pakistan. He placed all his trust on one man - Musharraf and then changed his mind to support “democracy.” He completely ignored the pleas of our ally Karzai to pay heed to Pakistan’s double game. The biggest blunder was to sign off on the 2005-06 “peace deal” that Musharraf made with the terrorists. I remember Bush standing with Musharraf in the White House and saying something like “If my pal Musharraf says that this peace deal will work, I trust him.”

Once Taliban and Al Qaeda got the space to set up hundreds of camps and safe houses, they cannot be uprooted without a massive land and air campaign. For all his toughness, part of Bush’s legacy will be his poor judgment in trusting our Muslim “allies” like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Quite disappointing.

[Prince Caspian]

Let’s face it, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan are the battle field to break the spine of this duplicitous Islamo-facist movement.

Throw in North Korea, China, and Russia -- and now your talking serious world peace for a long while (assuming all of civilization doesn't get wiped out in the process).

[johnnycap]

Please...one crescent at a time.

[Prince Caspian]

Informal, personal friendships has always been one of Bush’s strengths. And, like any strength, it can sometimes go too far and get out of control. That’s when it has become a weakness - such as Pakistan, or maybe holding onto Rumsfeld too long, or the “New Tone”, or trusting Ted Kennedy too much, etc.

[Marine_Uncle]

The problem with Obama is one never knows where he really stands on an issue. And when he makes statements that are tough talk, it could just be to deceive some folks that do not want to vote for McCain.
Same goes with Hildebeast say on the statement she made where asked if Iran attacked Israel we would totally obliterate Iran. Such a blanket statement is so easy to make on the fly.
I respect AJ's reasoning on most of all I have read, but on this particular issue, I wonder. How effective an argument can be made as to who is going over the line regarding going into Pakistan un-invited.
If Obama is really honest. Then he is telling us we are literally going to go into another Iraq war with a similar very long term SASO. Nothing else would fit the bill.
I wonder how many of his peace-neks are paying attention to what he proposes. He is calling for a war with Pakistan.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Ernest_at_the_Beach.