Should the U.S. launch an offensive into Pakistan? (FR Poll)

Free Republic ^ | 1/29/4 | FreeRepublic

[End Times Sentinel]

Should the U.S. launch an offensive into Pakistan to seek and destroy Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda network?

[End Times Sentinel]

Why or why not?

 

Personally, I voted no.  My brother in law was stationed at a Firebase in Eastern Trashcanistan and relayed to me that until Mushareff brings some control into that area via his own troops, operating as anything more than a disruptor/buffer is impractical.

 

Although I could certainly see the other side.  Maybe we should just nuke the whole area.

 

I'm interested to see what other Freepers think.

Owl_Eagle

" WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
DIVERSITY IS STRENGTH"

[thoughtomator]

I voted "undecided". I think we need to give Musharraf a chance to do the job himself. Considering that these same folks are trying to kill him, and have almost succeeded more than once, I feel we can rely on his intent, if not his capability.

If he is not capable, then we will need to do the job. If left alone, NW Pakistan will breed nothing but mass murderers, and in the long run we will pay a heavy price for ignoring it, just like we paid a heavy price for ignoring the Taliban.

[7thson]

I voted yes, but I think it should be done after the elections. I thinkg the dems would jump all over President Bush and his administration - calling him a war monger, acting on bad intel, killing our "boys" even though they don't care a rats arse for them.

[DoctorMichael]

Should the U.S. launch an offensive into Pakistan to seek and destroy Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda network?

No.

While it would be nice to advocate 'Bravado', we would be entering into a tribal area and would have to literally kill a lot of civilians (albeit al Qaeda sympathizers) of a country that we are not technically at war with.......a real hornet's nest.

[CougarGA7]

I'd be curious as to the details on how this is being done. But I don't think they should be posted for security reasons. (nice contradiction)

I'm all for it if Mushareff wants to do as joint operation with his and US troops to hunt these guys down.

[Reader of news]

Terrorrists declare war to the United States of America so now we are fighting against them until we win this war. If Pakistani troops could not defeat Al Qaeda, we should launch an offensive.

[American in Israel]

My vote is No. We have already invaded, why bomb now. The gentle touch is best to keep from harming civilians. Normaly we would have to bomb them into submission to get to this point.

We need the bombs for better targets. I would however vote yes to Nuke Mecca, preferably during the Haji. More cost effective that way.

[Former Proud Canadian]

Yes.

But not until after the elections.

[cripplecreek]

I voted yes.

Mushareff has held us at a distance for awhile, but i think he's recognized that the situation in his own country is starting to spin out of control. Frankly the alternative form of Pakistani govt would likely be the taliban with nukes.

[OrioleFan]

These matters are best left to the UN. I propose providing the UN with our troops.

-John Effing Kerry

[The Old Hoosier]

I vote NO! Enough military adventures. We're overstretched as it is. We won't be able to deal with the North Koreans and Chinese when it comes time for war.

[thoughtomator]

I hear that. I think it would be extremely effective to bomb that stupid rock they worship and explain to them that, as far as they are concerned, the US military is their new god and they'd better start praying - now.

[not2bbpb]

A no brainer NO. If we go in in force the General is dead, and good luck keeping track of the nukes.

[GigaDittos]

I wonder what these Dems would place their left hand on during the swearing, should one of them be elected president.

[metoooo]

conservatives are against foreign entanglements and should therefore oppose this suggestion...

[verity]

You are going to be disappointed because it will happen!

[Arkinsaw]

conservatives are against foreign entanglements and should therefore oppose this suggestion...

Taking out people who kill thousands of your countrymen is not a foreign entaglement as envisioned by the founders. The idea that you cannot attack people who attacked you just because they are not in our borders (foreign) is ludicrous and it is not conservative at all, its pacifist.

[zook]

I vote yes, assuming that they wouldn't consider it unless they felt confident of success.

[ASA Vet]

We won't be able to deal with the North Koreans

[armymarinemom]

Yes. I don't like it but I have hear severe complaining from our troops that it is needed. I'm just ticked that it is being discussed in the media.