>>Musharraf exposed the ringleader. But if M. goes too far in placating us, he'll die at the hands of domestic Paki terrorists. Remember what happened to his predecessor.
1. Mush didn't expose the ringleader. The US did, with the help of Qaddafi and Mush had no choice but to Pardon Khan.
2. Mush's predecessor was overthrown by Mush in a coup d'etat. Mush then consolidated his position by having an election after 911 where he won something like 95% of the vote.
So tell me, is it better for U.S. interests for Mush to remain in control or to force his hand with bin Laden? It seems to me it's wiser to bide our time using whatever anti-terrorist assistance he can provide in the short term. Do we want to trigger the angry hornet's-nest of fundamentalist anti-Americanism that exists in Pakistan by violating their territory and arresting/killing their hero bin Laden?
I think Porter Goss has stated the problem accurately, calling it one of "diplomacy." I don't know what concessions Mush expects from all this but it's true that we exposed Khan and Mush protected him. I think he's protecting bin Laden as well, for fear of a terrible political backlash. I think the fundamentalist Pakis have us over a barrel for the moment unless we're willing to risk a nuclear war.