Skip to comments.
Pakistan is Lost — We better Get Used to That Fact
Men's News Daily ^
| 10/2/06
| warner todd huston
Posted on 10/03/2006 2:51:53 PM PDT by Mobile Vulgus
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-34 next last
What really should we do if we lose Pakistan as an ally?
To: Mobile Vulgus
Bomb the crap out of their nukes.
To: Mobile Vulgus
Same thing we should do today. Kill the enemy.
3
posted on
10/03/2006 2:54:30 PM PDT
by
Khepera
(Do not remove by penalty of law!)
To: Mobile Vulgus
What really should we do if we lose Pakistan as an ally? Didn't we already tell them what we would do?....something about bombs and stoneage? lol
4
posted on
10/03/2006 2:58:02 PM PDT
by
Chani
(Life is fatal. The 100% statistic is compelling.)
To: Mobile Vulgus
Court the hell out of India. That way, when we go over the borders to eliminate terror nests, Pakistan will be unable to take action because India will be sitting right there, ready to exploit them. Basically, lock them down guarding against India so we can do what we need to do.
5
posted on
10/03/2006 2:58:54 PM PDT
by
domenad
(In all things, in all ways, at all times, let honor guide me.)
To: Mobile Vulgus
6
posted on
10/03/2006 3:01:46 PM PDT
by
Perdogg
(Democratic Party - The political wing of Al Qaeda)
To: Mobile Vulgus
Annex and occupy Waziristan as a province of Afghanistan.
7
posted on
10/03/2006 3:05:28 PM PDT
by
marron
To: domenad
The government of Pakistan has ceded control of Waziristan to the Taliban and AQ. Because of that, we now have the right to take care of the problem there.
In the 21st century, the world can longer afford "tribal areas" that are off limits to civilized people. Perhaps in the past it would have made no difference. But now, these "tribal areas" are producing terrorists and terror enablers by the thousands. The Madrassas alone recruit young men for radicalization and jihad.
We know this. And Pakistan has just told the world it can't control its own territory.
Well, we can't control it, but we can do something about it.
I don't really care if Pakistan doesn't like it. What are they going to do? Attack us? Really?
Yes, they have nukes. It's my understanding that we know where they are and have a plan to secure them if necessary. We cannot allow an Isalmist state with nukes. Their right to have them ends when they threaten us.
Deal with it now, or we'll be dealing with the blowback for decades.
The ONLY reason we became allies with the Pakis back in the 1970s was to counter India, which was a leader of the "Third World" movement. That movement is dead, and India is now our friend and ally. Pakistan serves no purpose to us today as a bulwark against anything. If they are not only going to have Islamists in the military and intelligence services, and give the Taliban and AQ free reign in the "tribal areas", then they are not helping us at all.
Pakistan insists it can't send its own troops into "tribal areas" because the region is too primitive. Sorry, but that's not an excuse. Deal with your own people or we will do it for you.
8
posted on
10/03/2006 3:09:08 PM PDT
by
sdillard
To: Mobile Vulgus
Pakistan was never really an ally in the true sense, like Britain. It is a matter of circumstance.
Mushariff (SP?) is only interested in his own butt. He has been walking a fine line between the West and his own countrymen for years.
The average Paki hates our guts, and the rest would like to move here, including some who hate our guts. There are vast areas of western Pakistan that have never been under the control of the central government. The autonomy agreement last week just formalizes that reality for one area.
We are going to have to deal with this threat sooner or later. And the Indians will be more than happy to help us.
What we, and especially Britain need to do meanwhile, is to stop the immigration of hostile tribes into our countries.
9
posted on
10/03/2006 3:17:30 PM PDT
by
outdriving
(Diversity is a nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there.)
To: Mobile Vulgus
What really should we do if we lose Pakistan as an ally? Shut down all the 7-11 stores.
10
posted on
10/03/2006 3:22:39 PM PDT
by
Shooter 2.5
(Vote a Straight Republican Ballot. Rid the country of dems. NRA)
To: Mobile Vulgus
BEFORE we do anything else, we would have to make sure that their nuclear weapons were eliminated -- and that implies a major war and lots of killing, not a series of antiseptic air strikes in the tribal areas, as the author suggests.
To: Mobile Vulgus
Was it ever realistic to expect Pakistan as an ally when Turkey is no longer an ally, but has gone over to the Islamofascist dark side?
To: sdillard
In the 21st century, the world can longer afford "tribal areas" that are off limits to civilized people.
The problem, of course, is that Pakistan would be facing a full scale war if they tried to take it over. The Waziri's have been there for many centuries and don't consider themselves Pakistani...in fact, many find it humorous that the Pakistani's even claim them to be in their country at all. The rest of Pakistan, for the most part, understands that the tribal areas are only technically Pakistani, and that in reality they operate as an independent nation. Up until 2004 Pakistani troops never even set foot in them. Even the British avoided the area whenever possible, and only held nominal control over it (they would enter the area to "punish" the Waziri's after a raid, and would then retreat back out of the area before the Waziri's could mass their forces...they never remained there for any length of time).
An elimination of the tribal areas would at a minimum lead to a full scale civil war, and would probably lead to Waziristan and the other tribal areas declaring their independence. The entire point of their "deal" with Pakistan is simply that they won't rebel if the government leaves them alone.
To: domenad; outdriving; sdillard
The three of you get it. Go to the head of the class.
14
posted on
10/03/2006 3:50:27 PM PDT
by
razoroccam
(Then in the name of Allah, they will let loose the Germs of War (http://www.booksurge.com))
To: Rockingham
uhhhmmmmm,
do you think these people will contemplate loss of life when they launch one of many of their nukes. geneva convention has nothing to do with it.
that was then, this is now. they never contemplated crazy muslimes en masse.
To: Arthalion
. Even the British avoided the area whenever possible, and only held nominal control over it (they would enter the area to "punish" the Waziri's after a raid, and would then retreat back out of the area before the Waziri's could mass their forces...they never remained there for any length of time). So you're telling us that the area cannot be held, only sterilized.
16
posted on
10/03/2006 4:35:12 PM PDT
by
SauronOfMordor
(A planned society is most appealing to those with the arrogance to think they will be the planners)
To: Mobile Vulgus
It was a nice dream. That we would have Pakistan on our side as a stalwart ally in this war on terror
When was this?
To: Mobile Vulgus
Were they ever really an ally? Musharraf has good intentions I think, but he really doesn't have the power to deliver. Like most leaders of Pakistan, he's not much more than a figurehead.
18
posted on
10/03/2006 5:55:17 PM PDT
by
Free Vulcan
(Show them no mercy, for you shall receive none!)
To: sdillard
Good comment as well as some others below. We could leave them alone to stew in their 10th century (or earlier mess) but this part of the world is exporting a terror virus.
To: Free Vulcan
I believe that half an ally with good intentions is STILL a usefull one. However, if he loses ALL power to help, he does us no good.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-34 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson