Pakistan is Lost — We better Get Used to That Fact

Men's News Daily ^ | 10/2/06 | warner todd huston

[Mobile Vulgus]

It was a nice dream. That we would have Pakistan on our side as a stalwart ally in this war on terror was such a wonderful happenstance. It would have gone a long way toward proving that not all Muslim states want to be our enemy.

You have to give President Pervez Musharraf credit. Yes, he has done some iffy things as president by oppressing certain extremists. But he has lent the USA able assistance when he could since 9/11. And, in so doing, he has made himself a repeated target of assassins, one attempt killing 14 and wounding 46.

We must not stop being grateful for what Musharraf has done for us and we should not abandon him too quickly. But the fact is, he was always on the edge of being eliminated as an ally, and by his own people at that.

He has never fully controlled his military, for one thing. He quickly found that, after he led a bloodless coup against Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s government in 1999, he never had the unquestioning support of those military officers who supported the Kashmiri separatists. And, after 9/11 and Musharraf’s vocal and active support of the US, he found that Al Qaeda and Taleban supporters filled his ranks, as well.

Further, Pakistan’s Waziristan region was never really in Musharraf’s control and is teeming with terrorist training camps and Al Qaeda supporters despite Musharraf’s efforts to stop them.

Now, on the eve of president Musharraf’s visit to Washington came word that his government has formally retreated and ceded all control of the Waziristan region to terrorists and their supporters.

Musharraf is cloaking this weakness as a “treaty with tribal leaders”, but the calamity is unmistakable to the detriment of both Musharraf’s safety and ours.

Read the rest here...

[Mobile Vulgus]

What really should we do if we lose Pakistan as an ally?

[Walkingfeather]

Bomb the crap out of their nukes.

[Khepera]

Same thing we should do today. Kill the enemy.

[Chani]

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

[domenad]

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.

[Perdogg]

where did it go?

[marron]

Annex and occupy Waziristan as a province of Afghanistan.

[sdillard]

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.

[outdriving]

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.

[Shooter 2.5]

What really should we do if we lose Pakistan as an ally?

Shut down all the 7-11 stores.

[Rockingham]

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.

[fireman43]

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?

[Arthalion]

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.

[razoroccam]

The three of you get it. Go to the head of the class.

[himno hero]

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.

[SauronOfMordor]

. 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.

[G8 Diplomat]

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?

[Free Vulcan]

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.

[nomorelurker]

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.

[Mobile Vulgus]

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.