U.S. Force Not Ruled Out in Pakistan

Newsmax ^ | July 22, 2007

[2ndDivisionVet]

The U.S. would consider military force if necessary to stem al-Qaida's growing ability to use its hideout in Pakistan to launch terrorist attacks, a White House aide said Sunday.

The president's homeland security adviser, Fran Townsend, said the U.S. was committed first and foremost to working with Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, in his efforts to control militants in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border region. But she indicated the U.S. was ready to take additional measures.

"Just because we don't speak about things publicly doesn't mean we're not doing things you talk about," Townsend said, when asked in a broadcast interview why the U.S. does not conduct special operations and other measures to cripple al-Qaida.

"Job No. 1 is to protect the American people. There are no options off the table," she said.

Responding to earlier comments by Townsend, Pakistan's foreign minister, Khurshid Kasuri, said Sunday that the country's military was in the best position to attack al-Qaida, if the U.S. provided intelligence.

The national intelligence director, Mike McConnell, said he believed that Osama bin Laden was living in the tribal, border region of Pakistan. Bin Laden is the leader of the al-Qaida network and mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks.

McConnell said Musharraf's attempt at a political solution to peace in the region had backfired by giving al-Qaida a place and time to regroup.

"Al-Qaida has been able to regain some of its momentum," McConnell said. "The leadership's intact. They have operational planners, and they have safe haven. The thing they're missing are operatives inside the United States."

In the National Intelligence Estimate released last week, analysts stressed the importance of al-Qaida's increasingly comfortable hideout in Pakistan that has resulted from a hands-off accord between Musharraf and tribal leaders along the Afghan border.

That 10-month-old deal, which has unraveled in recent days, gave al-Qaida new opportunities to set up compounds for terror training, improve its international communications with associates and bolster its operations.

Since then, U.S. officials have said they expect Pakistan to launch more military strikes on Islamic militants while the Bush administration pumps hundreds of millions of dollars in development aid into lawless tribal regions to fight extremism.

On Sunday, Townsend reiterated the importance of Musharraf's efforts.

"We should also be clear that we believe Pakistan has been a very good ally in the war on terrorism," she said. "Musharraf has been the subject of numerous assassination attempts. Al-Qaida's trying to kill him. They get what the problem is. And we're working with them to deny al-Qaida and the Taliban the safe haven."

McConnell also sought to bolster the leader of Pakistan, a key U.S. partner in its fight against terrorism. "President Musharraf is one of our strongest allies," McConnell said.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he agreed with Townsend that the U.S. should consider going after al-Qaida militarily "wherever they are."

"We have the NIE report, which just came out, that says al-Qaida during this administration is stronger than ever. I don't think we should take anything off the table. Wherever we find these evil people we should go get them," Reid said.

But Kasuri said Pakistan was ready to act on any intelligence from the U.S.

"Let the United States provide us with actionable intelligence and you will find that Pakistan will never be lacking," he said. "Pakistan's army can do the job much better and the result will be that there will be far less collateral damage."

Townsend spoke on "Fox News Sunday" and "Late Edition" on CNN. McConnell appeared on "Meet the Press" on NBC. Reid was on "Face the Nation" on CBS. Kasuri was on CNN.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Just as it was foolish not to attack enemy havens in Cambodia in the Vietnam war; it is unwise to give al-Qaida sanctuary in Pakistan. In 2001, we said we would go anywhere to track them down, why has it taken so long to do the obvious?

[Abcdefg]

Because the Paks have nukes?

[gura]

Everything worth doing isn’t easy.

[2ndDivisionVet]

We have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the rest of the world, so why doesn’t everyone tiptoe around us? I think it’s because they know we won’t use them unless attacked.

[Anti-Bubba182]

"..it is unwise to give al-Qaida sanctuary in Pakistan. .."

Amen.

[stm]

We might as well, the Pakis aren’t doing squat about it.

[Brilliant]

If Pakistan is inclined to use nukes, I’d prefer that they do it now, before they have a missile that can reach the US.

[Paladin2]

These are autonomous provinces of Pakistan. The Pakis have historically not attempted to integrate these folks with the rest of the country. To the extent that they are independent, let them learn the lessons of responsibility for independent action(s).

[mjp]

Job No. 1 is to protect the American people. There are no options off the table,"

She gets it.

[onedoug]

U.S. Force Not Ruled Out in Pakistan

...But go easy on so called palestinians in Israel....

[expatguy]

What the hell is this crap?

HELLO MCFLY !!!

It has been what.... OVER 6 years now - If your boy Musharraf still has not figured out which side he is on then its high time to take the bull by the horns!

My security and the security of all Americans should not be solely dependent on the whims of this clown.

We are responsible for our own security!

HEY PRESIDENT BUSH! REMEMBER THIS??!!

"...And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists .... From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime. Our nation has been put on notice, we're not immune from attack. We will take defensive measures against terrorism to protect Americans. Today, dozens of federal departments and agencies, as well as state and local governments, have responsibilities affecting homeland security...[sic]"

Perhaps Mr. Bush you can explain to the American people tonight why you feel the need to give BILLIONS of dollars in US TAXPAYER money to a nation that has and continues to harbour terrorists!

You President Bush are giving AID AND COMFORT to our nation's enemies. You didn't promise to the nation on 21 September 2001 - that you would try to APPEASE terrorists or that you were going to give them 750 MILLION DOLLARS to build schools - You said you would destroy them!

Myself and millions of Americans couldn't give a rat's ass whether these people can read or write - what we care about is whether or not they are dead yet! Do you get it??!

President Bush if you are not going to destroy these terrorists in the interest of our national security like you promised then at least do it for the sake of the environment! Imagine how much greenhouse gas these hot-headed terrorists produce and how better off humanity would be when they are gone.

Mr. Bush tonight Americans have many questions... can you guess what they are?

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

[Logical me]

Because the Paks have nukes?

And we don't? They darn well know the first nuke launched and was a threat, good by Pakies.

[ol' hoghead]

The thing they're missing are operatives inside the United States."

Are you sure about that????????????

[Diogenesis]

"The thing they're missing are operatives inside the United States."

Millions of Americans simply do not believe this BS,
and probably thousands of terrorists in America simply chuckled and continued their planning.

[Androcles]

We have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the rest of the world, so why doesn’t everyone tiptoe around us? I think it’s because they know we won’t use them unless attacked.

Perhaps because the rest of the world has enough nukes to destroy you, in the unlikely event that America was about to tarnish a proud history with indiscrimante slaughter. Nukes are not scalpels. There is a reason they aren't lightly used.

[2ndDivisionVet]

The Trident SLBMs and Peacekeeper ICBMs were designed for first strikes, IIRC. Also, we have several nonnuclear weapons that would render useless everyone else’s weapons. We spend more on defense than all the rest of the world, combined. Much of it is an umbrella that allows countries like yours to spend money on social programs rather than arms. Don’t you agree?

[Bean Counter]

Is this area really Pakistan??

Part of the problem all along has been the triabl areas between Pakistan and Afghanistan, and the inhabitants there who recognize no government beyond themselves. In the Waziristan region an attack from the Pakistani forces would be as unpopualr as an attack fro the American forces, and we have the means to hit those targets a lot harder and much more effectively than anyone else does.

If we could get good targeting data, this would be an excellent opportunity to op-test one of those Ohio class nuclear submarines that was just converted from carrying a whole bunch of ICBMs to even more cruise missiles...

[Androcles]

I agree that much of the rest of the world shelters behing US strength and have never denied it.

Don’tr mistake me - I am simply saying that the US does not have the sole capacity to deal nuclear death on a grand scale and even if it were thought necessary, it would be dangerous for the US too.

Yes, the US first-strike capacity is impressive, but even the minimal chances of one of the second-rank nuclear powers getting a revenge shot off are not worth the risk.

Besides, the moment the US use them in a way that is seen as unnecessary, all efforts to control nukes are off. Everyone will pay lipservice and pretend to comply, but everyone will be after them as insurance.

In terms of an attack, nukes simpl,y aren’t the option for these situations. Sustained bombing, MOABS, etc, vruise missiles are all more appropriate. The blowback from lightly breaking the nuclear taboo will be nightmarish for America and the world.

[dwhole2th]

I am positive that the US has been operating in Pakistan off and on for most of this war.

[phillyfanatic]

Because we always think that other tyrants are our tyrants so they are our allies. Actually, Pak has done some good work. So now, Bush , with only15 or so months left for a legacy and a partial win, is saying, go get the thugs no matter where. It is about time and welcome news for all except the MSM and Harry Reid.