Posted on 01/20/2002 9:25:53 AM PST by CreekerFreeper
Here was the question and the answer. Everything else was just elaboration.
RUSSERT: The point being, in November, Pakistan was able to airlift people out of Afghanistan. Did that happen?
SEC’Y RUMSFELD: I do not believe it happened.
Apparently, the mistake Rumsfeld made is that he started providing reasons why he doesn't believe it happened. That is being parsed so that we can believe that he's really lying, and that evil b*ast*rd President Musharraf, is someone who deserves to be nuked.
But Rumsfeld's answer was not ambiguous. Those who are trying to make it so, are doing so for their own reasons.
If only they had such power and influence...
What's it they say? Even a dumb, blind squirrel.....
What did people expect....that Pakistan didnt have advisors in Afghanistan? That we wouldnt open up a window for them to get their people out?
So they brought some with them...I am bothered by it but indeed if they brought Al Quieda or Taliban with them then I am fully pursuaded that we can exterminate them in due time.
We live in an imperfect world people...this is what happens.
It is the people who can keep their heads about them and not start throwing scorn around or attempting to shed a media light on what they dont comprehend, who overcome.
Liberals get over it.
Eitherway....I "choose" to believe Rumsfeld. :o)
Huh? The Dems are gonna have a field day with this!
Hold all countries that harbor these terrorist thugs accountable and kill all those leaders who assist them in any way, including that two-faced Pakistani President.
Wait a second there, pal. Hit the ol' rewind button about three months. Who was the only Islamic leader in the region who agreed to let us use his nation as a launchpad? And don't say "King Fahd." Musharaff walked a tightrope to appease us and not get shot by his own people. And he probably will end up assassinated for his troubles. If anyone needs an American shell in his head, it's the Saudi monarch, and the whole ruling family, for claiming to be our allies, when in fact, they were our enemies. In contrast, Musharaff had never claimed to be America's ally.
The average persistance of a carrier based F14 or F18 over target in Afghanistan was 10 minutes. And that was using 70% of the available US military tanker fleet in support of our carriers!
We had far better logistical support due to closer Saudi air bases in the Persian Gulf War, for our F15s, and we could not stop the Iraqi air Force from bugging out to Iran. This was when we had standing patrols of E3A AWACS, Tankers and squadrons of F15s dedicated to the task!
Several hundred to a couple of thousand ISI/Taliban/Al-Qaeda fighters could have gotten out. A dozen Hip helicopter sorties and three C130 sorties (Which the Paks own) would have gotten out 25x12=300 and 3x100=300 for six hundred right there.
The Pakistanis had all their air defense radars up and monitoring their air space looking at both us and for Indian intruders. Once they had the pattern of our strikes. They could have timed flights into Kunduz that stayed on the ground no more than five minutes in the case of C130s and less than a minute for a Hip.
Not shooting at the Pakistanis in this situation, when we had Marine and Special Forces troops in Pakistan providing logistical support to our operations in Afghistan, doesn't constitute 'supporting' the Pakistani ISI's bug out from Kunduz. It is called preventing another Iranian style hostage crisis.
We have modern-day eauivalentt in the "air corridor" - except that it is now for the baddies!
It does make sense. Sometime politics is played in the margins.
Many eyewitnesses reported air transports landing and taking off from Kunduz. The stories didn't sound like disinformation at the time, and they still don't.
Thats good enought for me - Hersh is a lying Clymer, Bigtime!
And to compare Bush's people having to spin this for military and political reasons so that we can continue our pursuit of the surviving Al Queda people in Afghanistan is ludicrous. Clinton lied to save his own ass. Bush might have to ask his people to be evasive to protect operations or to ensure the survival of some of the unsavory people we must do business with in order to eliminate the jerks who killed our people on 9/11. Time for some of those on this forum to get real. Any student of history will see numerous examples...like Saint Ronald doing business with Iran..and the contras...many of whom were doing traffic in coke to support their fight against Ortega. Remember Mena?
Comon folks...gimme a break.
But this Debka sourced article does not diminish the fact that this is true: UPI Exclusive: The porous Afghan border.
As it was designed, no doubt. Pure BIAS. Anyone knowing operations in this war would realize that the administration is not micromanaging this fight like Clinton did during his regime. It has been refreshing that the mil is let loose enough to succeed.
I think history will eventually judge muslim Musharraf as just another betraying muslim Arafat.
SATURDAY NOVEMBER 24 2001
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2001530007-2001543526,00.html
26 November 2001
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia_china/story.jsp?story=106824
The blind trust shown in this thread of the government is scary...really folks you can ask tough questions and still be good republicans.
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.