Skip to comments.
Misreading Musharraf
washingtonpost.com ^
| Thursday, May 23, 2002; Page A33
| Jim Hoagland
Posted on 05/23/2002 4:44:26 PM PDT by AM2000
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:50:31 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
1
posted on
05/23/2002 4:44:26 PM PDT
by
AM2000
To: *southasia_list;dog gone;sawdring;swarthyguy;mikeiii;keri;aaron_a;maquiladora
This is a good read.
2
posted on
05/23/2002 4:45:13 PM PDT
by
AM2000
To: AM2000
Why should we want to prevent it? Get it on and get it over, and get all the islamic bombs and missiles destroyed and/or used up.
3
posted on
05/23/2002 4:47:20 PM PDT
by
crystalk
To: crystalk
To: AM2000
Yes, it is a good read, even though I think the Post has misread the situation. IMHO, I thing GW is willing to let Musharraf hang himself, and deflect anger away from the U.S. towards India in the process.
5
posted on
05/23/2002 4:58:54 PM PDT
by
jimtorr
To: AM2000
3 to 4 weeks from war, and a month from impenetrable heat and monsoon. It doesn't add up, does it. Other articles say September. But they are as ready now as they ever will be.
To: AM2000
Pakistan helped create and foster al Qaeda and the Taliban. It has long used terror as an instrument of state policy to try to break India's hold on two-thirds of Kashmir that New Delhi controls. And Musharraf is the dictator of a state that exceled in its commitment to terror. Don't you think sending jihadi squads to kill kids(why target living quarters on an Army base otherwise) necessitates some kind of a response.
This fits Bush's definition of international terrorism; across internationally recognized albeit disputed sovereign borders(LoC).
But seems like India will hit Kashmir and no more. If at all!
To: Keri; Mitchell; The Great Satan
Must Read.
8
posted on
05/23/2002 5:10:52 PM PDT
by
Nogbad
To: RightWhale
It's really hot in the plains and the desert, but Kashmir is a more alpine place and it's hot in the valley but not uncomfortable and cool higher.
Comment #10 Removed by Moderator
To: abwehr
We can live without him, India can't live with him. get rid of him. Yes, but then who replaces him!
11
posted on
05/23/2002 5:20:27 PM PDT
by
crypt2k
To: AM2000
...from a foreseeable war that the United States has done too little to prevent...Who the heck elected US God???
India and Pakistan have never been very far from each other's throats and the current Pakistani-based terrorism in India has driven New Delhi's patience to the breaking point.
We can wheedle and noodle these guys towards the peace table as much as we can, but in the final analysis, if they decide they are going to fight, we are not going to be able to stop them.
12
posted on
05/23/2002 5:49:30 PM PDT
by
Ronin
To: crystalk
Comment #14 Removed by Moderator
To: AM2000
This is a good read, but I don't know how much of Hoagland I believe. His premise is that Musharraf wants war in order to focus international attention on Kashmir.
I don't buy it. It essentially would be a bet that either the US or China would come to his aid in time to save his hide, before the nukes fly. That would be one hell of a reckless gamble.
It would be a foolish gamble if it's true that Musharraf knows about 50 - 60 terrorist camps in Kashmir that he won't shut down. If Hoagland is right about that number, the US should not only signal the go-ahead to India, but we should help bomb them ourselves.
In reality, a war between Indian and Pakistan today would almost certainly result in Musharraf being replaced somehow. I have trouble believing that he wants that to happen.
Maybe Musharraf has fooled me, and he's both evil and stupid. That certainly isn't my impression.
15
posted on
05/23/2002 5:52:21 PM PDT
by
Dog Gone
To: crypt2k
Yes, but then who replaces him! That's a recipe for inaction; Mullah Omar & Co., and WW2 enemies weren't thought about in terms of replacements.
To: swarthyguy
That's a recipe for inaction; Mullah Omar & Co., and WW2 enemies weren't thought about in terms of replacements.Do a google search on Yalta and Potsdam sometime. You apparently skipped those chapters in your history book.
Having an endgame worked out in advance is critical. You may not have the details, but you have the long-term goal, and a way to achieve it. If not, you're so dumb you probably won't achieve the short-term goal anyway.
17
posted on
05/23/2002 6:08:14 PM PDT
by
Dog Gone
To: Nogbad
Yep. We're likely to catch it.
You don't have any vacation plans within the next six months or so, do you?
18
posted on
05/23/2002 6:11:54 PM PDT
by
keri
To: Dog Gone
Not Stalin; Hitler and Tojo. Defeating Axis leaders was the primary function. Yalta and Potsdam were about organising Europe and some of the world.
To: Dog Gone
We don't know how the war on terror is going to end, either.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 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