- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 79,903
- Reaction score
- 20,981
- Location
- I love your hate.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Wait! You mean he is not a moderate?? Why, that's an enigma...
0o.0.1?
.....:mrgreen:
Wait! You mean he is not a moderate?? Why, that's an enigma...
You're absolutely correct about that.except, maybe, a little observation---for people who are sposed to be so fundamentally faith driven, the folks you describe sure are practical
Thank you for your kind words. I am highly interested on these topics, and I collect tadbits here and there. Much of it is just my interpretation of the material.i'd be very interested to know how you acquired such depth here, but i wouldn't want to pry
oh, and...
it appears to me that
1. we've really put pakistan in a spot
If Bhutto's own life reads like a Greek tragedy, she was nonetheless a very modern politician, and the book she has written is part manifesto, part spin job, part selective history and part term-paper analysis. It shows Bhutto in the many guises the public in both the West and her native Pakistan came to know: an Oxford-educated debate champion, adept at invoking Spengler and T. S. Eliot to make her points; a savvy and self-dramatizing campaigner, adroit at charming members of the Washington power elite as well as the disenfranchised poor in Pakistan, whom she pledged to represent; a determined heir to her father's political legacy, who found duty turning over "years of pain, suffering, sacrifice and separation" into "an all consuming passion."
2. the ulitmate success of obama's plan for obama's war is ENTIRELY DEPENDENT on both the will and the ability of zardari to do some of the heaviest lifting
he's bhutto's widower, if i recall
3. dick durbin, whip, illinois ear of obama, when pressed on fns today about his support or not of obama's afghan plan, answered---i understand the president's position, i'm skeptical that 30K troops will make a difference
but you will fund it, chris wallace (60 minutes mike's son) premised
durbin---well, i'm gonna meet with the president...
me: it will be funded, with republican support, but there will be a lot of cya grousing from dupes like durbin
"Taliban Says It Won't Meddle in West if Troops Are Withdrawn'
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Blah-blah-blah-blah. How about you stop pretending to be a damned mind-reader and simply address the words I've written?
Where have I said I supported nation-building?
Where have I said I supported invading Iraq?
A functional democracy that is friendly toward civilized nations.
Also, we're winning in Iraq. It will be a model country within the next decade.
Oh, I haven't? Then why are you making such stupid assumptions?
Who said anything about it being legal under the charter of the UN? It does not apply.
Run EnigmaO01 Run! :lol:
I guess you can't counter me so you now you're playing grade schooler.
There are several pending queries you have failed to answer, so the failure is utterly and completley yours.
You can keep saying that but it doesn't make it so. I responded to all your queries.
At least you didn't name call this time.
Night night. I have a living to make in the morning.
When you make the following two statements you are endorsing nation building and you endorsed the invasion of Iraq. You can deny it all you want but it's right there for all to see. No need to a be a mind reader.
BTW why the abusive language? Why so easily provoked? Do I make you feel inadequate?
I won't go into great detail, but obviously the biggest unnerving uncertainty is that Usama bin Laden acquires any form of nuclear material. al Qa'ida al-Jihad with any form of HEU or HEP (Uranium or Plutonium) will make the Cold War look like we were playing patty-cake with the Soviet Union; no doubt that martial law would take effect almost immediately in almost every major US city, probably every major city in the world.
The Pakistani nuclear stockpile is heavily guarded by 30,000 of Pakistan's most elite troops (the Pakistani's aren't just worried about al Qa'ida taking from it, but also sabotage from India).
Unless there are entire battalions of rogue Pakistani military personnel, then we shouldn't worry about Jihadists acquiring a nuclear bomb or missile. However, there are other scenarios that could make the situation difficult. The Jihadists don't necessarily need to even have possession of the materials, they just need to get it to reach critical mass.
The biggest threat wouldn't be nuclear, wouldn't chemical, it would be biological weapons. However, I do not think the organization is well enough to be worrying about anything other than getting blown to miniature Jihadis
do you think zardari is gonna take on with whole heart some of the more frightening tribal elements within his country?
and even if he were wont, is he able?
obama's escalation in afghanistan is gonna increase the emigration of terror types into pakistan?
obama's afghan plan is too dependent on zardari to do his share?
i ask you, my friend
A platoon of Taliban fighters attacked a Pakistani Army checkpoint in South Waziristan in a region where a peace agreement with the Taliban is in effect.
Upwards of 40 Taliban fighters opened fire on checkpoint at a bridge in Wana, the main town in South Waziristan, killing one soldier and suffering six of their own in a counterattack.
Wana is under the control of Mullah Nazir, the leader of the Taliban forces in the western Wazir tribal areas of the agency. Pakistan's military and intelligence services consider Nazir and his followers "good Taliban" as they do not openly seek the overthrow of the Pakistani state. However, Nazir openly supports Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden, and wages jihad in Afghanistan; more senior al Qaeda leaders have been killed in Nazir's tribal areas during the US air campaign than in those of any other Taliban leader in Pakistan.
A Pakistani military commander said the current operation in the Khyber tribal agency has succeeded in clearing the Taliban from a vital area
------------
In the operation, 61 Lashkar-e-Islam fighters were killed and 87 other fighters including Uzbeks and Afghans, have been detained, Fayyaz told the media. Enemy bases, bunkers, and vehicles have been destroyed in the six-day-long operation. Fayyaz also claimed that the military found evidence that India was providing weapons to the Lashkar-e-Islam.
In Pakistan there is increasing suspicion that India will use its influence in Afghanistan to further destabilise its troubled border region.
------------------------------
Robert Wirsing, a professor at Georgetown University in Doha, told Al Jazeera: "There is no question that Pakistanis are inclined to exaggerate a lot of things and no doubt the allegations made about India are from time to time exaggerated - it plays into their overall strategy.
"Nevertheless, both Pakistan and India are not above a variety of covert or clandestine activities. They do what they feel they must in order to protect their national interests and strategic interests in this region.
"Afghanistan is certainly an important strategic arena in which they engage in these kinds of activities ... its tit-for-tat," he said.
I won't go into great detail, but obviously the biggest unnerving uncertainty is that Usama bin Laden acquires any form of nuclear material. al Qa'ida al-Jihad with any form of HEU or HEP (Uranium or Plutonium) will make the Cold War look like we were playing patty-cake with the Soviet Union; no doubt that martial law would take effect almost immediately in almost every major US city, probably every major city in the world.
The Pakistani nuclear stockpile is heavily guarded by 30,000 of Pakistan's most elite troops (the Pakistani's aren't just worried about al Qa'ida taking from it, but also sabotage from India).
Unless there are entire battalions of rogue Pakistani military personnel, then we shouldn't worry about Jihadists acquiring a nuclear bomb or missile. However, there are other scenarios that could make the situation difficult. The Jihadists don't necessarily need to even have possession of the materials, they just need to get it to reach critical mass.
The biggest threat wouldn't be nuclear, wouldn't chemical, it would be biological weapons. However, I do not think the organization is well enough to be worrying about anything other than getting blown to miniature Jihadis
Good observation about the cold war and the Soviet Union. The soviets may have been despots, but they were at least sane. The same can't be said for the Taliban.
Now if only you're right about the Taliban not being able to get hold of Pakistani nuclear weapons. Just how stable do you think Pakistan is just now?
I am not an expert on Pakistani Politics, but all indicators do lead to a near failed-state.
The central authority in Pakistan seems to be distant to the majority of the people in Pakistan-- it seems the authority is just not there.
Now this does not necessarily mean that Pakistan is going rogue. The majority of the Pakistani population do not sympathize with the Taliban and Jamaat-i-Islami extremists, but this also means that the money we funnel to the Government or intelligence services may not be used for building the infrastructure of those who need it.
I am not too certain that there is much of an increase in the stability of the country whenever the military incharge, this would be an interesting topic to further explore.
Yes, it would, particularly if there is a possibility that the Taliban could take over that failed state. I don't think the majority of the population of Afganistan sympathizes with the Taliban, either, but it seems a not so remote possibility that they could take over that nation without the US presence.
Ethnic groups: Pashtun 42%, Tajik 27%, Hazara 9%, Uzbek 9%, Aimak 4%, Turkmen 3%, Baloch 2%, other 4%
Definition: This entry provides an ordered listing of ethnic groups starting with the largest and normally includes the percent of total population.
Source: CIA World Factbook - Unless otherwise noted, information in this page is accurate as of September 17, 2009
I do deny it, because it's totally untrue.
I never supported the invasion and I do not support nation-building as a basis for foreign policy, BUT I am not so rigid ideologically that I cannot make pragmatic exceptions when the circumstances merit.
I believe our foreign policy should endeavor to be non-interventionist, but ultimately that it should situational and flexible.
If we leave Iraq prematurely it will threaten global stability along with American security.
If we leave Afghanistan prematurely it will threaten American security very severely. AQ is just waiting for us to quit; they need a victory so that they can reorganize and concentrate on the American homeland. It seems some Americans are already starting to forget 9/11, like they won't try to attack us again and again; this is a zero-sum game and AQ has no intention of losing.
lie #1
lie #2
suspecting lie #3 :shrug:
Well you know what they say about folks that go around accusing everyone of being a liar. It's the same thing they say about folks that are paranoid someone will steal from them.
Gotta go. My lunch hour is over. I'm self employed. If I don't work I don't get paid and I'm sure as hell am not going to waste my time responding to your name calling.
BTW consider yourself ignored from here on out.
Yeah, but they gonna meddle all the more in Afghanistan.
Taliban Says It Won't Meddle in West if Troops Are Withdrawn - WSJ.com
:lol: You ignoring me doesn' mean much, you don't respond to my questions anyway. :shrug:
At least you didn't name call this time.
lie #2
Night night. I have a living to make in the morning.
suspecting lie #3