View Poll Results: Per the question in the thread

Voters
44. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, and I supported Afghanistan

    12 27.27%
  • Yes, and I supported Iraq

    0 0%
  • Yes, and I supported both

    10 22.73%
  • Yes, and I supported neither

    1 2.27%
  • No, and I supported Afghanistan

    4 9.09%
  • No, and I supported Iraq

    1 2.27%
  • No, and I supported both

    5 11.36%
  • No, and I suppported neither

    5 11.36%
  • Undecided, leaning towards yes

    3 6.82%
  • Undecided, leaning towards no

    3 6.82%
Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 101

Thread: Attack within Pakistan

  1. #31
    Advisor Sanitas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    The world.
    Last Seen
    03-05-12 @ 01:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    459

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    A nuclear armed Taliban would be a terrible thing. Though the US might not be directly attacked, I find that Obama would be apologizing just as Clinton did about the Rwandan genocide, years later. India, though, certainly wont allow for a nuclear armed Taliban. Neither will Iran or Israel.

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 04:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by bub View Post
    The US Army got its ass handled by guerilleros in Viet-Nam, is going to retreat from Iraq and is not winning in Afghanistan, even with hundreds of billions of dollars being spent.

    Why do you think it would work in Pakistan? Why do you think it would not be a quagmire?
    The Taliban must be stopped. Iran must be stopped. Radical Islam must be stopped. It is that simple. We cannot allow detractors like yourself desuade us from those goals.

  3. #33
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    04-04-14 @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,233

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    The Taliban must be stopped. Iran must be stopped. Radical Islam must be stopped. It is that simple. We cannot allow detractors like yourself desuade us from those goals.
    Aggressive interventionists must be stopped. We cannot let militarists and interventionists like yourself to pervert our civilisation and security to lead to the rise of despotism.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  4. #34
    Sage
    Infinite Chaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:09 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,357

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Simple question.

    Would you approve of an attack ordered by President Obama against the Taliban within Pakistan with or without the consent of the Pakistani government? Why?--
    Difficult because attacks using drones have already been established as an attack method during Bush's campaign. The Pakistanis complained but did not try and stop them.

    Using ground troops at this stage? No - Pakistan has finally (last month) started attacking the Taliban in the Buner valley. They got 80 or so personell captured and have since rescued 16 (approx) and need to demonstrate / have the chance to show they can run their own country.

    What the west can and should do is offer support / logistics / intelligence so that the Pakistani Govt and army can finally redeem themselves and take control of their own country. A major attack at this stage by the US led forces will simply be more of a recruiting ground for the Taliban or associated forces and anyway it's about time the Pakistanis started showing up to the fight.

    I also think contingency plans should be being made to keep Pakistan's nuclear arsenal out of the hands of any radical Islamist Govt - overtures to the present Govt should be made to help with disarming or removal of the nukes. In the worst case scenario there should also be plans to take them by force. The greater threat is not a Taliban style govt - that is ever more likely whatever we do - the greater threat is a nuclear armed Taliban style Govt.

    If the Taliban take control they are out in the open and easy to locate, they are at their most dangerous as a guerrilla force drawing from islamist fanatics who are everywhere you could look. Pakistan has never really been a true ally of the West, each year the spring offensive into Afghanistan came from Pakistani territory and Pakistan (especially under Musharraf) sat back and let them attack Western forces at will.

    My answer is a temporary "no" as in "not yet" - let's see how Buner valley goes and whether the Pakistani Govt asks for help. We must however keep our eye on the nuclear assets. And for the record, I was one who did not support the invasion of Iraq.

  5. #35
    Educator nerv14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    02-07-11 @ 06:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    601

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Infinite Chaos View Post
    Difficult because attacks using drones have already been established as an attack method during Bush's campaign. The Pakistanis complained but did not try and stop them.

    Using ground troops at this stage? No - Pakistan has finally (last month) started attacking the Taliban in the Buner valley. They got 80 or so personell captured and have since rescued 16 (approx) and need to demonstrate / have the chance to show they can run their own country.

    What the west can and should do is offer support / logistics / intelligence so that the Pakistani Govt and army can finally redeem themselves and take control of their own country. A major attack at this stage by the US led forces will simply be more of a recruiting ground for the Taliban or associated forces and anyway it's about time the Pakistanis started showing up to the fight.

    I also think contingency plans should be being made to keep Pakistan's nuclear arsenal out of the hands of any radical Islamist Govt - overtures to the present Govt should be made to help with disarming or removal of the nukes. In the worst case scenario there should also be plans to take them by force. The greater threat is not a Taliban style govt - that is ever more likely whatever we do - the greater threat is a nuclear armed Taliban style Govt.

    If the Taliban take control they are out in the open and easy to locate, they are at their most dangerous as a guerrilla force drawing from islamist fanatics who are everywhere you could look. Pakistan has never really been a true ally of the West, each year the spring offensive into Afghanistan came from Pakistani territory and Pakistan (especially under Musharraf) sat back and let them attack Western forces at will.

    My answer is a temporary "no" as in "not yet" - let's see how Buner valley goes and whether the Pakistani Govt asks for help. We must however keep our eye on the nuclear assets. And for the record, I was one who did not support the invasion of Iraq.
    I suppose this is simillar to what I believe.

    In the end, I would be willing to support whatever will get rid (or greatly harm) the Taliban, in that I don't immedietly care about violating Pakistan's borders.

    I am saying a "yes" but I would be cautious right now to try and get the Pakistan people on board.

    As I have heard many times, if Pakistan would have responded to the Taliban as if they were India, then the Taliban would have been destroyed by now. The focus is on getting Pakistan to be willing to do what it takes, if they do that then we have won.

    I just don't believe too many attacks into Pakistan that results in civilian deaths will contribute to some victory. But problems only emerge if we kill civilians, so if we are cautious, then attacks without aproval from Palistan can be beneficial.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 04:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    Aggressive interventionists must be stopped. We cannot let militarists and interventionists like yourself to pervert our civilisation and security to lead to the rise of despotism.
    Shouldn't you be out hugging a tree?

  7. #37
    Sage
    First Thought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    DFW, Texas
    Last Seen
    12-01-10 @ 02:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,218

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    Shouldn't you be out hugging a tree?
    That's hardly conducive to intellectual discourse. Try again.
    "An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it." - Gandhi

  8. #38
    Educator nerv14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    02-07-11 @ 06:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    601

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by EgoffTib View Post
    That's hardly conducive to intellectual discourse. Try again.
    Let me help then.

    Actions in other countries have a very indirect effect on the level of tyrrany at home. Unless a war is used to make some real police-state policies then we should focus on what the war does abroad compared to what it indirectly does to our freedom.

  9. #39
    User Kaiser Katzenjammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Last Seen
    05-04-09 @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    23

    Arrow Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Even though I don't support the war in Iraq and have always been dubious about any involvement in Afghanistan I would definitely support a unilateral military action in Pakistan only if it were:
    1. solely for the purpose of securing and removing the Pakistan nuclear arsenal,
    2. as soon as we accomplished that we left and didn't return unless accompanying a UN or other multinational task force for the specific purpose of restoring a democratic government,
    3. and even then I'd be reluctant to return because our economy is so poor that we can do without needless military expenses.
    POLITICS, n.

    A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.

  10. #40
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    04-04-14 @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,233

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    Shouldn't you be out hugging a tree?
    Shouldn't you be planning invasions from your armchair?

    And you do know I'm quite conservative right?
    Last edited by Wessexman; 05-04-09 at 09:24 PM.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •