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 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 101

Thread: Attack within Pakistan

  1. #41
    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 nerv14 View Post
    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.
    The level of respect for national sovereignty has a direct effect on the level of international security and the amount of militarism and aggression in a culture has a direct effect on the level of tyranny at home. Look at the massive increases in state power during the world wars which did not go down by too much afterward, certainly not to pre-war levels. This certainly dwarfs any effect on our tyranny that Iran or Venezuela having repressive regimes might inflict.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  2. #42
    Tavern Bartender
    #neverhillary
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    68,027

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    Shouldn't you be planning invasions from your armchair?

    And you do know I'm quite conservative right?
    You tree hater.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)

  3. #43
    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 American View Post
    You tree hater.
    Trees are often ancient and don't really change much. Sounds rather conservative to me.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  4. #44
    Libertarian socialist

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,420

    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?

    I would ask those that if you post in this thread that you at least spent the majority of your post explaining YOUR position before attacking anyone elses position. If you don't intent to give your own views on this action and your own stance on it and simply wish to attack others for potentially being hypocritical on EITHER side, please don't participate. Its unfair to everyone debating if you're going to attack them for their views without giving your own to begin with.

    This is spurred from the fact Clinton recently said they were a mortal danger.
    I voted no and have pretty mixed feelings about the wars in Iraq and Afganistan.

    Ild have no problem with working *with* the pakistani government to deal with the taliban but invading without Pakistans permission would be insane as it would destablise a government that is slowly democratising. Pakistan has promised to repel attacks on its territory by force so its fair to assume an invasion of pakistan would mean a war with the Pakistani state as well as the Taliban. Wouldnt this create a chaotic situation that the taliban would be able to take advantage of?

    Also assuming that U.S intervention toppled the government then they would have to install another one via a military occupation. I dont think i need to explain how that could be problematic

  5. #45
    Libertarian socialist

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,420

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by new coup for you View Post
    I've often thought that some kind of collapse might actually be useful, because it would the government to take full action in one swift blow.

    I don't think that Pakistan is just a place where a local populace is being radicalized, I think it's also a place where significant Al Qaeda members from around the globe are able to take refuge.

    Now, I'm treading closely to Bush "all those who harbor terrorists" rhetoric, but I think there's a certain utility in the idea. It's not just about serving potential terrorist harboring countries a threat, it's about allowing yourself to take advantage of concentrations of terrorists. A Taliban government in Pakistan would mean for a real target to bomb.

    I think the US has proved that it's pretty good at destroying nations, it's just poor at fighting insurgencies.

    So what would a Taliban government in Pakistan pose to use other then an easy target? It'd make them come out hills and out into the open, where we can bomb them.
    Wouldnt that suck somewhat for the 90% of Pakistanis that dont support the Taliban? [Not to mention those who are fighting it] We should be getting these people on side, not alienating them.

  6. #46
    Clown Prince of Politics
    Psychoclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hiding from the voices in my head.
    Last Seen
    09-24-16 @ 12:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,723

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Its a difficult question with a lot of competing variables to weigh. Here's a few that come to mind.

    1. How much could be gained in the fight against the Taliban by such a strike?

    If we could wipe out the Taliban completely, it becomes much more appealing. Even preventing them from seizing power in Pakinstan would be a worthwhile goal. But if were talking about just capturing/killing a few people and/or bases of operation then the gains are far les significant. What are the realistic gains we can hope to achieve?

    2. How much would such an action destablize the Pakistani government?

    If it lead to a complete collapse of the Pakistani government, that could be disasterous given their status as a nuclear power. We definately don't want to acceleerate or cause such a collapse. However if the Pakistani government is going to collapse either way, then it could be worth it just to prevent the Taliban from filling the void.

    3. Would it further radicalize the Pakistani population?

    As others have pointed out, it is difficult if nto impossible to completely defeat guerrilla/insurgent forces with traditional armies. Hearts and minds of local populations is very important in limiting and eventually eliminating such forces. Would such an action be seen as a hostile invasion by a large segment of the Pakistani population? Would it push them closer to the Taliban and other radical militant elements?

    One thing I would say is aboslute is that militant radicals such as the Taliban cannot be allowed to gain access to Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. I think in that point we would have pretty widespread international support, particularly from India, Isreal, and probably even Iran.
    Last edited by Psychoclown; 05-08-09 at 06:10 PM.
    Slipping into madness is good for the sake of comparison - Unknown.

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 03:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    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?

    I would ask those that if you post in this thread that you at least spent the majority of your post explaining YOUR position before attacking anyone elses position. If you don't intent to give your own views on this action and your own stance on it and simply wish to attack others for potentially being hypocritical on EITHER side, please don't participate. Its unfair to everyone debating if you're going to attack them for their views without giving your own to begin with.

    This is spurred from the fact Clinton recently said they were a mortal danger.
    I say yes, the Pakistanis can't be trusted, the ISI and Pakistani military have been infiltrated within the highest echelons of their ranks, they should not even be told if an attack is going to take place as the risk of them tipping off the target is to great.

    But still believe it was foolish of Obama to tilt his hand and announce that he would do it, just do it,
    Last edited by Agent Ferris; 05-09-09 at 04:04 AM.

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 03:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    As I understand it, much of the Taliban was displeased with OBL and Al Qaeda's provocative acts.
    No actually OBL and Mullah Omar were the best of friends and in fact related through marriage after OBL's son married Omar's daughter, in fact AQ sat on the Taliban ministry of defense and their was a special AQ brigade fighting in the Taliban army against the Northern Alliance. Their ranks were so intertwined as if to be indistinguishable.

    It's when the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and Sadr's Shiite militia are all conflated into one jumbled mess by uninformed (not claiming you're uninformed) "analysts" with no regard for critical distinctions between these groups that we lack the ability to comprehend intelligent analysis.
    There was no real distinction to be made.

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 03:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    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?
    A) We only lost in Vietnam because we were not allowed to actually attack the NVA.

    B) We have obtained victory in Iraq pick up a paper.

    C) The only reason why we have not totally eradicated the Taliban is because the Pakistanis offer them safe haven and refuse to do anything worthwhile to oust them or secure their borders, but that will be a moot point as soon as our battle hardened soldiers fresh off victory in Iraq rotate to Afghanistan in force.

  10. #50
    Libertarian socialist

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,420

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    A)
    The only reason why we have not totally eradicated the Taliban is because the Pakistanis offer them safe haven and refuse to do anything worthwhile to oust them or secure their borders,.
    Wouldnt the fact that the government of Pakistan is currently at war with the taliban appear to contradict this?

Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •