• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are we at war with Pakistan?

Are we at war with Pakistan?

  • Total voters
    28
  • Poll closed .
At least in your mind. All I know is that our military personnel violated Pakistani air space on Sunday, killed people in Pakistan, took materials and a body, and, flew back even as Pakistan was scrambling air craft to defend their territory. It was a military incursion.

You don't want to call that war. But, as the saying goes, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it must be a duck. All I'm saying is it's a duck.
 
Chappy said:
At least in your mind. All I know is that our military personnel violated Pakistani air space on Sunday, killed people in Pakistan, took materials and a body, and, flew back even as Pakistan was scrambling air craft to defend their territory. It was a military incursion.

You don't want to call that war. But, as the saying goes, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it must be a duck. All I'm saying is it's a duck.
Click to expand...

It's not war if it's only one side doing the fighting. Your argument makes no sense.
 
And Pakistan is not funding and protecting Taliban groups which are actively killing Americans and coalition forces in Afghanistan? In Kabul? You aren't keeping up with the news.
 
Chappy said:
And Pakistan is not funding and protecting Taliban groups which are actively killing Americans and coalition forces in Afghanistan? In Kabul? You aren't keeping up with the news.
Click to expand...

That might be working at cross purposes with us, that does not mean we are "at war" with Pakistan.
 
The coffins being off loaded at Dover Air Force Base call you a liar.
 
wow. reaching much?


No, we aren't at war with Pakistan. We are at war with some Pakistanis. If we were at war with Pakistan, then at a minimum we would be currently bombing their nuclear facilities and perhaps employing our own.
 
Chappy said:
At least in your mind. All I know is that our military personnel violated Pakistani air space on Sunday, killed people in Pakistan, took materials and a body, and, flew back even as Pakistan was scrambling air craft to defend their territory. It was a military incursion.

You don't want to call that war. But, as the saying goes, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it must be a duck. All I'm saying is it's a duck.
Click to expand...
So do you think Obama should be charged with war crimes for ordering the mission?

.
 
TOJ said:
So do you think Obama should be charged with war crimes for ordering the mission?

.
Click to expand...

Only if up is down.

How you leap to charging Obama with war crimes from my remarks is beyond me.
 
Chappy said:
Only if up is down.

How you leap to charging Obama with war crimes from my remarks is beyond me.
Click to expand...
You seem to be claiming that the mission to kill UBL was illegal. Obama ordered it. Shouldn't he be held responsible for that illegal act?

.
 
American said:
Up at the northern border there are Taliban-friendly groups.
Click to expand...

UBL wasn't living up at the northern border now was he? In fact all of the major al Qaeda and Taliban leadership figures caught in Pakistan were located in or near its three largest cities and in many cases close to major military installations. Point is that those Pakistanis we agree we're at war with appear to be pretty mainstream if not in significant control of important national military and intelligence assets; i.e., the people who really run things in Pakistan. Add a thin patina of westernized, corrupt Pakistanis on top and you have what is Pakistan today, a friendly, even familiar, highly dependent nation with a not so invisible, radicalized nation within.

 
TOJ said:
You seem to be claiming that the mission to kill UBL was illegal. Obama ordered it. Shouldn't he be held responsible for that illegal act?

.
Click to expand...

No. I'm saying this is war. We're at war with Pakistan. Only nobody wants to say so because that would be inconvenient for us and them. We've entered a new phase in modern warfare where the war is not only undeclared (Korea, Vietnam), not acknowledged (Laos, Cambodia), and now where we carry on country-to-country relations, even subsidize the enemy country, as if nothing untoward was happening (Pakistan).
 
If we're not at war with Libya, how can we be at ware with anyone?
 
Chappy said:
Are we at war with Pakistan?
Click to expand...

No, killing of an Islamic moron was merely a necessity to avoid following terror attacks in the U.S.
 
Chappy said:
No. I'm saying this is war. We're at war with Pakistan. Only nobody wants to say so because that would be inconvenient for us and them. We've entered a new phase in modern warfare where the war is not only undeclared (Korea, Vietnam), not acknowledged (Laos, Cambodia), and now where we carry on country-to-country relations, even subsidize the enemy country, as if nothing untoward was happening (Pakistan).
Click to expand...
Well then, should Obama be impeached for taking the USA into a war with Pakisatan without Congressional authorization?

.
 
If we are not fighting Pakistan, and Pakistan is not fighting us, how exactly are we at war with them?
 
Paschendale said:
… Pakistan is not fighting us …
Click to expand...

You think? I don't. I think there are Pakistanis who are directly supporting Taliban groups which are attacking American and NATO personnel in Afghanistan. I call that making war on us.
 
TOJ said:
Well then, should Obama be impeached for taking the USA into a war with Pakisatan without Congressional authorization?

.
Click to expand...

All it takes is a majority vote in the Republican controlled House to impeach the president. High crimes and misdemeanors means whatever the House wants it to mean.

See: The Coming Impeachment of Barack Obama

Getting a conviction in the Senate is a little harder.

More important impeaching a president for an undeclared, unacknowledged clandestine war might require exposing national means and methods that normally would be considered the crown jewels of a country's military establishment. But, if getting Obama at any cost suits you, be my guest.
 
Chappy said:
You think? I don't. I think there are Pakistanis who are directly supporting Taliban groups which are attacking American and NATO personnel in Afghanistan. I call that making war on us.
Click to expand...

If an English citizen joined Al Queda and fought against us for them, would we be at war with England?

Why would we WANT to be at war with Pakistan?
 
If you discovered that many senior current Pakistani ISI agents in good standing were actively assisting al Qaeda and the Taliban, would you still say we're not at war with Pakistan? No?

“At best, it was willful blindness on the part of the ISI.” — Art Keller, a former officer of the Central Intelligence Agency who worked on the hunt for Bin Laden from a compound in the Waziristan region of Pakistan in 2006​

Excerpted from “Probing Link to Bin Laden, U.S. Tells Pakistan to Name Agents” By HELENE COOPER and ISMAIL KHAN, The New York Times, Published: May 6, 2011
[SIZE="+2"]P[/SIZE]akistani officials say the Obama administration has demanded the identities of some of their top intelligence operatives as the United States tries to determine whether any of them had contact with Osama bin Laden or his agents in the years before the raid that led to his death early Monday morning in Pakistan. …

Obama administration officials have stopped short of accusing the Pakistani government — either privately or publicly — of complicity in the hiding of Bin Laden in the years after the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. …

Still, this official and others expressed deep frustration with Pakistani military and intelligence officials for their refusal over the years to identify members of the agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, who were believed to have close ties to Bin Laden. In particular, American officials have demanded information on what is known as the ISI’s S directorate, which has worked closely with militants since the days of the fight against the Soviet army in Afghanistan. …
Click to expand...
 
Chappy said:
Have they needed reasons in the past? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

With the exception of the war of independence for Bangladesh, wars between the two have involved Kashmir and Pakistan and India's mutual claims to the territory. The other was when India intervened on East Pakistan's behalf in its war for independence when it formed the state of Bangladesh...
 
Chappy said:
All it takes is a majority vote in the Republican controlled House to impeach the president. High crimes and misdemeanors means whatever the House wants it to mean.

See: The Coming Impeachment of Barack Obama

Getting a conviction in the Senate is a little harder.

More important impeaching a president for an undeclared, unacknowledged clandestine war might require exposing national means and methods that normally would be considered the crown jewels of a country's military establishment. But, if getting Obama at any cost suits you, be my guest.
Click to expand...
You are the one declaring that the USA is at war with Pakistan. I am only pointing out that, if you really believe that and you were even close to being intellectually honest, you would want someone to be held accountable for taking the USA into an illegal war. Since Obama is in charge, shouldn't he be held responsible?

.
 
Is it an illegal war? The House keeps paying for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom