Thread: Pakistan aiding and funding Taliban - Thanks again Republicans

Our great ally in the war on terror. Our great friend against the great threat in Iraq. Our trusted amigo so cozy we can allow them nuclear capabilities without even raising a concern. That's right.. America's favorite client terrorist state: Pakistan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/21/wo...th&oref=slogin

Oh but we need their cooperation to fight terrorists? Why are you pinko commie liberals supporting terrorists in Iraq against our beloved allies the Pakistanis? The nuclear power Pakistan. The midevil semi-feudal warlord state of Pakistan... who we support fully as an ally in our war against terror.

Can someone explain this to me without calling me a liberal? I think the Canadians in Afghanistan are a bit confused.

Hey, remember who was in office during the hey day of the Taliban and did next to nothing about it.Ole "slick Willie" himself. That Pakistani tribes and elements of the secret police are supporting the Taliban is no great secret. It is one the things that the US is trying to pressure Pakistan to help stop but the reality of the very tenuous situation on the borders and with Islamic extremest call for a very low key approach to the issue. The has been a good deal of progress on the issue but it is an ongoing program. The Pakistani Army has lost a number of troops along that border fighting various tribes and they continue to fight them today. There is just so much that can be achieved in that area realistically without causing a bigger problem, the fall of a "friendly" government and the take over by Islamic radicals with access to nuclear weapons and the missiles to delver them.

There is just so much that can be achieved in that area realistically without causing a bigger problem

This is entirely, exactly true. And has been the argument against the war in Iraq from the first day it was propsed. This is what the world was screaming, why NATO and the UN wanted no part of it, and why those responsible for it ought to be held responsible. It's not like it is an uncommon situation. But why is this style of government to be permitted in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait etc... but people are traitors, cowards or cut and runners for suggesting that Iraq was exactly the same? Would a ill-planned invasion of Pakistan tomorrow be a good idea, or a bad one.

All of what you say is the only possible, logical way to view the situation... IF SOMEONE DOES NOT ACTIVELY ARM, TRAIN, FUND AND ENCOURAGE THE PROBLEM in order to advance their own economic interest. Courting Iraq to fight Iran resulted directly in two Iraq wars, Courting the Taliban to fight Russia resulted directly in the Taliban, courting Saudi Arabia to fight Iraq resulted directly in 9-11, and courting pakistan to fight the Taliban will result in.... I'm sure we can allsee it coming.

Dealing with totalitarian butchers does NOT work. It never has. It constantly bites the US in the ass again and again and again and still the money, arms, fighter jets, training, sattleite assistance. UN vetos and repressing of international outrage against the most rabid and violent fundamentalists keeps on being policy of every Republican administration. It doesn't work. Never has. Never will.

And it makes lines such as "the guy we gave chemical weapons to and gave satelite imagery of his enemy USED them on his enemy... this is unaccepptable. We must stop this madman and we demand the world help us or we will brand them cowards and terrorists" very hard to swallow.

Originally Posted by celtic pax

Hey, remember who was in office during the hey day of the Taliban and did next to nothing about it.Ole "slick Willie" himself. That Pakistani tribes and elements of the secret police are supporting the Taliban is no great secret. It is one the things that the US is trying to pressure Pakistan to help stop but the reality of the very tenuous situation on the borders and with Islamic extremest call for a very low key approach to the issue. The has been a good deal of progress on the issue but it is an ongoing program. The Pakistani Army has lost a number of troops along that border fighting various tribes and they continue to fight them today. There is just so much that can be achieved in that area realistically without causing a bigger problem, the fall of a "friendly" government and the take over by Islamic radicals with access to nuclear weapons and the missiles to delver them.

You blame Clinton, but I put more of the responsibility on Unocal.

Seeing as the US has never understood the politics, history, or way of life in most of the Middle East who are we to say what should or shouldn't be done in Pakistan? We don't have to deal with the fallout. We want a puppet regime in Pakistan that is at our beck and call, yet we have proven time and again that when the puppet is less useful we tend to forget about them. Current political and military aims in the Middle East are temporary, we don't have to deal with the results when we tire of the region.

Maybe its time for the US to look at what its goals are for the long term. The US has never been that adept at looking into the future beyond the next elections. Every indication of what Pakistan is currently doing would show that Pakistan is looking towards the future THEY have to deal with. When the US shows that it is capable and willing to keep up its end of the bargain in the long run maybe some of these smaller countries would be a lot more willing to go along with our suggestions.

Whenever there is a terrorist event, all roads lead to Pakistan.

On general, I think that the average Pakistani has no clue to what goes on in his country, the average Pakistani is too busy trying to scrape a living. The Pakistani government is basically split into three main groups, the moderates, the conservatives and the Talibani-Bin Laden fundamentalists. The majority of the government is in the third group, When Gen. Zia ul-Haq carried out a coup, he decided to Islamisize the Pakistani military turning them into terrorist supporting fundamental radicals. He was also instrumental in making the ISI more powerful virtually creating a state within a state, answerable to no-one. It was the ISI which has been responsible for creating and propping up the Taliban, it was the ISI that was responsible for the 1999 coup that put Mush into power. The ISI is basically funded thru the Pakistani government, but it also has its own methods of raising funds, mainly thru the illegal opium trade in Southeast Asia. ISI also provides protection as part of its illicit activites to drug lords such as Dawood Ibrahim who was responsible for the Mumbai Stock Exchange bombings, but this protective service comes at hefty price tag, it has been reported that Dawood Ibrahim pays the Pakistani ISI almost US$ 1BN for protection. Bin Laden may have also been protected by ISI and they may have arranged his escape from Torah Borah.

I don't think the average person of any country has a clue whats happening in their country.

Originally Posted by celtic pax

Hey, remember who was in office during the hey day of the Taliban and did next to nothing about it.Ole "slick Willie" himself. That Pakistani tribes and elements of the secret police are supporting the Taliban is no great secret. It is one the things that the US is trying to pressure Pakistan to help stop but the reality of the very tenuous situation on the borders and with Islamic extremest call for a very low key approach to the issue. The has been a good deal of progress on the issue but it is an ongoing program. The Pakistani Army has lost a number of troops along that border fighting various tribes and they continue to fight them today. There is just so much that can be achieved in that area realistically without causing a bigger problem, the fall of a "friendly" government and the take over by Islamic radicals with access to nuclear weapons and the missiles to delver them.

Blaming Clinton is just getting SOOOOOOOOOO old.

Pakistan has got it's so-called Allies over a barrel, Pakistan needs to be taught a lesson.

The majority of the Al-Qaeda crowd are in Southern Pakistan, the Lahore region....I'm sure a ton of MOAB's dropped in a blanket bombing sweep of the ENTIRE Lahore region would eliminate most of the Al-Qaeda crowd from Pakistan's hair.

This could easily be done, but Musharraf won't permit Allied forces access to do it....because Musharraf is a little jumped up coward and FULL of bullcrap.

Yes, the Allies "friend", the Pakistani Puppet Dictator who took charge via a Coup and then had an "election" a while later where he got something like 80% of the vote ie. he had the election rigged for him....hilariously pathetic really, considering W likes shouting his piehole off about "free and fair elections" and "democracy", obviously W doesn't believe that the Pakistani people are entitled to "free and fair elections" and "democracy"

So Pakistan is both harboring Al-Qaeda, including senior Al-Qaeda figures, as well as assisting The Taliban....not to mention STILL allowing the Madrassas schools to operate openly, preaching hatred of the West and teaching their pupils that suicide bombing and killing Infidels is their destiny.

I've said for a long while, that instead of invading Iraq, which posed next to no imminent threat....that Pakistan AND Saudi Arabia should have been dealt with.

The REAL War on Terror should be with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, The Sudan....not with Iraq nor with Iran.

Originally Posted by TennesseeRain

You blame Clinton, but I put more of the responsibility on Unocal.

Me, too. There's a great book about it all, called "The Taliban." It has lots of history on the pipeline mess.