Pakistani troops confront US troops

[Skybird]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7396366.stm

This time it was shooting into the air only, giving tribesmen the time to take defensive positions against the americans.

And next time?

If you want to win Afghanistan, Pakistan must be neutralised to be safe haven for the enemy - at all cost. As long as Pakistan remains to be untouchable, options in Afghanistan are meaningless. It needs to be understood that Pakistan never was a real ally, and today with the unfolding political drama in Islamabad is more an enemy than ever before. Pakistan is not the key for solving problems - it is the cause of the problems.

[Tchocky]

Only 7 years late, too.

[Skybird]

Only 7 years late, too.
One could even say: three decades.

[Tchocky]

Inside the Beltway memory length tends to reduce to the election cycle :p

[Skybird]

Inside the Beltway memory length tends to reduce to the election cycle :p
Yes. In politics, the decimal system consists of just four numbers: 1, 2, 3, and "me".

[DeepIron]

I don't understand US policy regarding Pakistan. One word: nukes.

[Diopos]

Iraq was the primary concern of the US administration. Not Afganistan nor the talibans. I think that the American public deserves an answer on this issue. Well maybe at some point in the future ...........

[Tchocky]

Inside the Beltway memory length tends to reduce to the election cycle :p
Yes. In politics, the decimal system consists of just four numbers: 1, 2, 3, and "me".

Hehe, never heard that one before

[Skybird]

No surprise. I just invented it. :cool:

[August]

Inside the Beltway memory length tends to reduce to the election cycle :p Yes. In politics, the decimal system consists of just four numbers: 1, 2, 3, and "me".
Hehe, never heard that one before

You probably never heard of it because it's not very accurate. Elections are held ever 2 years in this country, not every 4.

[Rockstar]

Whats your policy with Russia invading Georgia? You do know it was right in your own backyard don't you? You frauds talk a mean game about how the world should be, we have listened to you all squak for years what should be done, if only somebody would listen. Well here you go NATO (thats you) we're listening, you have your chance to show the world just how to deal with aggressor nations, like Russia. Show us the error of our ways and we shall follow your lead.


But alas I know what action you will take NOTHING. You're a frikin' bunch of highminded fakes and frauds crying for peace like a bunch of school girls. Your action for global peace and harmoney is nothing more than sticking your heads in the sand hoping the bad man will just go away. You sit on your arses while Russia wages war for your winter oil supply. And STILL all you can do is armchair quarterback what the U.S. should do in Pakistan?

For cryin out loud Russia just attacked someone what should we do eurogirls? Show us the way please, we need your help. I am sooo ashamed of our actions in Pakistan please show us how it's done.


Ya freaks. LOL LOL LOL at you

[Frame57]

Mushy did not keep his end of the bargain. But that will change with either Obama or McCain and has been discussed by both candidates.

[Zayphod]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7396366.stm

This time it was shooting into the air only, giving tribesmen the time to take defensive positions against the americans.

And next time?

If you want to win Afghanistan, Pakistan must be neutralised to be safe haven for the enemy - at all cost. As long as Pakistan remains to be untouchable, options in Afghanistan are meaningless. It needs to be understood that Pakistan never was a real ally, and today with the unfolding political drama in Islamabad is more an enemy than ever before. Pakistan is not the key for solving problems - it is the cause of the problems.

I think everyone knew that when we first invaded Afghanistan.

Pakistan says they're against the Taliban.
They also say they're "handling" the situation with them.
They say "Don't come in here - we'll take care of them."
Yet, they are afraid of sending troops into the northern areas.
Any government "afraid" to deal with those people doesn't deserve the right to say "We'll take care of it ourselves." They won't take care of anything.

They want to look tough on the Taliban, yet they don't want the Taliban to destroy them, so they take a hands-off approach, with a wink wink "look, if you don't attack us, we'll leave you along, and just 'say' we're going to deal with you."

I'd say this: Want to keep the USA out of Pakistan in the area where the Taliban is hiding. Fine. Station troops all along the borders to keep us out.

That'll also keep the Taliban out of Afghanistan.

Personally, if I were president, I'd tell them "You've got 30 days to 'take care of it' - otherwise, I'll come in there and fix it FOR you."

Yeah, I'd be condemed and all that. I wouldn't care, either.

[Skybird]

Mushy did not keep his end of the bargain. But that will change with either Obama or McCain and has been discussed by both candidates.They discussed it. Wether they are able or willing to do it - that is something totally different. Talk is cheap, especially when you are on campaign.

[Frame57]

Mushy did not keep his end of the bargain. But that will change with either Obama or McCain and has been discussed by both candidates.They discussed it. Wether they are able or willing to do it - that is something totally different. Talk is cheap, especially when you are on campaign.True! It would be senseless to keep pouring money into Pakistan with little or no results.

[baggygreen]

Like deepiron said, the problem with pakistan is we cant go attacking the talibanis with impunity through pakistan because they have nukes.

Everyone knows if you get nukes you're safe from military action... just ask kim jong il!

[Skybird]

They do not have global range, but they could arrange some device getting smuggled around. however, one could tell them that if they dare to play that card one would nuke them and all their country back to the age when life on earth consisted of cellular slime floating in water. Pakistan'S role in supporting islamic terror and the taleban, as well as it's dubios - at best - role in nuclear trafficking must be brought to a halt irreversibly. i think this must become an unconditional imperative of western politics. In my eyes Pakistan is the most dangerous and split-tongued country in the world, and it'S relgious ideology is primary reason for that. Neither North Korea nor Iran compares to them, currently at least. therefore i do not accept to obey a rule saying that we must accept that we cannot act against them because they threaten with their bomb. threatening with bombs is something we can do, too - with many, many more bombs of far greater range.

Infiltrating Pakistan by man-intelligence and finding out where they hide them, also should be considered an absolute top priority. I do not know in how far diplomatic sensibilities probably prevent this currently.

[Kapt Z]

Whats your policy with Russia invading Georgia? You do know it was right in your own backyard don't you? You frauds talk a mean game about how the world should be, we have listened to you all squak for years what should be done, if only somebody would listen. Well here you go NATO (thats you) we're listening, you have your chance to show the world just how to deal with aggressor nations, like Russia. Show us the error of our ways and we shall follow your lead.


But alas I know what action you will take NOTHING. You're a frikin' bunch of highminded fakes and frauds crying for peace like a bunch of school girls. Your action for global peace and harmoney is nothing more than sticking your heads in the sand hoping the bad man will just go away. You sit on your arses while Russia wages war for your winter oil supply. And STILL all you can do is armchair quarterback what the U.S. should do in Pakistan?

For cryin out loud Russia just attacked someone what should we do eurogirls? Show us the way please, we need your help. I am sooo ashamed of our actions in Pakistan please show us how it's done.


Ya freaks. LOL LOL LOL at you

I think we just found our next representative to the UN!!! ;)

[baggygreen]

They do not have global range, but they could arrange some device getting smuggled around. however, one could tell them that if they dare to play that card one would nuke them and all their country back to the age when life on earth consisted of cellular slime floating in water. Pakistan'S role in supporting islamic terror and the taleban, as well as it's dubios - at best - role in nuclear trafficking must be brought to a halt irreversibly. i think this must become an unconditional imperative of western politics. In my eyes Pakistan is the most dangerous and split-tongued country in the world, and it'S relgious ideology is primary reason for that. Neither North Korea nor Iran compares to them, currently at least. therefore i do not accept to obey a rule saying that we must accept that we cannot act against them because they threaten with their bomb. threatening with bombs is something we can do, too - with many, many more bombs of far greater range.

Infiltrating Pakistan by man-intelligence and finding out where they hide them, also should be considered an absolute top priority. I do not know in how far diplomatic sensibilities probably prevent this currently.Problem is, theres so many people in positions of power in pakistan who would gladly die to set off a nuke in say, washington DC. One basic and common point of these extremists is they dont care who dies as long as they achieve their goals. the threat of being nuked in retaliation doesnt worry these freaks..

[Foxtrot]

How about posting more and more troops along the border region with "shoot-on-sight-upon-crossing-ze-border" order?

[Skybird]

How about posting more and more troops along the border region with "shoot-on-sight-upon-crossing-ze-border" order?
Look at a topographic map of the the area, and you have your answer: too rugged terrain, mountains and valleys. It simply does not work.

[Skybird]

The guys in power in Pakistan are precisely not extremists, well not religious extremists at least. That's probably why the US supported Musharraf and supports Zardari, one was a dictator and the other is a crook and both are liars regarding their actions against talebans, but while they're in power the nukes are in "less bad" hands than if an islamic government pro talebans came to power.
Major parts of their intelligence and military are pro-Taleban, and now a mentally ill madman has come to power. Feel better? ;)

[TDK1044]

This was an argument over a curry delivery to a special forces outpost. Once a reasonable tip was handed over, all was well.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7396366.stm

This time it was shooting into the air only, giving tribesmen the time to take defensive positions against the americans.

And next time?

If you want to win Afghanistan, Pakistan must be neutralised to be safe haven for the enemy - at all cost. As long as Pakistan remains to be untouchable, options in Afghanistan are meaningless. It needs to be understood that Pakistan never was a real ally, and today with the unfolding political drama in Islamabad is more an enemy than ever before. Pakistan is not the key for solving problems - it is the cause of the problems.