Pakistan's parliament condemns bin Laden raid

[Sledgehammer427]

I think once we bring in the SEALs we are basically giving diplomacy the middle finger.

Pakistan should just let it go. We got 'im. We left. Done deal.

EDIT: Loving the fact my opinion gets its own page.

[Anthony W.]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Is it your position that the Old Testament has absolutely no role in christanity?

No - but the New Testament does take precedence

[MH]

Originally Posted by Anthony W.

No - but the New Testament does take precedence

Its Taliban thread.
The religious one is next door.

[Anthony W.]

Originally Posted by MH

Its Taliban thread.
The religious one is next door.

Memory = jogged

My final point was going to be that if a country is ruled by theocracy of one of the violent sects mentioned, we are thusly at war with them by default.

[Bakkels]

Originally Posted by Sledgehammer427

I think once we bring in the SEALs we are basically giving diplomacy the middle finger.

Pakistan should just let it go. We got 'im. We left. Done deal.

EDIT: Loving the fact my opinion gets its own page.

Well I can't disagree with that, but I can also completely understand the point of the Pakistani government. It completely makes sense.
Consider something like this happening in your country. You'd be all 'Wtf? they just dropped some soldiers in our country?' So the Pakistani government has to hold up face to their people. (Is that an expression? anyway, you know what I mean)

My guess is the White House have (probably a couple of hours before) informed the Pakistani government of what they were about to do.
Pakistan let the US go ahead, and gets rid of Bin Laden (it's also a load off their chest), and afterwards they get the opportunity to 'struggle' a little, because diplomatically it's not entirely correct.
But this way some more Islamic groups (read: votes) wouldn't be too pissed off. It's politics. The rules of the game are the same all over the world

[MH]

I'm not sure about the warning but the rest is probably partly true.
Particularly the reason behind the complaining.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by MH

You can put this fraction or that fraction in charge and you still come out with forceful regime ruling nuke armed country while the people are in anti west dark ages mentality.
Nuklear stick is too dangerous for them to have no matter how you look at it.

That is not necessarily true by having a more stable government it is possible that they and India can reconcile some differences nothing is impossible.Taking out there nuclear weapons in regular strikes is much more difficult than it sounds I am sure that they well expect this kind of attack as it is possible for India to attempt it.

As I said it is known that the majority of Pakistanis dislike the Taliban because it has begun to cause unrest all over the country we can use this to our advantage or do nothing and risk that the Pakistani Taliban and supporters take over and then we'd have a real ---- storm.That our find ways to get those who are more friendly to the west in power which would result in a more aggressive action aginst Taliban sanctuaries in the border region which provide aid,support,and training to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Provoking by attacking the warheads would do nothing but insure that they side fully against us and then we'd be truly screwed and merely cause our troops in Afghanistan to be grossly outnumbered and make an already bad conflict much worse.

It could also further de-stabilize the region as India could use the chance to attack Pakistan and then China who dislikes India they have fought each other before in 1962 could likely go to war with India.Make one wrong move in this region and it will be very bad news.

[Bakkels]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

That is not necessarily true by having a more stable government it is possible that they and India can reconcile some differences nothing is impossible.Taking out there nuclear weapons in regular strikes is much more difficult than it sounds I am sure that they well expect this kind of attack as it is possible for India to attempt it.

As I said it is known that the majority of Pakistanis dislike the Taliban because it has begun to cause unrest all over the country we can use this to our advantage or do nothing and risk that the Pakistani Taliban and supporters take over and then we'd have a real ---- storm.That our find ways to get those who are more friendly to the west in power which would result in a more aggressive action in Taliban sanctuaries in the border region which provide aid,support,and training to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Provoking by attacking the warheads would do nothing but insure that they side fully against us and then we'd be truly screwed and merely cause our troops in Afghanistan to be grossly outnumbered in make an already bad conflict much worse.

It could also furhter de-stablize the region as India could use the chance to attack Pakistan and then China who dislikes India they have fought each other before in 1962.Make one wrong move in this region and it will be very bad news.

Yep. I can do nothing but approve.

However, what concerns me is Mh's post.

Originally Posted by mh

You can put this fraction or that fraction in charge and you still come out with forceful regime ruling nuke armed country while the people are in anti west dark ages mentality.
Nuklear stick is too dangerous for them to have no matter how you look at it.

Please elaborate. What is forceful about Pakistan's regime? What do you really know about that country? What can you tell me about it factually?
OBL is dead. Now give me one good reason why we should still interfere with Pakistan's business.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

It could also further de-stabilize the region as India could use the chance to attack Pakistan and then China who dislikes India they have fought each other before in 1962 could likely go to war with India.Make one wrong move in this region and it will be very bad news.

You have taken this too far-dooms day
I don't think that India or China are looking for war with each other or Pakistan.
The coutries are currently too busy with themselves.

If USA can leave the region ensuring stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan then let it be.
Ten years of this war is more than enough.
If USA just packs the bags then simply it would be better for Pakistanis not to have nukes or for USA to have good plan for the country when needed.

Pakistan is a country that supports taliban then it doesn't.
Depends which direction you look-a sort of democracy.
Its messed place with nukes and weak Islamic democracy coalition where each side looks in different direction.
The money that Pakistan receives is a bribe for good behavior.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Bakkels

Please elaborate. What is forceful about Pakistan's regime? What do you really know about that country? What can you tell me about it factually?
.

Dont be mad at me.....i read wikipedia

[Stealhead]

Well that is your downfall there a multitude of far more reliable sources than wiki.

We already know that leaving Afghanistan to its own devices without a stable government is a very bad idea that is how we got into the current situation in the first place because we left them behind and failed them in after the Soviets left in 1989.

This is why we rebuilt Germany and Japan and ensured that they had stable goverments after WWII because we learned the hard way after WWI that not doing so only results in you getting involved in a conflict all over again.We can set up Afghanistan with a stable government that does not need much foreign help in security.The under lying issue is no matter who is in control in Pakistan they will always (and rightly so) see Afghanistan as a "buffer" state to their own security therefore it is vital that the west try to also insure that the Pakistani government is more stable than it is at the current time.Both of these things are very possible.People just need to understand that both nations tie into each other and if one is weak the other will fail(to be friendly to western governments).We simply have to have to insure that moderates are in control of the government if they are they can easily take care of the small numbers of Pakistani military and ISI that are the problem.The killing of OBL may be more of a benefit in this situation than it seems as the majority of the non extremist supporting populace may feel that the US did not inform the Pakistani Goverment because of portions being un-trustworthy(as most Americans feel short of the ones who are granola eaters and are in love with Julian Assange) and they may demand that something be done about cleaning out the military and ISI of these elements which would clear the way for the Pakistani government to more aggressively deal with the Pakistani Taliban(which is a threat to even the current government) in the Federally Administered Tribal Regions.

And I am not talking about a doomsday situation I am simply stating that this region could be become highly un-stable very easily long term wise China and India see each other as competing for the same interests India is China's biggest threat in the region militarily India and Pakistan do not see eye to eye at all and barely avoid war as it is now so an unstable event like extremist supporting factions taking full control in Pakistan would result in military action by India.Even though China see extremism as a threat they will see India waring with Pakistan and possibly controlling all or some it as a much larger threat to Chinese interests.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

Well that is your downfall there a multitude of far more reliable sources than wiki.
.

Just kidding...not that i STUDIED Pakistan.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

This is why we rebuilt Germany and Japan and ensured that they had stable goverments after WWII because we learned the hard way after WWI that not doing so only results in you getting involved in a conflict all over again.We can set up Afghanistan with a stable government that does not need much foreign help in security.The under lying issue is no matter who is in control in Pakistan they will always (and rightly so) see Afghanistan as a "buffer" state to their own security therefore it is vital that the west try to also insure that the Pakistani government is more stable than it is at the current time.Both of these things are very possible.People just need to understand that both nations tie into each other and if one is weak the other will fail(to be friendly to western governments).
.

I don't think that Germany or Japan are good analogies to Pakistan Afghanistan Libya.....or Iraq
Don't think just technicalities think mentality and traditions of the regions.

[Stealhead]

Sure they are when WWII ended we made sure to set up governments that where friendly to the West.I am not even talking about Libya or Iraq these are different situations.But this is how the world works larger nation states try to ensure that smaller and weaker states have governments that are friendly insuring stability in a region.

I have already shown that I have an understanding of Pashtun culture so I am doing as you said:"Don't think just technicalities think mentality and traditions of the regions"
There has been a large foreign pro extremist influence in Pashtun regions since the Soviet Afghan War that goes against Pashtun tradition basically these foreign elements are taking advantage of poor education and clan level differences in the region to spread their agenda.At the same time a Pashtun man in Afghanistan took in a seriously wounded US Navy SEAL in 2006 that was being chased down by Taliban fighters.The Taliban knew that the SEAL had been taken in according to Pashtun codes and they demanded he be turned over the Pashtun man did not do so and the Taliban had no choice but to leave because if they had forced their way in to kill a person under protection the entire village would attack the Taliban fighters according to Pashtun "laws" so to speak.

Are you even reading what I have posted or are you simply trying to argue?Some of your posts seem to point at the later.I dont see you posting any valid counter points to anything I have posted.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Anthony W.

No - but the New Testament does take precedence

Originally Posted by MH

Its Taliban thread.
The religious one is next door.

you are right, perhaps if there is interest we can have an "Old Testament. applicable or not" thread. In any case this question should not hijack this thread.