HotNSexyMILF
Well-Known Member
Flood the media with the footage of the dead bodies.. maybe there's an ounce of human compassion left in American's veins.. though I'm beginning to doubt it..
So, anyone else think they're making a BIG mistake by bringing the war into Pakistan?
- Thread starter HotNSexyMILF
- Start date
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/world/asia/16pstan.html?ref=world
The real question is did it really happen?
And if it did, of course it was a stupid move. Pakistan is a Nuclear Power.
The real question is did it really happen?
And if it did, of course it was a stupid move. Pakistan is a Nuclear Power.
medicineman
New Member
So are you saying that it's alright to bomb the little guys, but don't fuck with the big boys?? Is that what a compassionate conservative does (Bush)?
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
No, war is a less than ideal solution to any problem. The idea behind having a strong standing army was not having to use it to ensure our security.
Of course, based on the historical record of how often our government screws over those that it helped support it's not really surprising that the Middle East, and Near Far East hates or dislikes us.
It seems that our politician's favorite game on both sides of the aisle is fuck your buddy.
Of course, based on the historical record of how often our government screws over those that it helped support it's not really surprising that the Middle East, and Near Far East hates or dislikes us.
It seems that our politician's favorite game on both sides of the aisle is fuck your buddy.
bobharvey
Well-Known Member
Bush doesn't care. If they used nuclear weapons we would have more of a reason to go to war which is all he is concerned about in the first place. It is stupid to go to Iraq when you haven't won in Afghanistan. It is stupid to go to Pakistan when you haven't won in Iraq. I could have done a better job at planning both wars and I suck at RISK. It makes you wonder if they really want to win the war... of course they don't. Just like we haven't won the war on drugs/poverty/aids. They consider fighting back terrorism and as long as people are fighting back there will always be the war on terrorism.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
Armchair General...
Bongulator
Well-Known Member
Well, y'all understand that Al Qaeda is based in Pakistan and goes into Afghanistan, kills our people, then they retreat back into Pakistan. So instead of chasing them back and getting them, you propose we just ignore them?
I don't know what the solution is, but allowing them to strike from Pakistan with impugnity doesn't seem ideal. We tried that for four years and they got stronger. So, beating our heads against a wall doesn't make a ton of sense to me.
The reason for the last bunch of civilian fatalities isn't a failing with our military. It's a failing with our intelligence capabilities. We don't have a lot of people who blend in, speak their languages, and are loyal to us. So our guys took the word of an informant, who lied in order to get us to attack a village we shouldn't have attacked. In effect, they used our lack of intelligence capability as a weapon to convince us to attack a rival tribe.
I don't think the solution is to handicap the ability of our military to respond with force against those who attack us. I think the solution is to *get* some folks who speak the language, can blend in, and who are loyal to us. All that probably takes is some money. But most of our money is still tied up in Iraq.
I don't know what the solution is, but allowing them to strike from Pakistan with impugnity doesn't seem ideal. We tried that for four years and they got stronger. So, beating our heads against a wall doesn't make a ton of sense to me.
The reason for the last bunch of civilian fatalities isn't a failing with our military. It's a failing with our intelligence capabilities. We don't have a lot of people who blend in, speak their languages, and are loyal to us. So our guys took the word of an informant, who lied in order to get us to attack a village we shouldn't have attacked. In effect, they used our lack of intelligence capability as a weapon to convince us to attack a rival tribe.
I don't think the solution is to handicap the ability of our military to respond with force against those who attack us. I think the solution is to *get* some folks who speak the language, can blend in, and who are loyal to us. All that probably takes is some money. But most of our money is still tied up in Iraq.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
Yeah, but ideally the solution would be to get Pakistan to actually attack the terrorists that are in their territory.
That, and violating the sovereign territory of a nuclear power is dicey. Though I don't think they'd be crazy enough to use nukes. It'd be, their last decision before we had to start wondering if this Pakistan was a real place or some made up imaginary place.
That, and violating the sovereign territory of a nuclear power is dicey. Though I don't think they'd be crazy enough to use nukes. It'd be, their last decision before we had to start wondering if this Pakistan was a real place or some made up imaginary place.
natrone23
Well-Known Member
How has that been working out....7 years now
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
Not very well, obviously... So I guess we don't have much of a choice but to hope that the Pakistani's are sane.
bobharvey
Well-Known Member
If Al Qaeda is based in Pakistan why didn't we go to Pakistan to begin with? Osama bin Laden was in Pakistan on September 11th. I propose that we seal off the border of between Afghanistan and Pakistan. You contain the area you don't leave it wide open. Cut off the routes that are being used and you cut off their troop supply it is that simple.
Bongulator
Well-Known Member
If you've got one dude every 50 yards, you can probably control the border area. But that'd take a couple hundred thousand people, and we don't have that many. It's not flat land, it's very mountainous and bouldery, so you can't see far, which means you need more people to plug all the possible holes. (And even then, you'd just get them tunneling and create a new North/South Vietnam scenario.)
Pakistan should be encouraged to do their job controlling their own land. Carrots and sticks -- make 'em nice carrots, and big sticks and they'll start taking the problem a little more seriously. This isn't really a military problem; it's more of a law enforcement problem, and Pakistan's got their own version of the Wild West up in those mountains. They need to bring in a Pakistani Wyatt Earp to kick some ass out there and lay down some civilized law.
But if there's convincing actionable intelligence as to the whereabouts of Osama, fuck Pakistan, send in the drones.
Pakistan should be encouraged to do their job controlling their own land. Carrots and sticks -- make 'em nice carrots, and big sticks and they'll start taking the problem a little more seriously. This isn't really a military problem; it's more of a law enforcement problem, and Pakistan's got their own version of the Wild West up in those mountains. They need to bring in a Pakistani Wyatt Earp to kick some ass out there and lay down some civilized law.
But if there's convincing actionable intelligence as to the whereabouts of Osama, fuck Pakistan, send in the drones.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
You think that people can't climb up mountains?
And the only thing you get when you patrol well known pathways is ambush situations.
And the only thing you get when you patrol well known pathways is ambush situations.
Garden Knowm
The Love Doctor
i agree... not a fan of killing people...
Crumbles
Well-Known Member
my reply is simple and its probably the same thing you've already read..
pakistan ain't fuckin around. they proved it with that warning shot when we tried cross the border. the tribal people of pakistan aren't a joke and when they say they can take the fight into afghanistan. they sure as hell can and the violence there could be moderately intensified. the gov. shouldn't underestimate people cause their poor and brown. the native americans put up one hell of a fight but they didn't have Aks or a sizable and strong military to ally themselves with. the tribal people of pakistan do.
pakistan ain't fuckin around. they proved it with that warning shot when we tried cross the border. the tribal people of pakistan aren't a joke and when they say they can take the fight into afghanistan. they sure as hell can and the violence there could be moderately intensified. the gov. shouldn't underestimate people cause their poor and brown. the native americans put up one hell of a fight but they didn't have Aks or a sizable and strong military to ally themselves with. the tribal people of pakistan do.
ZenMaster
Well-Known Member
We have the air power, thats all you need.
If we were to war, we'd have all their communications, intelligence, and radar knocked out by noon. The army of Pakistan would be crippled and the only thing they'd have left is guerrilla warfare.
As far as an actual "war" would go, it would probably be the same as Iraq. 2 Weeks. Tops.