You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
India-Pakistan
US attack imminent, says Sherpao
2008-07-13
Former interior minister Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao on Saturday sounded "serious" threats to the country's sovereignty and integrity, saying that the United States could attack Pakistan any time soon. "There is an imminent danger of [a] US attack on Pakistan," Sherpao told reporters at his residence.
Bet he hears the buzz of UAVs at night ...
His comments came two days after NATO attacked a Pakistani outpost on the Afghan border in South Waziristan. "The government should immediately call a joint session of parliament to discuss the situation and evolve a national consensus," the former minister said. "The country's security is apolitical issue and we must all be concerned about it," he added.

He however said it was difficult to say the US would land boots in the Tribal Areas or continue with airstrikes to target what Washington terms militants. "We don't know this ... they may be Iraq-like mercenaries."
Posted by:John Frum

#10  OP, I didn't mean to imply the Chinese would GET Houston (probably something like 5 million small arms in that town - not counting the ones held by gang members and other incompetents), merely that much of San Francisco would not care if they tried to.
Posted by: Glenmore   2008-07-13 20:49  

#9  Houston would give China a port on the Gulf of Mexico, something I don't think would be tolerated. The situation is more that of Laos during the Vietnam War. We bombed it, but we didn't invade it. We tried to get the Vietnamese to do it, but they weren't very serious about it.

Taking the fight to the Taliban where they live would be a very good thing, IMHO. Wasting a half-dozen towns in Pakistan's NWFP might just get the idea across that we're serious about this WOT thing, and anyone that stands in our way, or helps our enemies, will pay a very heavy price. Bush needs to go out a winner, not a whiner.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2008-07-13 17:22  

#8  Since I don't speak either Chinese or Spanish, How would you ever know?
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2008-07-13 15:56  

#7  g(r)omgoru, you're correct about Telegraph Ave. I miss browsing Moe's & Shakespeare's terribly. But I make do with Alibris and Abebooks. And it costs a lot less.

The harbor is useless because there are no more Navy bases and the USN isn't welcome. Seattle is a day closer to Japan and LA has better train connections.

Finally I'd contend that SF has been taken off our hands, they just didn't issue a press release.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2008-07-13 15:40  

#6  The best harbour on the Pacific.
Posted by: .5MT   2008-07-13 15:14  

#5  if someone were to take San Francisco off our hands, can anyone explain why that would be a bad thing?

Telegraph Av. Has some of the best used bookstores in the World. And some of the best restaurants.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2008-07-13 14:45  

#4  yeh, bigjim, but how miffed would the San Franciscans be if China invaded Houston?
Posted by: Glenmore   2008-07-13 10:53  

#3  I like the San Francisco analysis. Seriously, if someone were to take San Francisco off our hands, can anyone explain why that would be a bad thing?
Posted by: Richard of Oregon   2008-07-13 10:43  

#2  We'd still be a little miffed if China invaded San Francisco.
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2008-07-13 09:59  

#1  I doubt there would be many tears shed by the city folk if some of these mountain tribes were decimated. And we could do a lot of pinpoint strikes without them even losing sleep over it.

Sovereignty means a lot more if you actually control your country.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2008-07-13 09:04  

00:00