Article

2005-07-17 Afghanistan/South Asia

Three out of four Brit boomers visited Pak

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2005-07-17 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11143 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 For the life of me, I cannot understand, and have not been able to understand,Â why we have claimed Pakistan is an ally through this Iraq war. Their "ally" status has proved to be as treacherous and ridiculous as that of Saudi Arabia.

Posted by jules 2 2005-07-17 03:08|| 2005-07-17 03:08|| Front Page Top

#2 Bush names Pakistan as an ally just as he names Saudi Arabia. Our troops are pretty busy right now with the first battles of this war, so the other targets will have to wait their turn... unless they somehow manage to fix themselves in the meantime.

Just my uniformed opinion, of course. ;-)

Posted by trailing wife 2005-07-17 07:30|| 2005-07-17 07:30|| Front Page Top

#3 The bottom line was that these four were British citizens no matter where they visited. Do we deny Britain as an ally? Methinks that this cancer is more than nationalities and lies with religious beliefs. They were not Presbeterians.

Posted by john">john 2005-07-17 07:37|| 2005-07-17 07:37|| Front Page Top

#4 Pakiland is an ally because we need a land line of communication to Afghanistan. We really need more C-17s.

Posted by Shipman 2005-07-17 08:35|| 2005-07-17 08:35|| Front Page Top

#5 Because, perhaps, Musharraf is much, much better than any alternative? Maybe we would prefer a foam-at-the-mouth Mad Mullah in charge of the nuclear weapons instead?

Posted by gromky">gromky 2005-07-17 09:47|| http://communistposters.com/]">[http://communistposters.com/] 2005-07-17 09:47|| Front Page Top

#6 Eventually the Pak government will have to give the bad guys up or will find themselves being marched on by us when we are done in Afghan.

Posted by 49 pan 2005-07-17 10:19|| 2005-07-17 10:19|| Front Page Top

#7 Jules

In this area an ally is country who is earmarked for an ulterior round of regimle change.

Posted by JFM">JFM 2005-07-17 12:20|| 2005-07-17 12:20|| Front Page Top

#8 If we have to go to war against Pakistan we'll be in serious trouble. The country is v.large, has nukes, and is full of Islamofascists (probably more than any other Moslem country). I can't see anything good coming out of that area. We'd have to be in total destruction mode to take on Pakistan. And that would have to mean an all-out nuke war against all Moslem countries at the same time.

I hope it doesn't end like that. If we get there, the Moslems will have forced our hand all the way to Armageddon.

Having said that, let's make sure Moslems understand Mecca and all their "holy" cities are on the immediate hitlist should they launch another attack on US soil. Will Mecca and Islamabad do to Moslems what Hiroshima and Nagasaki did to the Japanese?

Posted by Kalle (kafir forever) 2005-07-17 13:28|| 2005-07-17 13:28|| Front Page Top

#9 We don't need to fight the Pakiwak Kalle. We have friends (likely temporary) in the region. We do need a line of communication to Kabul tho and overland thru the otherStans is to elongated.

India takes out the PakiWakis in 5 weeks without Chinee intervention. then it would take 12 weeks.

Posted by Shipman 2005-07-17 14:37|| 2005-07-17 14:37|| Front Page Top

#10 love the surveillance cameras that London has. That would be great here huh?
I hope the recent retaliation near the border of Pakistan doesn't get anyone fired up to find fault with America. I hope they see it for what it was, and is. That angry Muslim in the other article was probably holding a koran in his other hand.

Posted by Jan 2005-07-17 14:50|| 2005-07-17 14:50|| Front Page Top

#11 My apologies to all the current and former non-civilians out there. I meant "uninformed", of course. If only I drank coffee!

Posted by trailing wife 2005-07-17 23:52|| 2005-07-17 23:52|| Front Page Top

#12 Separately, would we need to conquer Pakistan, or simply defeat it? Defeat would mean the Pakistanis would be too busy sorting themselves out to pose a threat beyond their borders, if done thoroughly enough, whereas conquest would involve building a society from scratch, with problems like Afghanistan and Iraq at least cubed, I would think.

Posted by trailing wife 2005-07-17 23:56|| 2005-07-17 23:56|| Front Page Top

23:56 Tibor
23:56 trailing wife
23:52 trailing wife
23:45 MunkarKat
23:45 trailing wife
23:20 Red Dog
23:17 3dc
23:16 3dc
23:15 bigjim-ky
23:09 MunkarKat
22:44 AzCat
22:36 Frank G
22:35 Bobby
22:22 Fred
22:14 C-Low
22:14 Bobby
22:11 Frank G
22:06 Whiskey Mike
22:05 mmurray821
22:00 mmurray821
22:00 AzCat
21:52 OldSpook
21:31 Phil Fraering
21:22 mhw