Article

2011-07-13 India-Pakistan

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 2011-07-13 00:00|| || Front Page|| [2 views ] Top
File under: Govt of Pakistan

#1 Read, Pak "Big Brother" + BFF CHINA.

This will not end well, for either the US or China, as China = Russia = its better for their interests to have the US-NATO in AFPAK fighting the Militants than other.

Many Bloggers correctly believe that the rise of LEON PANETTA = US PREPPING TO MILPOL ESCALATE AGZ NUKE-HAPPY IRAN, but as per POLITICAL JIHAD a break in US-PAK relations will likely result in an increased Islamist influence in the Pak Govt, iff not ourright dominance of same, which in turn may ultimately lead to an alignment of already Nuke-armed Pakistan [China?] wid Iran agz the US, + sovereign rapid transfer of Pak Nuctechs to SYRIA or other anti-US Muslim Govts-States???

ISLAMIST DOMINOES.

Instead of US-VS-IRAN only, it will be US-VS-ISLAMIST-NUCLEAR-ALLIANCE???

Iff the MilTerr Groups aren't inspired now, they will be then.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2011-07-13 00:24|| 2011-07-13 00:24|| Front Page Top

#2 A big war would create a lot of jobs. And NATIONAL SURVIVAL ( fighting for your very life) does tend to unite a country in a spectacular way.
The Left would open its mouth and then disappear as fast as the Bund ( does anyone remember the Bund? No? ) That's what happens to some people.

If Iran and Pakistan united in a Nuclear alliance... they would over reach in very short order. They would actually push it. And then there might be a big surprise...we can reach farther than they can. We can hit them where they cant hit us. They can throw a nuke at Saudi Arabia, say, or hit an American Carrier.
And our response? These things escalate very fast once they start. Is war such a bad idea? Wars DO settle things. Sometimes WAR IS THE ANSWER. If you win a war even if millions die in it, as long as most of the dead are Moslems and its largely fought in THEIR yard...and FINISHED in their yard. Smoking holes finished and entire nations obliterated. We CAN do that...they dont have the ability, not yet, and it will be a generation before they do match our reach and our kill capacity.

There is no nice way to win a war. And there is absolutely NO future in losing one. Pre-emptive attack is not a bad idea. Aggression is not a bad idea if you MEAN BUSINESS. Remember that scene in The Unforgiven when William Muney ( Clint Eastwood) said he was coming out of that saloon in the rain at the end of the film? Think about it. "Anybody shoots at me, I will kill them, I will kill their family and then I will kill all their friends." He meant it. Hold that thought.

Killing people is what Wars do. General are not Professors ( get rid of those ) and use your military power ruthlessly and efficiently. Take THEIR resources. Take their Gold Reserves. Take their mommas and their dog too. Dont "occupy" them, dont rebuild them. Cook them. Hand of God every son of a bitch who can squeal.

Win IT!

And nobody will curse your name or complain because they will all never write a single history book.
WE already HAVE that kind of Power, now. What we dont have is the WILL to win. If you are too soft to fight, you deserve what happens to your little girl.

I think we will have to fight sooner or later. Give it thirty years?
Dont lie to yourself about Human nature, yours or theirs. We live on blood, the human race always has. History is one long endless litany of blood. REALITY is being willing to pull the trigger if the bugger so much as moves. You think I sound crazy? You know what Harold McMillan said?
yeah? Now there was a ( very very stupid) crazy son of a bitch.

Posted by de Medici 2011-07-13 06:36|| 2011-07-13 06:36|| Front Page Top

#3 Leftists/Collectivists do just fine starting wars for national unity; in fact I'd call it SOP for stage 3 collectivism - the whisker being the EU but could count Balkins, now Libya.

Agree an official Iran/Pak alliance would grab the attention of S.A., India, Iraq. Probably why it is not official. Yes, plenty of local US targets just gonna guess that the military folks are on top of that; but hey we apparently traded east Europe missile defense for a promised train ride from the Russians, what firmer bedrock for policy could there be than that?

Posted by swksvolFF 2011-07-13 12:23|| 2011-07-13 12:23|| Front Page Top

#4 Iran/Pak alliance

Sounds good, except for that Shia-Sunni exterminate each other thing.

Posted by Eohippus Phater7165 2011-07-13 16:56|| 2011-07-13 16:56|| Front Page Top

#5 "Sounds good, except for that Shia-Sunni exterminate each other thing."

You're right, EP - that does sound good.

Posted by Barbara 2011-07-13 18:18|| 2011-07-13 18:18|| Front Page Top

#6 Sounds good, except for that Shia-Sunni exterminate each other thing.

One step at a time, Eohippus Phater7165. First they defeat their joint enemies, then they can turn on one another at leisure. After all, Turkey is currently Iran's other bestest friend ever.

Posted by trailing wife 2011-07-13 18:53|| 2011-07-13 18:53|| Front Page Top

23:07 retired LEO
22:59 DarthVader
22:54 JosephMendiola
22:47 Keystone
22:37 JosephMendiola
22:36 Frank G
22:35 USN,Ret.
22:31 trailing wife
22:27 USN,Ret.
22:26 trailing wife
22:06 JosephMendiola
22:01 JosephMendiola
21:58 KBK
21:42 Frank G
21:39 Frank G
21:36 JosephMendiola
21:24 Dale
21:22 JosephMendiola
21:20 Barbara
21:20 ryuge
21:03 SteveS
20:57 SteveS
20:51 Anonymoose
20:48 Anonymoose