Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Aren't we involved in enough wars in the Middle East? I guess your a Republican like McCain who wants to bomb , bomb , bomb. Can't we take about 10 years off from war so we will have the money to update our infrastructure?
I can think of no other country that has done so much damage through Jihadism as Pakistan has. They are at war on their borders with Afghanistan, India and China - they are a major backing force to the Xinjiang conflict, as they are to Jihadism around the world.
Not only this, but this country holds Nukes and is in close contact with countries that can't be trusted, like Russia or North Korea.
It seems like the US is trying to stop a leak from flooding the house by bailing out water but leaving the leak untouched.
Considering the horrendous results of the Bush II invasion of Iraq, and the complete destabilization of the already shaky Middle East that ensued and whose effects ultimately led to the IS, is it possible that Americans want to try it again????????!!!!!!!!
What fresh hell do you think the world needs from yet more military adventurism?
I too consider Pakistan one of the top worrisome countries, but that is all the more reason not to push it into the boiling cauldron of religious war and terrorism that the U.S. had a major role in precipitating.
Considering the horrendous results of the Bush II invasion of Iraq, and the complete destabilization of the already shaky Middle East that ensued and whose effects ultimately led to the IS, is it possible that Americans want to try it again????????!!!!!!!!
What fresh hell do you think the world needs from yet more military adventurism?
I too consider Pakistan one of the top worrisome countries, but that is all the more reason not to push it into the boiling cauldron of religious war and terrorism that the U.S. had a major role in precipitating.
The first time I ever heard the terms "the Bombsey Twins" was back when General Curtis LeMay ran with George Wallace. It seems that they have spawned a whole cadre of Bombseys in the Republican Party who want to be in constant wars around the planet. They see wars and attacks as a first resort, not a last resort. And yet they worry about government spending.
I can think of no other country that has done so much damage through Jihadism as Pakistan has. They are at war on their borders with Afghanistan, India and China - they are a major backing force to the Xinjiang conflict, as they are to Jihadism around the world.
Not only this, but this country holds Nukes and is in close contact with countries that can't be trusted, like Russia or North Korea.
It seems like the US is trying to stop a leak from flooding the house by bailing out water but leaving the leak untouched.
Counter question : Why has US invaded India or China? They cause economic havoc through their cheap labor and cheap goods than what Pakistan does..So why not?
The first time I ever heard the terms "the Bombsey Twins" was back when General Curtis LeMay ran with George Wallace. It seems that they have spawned a whole cadre of Bombseys in the Republican Party who want to be in constant wars around the planet. They see wars and attacks as a first resort, not a last resort. And yet they worry about government spending.
They approve whole-heartedly of govt spending on bomb craters.
It's spending that benefits taxpayers that they hate.
Counter question : Why has US invaded India or China? They cause economic havoc through their cheap labor and cheap goods than what Pakistan does..So why not?
China and India are vital to the world economy. They consume more than they produce.
That really bugs me when people put the full blame for the middle east mess on Bush and Cheney. When we were attacked on Sept. 11 the majority of the country was demanding revenge and the best evidence at the time seemed to point to Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a murdering dictator that gassed his own people. He and his regime were monsters but they did keep the region in check.
Bad evidence led the US to Iraq and hindsight is always 20/20 but at the time it was the best we had.
Not quite. Bin Laden's people attacked the USA, then the government of Afghanistan hid him. We attacked Afghanistan to go after Bin Laden as a response to a direct attack.
The only justification for invading Iraq was Dubya wanted to bring Democracy to the Middle East (ya, right). Or else he wanted to act as the world police because of the gassing and/or MOMD, depending on who you believe. Yes, it was a multi-national coalition, but there is no doubt that Iraq would not have been invaded without the USA leading the way. We are not the world police, and whether you claim "hindsight" or not, invading Iraq was a dumb and massively expensive move; both in direct costs and in the fact that it distracted us from Afghanistan and greatly extended that war.
Invading Pakistan is even less justified that Iraq (i.e., there is no justification), and would result in even more of a quagmire than Afghanistan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cape Cod Todd
I would like to see that area of the world isolated so they could fight it out themselves once and for all and in 10 years we could open the gates and see if any one is left.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo
The US should withdraw all personnel and equipment from the ME immediately and let those savages continue to slaughter one another like they have for the past 10,000 years. Not our problem. Let it bleed.
Interestingly similar response from people on opposite sides. Interestingly, such a move would have prevented 9/11... the justification behind that attack was supposedly the US's support for Israel and/or mistreatment of the Palestinians.
The only problem would be the fact we would be abandoning long-term allies to certain doom (Israel has a massive military, but would be no match if all the other nations ganged up on her), plus the massive hit to the global economy after losing all those oil reserves.
Actually more like 95-98%. They have almost no tolerance for other religions. The few Christians in Pakistan are being slaughtered or harassed into emigrating. There are hardly any Jews left, no Hindus or Buddhists except maybe a handful in the border regions. The minority sects of Islam that are not mainstream Sunni are viciously persecuted.
American support for Pakistan dates back to the Cold War era when India declared itself neutral or tilted pro-Moscow, and steadfastly opposed the U.S. on many fronts. In retaliation, the Americans bulked up Pakistan's dictatorship with billions in military aid, and allowed them to go nuclear.
Outside the more progressive urban areas, women are treated like slaves, can be stoned to death if raped, many "honor killings", are forcibly wed to strangers twice their age, etc.
Overall, Pakistan is a backward, useless place, an artificial creation of post-Indian independence. The Indians certainly don't want it back. Why would we want it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
