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
Afghanistan/South Asia
US may move against al-Qaeda havens in Pakistan
2004-04-06
Pakistan must eliminate terrorist sanctuaries or this country will step in and do its part in obliterating them, U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad said Monday.
Sounds like a warning to me. Wonder what it sounds like to Perv?
Unless the issue of sanctuaries is solved, it will be difficult to fully abolish security problems in the southern and eastern parts of Afghanistan, he said. "We cannot allow this problem to fester indefinitely," Khalilzad told about 100 people at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank. "We have told the Pakistani leadership that either they must solve this problem or we will have to do it for ourselves." However, he cautioned, "to consolidate the victory over extremism and terrorism in Afghanistan will take a sustained commitment of at least five years by the United States and its partners."
Yeah, and it's still going to take scrubbing both Waziristans...
One of the greatest worries remains over the Taliban and other hostile groups that continue to be able to base, train and operate from Pakistani territory, he said. Khalilzad said the United States prefers that Pakistan take responsibility and the Pakistani government agrees. "We are prepared to help President (Gen. Pervez) Musharraf. However, one way or the other, this problem will have to be dealt with."
In the long run, it'll probably be the other...
Progress is evident in rebuffing the Taliban and other terrorists who aim to destabilize Afghanistan, the ambassador said. The number of security incidents has remained roughly constant during the past year; the attacks consist of terrorist actions or small, uncoordinated military activities. "They are too weak to threaten the new government and the coalition," Khalilzad said.
But they're hell on schools and unarmed civilians...
He said the most immediate challenge are presidential and parliamentary elections, scheduled for September. The challenge is logistical and operational, not security-related, he said.
Posted by:Dan Darling

#14  NMM, you leave me disapointed as your arguments are usually better woven. By your logic NMM we should have respected the Taliban's right to provide safe haven for AQ.

You analogy is also logically challenged. A correct parallel would be Canada complaining that we are allowing cattle rustlers to run amok in Canada from border safe havens in Montana. They would certainly be within their rights to come across the border and whack some rustlers if our failure to maintain law and order in a contiguous area was posing an unacceptable security problem to them. Unfortunately for my analogy to really work, Canada would need to own a larger military. :-)
Posted by: Super Hose   2004-04-07 12:19:33 AM  

#13  Oops previous post was by the perennial Rantburg fave NMM
Posted by: Not Mike Moore   2004-04-06 11:53:56 PM  

#12  Uhh Lord of the Rings analogies aside--doesn't this sound like a threat to invade/tamper with a sovereign nation such as Pakistan? It would be like Guatemala telling us to start dealing with the Mexican problem or they'll bomb Arizona
Posted by: Anonymous   2004-04-06 11:51:05 PM  

#11  Nazgul Attack Helocopter - I get a mental picture of something LARGE, with a powerful enough engine and rotor system to support the A10's GAU-8 cannon, mounts for a dozen HELLFIRE missiles, and capable of doing anything from static hover to speeds of up to 350kph. I can already hear a few Apache drivers drooling...
Posted by: Old Patriot   2004-04-06 2:37:38 PM  

#10  SH, sure. And those oliphaunts could be Abrams tanks. Sauron-6 could be a cool call sign for an actual........the ring wraiths ride in black.....ride on.
Posted by: Jarhead   2004-04-06 2:36:48 PM  

#9  Now that would be one cool name for a new type of helicopters - the Nazgul Attack Helocopters....
Posted by: CrazyFool   2004-04-06 2:27:00 PM  

#8  Jarhead, winged riders = cobra aircraft?
Posted by: Super Hose   2004-04-06 2:22:17 PM  

#7  Negative Ptah, I've always liked playing the villain ;) Plus that eye thing from the movie was bad-ass. Sauron was just misunderstood imho. (tongue planted firmly in cheek.)
Posted by: Jarhead   2004-04-06 11:40:35 AM  

#6  You mean the Forces of the West and Gondor, Jarhead?
Posted by: Ptah   2004-04-06 11:10:51 AM  

#5  I agree SH. The eye of mordor will turn to pakistan when Sadr and fallujah have been dealt with sufficiently.
Posted by: Jarhead   2004-04-06 10:43:40 AM  

#4  inadvertently by igniting a controlled burn in windy weather

Nothin inadvertent about it. Fire's are fun. (That's my new motto, BTW)
Posted by: Smokey Bear   2004-04-06 8:38:20 AM  

#3  I don't think we'll move until we've whacked and stacked al-Sadr and the Baathist in Falluja unless we have direct control of the Paki nukes. I am cautious with starting too much stuff at once. For example, the Forest Service thoroughly toasts at least on state each year inadvertently by igniting a controlled burn in windy weather.
Posted by: Super Hose   2004-04-06 4:47:24 AM  

#2  I was wondering how long this would take to happen. Pakistan's limp pursuit of al Qaeda has been a major issue from day one. One would think that al Qaeda announcing their intention of whacking Pervez would have built a fire under the Pak forces, but I don't see it.

Posted by: Zenster   2004-04-06 4:34:46 AM  

#1  It is possible that the Pakistanis are using the amnesty offer because they know they are now on the clock. Maybe that is what is being setout in the Jirga. If we have to go in to clean out the rat's nest, will the other areas of Pakistan call a general strike in support of the autonomous tribal regions?
Posted by: Super Hose   2004-04-06 2:55:36 AM  

00:00