Submit your comments on this article | ||||||
India-Pakistan | ||||||
Fear of losing drove US raid | ||||||
2008-09-13 | ||||||
The United States decision to mount a ground strike inside Pakistan last week reflected fears that terrorists were winning the war against the US-led forces.
| ||||||
Posted by:Fred |
#15 I'm sure a 20-ship ARCLIGHT strike down through the middle of Rawalpindi/Islamabad would help Phakestan to make up its mind about allowing us to chase Talibunnies on their territory. Send the BUFFS with an F-22 escort. I'm sure the message will be received loud and clear. Do it the day after the elections, if we need to wait that long, but don't delay it any later. Phakestan needs a wake-up call - loud and clear. |
Posted by: Old Patriot 2008-09-13 15:26 |
#14 In his address to the joint session of Congress nine days after 9/11, President Bush declared: “Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.” |
Posted by: Parabellum 2008-09-13 09:19 |
#13 Will keep it in mind .5MT. It was a nice shotgun, but it wasn't in working order. The firing pins had been removed (back in the 1940s) out of concern that the barrel was weakened, although there were no visible dents or splits. It was used as a farm gun prior to that. I must admit, we did not sell that one to the government. We gave it to them. It was donated to an army armourer apprentice school as a training aid. |
Posted by: Bunyip 2008-09-13 08:50 |
#12 If you want to cripple the drug trade, legalize it. Let the profit potential disappear. Then it won't be a problem. If we can't keep the drugs out of our prisons, we sure can't keep them out our neighborhoods. And we haven't. There's too much money. I can't begrudge the dirt poor farmer in Afghanistan his cut when my neighbor is getting his just because of our stupid laws. That would cripple the Taliban. |
Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-09-13 08:17 |
#11 Yo Bunyip! Ima want to talk to you about that double barrel shotgun you sold to your government. Next time please holler at me. It broker my heart to read your post yesterday. |
Posted by: .5MT 2008-09-13 08:14 |
#10 I don't buy that Mike. Sure, the Afghan farmer feels that his best bet to feed his family is to grow poppies. However, his product hurts people, and the profits help fund a long chain of criminal enterprises. There are always alternatives they can grow. If poppies will grow, then other crops will as well. They will just be less profitable. If I started growing poppies at my place, then said I wouldn't stop until I was given an equally profitable alternative, then my local law enforcement community would, I expect, tell me to "Go directly to jail, do not pass go, and definitely don't collect $200". If I every got out of jail, I would need to find a less profitable, and less damaging way to feed the family. So why should the Afghans get a moral pass to grow poppies? |
Posted by: Bunyip 2008-09-13 08:01 |
#9 Recalling my US/New York State history , Fenian Irish of the 1860's who attempted attacks on British forces in Upper Canada were usually turned over to the Brits for proper disposal. Not always as promptly as Canada would've prefered but even then it was understood a real nation-state doesn't harbor scum unless they want a fight. Fenian Irish |
Posted by: JDB 2008-09-13 04:52 |
#8 Its not as easy as just spreading a fungus. The Afghan government then has that many more people with no money and nothing to farm. What they need is a viable alternative that's at least somewhere near as profitable. A law putting these growers in jail wouldn't hurt either - as long as they have something else to grow. |
Posted by: Mike N. 2008-09-13 03:44 |
#7 virus or fungus that kills the poppies would be a good start. |
Posted by: 3dc 2008-09-13 03:22 |
#6 From what I understand a big part of our enemy is criminal enterprise. I think a good cunk of that is based around the opium and we should go after it and destroy it and cut off their cash flow. |
Posted by: rjschwarz 2008-09-13 02:13 |
#5 The Hague Convention I would question whether Pakistan is a neutral Power under article 5, but maybe I'm not nuanced enough. Art. 5. A neutral Power must not allow any of the acts referred to in Articles 2 to 4 to occur on its territory. |
Posted by: SteveS 2008-09-13 01:43 |
#4 The Surge II. Only this time the donks probably won't say it can't work. They'll have to stick to the 'I told you so' card |
Posted by: Mike N. 2008-09-13 00:40 |
#3 I hope Petraeus will square it away. We need to get rid of those opium warlords too. |
Posted by: Penguin 2008-09-13 00:35 |
#2 Apparently we are afraid that unless we systematically exterminate every cockroach in the nest, we will get more cockroaches. And at the high rate we are taking them out, they will be lucky if they have a poop-stained prayer rug between them by the time we leave. |
Posted by: Anonymoose 2008-09-13 00:17 |
#1 "the Pakistani official said, 'There are certain circumstances in which a special operation might be required to go Not by YOU, maybe.... |
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2008-09-13 00:11 |