Article

2007-05-16 Home Front: WoT

Pakistan, S Arabia may pose bigger problems than Iraq, Afghanistan

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 2007-05-16 00:00|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 No kidding.

Posted by 3dc 2007-05-16 00:10|| 2007-05-16 00:10|| Front Page Top

#2 I thought they were posing these problems now?

Posted by gromgoru 2007-05-16 00:22|| 2007-05-16 00:22|| Front Page Top

#3 Very good points but all of them are a day late and a dollar short.

One of the reasons that the ideology of Bin Laden isnt growing in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is because it doesnt offer anybody anything. Its very dark, very narrow and very negative and people understand that.

Unfortunately, this changes not one whit Islam's obsession with global shari'a law, which is every bit as fatal as bin Laden's scheme. Back to square one.

Iran still remains our top priority. Both its pursuit of nuclear weapons and, of equal importance, its standing as an Islamic Theocratic regime demand immediate action. Theocratic Islam simply must be prohibited by the West. Shari'a law's direct contradiction and violent assault upon constitutional government make it a primary target. Islam must be taught that its aspiration for global shari'a law will be met at all turns with military response and physical extinction where needed.

The West has yet to learn the precise military argot which will render a successful strategy against Islam. Lack of sufficiently violent retaliation is one of several phrasings that currently elude us. Western politicians, and to a lesser extent, our military both exhibit a fatal unawareness regarding the machinations of high context cultures. This garbles our message and distorts the intended results that we obtain or convey through our our military actions.

Until our military's "dialogue" matches Islam's own understood high context vocabulary, any return we see for the continuing loss of our soldier's lives and stupendous financial drain will never match the desired results.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-05-16 04:12|| 2007-05-16 04:12|| Front Page Top

#4 Both countries are connected by the same ideology-Global islamic dominated world funded by the Saudi Government!!!!!

Posted by Paul 2007-05-16 05:05|| 2007-05-16 05:05|| Front Page Top

#5 No support for al-Qaeda in the Saud entity? One post 911 poll found 95% admiration for Osama bin Laden. That terrorist has massive support there and in Pakistan. In Karachi he is despised on Sindhi nationalist grounds. In Peshawar he is a saint.

Posted by Sneaze 2007-05-16 05:58|| 2007-05-16 05:58|| Front Page Top

#6 Zenster:

Stay the course does seem to be piecemeal. Maybe support for counter-terrorism would be restored if we started to think wholesale. Flatten Qom and the Ayatollahs will be hanged by their own people. Flatten "Sadr Slum" and Baghdad belligerents would consolidate at a status quo. If we think of 9-11 as "Pearl Harbor" then we might look for some variant of "Hiroshima."

Posted by Sneaze 2007-05-16 06:03|| 2007-05-16 06:03|| Front Page Top

#7 "One of the reasons that the ideology of Bin Laden isnt growing in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is because it doesnt offer anybody anything. Its very dark, very narrow and very negative and people understand that."

It's hard to expand a business when you already dominate the market.

Posted by Sonar 2007-05-16 07:33|| 2007-05-16 07:33|| Front Page Top

#8 Pakistan, S Arabia may pose bigger problems than Iraq, Afghanistan

Of course they do -- now. But that's because the rather more immediate problems that Iraq and Afghanistan posed a few years ago have been removed. We're now in the mopping up stage with both, and in both a large part of the remaining problems are caused by .... (drum roll, please!) Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. With a great deal of help from Iran, Russia, quite probably China in the deep background, etc. The problems are being attacked in order of priority, which is as it should be when key resources (troops, funding) are limited.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-05-16 08:08|| 2007-05-16 08:08|| Front Page Top

#9 One of the reasons that the ideology of Bin Laden isnt growing in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is because it doesnt offer anybody anything. Its very dark, very narrow and very negative and people understand that.
I love that quote too. I believe that the reason these countries and others who are muslim but not terrorists, is that these people don't believe the bullshit dogma of Islam. They just go through the ceremonies to appear to be religious, but in fact, they are into power, money, golf, or something. They tolerate Islam to keep the masses from focusing on their extreme wealth in the midst of poverty. It's a verbal shell game to hide a better life from the common folk. But as long as the common folk are kept stupid, it works. Much like the MSM and the donks.

Posted by wxjames 2007-05-16 10:41|| 2007-05-16 10:41|| Front Page Top

#10 What Zen said. You have to smack these people hard every time they make a move until they understand that they better sit still. So far we have failed to do so in places like Kosovo, Thailand and the Phillipines. Hell, we had an ally in Serbia and we bombed him instead of the enemy. This is plain and simple a failure to understand the enemy. And it's going to be far more complicated trying to secure the Pak nukes if we don't deal with Iran first.

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2007-05-16 12:11|| 2007-05-16 12:11|| Front Page Top

#11 Stay the course does seem to be piecemeal. Maybe support for counter-terrorism would be restored if we started to think wholesale. Flatten Qom and the Ayatollahs will be hanged by their own people. Flatten "Sadr Slum" and Baghdad belligerents would consolidate at a status quo. If we think of 9-11 as "Pearl Harbor" then we might look for some variant of "Hiroshima."

Gosh, Sneaze, wouldn't that be mass murder or genocide? Yesterday, I mentioned how a series of limited nuclear attacks on Cairo, Damascus, Tehran, Riyadh and Islamabad would reducde global terrorism by a huge margin and was accused of the same thing. Of course, my stated preference that we instead pursue a campaign of targeted killings against Islam's top tier leadership was simultaneously ignored. You are absolutely right that we need to implement measures which make ordinary Muslims seek to slit the throats of jihadist imams and ayatollahs.

I'm glad you appreciated what I meant to convey by mentioning how we need to make it so that "our military's "dialogue" matches Islam's own understood high context vocabulary". As yet, we are not tailoring our responses to Islam's narrow scope of comprehension. Our refusal or inability to do so only increases the likelihood of being forced to use less desirable options like a series of nuclear attacks upon Middle East terrorist centers.

I still oppose first use of nuclear weapons by America. We have sufficient conventional firepower to achieve many of the required goals that confront us. While Islam's "vocabulary" is one of almost unmitigated bloodshed and mayhem, all of our replies need not consist of the same ilk. However, it is crucial for us to abandon the "hearts and minds" approach that clearly is not working". While some portions of Iraq may have benign regard for America's liberating presence, far too many continue to embrace the clannish, tribal high context mentality that still regards us as Crusading occupiers. This will not be overcome with any benevolent policies.

In the short time we have left before escalating nuclear proliferation finally enables terrorist nuclear attacks upon American soil, we need to establish a firm track record of making life incredibly miserable for those who seek to do us harm. We have other ways of doing this than solely with military invasions. Selective disruption of economic infrastructure is one of them.

Iran could be toppled with several very minor stand-off attacks upon its limited gasoline refining capacity and petroleum off-loading facilities. This, combined with pinpoint destruction of their known nuclear facilities could easily destabilize their mullahcracy and bring down the Iranian house of cards.

The more we resist using such leveraged methods, the more likely it becomes that gruesome wholesale slaughter will arise as our sole option. To hell with being loved, to hell with spreading democracy in nations whose soil is so parched by theocratic tyranny that such fragile seeds will never take root in our lifetimes. To hell with anything that does not inspire fear and dread of America's wrath.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-05-16 16:23|| 2007-05-16 16:23|| Front Page Top

23:58 Classical_Liberal
23:57 Pappy
23:57 Grumenk Philalzabod0723
23:51 JosephMendiola
23:47 newc
23:45 JosephMendiola
23:41 Zenster
23:40 Silentbrick
23:36 JosephMendiola
23:24 CrazyFool
23:23 newc
23:12 newc
23:07 Jackal
23:02 Jackal
22:58 Jackal
22:58 Angaiger Tojo1904
22:57 JSU
22:56 JosephMendiola
22:56 Angaiger Tojo1904
22:55 Frank G
22:52 Angaiger Tojo1904
22:50 JosephMendiola
22:46 Zenster
22:43 DarthVader