Comments on: U.S. Hits Pakistan Again, Tension Mounts

At Least 12 Reported Killed; Diplomats Warn Rift Between Washington, Islamabad Dangerous

[grandesign]

"Senior U.S. military leaders said earlier this week that America would need to revise its strategy in combating militants on the Pakistani side of the border, following an increase in military casualties in Afghanistan."

Pakistan has been mostly talk with addressing the harboring of al Qaeda and Taliban elements. The Pakistan population has to decide if they are willing to side with one or the other since riding the fence is not helping reduce the threat.

And at some point we have to decide whether Pakistan''s capability of nuclear launch doesn''t fall into the hands of militants who commit suicide and kill innocents.

[DDouville]

Agree with tcandrews except armed militants do not give townspeople much choice on whether or not to support them.

[hotpaulie]

King George does what he wants...international law does not apply. Our foreign policy is going great isn''t it?

[TommyCraig]

"He had YEARS while Musharaff (sic? was in control that he could have gone in, but had to wait until the man was out and risk attacking a nuclear-armed country for an entity that he should have gone after years ago instead of attacking Iraq"!
Posted by gramto8 at 10:52 AM : Sep 12, 2008

Who is to say that we haven''t been going into Pakistan?
They didn''t broadcast that information the way they do now...

[gramto8]

If a democrat was president on 9/11 we will under constant islamic terrorist attacks on the US and all we will be doing is surviving frequent attacks on the US mainland.

Posted by mahalapril at 10:52 AM : Sep 12, 2008

It must be so nice to be able to read the future, the future if such -and-such had happened, etc. Do you also tell people what the lottery numbers are going to be? I never heard such a crock of fecal material!

[docpeter1953]

Fromm the above article, "The main opposition party called Friday for parliament to meet in joint session to devise strategy on how to deal with cross-border attacks after the latest suspected U.S. missile strike killed 12 people in northwestern Pakistan.

American forces in Afghanistan are stepping up their efforts to hit Taliban and al Qaeda militants in what they call safe havens in Pakistan''s wild border regions, despite stiff protests from Islamabad."
___________________
The solution here is obvious. the Pakistanis need to quit allowing the terrorists to hide in their country and start turning them over to American/NATO forces in Afghanistan.

You don''t get rid of rats by hiding in holes them and feeding them.

[gramto8]

If it was so important to go into Pakistan, why not go while someone who is pro-USA is the head and could OK the intrusion? Why wait until that person is n longer there and then attack and cause yet another country to be ready to blow the USA apart? Does this make any sense to any of you, Democrat or Republican?
I am Democrat, BTW, and from my perspective I can see nothing that makes any sense in this scenario. He had YEARS while Musharaff (sic? was in control that he could have gone in, but had to wait until the man was out and risk attacking a nuclear-armed country for an entity that he should have gone after years ago instead of attacking Iraq!

[mahalapril]

There are many multinational islamic fanatics running to the safe havens in Pakistan because they are being wiped out by our troops in Iraq.If Bush was not president on 9/11 we would not be talking about the election and the economy.The democrats are too coward to defend our homeland.Bush made sure by pre-emptive attacks against the Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan by wiping out their manpower and resources.The result is that it prevented a major islamic terrorist attack on the US since 9/11.If a democrat was president on 9/11 we will under constant islamic terrorist attacks on the US and all we will be doing is surviving frequent attacks on the US mainland.Now we should not be kidding ourselves that we can win in Afghanistan by troops surge.We are not allowed to cross the border to Pakistan.Bush is now allowing cross border attacks but these would not be enough.Just use the airforce to bomb these safe havens with or without Pakistan''s permission.The whole population should be obliterated including women and children since they are used as human shields but also are potential terrorists because they are brainwashed very early in life.Their only purpose in life is to kill as many infidels as they can with whatever means necessary especially suicide bombings to become martyrs.This safe havens bombings should end in a few days.This is the only way to win.

[gramto8]

want them to use words like, "Yeah we found out who it was, and we kicked their as$. We bombed them, we watched their families burn to death, and watched their houses burn to the ground" I do not want my government to give a measured calculated response. I want them to react in a furious rage blinded by the visions of burned bodies on the streets of an American city and bomb any person or persons or foreign government that ever did, does, or we suspect ever will coordinate a terrorist atack.

Posted by endpcnow at 10:25 AM : Sep 12, 2008


Time for restraint should have been when GHWB should have pulled out.... GWB wouldn''t have been conceived. This menace to the world (with the assistance of his administration) has caused more deaths than those planes could have had they taken out all of Mahattan. He is now trying to get us involved in wars in at least two more fronts. Our military cannot cover this. They are stretched too far now.

If he continues, we will be the ones waking up with more visions of death on OUR doorsteps, because he is giving them the ''Bring it on!" challenge.

[TommyCraig]

If Pakistan won''t go after those harboring on their border who plan and attack us, we must go after them. This is not adding a new war. This is completing the existing war. We should certainly try to work with Pakistan. But, if they are unwilling, we must do it.
Several months ago, the left was complaining that we weren''t going after them. Now they complain that we do. If the townspeople would not support the enemy, they wouldn''t be in the way of firefights. Were are all of the complaints against the enemy when they blow up their own muslim brothers and sisters?

[ajayvee]

What a fuss over nothing! It''s not like we''re bombing a sovereign country. This is Pakistan and we own their ***.

[jmurrieta11]

The headline is misleading. In no way are these border tribal areas really part of Pakistan. They are lawless areas under control of whatever ayatollah or mullah has the most AK-47s under his control--the Northwest Border land has always been like this.

If Pakistan cannot exert its sovereignty in the tribal areas, they cannot claim it is their territory. It is a no-man''s land.

As if the Pakistanis can be trusted anyway--developers of the Islamic bomb, who spread nuclear weapons to any state with enough money to pay off the *** power structure and Dr. Q.

Bomb away! Hope they nail Ben Laden. Bush has neglected him for too long in Bush''s rush to do favors for multi-national corporations--there''s no money for them in catching OBL!

[gramto8]

Wow ,going bankrupt in 2 losing wars & the solution is add 1 more-is that a stroke of brilliance... or what.?

Posted by babooph at 10:11 AM : Sep 12, 2008

And that isn''t all..... GWB has ''decided'' to give Russia the old ''Bring ''em on'' challenge as well. He has forgotten, just like Palin, or perhaps Palin just never even knew, that Russia has far more nukes than we do.

[gramto8]

*** (my editing) Pakistan! They are meaningless. I say go in there and completely exterminate all the terrorists who are holed up there. Pakistan is irrelevant, so who cares what they think.

Posted by mortal3 at 04:22 AM : Sep 12, 2008

Pakistan is a country that has as much right to exist as the USA. We have NO right to be bombing them and killing their civilians! If GWB wished to ''get'' bin Laden, he should have done it seven years ago. We ahve capabilities that would enable us to get this person without taking out whole communities. Why can they not be used?

Instead he has killed close to, or possibly more than, a million innocent Iraqis. We won''t even include all the Afghanis he has killed. And should I mention the 4743 dead US service personnel? How about the 33077 wounded in action, counting those returned to action as well as those not able to return? Have you seen some of the pictures of some of those soldiers unable to return? They are rather horrific injuries these soldiers are having to cope with.... and thanks to this administration, are doing so without appropriate veteran medical care.

My numbers are from the DoD site dated 9-11-08.

Here is a site with some further numbers that are quite interesting.

http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

[lemonskink]

Looks like the Bushites will have to declare war on Pakistan now. Barracuda Barbie wants war with Russia and she''s not even in office. Four more years of McBush ought to do us in.

[babooph]

Wow ,going bankrupt in 2 losing wars & the solution is add 1 more-is that a stroke of brilliance... or what.?

[checkthepast]

The term neoconservative was originally used as a criticism against liberals who had "moved to the right".[3][4] Michael Harrington, a democratic socialist, coined the usage of neoconservative in a 1973 Dissent magazine article concerning welfare policy.[5] According to E. J. Dionne, the nascent neoconservatives were driven by "the notion that liberalism" had failed and "no longer knew what it was talking about"

And still doesn''t....

[rushliberal]

Here you go you Dumb Republican Alaskan Rednecks and all you other NeoCONs who support Bushit - You do understand that NeoCON stands for the National Socialists Party - don''t you? That was the Party that started Hitler to power.

Two Russian supersonic strategic bombers, the advance party for a deployment of Russian forces for a joint exercise, landed in Venezuela on Wednesday in a move guaranteed to infuriate all believers in America%u2019s divine right to hegemony. The Tu-160 bombers(pictured above) are reputed to be the equals of America%u2019s B-1 and with an even bigger weapons load. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said that the bombers were there for ''training purposes%u2019 and added that he planned to fly one of the aircraft himself.

The entire exercise is designed to send a %u201Chow do you like it?%u201D message to the West, following the US and allied military presence in Georgia and the Black Sea:

[skyk239]

The military in Pakistan hasn''''t got the power to stop us. We can go in and kill all of them if we want to.

Posted by OlFishGut at 09:29 AM : Sep 12, 2008

You know I think the Russian''s said the SAME thing... Oh didn''t WE say that about Iraq as well. LOL That''s the problem with the fascist and those who follow them. THEY can not understand where the strength of this nation REALLY comes from... It IS not our military.

[skyk239]

Duh, Bush is not running against Obama. Obama is running against McCain & Palin. Obama has certainly impressed Europe, that is until he said he expected them to pay for their own defense, then their cheers turned to awkward silence. State one accomplishment Obama can list as a credential that leads you to believe he can change our enemies into our friends.
You may not want to waste your time thinking about it because there are none.

Posted by willymack4 at 08:59 AM : Sep 12, 2008


You are just a typical Bootlicker there Sparky! We were TOLD by Bush/McSame that IRAQ was the "Front" in the War on Terror! We were told that Al Queda and Bin Laden weren''t important anymore. Now any FOOL listening to Obama and DOESN''T understand that he was right about Iraq all along is in stupid denial. Anyone listening to Obama on Afganistan now KNOW''s he has the judgment an vision to lead... NOT these two old tired men. McSame has supported Bush every step of the way in this INSANE LIE so let''s not try that old bait and switch.