Pakistan Fires Back At Obama

Officials Criticize Presidential Hopeful For 'Irresponsible' Comments on Military Strikes

(AP)  Pakistan criticized U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama on Friday for saying that, if elected, he might order unilateral military strikes against terrorists hiding in this Islamic country.

Top Pakistan officials said Obama's comment was irresponsible and likely made for political gain in the race for the Democratic nomination.

"It's a very irresponsible statement, that's all I can say," Pakistan's Foreign Minister Khusheed Kasuri told AP Television News. "As the election campaign in America is heating up we would not like American candidates to fight their elections and contest elections at our expense."

Also Friday, a senior Pakistani official condemned another presidential hopeful, Colorado Republican Tom Tancredo, for saying the best way he could think of to deter a nuclear terrorist attack on the U.S. would be to threaten to retaliate by bombing the holiest Islamic sites of Mecca and Medina.

Obama said in a speech Wednesday that as president he would order military action against terrorists in Pakistan's tribal region bordering Afghanistan if intelligence warranted it. The comment provoked anger in Pakistan, a key ally of the United States in its war on terror.

Many analysts believe that top Taliban and al Qaeda leaders, including Osama bin Laden, are hiding in the region after escaping the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

President Gen. Pervez Musharraf has come under growing pressure from Washington to do more to tackle the alleged al Qaeda havens in Pakistan. The Bush administration has not ruled out military strikes, but still stresses the importance of cooperating with Pakistan.

"There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again," Obama said. "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not act, we will."

The Associated Press of Pakistan reported Friday that Musharraf was asked at a dinner at Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz's house on Thursday about the potential of U.S. military operations in Pakistan. Musharraf told guests that Pakistan was "fully capable" of tackling terrorists in the country and did not need foreign assistance.

Deputy Information Minister Tariq Azim said no foreign forces would be allowed to enter Pakistan, and called Obama irresponsible.

"I think those who make such statements are not aware of our contribution" in the fight on terrorism, he said.

Pakistan used to be a main backer of the Taliban, but it threw its support behind Washington following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

Since then, Pakistan has deployed about 90,000 troops in its tribal regions, mostly in lawless North and South Waziristan, and has lost hundreds of troops in fighting with militants there.

But a controversial strategy to make peace with militants and use tribesmen to police Waziristan has fueled U.S. fears that al Qaeda has been given space to regroup.

In Pakistan's national assembly on Friday, Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Sher Afgan said he would bring on a debate next week on recent criticism of Pakistan from several quarters in the U.S., including Tancredo's remarks.

It was a matter of "grave concern that U.S. presidential candidates are using unethical and immoral tactics against Islam and Pakistan to win their election," Afghan said.

Tancredo told about 30 people at a town hall meeting in Osceola, Iowa, on Tuesday that he believes that a nuclear terrorist attack on the U.S. could be imminent and that the U.S. needs to hurry up and think of a way to stop it.

"If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina. Because that's the only thing I can think of that might deter somebody from doing what they otherwise might do," he said.

[hootinannie2]

usatheway98...that was TOTALLY UNCALLED FOR!!! I'm not even black OR democrat, but even I could see you are sick and hateful. Your hateful extremely racist diatribe against Obama puts you WAY BELOW where you think he is. The poorest, most uneducated, backwards black man's mangey hound dog is better than you. GROW UP!!!!

[toldyouso21]

"Pakistan criticized U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama on Friday for saying that, if elected, he might order unilateral military strikes against terrorists hiding in this Islamic country. "

Yep. Obama did not play by the rules, which is to allow Musharref to pretend to oppose the strikes, while secretly letting America do them as he has done for the past few years. By stating what has been policy (in the Pakisatini village of 2006 and the Muslim schools in Northern Pakistan in 2006) Obama did not keep the little game a secret.

[drummer94]

Geezus. Not that way,"theway". It's 2007 out there.

[realpatriot1]

dargay,

A.Q. Khan may be a hero in Pakastan for bringing your country into the nuclear club and that may have deterred India and kept the peace in Southeast Asia during tense times.

What's resulted from him, by his own confession, providing the bomb to Iran and Libya(and indications are that he also provided technology to North Korea) is far different.

He may not have violated any laws but I believe he has a moral responsibilty to be more forthcoming about how he transferred this technology and to contribute the money he received to efforts for peace. That's just my personal opinion.

what greater moral crime could there be than to provide the means for mass destruction to people who've indicated the desire to use such means against innocent people?

I'm not privy to the intelligence but reports state that the White House is considering what Obama has suggested and I don't believe that discussion would be happening at all if there weren't actionable intelligence not being adequately acted upon.

If Pakastan could seal its border to Afghanistan and root out the Al Quaeda fighters we wouldn't have to act. Are you saying that they aren't in your country?

[dargay]

realpatriot1:

Pakistan has already told the US, give us actionable intelligence, we will take action. The US is short of such intelligence but long on threats and blame-games.

Regarding Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, he broke no international laws and he doesnt deserve any prosecution of any sort. He is a hero in Pakistan for bringing peace to South Asia.

[realpatriot1]

shutupfreak, Your boy David Duke has been done.

[cetomlinson]

I am so tired of hearing about the freaking middle east getting pissed off over every little thing that is said against them. I am by no means condoning what Obama said, aa a matter of fact I do not even support him, but I do support my country!!! Anyone who makes threats at our country are terrorist! By definition, terrorism is about creating fear and intimidation against a population or government. How many thousands of comments have come from them that they will annihilate us? And that from many of their governmental leaders.When will we as Americans unite and fight, not for a political figure, but for freedom and for our country. This will only happen when we recognize that anyone who threatens us will not be tolerated. We will not be terrorized, live in intimidation or fear! If you don't agree with this or don't want to be proactive in doing something about it then you don't deserved to live in this great country. Move the heII to Canada!

[realpatriot1]

dargay,

So anywhere Al Quaeda wants to set up shop to train jihadists and institute plans to attack innocent civilians worldwide is off limits? If so, they will have free reign.

I don't think we can defeat Al Queada solely by military action alone, we need to use all of our assets and the number one tool that we have is to stop occupying Muslim land. However, I think most of the world including most of the Muslim world would understand limited action to defend ourselves against attack.

There are no easy choices. I understand that Americans, particularly the troops and their families are war weary.

Iraq was a wste of time becuase Al Quaeda even now doesn't have the influence to control the county if we leave and establish major camps. The Iraqis want them out too and they will be taken care of once we go. We can't afford to allow them to attack our troops and regain control in Kabul. That would be an exponentially greater disaster than Iraq.

If Pakastan were to prosecute Professor Khan I would have more confidence in their efforts.

Comments like this will give Pakistan cause to reflect on what else they can do to fight terrorism.

[dargay]

realpatriot1:

No, the Taliban paid for their sins and refused to cooperate.

Pakistan is cooperating to the maximum extent, suffering severe turbulence as a result, and has not committed any crimes against America. Pakistan doesnt deserve to be threatened and bombed by the USA. Neither will bombing Pakistan solve any problems.

[realpatriot1]

dargay,

Do you believe that it was a mistake to remove the Taliban in Afghanistan? Was that a failure?

Conservatives don't have a monopoly on oversimplifying matters.

[drummer94]

Obama- Open mouth. Shoot foot. Stick in mouth.

[alrobrts]

Obama is definitely inexperienced. It was a very irresponsible statement about an ally. So many Pakistani security forces are being killed to fight al-queda in Pakistan. I cannot ever vote for this guy.

[dargay]

Barack Obama the fool should learn that unilateral militarism failed in Iraq and will fail in Pakistan as well. Additionally you dont threaten countries whose cooperation you are seeking.

[brianbwb-2009]

You really want Bin Laden, rather than going into yet another sovereign state, simply go into the white house and the pentagon, that is where Bin Laden's strings are being pulled.

As for Obama, I, even as one who is percieved as a "Black man", had non specific suspicions about him from the start, now they are specific, he has been bought off by the war profiteers.

I refuse to believe that our civil rights martyrs and other heroes of our continuing struggle againse oppression, died so that their progeny could become just more of the same racist and elitist dogs that continue to stand on our souls, Colin Powell, Condolezza Rice, and Barack Obama could not possibly be what they saw in their dreams. I pray not.

They were fighting and dying for the right to become better than this, we fought to make a better world for all men, not just for a chance to be players in the same BS game.

[annefrank10]

Looks like Obama's "new politics" is gonna get us a new war!
No thanks - we'll stick with John Edwards - the candidate with the best foreign policy.

[deltawildman]

Just as Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry, and their likes,,
What Senator Obama thinks does not matter much in the larger picture of things..
Obama is a non-issue,, Obama is a trainer for Hillary Clinton,, That's it..
Obama can't become the world Champ, because he's not built to become the Camp..
But he does do a good job at warming up someone who thinks she can be..
Will Hillary Clinton win??
Depends on how many people vote for her.
And from the looks at the polls, don't think it's going to happen..
It's the Republicans election to loose..
But they have lost elections before,, 2006 ring a bell?
Some in the Republican party are worried about ***,,, when in fact, the Republican parties worst enemy is the liberals what are in power in their very party..
Democrats, I'm asking you this,, and it's from the hart..
Are You Wanting To Win Another Election Again, Anytime Soon??
DO YOU WANT THE WHITE HOUSE??
Better find someone other than these clowns to run for you then..

And Pakistan,
Just as it takes a village to raise a child,, in Senator Obama's case,,
Every village needs their IDIOT..
Obama is ours...
Sorry for the mix up..

[pesojoe]

The chinese think some religious groups are terorist. Don't they have the right to send troops inside the usa to kill or capture them, because we will not extradite them. If we can do something why can't others do the same to us? Because we are always right, everyone else should obay us,and we are above the rules. Bush has us on that track, that is why everyone hates us now.

[sirwmhenry]

BOTTOM LINE: I will not vote for any candidate who does not state that they will pursue Bin Laden, and his cronies, into Pakistan. If Pakistan is our friend then they will support the move to take out the Terrorist where ever they are hidden. If Pakistan is not a friend of the War on Terror then they are a friend of its institution and should be agressively sought after. I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR ANY U.S. PRESIDENTIAL CANIDATE WHO DOES NOT HAVE THE 'PREVERBIAL BALLS' TO FIGHT TERROR WHEREEVER IT LIES!!!

[icecap50]

Interesting to ponder a rational discussion of how western civilization will survive the spread of Islmic facism. Our "leftist liberal" (vs "libertarian") classes are totally engrossed in appeasement politics and celebrity science. What about the "real survival issues" we face?? Throwing barbs at Bush and those of us they see as pesky small-minded munchkins for failure to embrace their values, is no doubt "fulfilling" in some way based on the frequency and volume of insults - like some kind of mental "french fries". At the end of the day, the Islamic extremists will haunt us to their dying day - their miserable world holds no greater reward than death and destruction after all. The "non-extremist" Muslims amongst us lift nary a finger to stop the madness, and in fact are essentially apologists for their acts. Wake up and smell the coffee folks... Find a new outlet for your energy.