Who else thinks that we'll be invading Pakistan before long ?
This is a discussion on Who else thinks that we'll be invading Pakistan before long ? within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I would have just put a link here but I don't know how,sorry. I think that it'll be right around six months, by then the ...
March 19th, 2009 05:20 AM
Who else thinks that we'll be invading Pakistan before long ?
I would have just put a link here but I don't know how,sorry. I think that it'll be right around six months, by then the Taliban will be running Pakistan for the most part and getting tooclose to getting their hands on the nukes. We'll go in, or India will, probably us, to keep India from nuking them. The Hindus lost over 80 million people to the Muslims,slaughtered,so they have been itching for payback for a long time. I'd rather see India deal with it, so we don't get bogged down trying to make a democracy in yet another place where the guy with the most guns always rules. IMO, the Government of Pakistan is barely in control.
March 19 (Bloomberg) -- Pakistan’s government urged the Obama administration to reconsider a plan to expand strikes by drones in the tribal regions to include targets in the southwestern province of Baluchistan.
“From the very first day, the government has been condemning drone attacks,” Information Minister Qamar Zaman Kaira said in the capital, Islamabad, yesterday, state media reported. Pakistan is “hoping the U.S. administration would review its decision to expand such attacks in Baluchistan.”
The Obama administration recently received two reports on Pakistan and Afghanistan that called for a broadening of targets to include a militant sanctuary in and around Baluchistan’s capital, Quetta, the New York Times reported this week.
Thousands of Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters sought shelter in Pakistan’s tribal region after the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in late 2001. Mullah Mohammad Omar, who led the Taliban government in Afghanistan, has operated with near impunity in Baluchistan, which is under central government control and abuts parts of southern Afghanistan, the Times said.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, asked about the report at a Defense Department briefing in Washington yesterday, said the U.S. is concerned about the security around Quetta and the presence of Taliban militants in the area.
“But I think this is principally a problem and a challenge for the Pakistanis to take on,” he said, according to a Defense Department transcript. “We are prepared to do anything we can to -- to help them do that.”
Pakistan’s government says it is pursuing a program of selective military action against militants while it woos tribal leaders to encourage them to expel foreign fighters.
Taliban and al-Qaeda-linked insurgents have made inroads in Pakistan in recent months, forcing authorities to sign a truce and agree to Islamic law in the Swat Valley, a former tourist destination northwest of Islamabad.
Some Obama administration officials are concerned extending strikes by Central Intelligence Agency-operated drones may worsen tensions with Pakistan, the newspaper said. Past attacks have triggered anti-U.S. protests in the tribal region and cities after civilians were killed.
President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani have repeatedly protested the strikes, Kaira said, according to the official Associated Press of Pakistan. They say the raids violate Pakistan’s sovereignty and weaken the government’s ability to effectively combat terrorism.
Drone strikes in tribal areas have been effective at killing nine of al-Qaeda’s top 20 leaders, the New York Times cited administration officials as saying. The aerial campaign was recently expanded to focus on the Pakistani Taliban leader, Baitullah Mehsud, as well as his fighters and camps, it said.
While American intelligence officials say many top Taliban commanders remain in hiding in and around Quetta, some Afghan officials say that other senior Taliban leaders have fled to the Pakistani port city of Karachi, according to the report.
Strikes on Quetta or Afghan settlements and refugee camps around the city and near the border with Afghanistan would carry high risks of civilian causalities, the newspaper cited officials as saying.
March 19th, 2009 05:20 AM
March 19th, 2009 06:36 AM
What does Pakistan have that we need?
March 19th, 2009 07:28 AM
I have some 'secret' news for you...we've been going in there anyway.
I have no proof, but eventually it will come out...any bets?
"That I cannot do."
"Give this to, uh, Clemenza. I want reliable people, people who aren't going to be carried away. After all we're not murderers in spite of what this undertaker thinks."
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member
March 19th, 2009 08:44 AM
we are there, but we don't have the "balls" anymore to do it right. they will just make a mess out of things.
An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.
Red State State of Mind
March 19th, 2009 08:52 AM
No war has ever been pretty, any vet will tell you that. Obama doesn't have the balls to get too aggressive with anyone. It's ironic how much Obama sounds like Alec Baldwin in Team America, he's that bad at foreign policy and the application of force. Anyone wonder who KJI, Hu Jintao, Ahmadenijhad and OBL voted for in '08? It's not a question most major press sources will pose.
Desperate people do desperate things in desperate situations.
Heavily medicated for your protection.
Kimber Tactical Custom II, SIS Pro
March 19th, 2009 11:45 AM
We won't invade Pakistan, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, or anyplace that threatens us.
We might invade Montana.
March 19th, 2009 11:51 AM
we've already have skirmishes and air strikes over there border with afghanistan, I don't think it will take much more before we go into the western part of that country if the pakistani gov cant get the job done on it's own
EDC's Colt Defender 45 acp and S&W 442 .38
Springfield XD 45 acp
Ruger Super RedHawk .44 mag
mossberg 590 12 gauge tactical
March 19th, 2009 02:48 PM
March 19th, 2009 03:03 PM
I can't for see the present administration or the US citzens having the will for another invasion.
I do think we have SpecOps have been in Pakistan
Noli nothis permittere te terere
Lord, Grant me a good sword and no need to use it.
March 19th, 2009 03:33 PM
Originally Posted by retsupt99
I'm talking about officially, with lots of troops, tanks...the whole enchilada.
I used to go to places that I've never been , I know how that game works.
March 19th, 2009 03:37 PM
Originally Posted by Ram Rod
Nukes, and the knowledge of how to make them. We don't need them, we just need to keep them out of the wrong hands. The hands of the Taliban and AQ,the guys who just took over the Swat valley. They won't be content with just that.
March 19th, 2009 03:40 PM
More than likely we will attack and kill some Americans in some militia somewhere. Think Clinton/Reno and Waco, Ruby Ridge... ect..
Way before we actually go after a country that harbors terrorist.
Think Pakistan. Or 19 of 20 hijackers on 9/11 from SAUDI ARABIA.
March 19th, 2009 03:53 PM
Sadly I think you are more right than I want you to be.
Originally Posted by GreenHorn
Ruby Ridge and Waco never should've happened, but when you have a piece of crap like Clinton/Reno for President/Attorney General you can expect no better.
March 19th, 2009 06:13 PM
The only thing protecting the Saudis is oil,and connections. They spent billions every year on the madrassas that teach hatred and jihad, in every country,ours included. Nobody knows how much else they spend helping terror groups to train,operate,arm up etc. If only they'd reap what they sow....unlikely to happen unless the oil dries up,or we don't need so much of it anymore. The Saudi royals should be arrested any time that they leave their sand box.
March 19th, 2009 08:08 PM
We have already been operating on a very limited scale in Pakistan. India would just love to do some damage to that country, but if they did, it would stir up a hornets nest and they would eventually have to throw nukes at several different countries afterwards.
Sadly we are now having to deal with the fact that we took our eye off the ball when we sent the majority of troops into Iraq instead of focusing on Afganistan like we should have. Seems we did actually support the Taliban a couple of decades ago. One more time we get bit in the butt for not seeing long term consequences. Now they have retreated to a portion of Pakistan where it is all but impossible to track them or effectively eliminate them.
Last edited by farronwolf; March 19th, 2009 at 08:52 PM.
Reason: brain fart
Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
Texas CHL Instructor
Texas Hunter Education Instructor
By Coder in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: January 5th, 2011, 12:43 AM
By artz in forum General Firearm Discussion
Last Post: February 10th, 2009, 12:45 AM
By CT-Mike in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: December 25th, 2007, 07:56 PM
By LastManOut in forum General Firearm Discussion
Last Post: September 9th, 2007, 05:59 PM
Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.