They just support organizations and export technology that do so.Originally posted by: jpeyton
Amen to that. Most countries this day and age do the same. There are just a few power-hungry empires that need to fulfill their rise-and-fall destiny like all those before them.Originally posted by: Lemon law
At least Pakistan tends to its own knitting and does not try to destabilize entire regions half way around the world.
If you're trying to defend the US, that's not really an avenue you want to go down.Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
They just support organizations and export technology that do so.Originally posted by: jpeyton
Amen to that. Most countries this day and age do the same. There are just a few power-hungry empires that need to fulfill their rise-and-fall destiny like all those before them.Originally posted by: Lemon law
At least Pakistan tends to its own knitting and does not try to destabilize entire regions half way around the world.
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: Buck Armstrong
Pakistan make a positive contribution? That's a good one.
There are plenty of positive contributions we have made. It's just that that the definition of positive will vary from culture to culture and from individual to individual.
Originally posted by: jpeyton
If you're trying to defend the US, that's not really an avenue you want to go down.Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
They just support organizations and export technology that do so.Originally posted by: jpeyton
Amen to that. Most countries this day and age do the same. There are just a few power-hungry empires that need to fulfill their rise-and-fall destiny like all those before them.Originally posted by: Lemon law
At least Pakistan tends to its own knitting and does not try to destabilize entire regions half way around the world.
Originally posted by: Aimster
Most people in this thread don't know squat about Pakistan.
They will have to do a wikipedia search if u asked them a basic question about the country.
They are just pissing on it because they are Muslim or because they want to blame everyone for the problems of the U.S.
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: Buck Armstrong
Pakistan make a positive contribution? That's a good one.
There are plenty of positive contributions we have made. It's just that that the definition of positive will vary from culture to culture and from individual to individual.
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Gobadgrs
Why does the news media go out of their fuckin' way to report what secret stuff we're planning to do in the war on terror. I'd much rather learn that we went in to Pakistan unilaterally after the strike was done and our guys were out safe than by some wanker whos determined to give out all details ahead of time.
And the people that are leaking this shit should be put in jail for endangering soldiers lives like that.
Oh please. You can't miss an attack group, especially an Aircraft Carrier based group.
Did you know India does not allow any U.S. military operations in any of it's territory?
Yeah it probably has nothing to do with them being a third world shithole that happens to have nuclear technology forcing others to take notice when normally they'd just ignore them, justifiably so.Originally posted by: Aimster
Most people in this thread don't know squat about Pakistan.
They will have to do a wikipedia search if u asked them a basic question about the country.
They are just pissing on it because they are Muslim or because they want to blame everyone for the problems of the U.S.
Pakistan, US at odds over border bombing that killed 11 Pakistani troops ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, July 17 (AP) - U.S. and Pakistani investigators have reached ?separate? conclusions about why warplanes killed 11 Pakistani troops at an outpost near the Afghan border, the Pakistan army said Thursday. Pakistan army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said a joint investigation had failed to produce an agreement on what happened. ?We have our separate findings. The findings are different,? Abbas told The Associated Press. He declined to give details of the findings because they remain confidential. However, he said the bombing could not be justified as self-defense. ?In our investigation, there was no act of offense from this side,? Abbas said. The paramilitary Frontier Corps troops manning the border post ?never fired a shot on the other side and it was taken by complete surprise when a number of strikes came on their post,? he said. Abbas also disputed New York Times report that U.S. military planners did not have the coordinates of the base. Abbas said the coordinates of all the posts on the Pakistani side of the border had been shared with the U.S.-led coalition force in Afghanistan at least three times since 2003. ?Even marked maps were handed over to coalition forces at one stage, indicating the location of our posts,? he said. Capt. Christian Patterson, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition forces in Afghanistan, said Thursday the incident was still under investigation. Abbas said the incident had heightened awareness on both sides to improve coordination and communications between troops on either side of the mountainous frontier. He said the two sides had ?generally agreed? on recommendations to address those problems and avert any repeat. Details would be released jointly at a later date, he said. (Posted @ 21:46 PST)
Most Pakistanis support dialogue with militants: poll ISLAMABAD, July 17 (AFP): Seventy-one percent of Pakistanis support dialogue with pro-Taliban militants in tribal areas bordering Afghanistan over military intervention, according to a survey published Thursday. The survey was conducted in June by the International Republican Institute, a US group with links to the Republican party. When asked what was the most effective way to deal with terrorism, 61 percent cited economic development and education, nine percent said military force, and 24 percent said both. ?IRI's poll reveals that the Pakistani people are unambiguous, preferring negotiation and development to military options,? the group said. More than 70 percent of Pakistanis opposed the country's cooperation with the United States' ?war on terror,? with just 15 percent in favour, according to the poll of 3,484 people selected at random. However 81 percent people supported new government's policy on terrorism. (Posted @ 17:10 PST)
This is no surprise, it's obvious that the Taliban and the majority of the Paks are the same animal.Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Most Pakistanis support dialogue with militants: poll ISLAMABAD, July 17 (AFP): Seventy-one percent of Pakistanis support dialogue with pro-Taliban militants in tribal areas bordering Afghanistan over military intervention, according to a survey published Thursday. The survey was conducted in June by the International Republican Institute, a US group with links to the Republican party. When asked what was the most effective way to deal with terrorism, 61 percent cited economic development and education, nine percent said military force, and 24 percent said both. ?IRI's poll reveals that the Pakistani people are unambiguous, preferring negotiation and development to military options,? the group said. More than 70 percent of Pakistanis opposed the country's cooperation with the United States' ?war on terror,? with just 15 percent in favour, according to the poll of 3,484 people selected at random. However 81 percent people supported new government's policy on terrorism. (Posted @ 17:10 PST)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Originally posted by: Red Dawn
This is no surprise, it's obvious that the Taliban and the majority of the Paks are the same animal.Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Most Pakistanis support dialogue with militants: poll ISLAMABAD, July 17 (AFP): Seventy-one percent of Pakistanis support dialogue with pro-Taliban militants in tribal areas bordering Afghanistan over military intervention, according to a survey published Thursday. The survey was conducted in June by the International Republican Institute, a US group with links to the Republican party. When asked what was the most effective way to deal with terrorism, 61 percent cited economic development and education, nine percent said military force, and 24 percent said both. ?IRI's poll reveals that the Pakistani people are unambiguous, preferring negotiation and development to military options,? the group said. More than 70 percent of Pakistanis opposed the country's cooperation with the United States' ?war on terror,? with just 15 percent in favour, according to the poll of 3,484 people selected at random. However 81 percent people supported new government's policy on terrorism. (Posted @ 17:10 PST)
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
This is no surprise, it's obvious that the Taliban and the majority of the Paks are the same animal.Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Most Pakistanis support dialogue with militants: poll ISLAMABAD, July 17 (AFP): Seventy-one percent of Pakistanis support dialogue with pro-Taliban militants in tribal areas bordering Afghanistan over military intervention, according to a survey published Thursday. The survey was conducted in June by the International Republican Institute, a US group with links to the Republican party. When asked what was the most effective way to deal with terrorism, 61 percent cited economic development and education, nine percent said military force, and 24 percent said both. ?IRI's poll reveals that the Pakistani people are unambiguous, preferring negotiation and development to military options,? the group said. More than 70 percent of Pakistanis opposed the country's cooperation with the United States' ?war on terror,? with just 15 percent in favour, according to the poll of 3,484 people selected at random. However 81 percent people supported new government's policy on terrorism. (Posted @ 17:10 PST)
Not racist, I just feel towards them what they feel towards me as an American and an Atheist. They could be pink as your mommia's fanny and I'd still have a problem with them, especially since they support the Taliban.Originally posted by: ranmaniac
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
This is no surprise, it's obvious that the Taliban and the majority of the Paks are the same animal.Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Most Pakistanis support dialogue with militants: poll ISLAMABAD, July 17 (AFP): Seventy-one percent of Pakistanis support dialogue with pro-Taliban militants in tribal areas bordering Afghanistan over military intervention, according to a survey published Thursday. The survey was conducted in June by the International Republican Institute, a US group with links to the Republican party. When asked what was the most effective way to deal with terrorism, 61 percent cited economic development and education, nine percent said military force, and 24 percent said both. ?IRI's poll reveals that the Pakistani people are unambiguous, preferring negotiation and development to military options,? the group said. More than 70 percent of Pakistanis opposed the country's cooperation with the United States' ?war on terror,? with just 15 percent in favour, according to the poll of 3,484 people selected at random. However 81 percent people supported new government's policy on terrorism. (Posted @ 17:10 PST)
Not only have you revealed your low-grade thinking and bigotry in your previous post, but now you're lumping an entire nation based on a tribe of people. Save your xenophobia and racism for Stormfront.
bullshit. I highly doubt that ANY of those included in the poll were from the frontier region itself; therefore, you can not draw any direct correlation with the poll results and the behavior of the Taliban.Originally posted by: Lemon law
I argue that it proves no such thing. It simply means that the Taliban is making no painful mischief inside of the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Eradication of the Taliban remains 50% of the objective. Always has been, always will be. Every last one of those fuckers needs to die.And partly by implication, its points out the the US occupation of Afghanistan will fail if our definition of success becomes taking out the Taliban.
I'm actually 100% sure.In case we do not remember its was Al-Quida and not the Taliban who struck us on 911.
We only went after the Taliban when they refused our demand to turn over Ossama Bin Laden. While it is now suspected that a good part of the Al-Quida leadership now shelters
somewhere inside of the tribal areas of Pakistan, NO ONE can be really sure.
I'd prefer we destroy both, but idiots like you won't let us go in and do so.And with or without the presence of top AL-Quida leadership, Al-Quida is active in many countries all over the globe. And even if we can exterminate the entire Taliban movement,
unless we get the top Al-Quida leadership, it seems to me, we would be accomplishing nothing.
...and we'll follow them there if we have to.Because the Taliban is a regional movement tied to just that region, and Al-Quida
is a global movement with global goals. And even if the US can establish military hegemony over the tribal regions of Pakistan, by the time that goal is even in sight, the Al-Quida leadership will have long before found new secret refuges.
Originally posted by: palehorse
bullshit. I highly doubt that ANY of those included in the poll were from the frontier region itself; therefore, you can not draw any direct correlation with the poll results and the behavior of the Taliban.Originally posted by: Lemon law
I argue that it proves no such thing. It simply means that the Taliban is making no painful mischief inside of the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Nice fucking try.
Eradication of the Taliban remains 50% of the objective. Always has been, always will be. Every last one of those fuckers needs to die.And partly by implication, its points out the the US occupation of Afghanistan will fail if our definition of success becomes taking out the Taliban.
no exceptions.
I'm actually 100% sure.In case we do not remember its was Al-Quida and not the Taliban who struck us on 911.
We only went after the Taliban when they refused our demand to turn over Ossama Bin Laden. While it is now suspected that a good part of the Al-Quida leadership now shelters
somewhere inside of the tribal areas of Pakistan, NO ONE can be really sure.
That said, I'm glad that AQ drew our attention to the evil of the Taliban. Had we not been hit by AQ on 9/11, we'd probably never have begun the honorable work of eradicating the Taliban from the face of the planet.
It's on the very short list of good things that have derived from the attacks on 9/11...
I'd prefer we destroy both, but idiots like you won't let us go in and do so.And with or without the presence of top AL-Quida leadership, Al-Quida is active in many countries all over the globe. And even if we can exterminate the entire Taliban movement,
unless we get the top Al-Quida leadership, it seems to me, we would be accomplishing nothing.
...and we'll follow them there if we have to.Because the Taliban is a regional movement tied to just that region, and Al-Quida
is a global movement with global goals. And even if the US can establish military hegemony over the tribal regions of Pakistan, by the time that goal is even in sight, the Al-Quida leadership will have long before found new secret refuges.
One of the biggest mistakes during the last 30 years was sitting idly by while various terrorist groups set up camps all over the world. We knew where they were, and we didnt take them out. So now we're paying the price...
The only sad part is that clowns like you STILL wont let us take out those camps... it's fucking disgusting.
bah...
Originally posted by: Oceandevi
Originally posted by: palehorse
bullshit. I highly doubt that ANY of those included in the poll were from the frontier region itself; therefore, you can not draw any direct correlation with the poll results and the behavior of the Taliban.Originally posted by: Lemon law
I argue that it proves no such thing. It simply means that the Taliban is making no painful mischief inside of the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Nice fucking try.
Eradication of the Taliban remains 50% of the objective. Always has been, always will be. Every last one of those fuckers needs to die.And partly by implication, its points out the the US occupation of Afghanistan will fail if our definition of success becomes taking out the Taliban.
no exceptions.
I'm actually 100% sure.In case we do not remember its was Al-Quida and not the Taliban who struck us on 911.
We only went after the Taliban when they refused our demand to turn over Ossama Bin Laden. While it is now suspected that a good part of the Al-Quida leadership now shelters
somewhere inside of the tribal areas of Pakistan, NO ONE can be really sure.
That said, I'm glad that AQ drew our attention to the evil of the Taliban. Had we not been hit by AQ on 9/11, we'd probably never have begun the honorable work of eradicating the Taliban from the face of the planet.
It's on the very short list of good things that have derived from the attacks on 9/11...
I'd prefer we destroy both, but idiots like you won't let us go in and do so.And with or without the presence of top AL-Quida leadership, Al-Quida is active in many countries all over the globe. And even if we can exterminate the entire Taliban movement,
unless we get the top Al-Quida leadership, it seems to me, we would be accomplishing nothing.
...and we'll follow them there if we have to.Because the Taliban is a regional movement tied to just that region, and Al-Quida
is a global movement with global goals. And even if the US can establish military hegemony over the tribal regions of Pakistan, by the time that goal is even in sight, the Al-Quida leadership will have long before found new secret refuges.
One of the biggest mistakes during the last 30 years was sitting idly by while various terrorist groups set up camps all over the world. We knew where they were, and we didnt take them out. So now we're paying the price...
The only sad part is that clowns like you STILL wont let us take out those camps... it's fucking disgusting.
bah...
I do not understand this logic. If you have a clear objective, achieve it. I for one have no fucking problem with our military blasting into Pakistan and killing AQ/taliban. We should only have to respect the borders of the world powers. Screw all the small weak countries that cant really stop us anyway.
But do it right, don't fuck up, and do not take 5 years and accomplish nothing!
How long has this pony ride been going on for? I wonder sometimes if its all just a game. Why go in and do it half assed? We could already be done and have all our people back home.
( Been there and done the non half assed route in Vietnam. At times we had 500,000 plus troops over there. We had a kill kill kill military strategy in Vietnam, we have a kill kill kill strategy in Afghanistan, and it did not work in Vietnam and is very unlikely to work in Afghanistan. And even less likely to work in Pakistan ) Palehorse may be a legend in his own mind, but he just does not have the results to support any degree of even semi competence.Originally posted by: Oceandevi
Originally posted by: palehorse
bullshit. I highly doubt that ANY of those included in the poll were from the frontier region itself; therefore, you can not draw any direct correlation with the poll results and the behavior of the Taliban.Originally posted by: Lemon law
I argue that it proves no such thing. It simply means that the Taliban is making no painful mischief inside of the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Nice fucking try. ( Totally wrong palehorse, the last time the US military made incursions into the tribal areas of Palistan, ALL the local tribes rallied around the Taliban and vowed to resist any US incursions. )
Eradication of the Taliban remains 50% of the objective. Always has been, always will be. Every last one of those fuckers needs to die. ( Funny palehorse, its becoming their goal that every one of you fuckers have to die. You are only outnumbered something like a thousand to one )And partly by implication, its points out the the US occupation of Afghanistan will fail if our definition of success becomes taking out the Taliban.
no exceptions. (If you say so Palehorse, after all you are stateside---its the people there that will have to do the dying )
I'm actually 100% sure.In case we do not remember its was Al-Quida and not the Taliban who struck us on 911.
We only went after the Taliban when they refused our demand to turn over Ossama Bin Laden. While it is now suspected that a good part of the Al-Quida leadership now shelters
somewhere inside of the tribal areas of Pakistan, NO ONE can be really sure.
That said, I'm glad that AQ drew our attention to the evil of the Taliban. Had we not been hit by AQ on 9/11, we'd probably never have begun the honorable work of eradicating the Taliban from the face of the planet. ( You only awoke to the fact that the Taliban were nuts
after 911? I knew they were many fruitloops shy of a full bowl in 1995. )
It's on the very short list of good things that have derived from the attacks on 9/11...( We derived all the wrong lessons from 911 )
I'd prefer we destroy both, but idiots like you won't let us go in and do so. ( Excuse me palehorse, neither GWB or Musharrif consult me at all in making their decisions. I am simply a voice of reality when you are not. )And with or without the presence of top AL-Quida leadership, Al-Quida is active in many countries all over the globe. And even if we can exterminate the entire Taliban movement,
unless we get the top Al-Quida leadership, it seems to me, we would be accomplishing nothing.
...and we'll follow them there if we have to. ( Only if you know where they are---you don't know where they are now and are unlikely to j=know where they go. )Because the Taliban is a regional movement tied to just that region, and Al-Quida
is a global movement with global goals. And even if the US can establish military hegemony over the tribal regions of Pakistan, by the time that goal is even in sight, the Al-Quida leadership will have long before found new secret refuges.
One of the biggest mistakes during the last 30 years was sitting idly by while various terrorist groups set up camps all over the world. We knew where they were, and we didnt take them out. So now we're paying the price... ( So you advocate taking out anyone who does not sing God Bless the USA?? You are now talking a huge and worse yet growing group of entire nations. Talk about biting off more than you can chew )
The only sad part is that clowns like you STILL wont let us take out those camps... it's fucking disgusting. ( See my earlier comment, it ain't me babe, talk to GWB, even GWB says no )
bah...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then Oceandevi says.
I do not understand this logic. If you have a clear objective, achieve it. I for one have no fucking problem with our military blasting into pakistan and killing AQ/taliban. We should only have to respect the borders of the world powers. Screw all the small weak countries that cant really stop us anyway. ( Part of the defect in that logic is that Pakistan is not your average small weak country, they have nukes. The other defect in that logic is that every small weak country on the planet is now saying, If the USA will pull this crap on someone else, I need nukes to prevent it. And now 40 or so nations are petitioning the IAEA for nuclear permits. The third defect in your logic is that if the world gets tired of our crap, and GWB has us skating on thin ice as it is, we are outnumbered 20 to 1. )
But do it right, don't fuck up, and do not take 5 years and accomplish nothing! ( five years, we have damn near seven years invested in the Afghan occupation. And for four years running, Taliban activity has increased for four years in a row )
How long has this pony ride been going on for? I wonder sometimes if its all just a game. Why go in and do it half assed? We could already be done and have all our people back home.
Originally posted by: Lemon law
snip
but he just does not have the results to support any degree of even semi competence.
Originally posted by: fallout man
So far, no one has described how I can import delicious hot and spicy ingredients from Pakistan.
I feel somewhat betrayed, as I had thought this to be a culinary matters thread.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Originally posted by: chucky2
Originally posted by: Lemon law
snip
but he just does not have the results to support any degree of even semi competence.
So since you have 0 results, that would make you 0% competent, Right?
Chuck