what does it have to do with anything, murky?  you fool libs are going
after the President for doing exactly what your boy b hussein nobama
said he would do.  double standards.  hypocrisies.

On Sep 21, 7:55 am, Doc Holliday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Israel is grinding their organ and America is monkey
> meat..............Join in the holy insanity...............It's a man
> made wonderland / Armageddon. Pakaistan does have nukes; don't they?
>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1431038195362274085
>
> Peace,
> Doc
>
> On Sep 21, 6:41 am, mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Wed Aug 1, 2007
> > WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack
> > Obama said on Wednesday the United States must be willing to strike al
> > Qaeda targets inside Pakistan, adopting a tough tone after a chief
> > rival accused him of naivete in foreign policy.
>
> > Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack
> > inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani
> > government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already
> > troubled region.
>
> > "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets
> > and President Musharraf won't act, we will," Obama said.
>
> > On Sep 21, 7:30 am, "mike532 [ Republicans for Obama ]"
>
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > were we at war with Pakistan as we were with Germany ?
>
> > > On Sep 21, 6:57 am, flamestar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > In World War II the US conducted military operations in Germany
> > > > without Berlin's permission. Needless to US popularity in Germany and
> > > > Japan hit a new low. Remember being liked it more important then being
> > > > alive and the only good American is a dead American.
>
> > > > On Sep 21, 5:10 am, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > US-Pakistani relations remain on the boil
> > > > > By Keith Jones
> > > > > 20 September 2008
>
> > > > > Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author
>
> > > > > During an impromptu visit to Islamabad this week, the chairman of the
> > > > > US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, reputedly gave
> > > > > Pakistan’s government and military assurances that the US will respect
> > > > > Pakistan’s sovereignty. But only hours later the US staged another
> > > > > predator-drone attack inside Pakistan, killing at least six people in
> > > > > a South Waziristan village.
>
> > > > > Pakistani Prime Minister Raza Gilani denounced the drone strike, which
> > > > > Pakistani authorities insist was mounted without their having been
> > > > > warned, let alone giving it their sanction.
>
> > > > > Mullen’s visit was described as an attempt to “defuse tension”—a
> > > > > euphemism for the crisis in US-Pakistani relations provoked by the
> > > > > unprecedented September 3 US military raid on Pakistan and the
> > > > > subsequent revelation that George W. Bush signed a presidential order
> > > > > in mid-July authorizing US Special Operations forces to carry out
> > > > > missions in Pakistan without Islamabad’s permission.
>
> > > > > In the days following the September 3 raid Pakistan’s parliament
> > > > > unanimously passed a motion calling for any further attacks to be
> > > > > repelled by force and members of the Pakistani top brass, including
> > > > > Pakistan military chief General Ashfaq Kayani, pledged future US
> > > > > incursions would be resisted.
>
> > > > > On Monday, gunfire from Pakistani forces reportedly forced two US
> > > > > military helicopters that were attempting to cross into Pakistan—very
> > > > > near the site of Wednesday’s drone strike and the September 3 raid—to
> > > > > turn back.
>
> > > > > A Reuters report cited a Pakistani security official as saying, “The
> > > > > US choppers came into Pakistan by just 100 to 150 meters at Angor
> > > > > Adda. Even then our troops did not spare them, opened fire on them and
> > > > > they turned away.”
>
> > > > > The US and Pakistani governments have emphatically denied such an
> > > > > encounter took place. The official Pakistani military account is that
> > > > > US choppers did come under fire, but from local tribesmen, not
> > > > > Pakistani military forces and that the choppers never entered into
> > > > > Pakistani air space. “Like others,” Major Murad Khan, told the Dawn,
> > > > > “our forces stationed in the region also heard firing but where it
> > > > > came from and what was the target, we have no idea.”
>
> > > > > This is belied by other reports. The governor of the nearby North-West
> > > > > Frontier Province, Owais Ahmed Ghani, said forthrightly in a
> > > > > television interview broadcast Tuesday, “My political administration
> > > > > has reported that an incursion took place. In the reaction, people and
> > > > > law enforcing officials took part.”
>
> > > > > The day after the thwarted US incursion into Pakistan, Major-General
> > > > > Athar Abbas, the head of the military’s press liaison branch (ISPR),
> > > > > told Associated Press that in the event of an attempt by US forces to
> > > > > cross into Pakistan, “The orders are clear. ... [If] there is a very
> > > > > significant detection, which is very definite, no ambiguity, across
> > > > > the border, on ground or in the air: open fire.”
>
> > > > > Mullen flew Tuesday from Baghdad to Islamabad—his fifth visit to
> > > > > Pakistan in the 11 months since he became US military chief. According
> > > > > to the New York Times, the decision that Mullen should visit Pakistan
> > > > > was made only after he had left for Iraq, strongly suggesting it was a
> > > > > response to Monday’s incident.
>
> > > > > A US embassy statement claimed that “the conversations” Mullen had
> > > > > with Pakistani government and military leaders “were extremely frank,
> > > > > positive and constructive.”
>
> > > > > An act of war
>
> > > > > The September 3 attack and the presidential order constitute nothing
> > > > > less than an act of war. They underscore that Washington arrogates to
> > > > > itself the unbridled right to militarily intervene anywhere in the
> > > > > world—state sovereignty and international law be damned.
>
> > > > > If they have elicited little political and press comment in the US, it
> > > > > is because there is a strong bipartisan consensus in Washington in
> > > > > favor of the US intensifying the war in Afghanistan and extending it
> > > > > into Pakistan’s border region. Democratic presidential nominee Barack
> > > > > Obama has repeatedly said he would be prepared to order unilateral US
> > > > > military strikes in Pakistan.
>
> > > > > The US and many of its NATO allies have latched on to the argument
> > > > > that Pakistan is serving as a “safe-haven” for Afghan insurgency under
> > > > > conditions where the US-imposed government in Kabul is increasingly
> > > > > isolated and discredited.
>
> > > > > The reality is the US occupation of Afghanistan has given rise to an
> > > > > insurgency in Pakistan’s border regions, whose local populace have
> > > > > never recognized the British colonial-imposed border. This insurgency
> > > > > is fueled by outrage over the US intervention in Afghanistan, chronic
> > > > > socioeconomic backwardness and Islamabad’s traditional indifference
> > > > > toward the region, and last but not least the brutal methods the
> > > > > Pakistani military have employed at Washington’s behest in trying to
> > > > > stamp out support for the Afghan insurgency. These methods have
> > > > > included carpet-bombing, “disappearances” and colonial-style
> > > > > collective punishments.
>
> > > > > In recent weeks, hundreds of people have been killed as the Pakistani
> > > > > military seeks to exert greater control in FATA, the Federally
> > > > > Administered Tribal Area. Tens of thousands have fled the region,
> > > > > swelling the refugee population in FATA, which is home to little more
> > > > > than 3.5 million people, to over 300,000.
>
> > > > > Mounted just days before Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) chairperson
> > > > > Asif Ali Zaradari was set to be officially sworn in as president,
> > > > > replacing the ex-army chief and dictator Pervez Musharraf, the
> > > > > September 3 US raid roiled the Pakistani elite.
>
> > > > > Zardari was in effect being put on notice that the US will work with
> > > > > him, but only insofar he does its bidding and intensifies the
> > > > > counterinsurgency war in the country’s border areas.
>
> > > > > For years, Washington strongly backed the dictator Musharraf, calling
> > > > > him an indispensable ally in the “war on terror.” Now that his regime
> > > > > has unraveled under the combined weight of popular opposition and
> > > > > economic crisis, Washington is ratcheting up the pressure, demanding
> > > > > that the new “democratic” government wage war on its behalf
> > > > > irrespective of the wishes and aspirations of its own people.
>
> > > > > Opinion polls have repeatedly shown that Zardari and the PPP have
> > > > > already suffered a huge drop in popularity because of their
> > > > > subservience to the US in respect to the war and their long dalliance,
> > > > > at Washington’s urging, with Musharraf.
>
> > > > > As for the military, which has a decades-long intimate relationship
> > > > > with the Pentagon, the US incursions are a tremendous blow to its
> > > > > prestige and can only exacerbate tensions within its ranks over its
> > > > > role in the counterinsurgency war.
>
> > > > > Many within the officer corps subscribe to a fierce Islamic Pakistani
> > > > > nationalism that was cultivated by General Zia ul-Huq, the dictator
> > > > > who with Washington’s full-support ruled Pakistan from 1977 to 1988
> > > > > and presided over the Pakistani military’s emergence as the conduit
> > > > > for US and Saudi support for the Islamic fundamentalist opposition to
> > > > > the Soviet-backed government in Kabul.
>
> > > > > Also, there is a strong Pashtun presence in the officers corps. Press
> > > > > reports suggest that this layer is particularly angered over having to
> > > > > suppress their own brethren—the Pashtun bestraddle the Pakistani-
> > > > > Afghan border—on
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to