mark, Go fuck yourself. There's not a fucking thing in my post that is either untrue of illogical.
On Sep 21, 10:38 am, mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > go sleep it off hollyhead. were you born ignorant, or has this been > something you have developed over all years. pay attention now old > man, and I will explain things to you. do try to keep up. > if the President signed such an order to attack terrorists in > Pakistan, good for him. should have done it years ago. now your boy > barry said he would do the same thing if he were president. do you > not find it just a bit hypocritical of you lame brained leftist libs > to criticize the President for doing something that your boy said he > would do? if it is wrong for the President, then why are you not > critical of your boy. oh wait, that's right. I forgot, you suffer > from hate Bush syndrome, as well as shove your head as far up barry's > ass syndrome. > > On Sep 21, 9:50 am, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > mark, > > > Last I checked Obama was not the POTUS, George Bush is. You mind if we > > react to something the sitting POTUS actually IS doing RIGHT NOW > > instead of what another man SAYS he would do IF he were POTUS? Thank > > you oh so very much. > > > 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 > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
