1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

I knew Musharraf gave us the RUN AROUND!

Discussion in 'World Politics' started by steveox, Aug 7, 2007.

  1. steveox

    steveox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,499
    Likes Received:
    178
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Way Down South
    Musharraf rejects US strikes in Pakistan

    By ROHAN SULLIVAN, Associated Press Writer

    Tue Aug 7, 2:05 PM ET

    ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - President Gen. Pervez Musharraf said Tuesday that talk of U.S. military strikes against al-Qaida in Pakistan only hurts the fight against terrorism, and his troops bombarded militant hideouts in their strongest response yet to a month of anti-government attacks. Ten suspected militants were killed.

    The assault by artillery and helicopter gunships "knocked out" two compounds in Daygan village in the tribal belt near the border with Afghanistan that were being used as staging posts for attacks on security forces, said Maj. Gen. Waheed Arshad, the army's top spokesman.

    Ten militants were killed and at least seven were wounded in the operation, about 10 miles west of Miran Shah, the main town in the North Waziristan region, he said.

    No ground troops were used in the operation, and the report on militant casualties was based on information from "local sources," he said without elaborating.

    There were at least four smaller-scale bombings and shootings in the border region Tuesday, the latest in almost daily violence that has intensified pressure on Musharraf to crack down on militants in the area.

    Musharraf, a key ally in Washington's war against terrorism, told visiting Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., that comments by senior U.S. officials and presidential hopefuls about the possibility of unilateral U.S. strikes within the country were not helpful. Musharraf met Durbin in the southern city of Karachi.

    "He emphasized that only Pakistan's security forces, which were fully capable of dealing with any situation, would take counterterrorism action inside Pakistani territory," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

    "The president pointed out that certain recent U.S. statements were counterproductive to the close cooperation and coordination between the two countries in combating the threat of terrorism," the ministry said.

    President Bush said Monday that America and Pakistan, if armed with good intelligence, could track and kill al-Qaida leaders in Pakistan. He stopped short of saying whether he would ask Musharraf before dispatching U.S. troops to the country.

    Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., a presidential candidate, has said that he would use military force in Pakistan if necessary to root out terrorists, prompting angry responses from Pakistani officials.

    Musharraf also described a new law tying U.S. aid to Pakistan to progress in combatting militants as an "irritant in the bilateral relationship," the statement said.

    His comments came two days before he is due to hold talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai about border security at a tribal council, or jirga, in Afghanistan.

    Arshad said U.S.-made Cobra helicopter gunships and artillery attacked the compounds in North Waziristan about 5 a.m. after receiving intelligence that militants were there. Militants fired back with light and heavy weapons. The clash lasted about four hours, he said.

    "The militants used to regroup and prepare attacks on security forces and take refuge at these compounds, so security forces targeted them," Arshad told Dawn television.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070807/ap_on_re_as/pakistan

    We Must warn Musharraf if US suffers another Terrorist attack again he would be held responsible. Remember what bush said at the UN? He said Youre Ether with us OR youre with the Terrorist. And Musharraf is harboring Al Queda. Bush also said any goverment who harboring terrorist will be held responsible and will be subjecting to Deterrance. That means we have the right to drop a nuclear bomb on his country if the US gets attacked again.
     
  2. 9sublime

    9sublime Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Bristol
    I don't care if George Bush said that. I'm not with America a lot of the time, and I'm definetly not with the terrorists, whoever the 'terrorists' are a lot of the time.

    Also, George Bush and America are hardly with the UN all the time, so its kind of hypocritical.
     
  3. steveox

    steveox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,499
    Likes Received:
    178
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Way Down South
    Subline i dont know where you stand on the war against terror but i do know one thing. Pervez Musharraf is lying about not knowing where osama bin laden is, and he certainly knows where Al Queda camps are.Its time to get tough on Pervez Musharraf. He claims hes an ally of america but hes not.Hes pulling our legs making us to belive hes against the war on terror. If we ever get a really big terroriost attack then bush has to call general Pervez Musharraf and tell him he better go down to his bunker cause a couple of nukes are headding towards pakistan. And A couple more nukes to IRAN. This will straghten out the whole arabic regime and terrorist will be defeated once and for all.
     
  4. 9sublime

    9sublime Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Bristol
    I was never questioning wether Pervez Musharraf is involved in or turns a blind eye to terrorist activites, what I am questioning is why you think we should jump in line with Bush and either arselick him or go around bombing people.

    I dont have to be with America in order not to be with the terrorists.
     
  5. 9sublime

    9sublime Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Bristol
    Also steveox, you really think nuking arabic countries is going to stem the flow of terrorism? You're really that naive? Have you ever considered it will make people hate the US even more, even countries that are supposedly neutral in all this.
     
  6. Kwaku

    Kwaku New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Hear hear!
    Of course it will make people hate the US more.
     
  7. steveox

    steveox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,499
    Likes Received:
    178
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Way Down South
    Did the world get over with Hiroshima? Yeah they did and the Japs never attack america again did they? And back during WWII the Japanese were like arabs today. Japanese felt asia belong to them just like Arabs feel muslim land belongs to them. Back in WWII They also felt hawaii was stolen from them thats why the Attack on pearl harbor.The same way arabs feel israel stole the land from palenstine. The Japanese used suicide attacks for glory the same way terrorist are using thisd methoid to them. Japanese look at soldiers death means theyre heroes to them. The samething arabs die to become martyrs for their people. So if the Nukes changed the Japanese then the Nukes will stop the arabic terrorism and learn to live with the jews.
     
  8. 9sublime

    9sublime Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Bristol
    Religion is a far more powerful motivation than pride of your country, because people foolishly believe they are going to live on once they die if they believe in it.

    Islamic extremism is far more widespread and comes in many more shapes and forms than the Japanese.

    Nuking people is the most terrible thing a country can do, and is easily above any terrorism.
     
  9. Castle

    Castle New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Former US of A
    So people are foolish if they believe in some form of after life? I have no desire to criticize you if you don't believe. However, I've seen no credible evidence to prove or disprove either side of that debate.

    I couldn't agree more. The Japanese had a defined fighting force with clearly defined goals. We knew who the enemy was so the war was ours to win or lose. Islamic extremism hides in the shadows behind complacent civilian populations banking that world opinion will somehow favor their cause - or at least ignore it. They have somehow managed this so far unfortunately.

    Ahh but if it is an Islamic terrorist group that acquires a bomb, what then? Is there any reason to assume that they will not use it on us? Should we leave no doubt that we would not respond in kind? I am not suggesting that we threaten the Islamic world with nukes at this point. I am suggesting however, that we make them aware that they assure their own destruction if they continue to pursue ours - with or without the fickle support of the so called global community.

    Castle
     
  10. 9sublime

    9sublime Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Bristol
    Sorry, I didn't make it clear. I am agnostic. I just find organized religion an abosloute load of chuff.

    Agreed.


    If they have a weapon of equal force and have a decent chance of using it (not like Saddams WMD's), then I think the action may be justified. However, we must remember that not very person living in a Muslim country is a terrorist, and they do not deserve to die anymore than innocent Americans or Brits.
     
  11. steveox

    steveox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,499
    Likes Received:
    178
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Way Down South
    Pervez Musharraf knows where Al Queda is. And he certainly knows where is Bin Laden hiding hes harboring and protecting terrorist and their camps. And he tells the US we cant bomb them? Bush said,,,,""any goverment who harboring terrorist will be held responsible and will be subjecting to Deterrance"" So why dont bush go directly to the pentagon and tell them were bombing Pakistan anyway? Find those camps on satellite Send a couple of stealth bombers and drop load of 5,000LB Bombs and let em go!! and see what happens to the arabs there. And what is Musharraf gonna do about it?
     
  12. heyjude

    heyjude New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, on the beach
    One or two reasons I can think of. You know that the Pakistanis know where bin Laden is? How do you know that?
    Pakistan is one of the few allies America has in the world today. They won't be for long if we start bombing them.
    Pakistan has nukes.
     
  13. steveox

    steveox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,499
    Likes Received:
    178
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Way Down South
    Jude read the article. Pervez Musharraf first told bush he would cooperate and allow them to execute the bombing on terrorist.Then he backed down and rejects US strikes in Pakistan. Now suppose you agreed to an LAPD Detective and you will cooperate with them with the investigation.And then Cops came over next morning and said they wanna take a look in your backyard and you said""" Get a Warrant """ What you think cops gonna do next? They gonna take you to Jail and then get a warrant. So if cops dont take crap from you when should US government take crap from Musharraf?
     
  14. Castle

    Castle New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Former US of A
    In truth, I agree with you here. Watching televangelists feed off the masses while professing to preach the word of God make me ill.

    In theory, I agree with you here as well. However, if we proceed from the assumption that most Muslims are not terrorists then we have already lost. Granted, I believe this statement to be true but where does that leave us? I guarantee you that Islamic extremists hope that we will conclude that it is not feasible to risk civilian casualties to get the job done. Since they have no issues with doing so, we are at a complete disadvantage from the start. My question still is and has been, how do we fight this with our hands tied?

    -Castle
     
Loading...

Share This Page