This Just In

Date 04-23-2009 15:49

Do you really think this is a US-Pakistan issue? I think there are more than enough of there southern neighbors that would not allow this to happen.

By BryonLewis (****)

Date 04-23-2009 16:13

Maybe if Bush wouldn't have dicked around in Iraq and handled the business in Afghanistan properly then we wouldn't be here at this predicament. I doubt the Pakis have anything that can reach us anyways. And don't forget about India. They have nukes and a hatred for the Pakis too.

By Kix

Date 04-23-2009 16:39

What do you mean they don't have anything that can reach us? All they need is something radioactive that can fit in a backpack and then can be detonated on top of a building in NYC. Then the place is shut down for 250,000 years.

By js55

Date 04-23-2009 16:44

Bryon,
We can bash Bush all we want (still a favorite pastime of lefties everywhere convinced he is responsible for all the ills of the world) but Obama is still going to have to deal with it.
And if you come up with a solution for Afghanistan lets hear it. Alexander the Great couldn't. Genghis Khan couldn't. The Caliphs couldn't. The Brits couldn't. And it was the Soviet Unions' Vietnam. But we're all listening. I'm sure Obama would love to hear it as well since in an effort to appear hawkish he made the campaign promise to solve it. :)

By js55

Date 04-23-2009 17:00

"I doubt the Pakis have anything that can reach us anyways."

How bout hatred, legs, a couple pieces of gorrilla proof Samsonite, and a plane ticket to Mexico City?

By Joseph P. Kane (****)

Date 04-23-2009 17:31

Bryon

Good post Bryon! It shows real insight and really shows how problems can be solved! Bash Bush some more!

On the other hand -- Maybe you should just take gas -- supposedly it is painless!

By CWI555

Date 04-23-2009 19:25

Lets put another pin in the bush voodoo doll. For that matter, lets serve him up to the sharks, he is after all at fault for everything from the spot on your shirt, world hunger, and generally everything and anything that ails whomever that needs a convient direction to point a finger. Why i bet bush killed Elvis.

They need to remake the waterboy movie. Instead of "It's the work of the devil", it should be the work of bush. Why I bet you can even blame bush for spilling coffee on that poor ladies lap that won her a judgement of millions.

I am no fan of bush, but enough is enough. If your not part of the solution, then your part of the problem. Either fork up some viable solutions, or stop with the bobbing head bush bashing/the devil made em do it.

By CWI555

Date 04-23-2009 16:47

It's a world issue. It doesn't matter where, it doesn't matter who, it doesn't matter for what cause, what does matter is that we will all be in deep **** "when" any rogue or fallen nation punches the button on a nuke in anger. Had anyone else but the U.S. had a nuclear bomb in 45, none of us would likely be here now.

We can all ***** and whine about politics, but at the end of the day, the glow doesn't care about your politics, dead is dead.

By hogan

Date 04-23-2009 22:18

That is a perspective I have never considered. But know the resources we had, and others had, I have to disagree that none of us would be here now. No one will ever be able to answer that question.

By CWI555

Date 04-23-2009 22:55

Consider the downstream effect of several more million killed in WW2. There is no doubt in my mind that if it were available to the axis powers that it would have in fact been used.
It was a lot closer than most realize.

By hogan

Date 04-24-2009 14:35

A few million more would probably be a non issue, what's a few million when your talking about 60 million. But a bombing of London, Moscow, or Paris would probably have just strengthen our resolve. I don't believe we even came close to that # in Japan. By the time they would have the knowledge and resources what could they have really done? It was a good thing we only needed two. They had lost so many resources, intellectually and geographically.

By CWI555

Date 04-24-2009 16:51

I don't think it would have been any of the three listed. However; properly placed and in the right number, the fall out would take care of the rest.

By js55

Date 04-23-2009 16:53 Edited 04-23-2009 16:56

hogan,
I think radical Islam with nukes is a world issue period.
Question is; who's gonna step up to the plate?
I'm not hot on sending troops to Pakistan. But somebody is gonna have to deal with this. Somehow. Talking pretty won't stop the Taliban.
Do you really want India pouring troops into Pakistan given their tensions and the fact India has nukes too? And that it has taken the greatest effort of world diplomacy to keep them from beginning the first full scale nuclear war. You really want the Pakistani army caught between India and the Taliban? Can you imagine what Pakistan (originally part of India) would feel like with Indian troops surging across their border? How would they react?
And if not us, and I'll grant that for now, and if not India, who?

Of course, if the Pakistani army holds off all is well. For now.

By hogan

Date 04-23-2009 22:19

I see why you were into Marx. You appear to have many of the same traits.

By js55

Date 04-24-2009 12:13

How so?

By hogan

Date 04-24-2009 15:44

I don't believe that you are a communist or find contempt for religion. I'm speaking more of personality. Very vocal conviction on political and economical issues. A passion to gather others to your cause with an almost "purge" of dissidents. Well educated with the ability to form independent thought, not to just recite. Maybe a little reciting but when researching sometimes others just say what you are thinking in words you could have never put together, happens to all of us. As I only know you from this forum there are other parallels I could draw but it would only be speculation.

By js55

Date 04-24-2009 16:28

Thats a very diplomatic criticism for someone who obviously disagrees quite strongly on some of the issues that we have posted. I actually consider that a compliment. Though I'm sure when we are in the heat of battle the idea of compliment is farthest from your mind. :)
There are many in here whom I consider well educated. And that is the challenge of it. How boring would it be if those who oppose capitulated so easy. Or worse, we all agreed.
I think 'purge' is too strong, as you would expect. I prefer to think of it in terms of expecting a lot from those well capable of defending their point, yourself included, under strenuous debate. And I would be but a hypocrit were I to argue so strenuously against totalitarianism while all the time harboring a sentiment of eliminating the very dissent that made us the greatest nation in the history of the world.
When younger I saw the conservative side of the spectrum as the establishment status quo and challenged it from a liberal perspective. The liberal is actually the establishment status quo now, though so few seem to realize it. A major shift in this state of affairs took place in the wake of Vietnam. The liberal is no longer the challenger of the establishment. The liberal IS the establishment. I'm essentially doing the same thing I've always done.
While the liberal struggles to make the big boys bigger with naive delusions that somehow government big boys would be different than those they prop up as the evil to be stamped out, todays true conservative recognizes the fallacy of this and challenges. So its not a purge. Its a chipping away at the real big boys. The most dangerous of all. Government. The very thing our founding fathers fought and died for.

By hogan

Date 04-24-2009 16:55

Purge was meant to be a bit of a Marx/communist joke.

By js55

Date 04-24-2009 17:21

I know. I smiled.
A bit of smile. :)

By OBrien

Date 04-23-2009 16:09

It would be wrong to get into someone elses business. That is untill they send a nuke our way. Bleeding hearts are whats going to kill this country. We got to be politically correct no matter how bad it hurts or offends us. Just my 2 cents.

By bozaktwo1 (***)

Date 04-23-2009 17:04

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599189337000

"The move by Taliban-backed militants into the Buna district of northwestern Pakistan, closer than ever to Pakistan's capital of Islamabad, have prompted concerns both within the country and abroad that the nuclear-armed nation of 165 million is on the verge of inexorable collapse."

I would be willing to bet that they waited until Bush was out of office to do this.

India and Pakistan do not hate each other that much. They have one main dispute in the mountain region of Kashmir. Otherwise they actually do quite a bit of trade together. India also has some nuclear capability, and I agree that it would be difficult for the Pakistani Army to be caught between the Taliban and the Indian borders.

Yes, it would be very nice to hear what the "proper" way to handle the Afghanistan problem might be.

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 04-23-2009 20:25

I say this..... To everyone who is (or think they are) So well informed on what goes on in the Middle East. Move over there and solve all the worlds problems. But, then what would the pages of this forum be filled with ? I'll just bet there would be another world crisis to be fixed.

By hogan

Date 04-23-2009 22:21

Only Kashmir? OK are we leaving religion out of the discussion?

By CWI555

Date 04-23-2009 23:26

leaving religion out of the discussion is like leaving electricity out of the discussion when building an electric power plant. Religion is 90 percent of the problem to begin with. Therein is a lot of the problem all around. When any person considers another as nothing more than cattle based on their religious or ethnic background, hostilities will be inherent. If the life of another holds no more value than that, but the territory they are parked on does, sooner or later, they are going to try to rid the area of what they perceive as an non believer with no right to live.
For that matter, how do you speak of respect for life and liberty to a group that believes death is honorable and preferable if you can take out an enemy in the doing?
It took two atomic bombs to break the Japanese of this belief. Even then, had the emperor showa/hirohito not seen the light they would have continued the fight.

That is only one incident.

There is not much of a more dangerous person than a true believer who believes it's honorable to die killing others.

Solving Kashmir without religious considerations? May as well tell the jews and muslims to play nice with the wailing wall/kotel/al-buraaq or whatever else they are calling it these days.

By bozaktwo1 (***)

Date 04-24-2009 17:05

I concede that the differences between the Hindu and Islamic religions are not to be set aside; however I believe that, for the most part, arguably, the religious question is not a significant source of friction between the two nations. Certainly not to the extent of the aforementioned border dispute. In my opinion, both nations have done a fair job of downplaying their religious differences on a national scale in the recent past. Had they not done so, it's not hard to imagine what the state of affairs might be, what with the second most populous nation (and nuclear-armed at that) going on a religious crusade.

None of this makes me any happier about current events in the region. I suppose I should feel somewhat secure in the belief that those special weapons are kept quite safe from tampering by unauthorized persons...let's hope so, anyway.

By hogan

Date 04-24-2009 17:26

I would think that the residents of Mumbai might argue that point. If you have any Indian friends ask them how they feel about the Paki Muslims.

By CWI555

Date 04-24-2009 23:39

I do have Indi friends. One in particular from Mumbai. He is one of the more intelligent and knowledgable RT LIII's I've ever meet btw.
There is no love lost for any Paki among them.

By uphill

Date 04-23-2009 22:10

How about the Pakastanis request the air force anilalation of the area for about one week. Make some talaban compost. Send the bill to the UN, we will pay it anyway.
If nukes ever start flying its not going to matter who gets them or who sent them. Just make your peace with whomever you hold dear.

The teleprompter wont help "O" deliver on this one.

By js55

Date 04-24-2009 12:18

Well, it appears the Taliban is pulling back. I think for the time being this is good news, obviously. But given the kind of people the Taliban are, their claim that the Pakistani government is illigitimate, and their insistence on the absolute imposition of the Sharia, isn't anyone curious (becasue the media sure doesn't seem to be) as to why they pulled back?
Make no mistake, they want the Pakistani government to fall. Pakistan may be heading towards a military take over.
However, in the meantime, what concessions were given that we don't know about. They sure the hell didn't pull back because someone asked "can't we all just get along?"
If someone has a article link I'd sure be interested in knowing.

By darren

Date 04-24-2009 23:22

it seems as though there is an undercurrent that is influencing and feeding the hot spots of the world.
as we pontificate from the bottom how the best to solve it there seems to be a very much more powerful group trying to foment war.
i think that we are gonna have one somewhere in the world go big as there are to many unexplainable world events that seem "hell bent" on securing some sort of destruction.
perhaps under this guise of world war the elements that are promulgating these events will prosper....just a hunch based on some history.
when we as a world can fully enact the constitution of the usa and the declaration of independence, world wide and by acceptance rather than force i think then and only then will there be a chance at long standing peace. the first step would be for american politicians to respect those laudable documents first but you've already heard my rants on that.
fundamental any thing is inherently doomed to fail,
there is a video series by g edward griffon called "individualism vs. collectivism"
very good
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMYicq_SN1E
here is the first of it if you are interested you will find the next three
darren

By DaveBoyer (*****)

Date 04-25-2009 04:09

Great series, it is a darn shame they removed the video from the last segment, but You know where they are going with it by that point.

By darren

Date 04-25-2009 04:45

http://video.google.ca/videosearch?q=Individualism%20vs%20Collectivism&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wv#q=Individualism+vs+Collectivism+5&hl=en&emb=0

By uphill

Date 04-25-2009 17:24

It must be because they are thinking that its all "W"'s fault as seen here. The most expensive "O"pork spending , socialistic, no experiance , most expensive campain is the Worlds history surely didnt scare them. Maybe they are taking a US paid holiday to celebrate the 100+ days of the "O"crap $pending $pree. Bash away you non-americans, apoligize to the rest of the world because the USA is what is wrong with the world. Right?? After all, "W" has been blaimed for everything since "O" bought his way in. P**s and moan all you want the big Zer"O" wont be arround long.

I would be scared of "H C" look how she castorated "B C"

Never found a truthfull reason for the pullback, just some lefty crap, sorry for the First amendment rant.

By bruce69 (*)

Date 04-25-2009 02:30

The Taliban has controlled an area 40 miles North of there called Swat Valley since the Bush administration. They are now moving South towards the capital. This is another problem that Obama inherited from the worst president the U.S. has ever known. In other words, this occupation is nothing new. It is estimated that Musharraf has diverted at least $10 billion we sent them to combat terrorism and applied it to Pakistan's nuclear weapons instead of fighting terrorism. Bush was once again played like a Stratavarius by Musharraf. Putin and Ahmad Chalabi did it to him too. If you don't know who Chalabi is, he is an Iraqi exile who fed that idiot Bush full of **** for a couple of years before the dumb ass figured out Chalabi had lied about everything. During this process, Chalabi was paid millions of YOUR taxpayer dollars for bad information and taken 100% at his word. What happened next was of course going to war in the wrong country. You know, the country that had NOTHING to do with 9-11. Instead of focusing on Pakistan and Afghanistan, they were in Iraq to settle an old score and make rich guys even richer. The Taliban did no such thing as waiting for Bush to leave office to make a move. Go to the library and get a book called "Against All Enemies" by Richard Clarke. It will really open your eyes. In case you think Clarke is just some lefty liberal, he started under Reagan, then worked for Bush I and Clinton. He resigned from W. (like many other highly qualified people did) because he couldn't work for the incompetent bastard.

By BryonLewis (****)

Date 04-25-2009 03:43

Bravo Bruce.

By bruce69 (*)

Date 04-25-2009 12:18

Bryon, are you still looking for work?

By darren

Date 04-25-2009 04:58

i dont think that w was incompetent, i think he is malevolent, incompetence was just a ruse. he new exactly how to empower banks and haliburton and a select group of corporate nations. he orchestrated on of the best thought out plans on how to collapse a system and then implement a new world order as his daddy stated.
obama is the "change" that will complete the job and his charm will lead the majority to the slaughter and have them thanking him for it.

By swsweld (****)

Date 04-26-2009 00:09 Edited 04-26-2009 01:35

Bruce, the original post was about the Talibans advance from Swat (100 miles from the capital) to the Buner district. 40 miles closer to Pakistans capital. You can't blame the Talibans current move towards the capital on FORMER president Bush. Obama is the president NOW. How will he handle it? Will he exorcize his BDS and hope this will fix the problem? (BDS=Bush Derangement Syndrome-it's very common) Some symptoms of it is terminology such as; inherited,(that is a very common one), failed past policies, stale and divisive policies, fresh conversations, worst economy since the Great Depression, i.e., the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency, the very existence of George W. Bush.

>During this process, Chalabi was paid millions of YOUR taxpayer dollars for bad information and taken 100% at his word.<

900 million of OUR tax dollars sent to Hamas, um, to rebuild Gaza. Unspecified amounts of money for abortions in FOREIGN nations and oh yea, he's spent more in 80 days than all of the presidents combined. I know, he had to because of the economy that he inherited.

>This is another problem that Obama inherited from the worst president the U.S. has ever known.<

Bush certainly had his problems but have you ever heard of a guy named Jimmy Carter?

>He resigned from W. (like many other highly qualified people did) because he couldn't work for the incompetent bastard.<

Richardson, Dachelle, Killifer, Geither, Sebollis, Solis, Gregg, Kirk- All resigned or disqualified or took the job even though they are guilty of tax cheating and/or ethics.

Back to the pressing issue of what will president Obama do with the clear and present danger of a nuclear armed Taliban possibility.

>Earlier this week Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., told editors and reporters at USA Today that more than three months into office, the Obama team still had not managed to come up with any coherent strategy for restoring stability to the populous Muslim, nuclear-armed power.

>"Pakistan is in a moment of peril," Kerry, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told the gathering. "And I believe there is not in place yet an adequate policy or plan to deal with it."<

I hope we get a coherent strategy for the Muslim nuclear armed power, Iran, N. Korea, etc and it be something other that the useless U. N.

Gotta go, I'm coming down with a case of ODS= Obama Derangement Syndrome :)

By js55

Date 04-27-2009 12:43

Bravo Tim.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!

By js55

Date 04-27-2009 12:38

bruce,
What you leave out of course is that every Intelligence service on the planet (including every one of our friends in Europe) save one, was providing the exact same information about what was going on in Iraq.
Its a stange logic that calls the person an idiot who actually takes serious an almost unanimity.