War in Pakistan seems inevitable

[K.C.]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080916/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan

http://www.slate.com/id/2200134/?from=rss

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/852816/dont-mention-the-afghanpakistan-war.thtml


It really is the most volatile situation in the world that no one is talking about. I'd recap it for those who haven't been paying attention, but it's so complex and intertwined between so many different factions, that it's almost impossible to lay out in bite size form.


For the record, Barack Obama has said he will cross the Pakistan border several times if he deemed it necessary.

I know McCain has said he'd redeploy brigades to Afghanistan, but I'm not sure if he's stated his opinion on crossing into Pakistan.


The moral of this story, though, is that anyone, liberal or conservative, who thinks we're just going to leave Iraq and that's it is sorely mistaken.

I am more convinced now than ever that regardless of who wins, there will be a SIZEABLE military presence in active duty in the Middle East for decades to come.

[patsopinion]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080916/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan

http://www.slate.com/id/2200134/?from=rss

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/852816/dont-mention-the-afghanpakistan-war.thtml


It really is the most volatile situation in the world that no one is talking about. I'd recap it for those who haven't been paying attention, but it's so complex and intertwined between so many different factions, that it's almost impossible to lay out in bite size form.


For the record, Barack Obama has said he will cross the Pakistan border several times if he deemed it necessary.

I know McCain has said he'd redeploy brigades to Afghanistan, but I'm not sure if he's stated his opinion on crossing into Pakistan.


The moral of this story, though, is that anyone, liberal or conservative, who thinks we're just going to leave Iraq and that's it is sorely mistaken.

I am more convinced now than ever that regardless of who wins, there will be a SIZEABLE military presence in active duty in the Middle East for decades to come.

pakistan is next to afganistan
iraq is next to iran

just a note



and the fucking indians, not those indians but the indians like the country, told us a few days after 9/11 that we didnt want to even talk to pakistan and that it any talking to them would end badly

we need to create a concrete coalition with the indians and treat them like the best fucking friends we have in the world

christ they have all our jobs we should be nice to them
and they are the only real deterrent to pakistan eventually acting a fool


they have the nuke
the muslim extremists terrorists and its because we meddled in their government
that is word for word the base case scenario of a post 9/11 world for osama
were all fucking dead man
game over man!

[CofyCrakCocaine]

In response to the thread title, there already is war in Pakistan. It's just not declared, like Vietnam. Kashmir sees people getting killed all the time. Northern Pakistan ain't so pretty. And I hear they done killed themselves a prime minister closer to the capital.

Unless you're referring to the U.S. going to war...which again, we've already bombed numerous militant targets in Pakistan. So yeah. War's already happening- scale might increase but violence began decades ago.

All that said, I do not see how pulling out of Iraq is a victory for Northern Pakistani militants. Iraq's way the fuck in the Middle East (which, believe it or not, is not Pakistan- you'd have to equate India as the ME too if so) and it's full of those dirty Shiite muslims. Sunni muslims don't like Shiites too well. Pakistan is majority Sunni. Just because you have alot of Muslims don't make Pakistan part of the ME.

I don't see us leaving Iraq but not because of Pakistan. I can see the world ending because of Pakistan, but that would happen regardless of troop deployment in Iraq.

[patsopinion]

yea
what he said

[K.C.]

they have the nuke
the muslim extremists terrorists and its because we meddled in their government
that is word for word the base case scenario of a post 9/11 world for osama
were all fucking dead man
game over man!

That's basically the British view.


In response to the thread title, there already is war in Pakistan. It's just not declared, like Vietnam. Kashmir sees people getting killed all the time. Northern Pakistan ain't so pretty. And I hear they done killed themselves a prime minister closer to the capital.

Unless you're referring to the U.S. going to war...which again, we've already bombed numerous militant targets in Pakistan. So yeah. War's already happening- scale might increase but violence began decades ago.

All that said, I do not see how pulling out of Iraq is a victory for Northern Pakistani militants. Iraq's way the fuck in the Middle East (which, believe it or not, is not Pakistan- you'd have to equate India as the ME too if so) and it's full of those dirty Shiite muslims. Sunni muslims don't like Shiites too well. Pakistan is majority Sunni. Just because you have alot of Muslims don't make Pakistan part of the ME.

I don't see us leaving Iraq but not because of Pakistan. I can see the world ending because of Pakistan, but that would happen regardless of troop deployment in Iraq.

The thread title refers to full-scale war war with U.S. involvement. I'm aware of Kashmir, which actually only complicates the Afghani/Pakistani more, as well as some of the preliminary operations with U.S. involvement.

As for calling it the Middle East...they're probably more a part of Southeast Asia.


Basically, the one potential out here is the U.S. to get the Pakistani government to turn on its own populace (which sounds like a horrible thing...but hey...)

Musharaff walked a fine line, but anything short of Pakistan sanctioning U.S. operations in the disputed border area, which would basically set off civil war in Pakistan, most likely means open war with Pakistan.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

I have to disagree with your terminology. 'Open war' and 'full-scale war' implies something way grander than the likely actions our government would take if Pakistan was completely out of control (which it already is). We don't have an open war with Iraq to this day- we hold back and we make the Israelis hold back for mostly political and some human considerations. What we really don't want to do is piss off the other nuke-holding players by having things like full-scale wars.

Don't think for a second that the U.S. can really go to full-scale war with them without having to use nukes. The Pakis wouldn't hestitate to use them if the northern extremist elements gained control of them. That would make them an unpredictable, unallowable risk. Boom goes the Pakistan.

And then the world. Even if we pre-empted them, it would create a precedent that morally allows other nations to use them too. Kinda like what Sulla did for Caesar- that's for all you Roman history buffs out there.

All that said I generally agree with ya beyond the semantics.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Kinda makes you feel good to know Obama's chief military advisor was the worst/least popular/least competent Chief of Staff in Air Force history. I really mean it when I say that I'd vote for Obama if anybody but McCain was running against him, but he really needs to find competent advisors on national security.

Every Pakistani I've met (granted they've been US or British citizens) said Musharraf made mistakes, but the level of development he brought to Pakistan was unreal. Meanwhile, Bhutto was just as corrupt and inept as Musharraf was Westernized. I can only imagine how unqualified her husband is.

As for Middle East, my Jordanian friend openly laughed when I said Americans consider Afghanistan part of the Middle East... and Pakistan is even further from Arabia.

[patsopinion]

in a wierd way the pakiez using nukes would help us because it militarize the rest of the world against them

especially if they used nukes in a "muslim" state

outside of the you know... nuke park, it might not be...
well it would suck but at least it would galvanize public opinion against them which might help us


im just putting it out there

[Zorro]

in a wierd way the pakiez using nukes would help us because it militarize the rest of the world against them

especially if they used nukes in a "muslim" state

outside of the you know... nuke park, it might not be...
well it would suck but at least it would galvanize public opinion against them which might help us


im just putting it out there

I say we give them the rights to 7-11 and be done with it.

[CousinDave]

India will fight this war.

The biggest failure of George W Bush was in not getting the Indians, Chinese, and Russians to fight the muslims.

[NewYorkDragons80]

India will fight this war.

The biggest failure of George W Bush was in not getting the Indians, Chinese, and Russians to fight the muslims.
???

Pakistan is our dog in this fight, like them or not. Additionally, China is an old ally of Pakistan, brother.

[YourAmishDaddy]

If one could bring back Orwell, and show him all this stuff I'm sure 1984 part 2 would be awesome.

It's all these people will ever do, all we'll ever get. Perpetual, unending, unceasing,, non-stop war.. And rumors of wars.

It really is pathetic when you rise to power, and all you can offer is war and death. Complete moral bankruptcy, and the poverty of ideas.

[CousinDave]

???

Pakistan is our dog in this fight, like them or not. Additionally, China is an old ally of Pakistan, brother.

India, China, & Russia all have muslim problems of their own.

We (read US govt) are just worried because both Pakistan and India have nukes

[NewYorkDragons80]

India, China, & Russia all have muslim problems of their own.

We (read US govt) are just worried because both Pakistan and India have nukes

I'm trying to explain to you that our foreign policy is not dictated by "MUSLIMS BAD"

[CousinDave]

I'm trying to explain to you that our foreign policy is not dictated by "MUSLIMS BAD"


Its not?

Hopefully that will change once George W is gone.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Its not?

Hopefully that will change once George W is gone.
We have a relationship with Pakistan that goes back to Nehru's tilt to the Soviets. I don't think I need to explain why Russia isn't on our side, and China's problems with Muslims are relegated to rural regions that the government barely gives a shit about, anyway. It's odd that you would point out the Bush administration's grasp on Islam while you yourself yearn for an even less nuanced view of the 2nd largest religion in the world.

[CousinDave]

We have a relationship with Pakistan that goes back to Nehru's tilt to the Soviets. I don't think I need to explain why Russia isn't on our side, and China's problems with Muslims are relegated to rural regions that the government barely gives a shit about, anyway. It's odd that you would point out the Bush administration's grasp on Islam while you yourself yearn for an even less nuanced view of the 2nd largest religion in the world.


Yea, I know more about the region than I want or need to, I think you are mistaken in you view of China's response, you just don't hear much about it, just like what happened in East Timor in the 90s. China and Pakistan will keep good relations, as China will want to keep tensions high between Pakistan and India. Russia could have been on our side (read US govt) but for whatever reason Bush criticized Putin when he should have kept his mouth shut and stayed out of Russia's business. You can't expect the rest of the world to behave like they're civilized, when most of them are nothing more than fundamentalists, savages, and gangsters.

I still don't believe there will be a war in Pakistan, considering they have nukes, that must remain a stable country at just about all costs.

[patsopinion]

Yea, I know more about the region than I want or need to, I think you are mistaken in you view of China's response, you just don't hear much about it, just like what happened in East Timor in the 90s. China and Pakistan will keep good relations, as China will want to keep tensions high between Pakistan and India. Russia could have been on our side (read US govt) but for whatever reason Bush criticized Putin when he should have kept his mouth shut and stayed out of Russia's business. You can't expect the rest of the world to behave like they're civilized, when most of them are nothing more than fundamentalists, savages, and gangsters.

I still don't believe there will be a war in Pakistan, considering they have nukes, that must remain a stable country at just about all costs.

also china is in an economic war with india over oil

[patsopinion]

are we in the preamble to ww3 and someone forgot to tell me

fuck you people cant even send me a pm er nuthin

[ChrisBrown]

We have a relationship with Pakistan that goes back to Nehru's tilt to the Soviets. I don't think I need to explain why Russia isn't on our side, and China's problems with Muslims are relegated to rural regions that the government barely gives a shit about, anyway. It's odd that you would point out the Bush administration's grasp on Islam while you yourself yearn for an even less nuanced view of the 2nd largest religion in the world.

I am agreeing with everything you have written, especially about our foreign policy needs to be more nuanced than "Muslims Bad". I used to hear this crap from the evangelicals I knew in the Army. I grew up in a Protestant church that mocked other religions. They claimed they were mislead at best or, more likely, fully in Satan's control. It's not a big leap to think in terms of we Christian nations in a battle against the Muslims. This perspective is one of the many things that the hardcore, fundamentalist Muslim suicide bombers have in common with our religious fanatics.

I do, however, disagree with what you said about China not giving a shit about the Uyghurs and other Turkic, Muslim minorities in Xinjiang province. They care deeply about the ethnic unrest in Xinjiang because the province is strategically important, like Tibet, and has oil and coal reserves. On top of that, the Beijing government is terrified of separatist groups pulling away from the Chinese political center. This spinning off of peripheral provinces and ethnic groups is the most common way for Chinese dynasties to unravel. The Beijing leadership's number one concern is regime survival and internal stability. They are also very aware of the dynastic cycle in Chinese history. That is also part of the reason why they care so much about the Tibetans. Sadly, many innocent Muslims are in Chinese jails because Beijing overreacts so much to any sign of anti-Han activity in the province.

[A.J.]

Kinda makes you feel good to know Obama's chief military advisor was the worst/least popular/least competent Chief of Staff in Air Force history.

Who is that?

[NewYorkDragons80]

Who is that?

Merrill "Tony" McPeak. Better known as Admiral McPeak within the Air Force.

[A.J.]

Merrill "Tony" McPeak. Better known as Admiral McPeak within the Air Force.

Oh, right. I remember that god-awful uniform.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Gen_Merrill_McPeak_1993.jpg

[NewYorkDragons80]

Oh, right. I remember that god-awful uniform.
Seriously, though, the fact that this is Obama's go-to guy on defense is really sad/scary. He consolidated all the power in the Air Force to the "fighter mafia" (Generals who spent their earlier career as fighter pilots). He abolished Strategic Air Command, and put nuclear stewardship under the direction of the new Air Combat Command. In that single act, nuclear weapons were no longer a top priority as ACC leadership was fighter pilots and bomber pilots now had a far diminished role. So it should come as no surprise that the Air Force unkowingly transports nuclear weapons or accidentally sends nuke triggers to a foreign nation. I seriously think that if Obama continues to keep this guy in his inner circle, he'll undo all the great work that Gates has done in the event that Obama wins in November.

[Recyclerz]

I don't see how we can pull off a new war with Pakistan. First of all, how do we supply the military we have in Afghanistan if we can't move the people and stuff through Pakistan? Can we risk a wider war with a country of 170 million Muslim people with nukes? No.

Let's face facts. We are going to be eating a whole lot of geopolitical shit sandwiches over the next generation because of the choices over the last 7.5 years or so (and I won't argue too vociferously if you extend the period back further). In retrospect it is very clear (and even at the time it was pretty damn clear) that the post 9/11 play was to have brought the full hammer of US military might down in Afghanistan and crushed the Taliban, al Qaeda and their empathisers in a relatively quick and brutal maelstrom. Sure some of the ultra-violence might have splashed into Pakistan, either accidently or on purpose, but we were holding the cards to get away with it in the short-term and we could have spread plenty of cash around to smooth things over in the longer-term. The "street cred" of the US would not only be intact but would have been enhanced. There was a window of time during which we could have pulled this off but that window is either rapidly closing or is already shut.

We are all going to be living the rest of our lives with the consequences of the stupendously, titanic, epically, colossally stupid decisions of the W/Cheney/Wolfowitz crew or, as I'd like to name them now, the Administration that only brought the wackness.

[Furtherman]

And here... we.... go....!

Pakistan moves troops to India border (http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/12/26/india.pakistan.tensions/index.html)

Pakistan has moved troops to border with India amid rising tensions, officials say

Pakistan forces on high alert after terror attacks last month in Mumbai

Indian defense spokesman: India "is monitoring the situation closely"

The two countries have fought three wars since 1947

[KnoxHarrington]

And here... we.... go....!

Pakistan moves troops to India border (http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/12/26/india.pakistan.tensions/index.html)

And for extra fun, they both have nukes now!

[NewYorkDragons80]

And for extra fun, they both have nukes now!

But not enough for MAD