So Obama will only invade Pakistan if he knows that Al Qaeda's there? Well, I'm not in the CIA, and I can tell you: Al Qaeda's in Pakistan. They basically control the Afghan-Pakistani border region. I don't know this, but I'd bet dollars to dougnuts that there is an endless stream of "actionable intelligence". It's like saying that he'd only unilaterally invade Mexican border towns if there were actionable intelligence of drug-smuggling gang activity. If Obama wants to put that kind of commitment into that region, we should prepare for either a 20-year-war that makes Iraq look like a walk in the park and complete realignment of Middle Eastern Power structure, or defeat.
Occupation of Pakistan is a near impossibility, and it wouldn't take a prolonged invasion to get us in deep ****.
Your taking that out of context...she is referring to why she's not interested in being a VP Candidate for McCain. "But there's something to be said for fresh blood," Rice added in reference to the running mate talk. "And I know that there are a lot of very good people who could be his vice president."
You must not know the definition of a lie. She voiced an opinion on a hypothetical, she did not present a statement as fact. So I can disagree with her opinion without calling her a liar. Go to the GARM please.
I've asked this before and received no satisfactory answer. Are you somehow exempt from the forum's "No political signatures" rule?
I usually find your schtick funny, but this is over the top. Rocket River is a great poster in here, with a different perspective for most of us. He asks a question, and you bad mouth him and ask him to leave. It's rude and unnecessary. The banter between you and Batman is different, because it's two-sided. This is stupid and immature.
weslinder, kpsta, Apollo Creed, Rocket River Consider yourselves reported to the mods by lil T. You may not attack him...at least not without him going crying to Clutch. Oh crap. I guess I'm reported, too.
Thanks for the note. I'd just ask that you police comments made towards me in the same fashion. Might want to clear your calendar for that -- it will occupy most of your days. GOOD DAY
point missed as usual you're usually a jerk to everyone, therefore people respond in the same tone you respond to them in, rocket river, although may be extreme in his positions, doesn't have to be a jerk because he is a secure individual, and therefore he does not deserve the same treatment.
actually, you're kinda saying that Obama would make us safer since in fact Hamas would hate us less and be happier with Obama.
Don't worry . . i'm too uhm .. 'urban' . . . . for The Traitor I don't let him bother me anymore. .cause i know what he is. . . a TROLL-kin Rocket River
It's strange that when a former NSA to your beloved Bush states that Obama would be fine as president, you'd disagree with her. Why don't you tell why she is wrong in her "opinion".
He's not planning to invade Pakistan at all. He's planning to conduct surgical strikes and covert operations on Pakistani soil (that's not even controlled by the government). Not on locations of specific high-value targets. He was talking about exactly what happened a few months ago. We learned that there was a high-level AQ meeting in Pakistan. In the past, we asked Pakistan to do something about it and they didn't. This time, we shot missiles into it and killed some high level leaders. Pakistan protested for a few days and then it disappeared. If we learn exactly where OBL & other top AQ people are going to be on a certain day and its in that region, do you think the US should or shouldn't go in and take them out? If so, you agree with Obama's stated policy. If not, you agree with McCain's stated policy (though I'm guessing he would actually follow Obama's policy - Bush has the same stated policy but also follows Obama's policy). US military and intelligence is currently trying to make this the stated US policy as well: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jaHgiDiFx7JI-5aMTNSVadA2AZdAD92E817O5 WASHINGTON (AP) — Top Bush administration officials are pressing the president to direct U.S. troops in Afghanistan to be more aggressive in pursuing militants into Pakistan on foot as part of a proposed radical shift in regional counterterrorism strategy, The Associated Press has learned. Senior intelligence and military aides want President Bush to give American soldiers greater flexibility to operate against al-Qaida and Taliban fighters who cross the border from Pakistan's lawless tribal border area to conduct attacks inside Afghanistan, officials say. ... Except no one's talking about invading anything or taking control of any territory.
If Bush maintains true to his MO, my guess is we are already crossing the border to pursue these guys, kind of like the secret bombing of Cambodia during Vietnam.
Oh we are. Obama says he'll continue the Bush war plan, with or without Pakistan's permission. McCain says he won't continue these strikes unilaterally.
I was just about to reply to your first five or so wrongheaded posts in this thread but I saw that Major had posted exactly what I was going to say, only more eloquently. Perhaps you missed it. It's just three posts above this one. Read and learn.
I agree with McCain's stated policy. I don't think the head of Osama bin Laden on a stake is worth the risk of unsettling our least secure ally. I don't think many non-neoconservative Middle East experts disagree with me. Al Qaeda is a hydra, and taking out a head only distracts it for a little while. We can never defeat Al Qaeda as long as we are giving them fodder for recruitment. Obama can continue the "fight them over there, so they cain't fight us over here" tactic, and continue to poke a stick in the wasp nest. So long as we don't knock the wasp nest down, it'll probably keep American shores safe only costing the lives of American troops, Afghans, and Pakistanis. But if we ever knock the wasp nest down, we've got a mess on our hand.
I think it's bizarre, but expected, that the same Democrats that were so against the surge in Iraq, with real objectives there, are for the surge in Afghanistan with no objective, just because Barack Obama is supporting it.
