Kidnapped Wall Street Journal reporter confirmed dead

I would imagine that it didn't work to well? As I interpret this, if I were the US gov't, I be more intrested in ensuring his stability, as the options seem unpalatable, despite a stratigic intrest in demonizing Pakistan to cozy up to India, to block China.

And, from what I understand, the general idea is that Musharaf is going to stay in power as long as he recieves support from the Army, who'll support him as long as he's making the country more powerful, which cozying up to the US would accomplish.

I hate to say it but I'd also, were I the US, back off of that 'free, democratic elections' thing that they were pushing for next year. Of course, I still give it lip service, as promoting democracy's a good goal, but I'd imagine that giving the vote to the Pakistani people might be a bit like giving the vote to all people under 10 years old in the US -- we'd end up with someone like Barney as president, and they'd end up with the tall, one-eyed Afghan Talaban dude.

I'd also that the more Pakistani cozys up to the US, the more likely they are to follow a foreign policy that'd enable India to at least tolerate them, given the options.

In otherwords, while I'd imagine that it might undermine him a wee bit with the (completely powerless and innefectual) man on the street, I'd imagine it can only strengthen him otherwise. No?

 

BTW, I find an intresting parallell that Islamic Americans should pay heed to:

How is killing Daniel Pearl simply because he's American, same as the US policy makers, any less onerous than redneck Americans harassing and injuring innocent Muslems, simply because they happen to be of the same religion as Mr. bin Laden?

 

Ottomaton:

The Pakistani ISI had a hand in this, I'd all but guarantee it. Musharaf has fired several top ISI officials recently at our bidding, and tried to reorganize the whole outfit, but... Its ties to Islamic extremist organizations are veryextensive. They are fighting back.

This is the organization that created the Taliban in Afghanistan, BTW.

The idea is to challenge Musharaf's capacity to reign in the more extreme elements of Pakistani government and society - something he's actually been trying to do without provoking a confrontation. They are trying to provoke that confrontation by forcing us to lay a heavier hand on Musharaf and say "you must do more". Of course, if Musharaf does more, then it might spark a widespread uprising against his control (and secular control in general)...

He might lose control of the Pak Army. And if that happens, the extremists will gain control of Pakistan (and its nukes).

I'm interested in seeing how much pressure we apply to Musharaf over this. As you imply, we do not want to see him replaced, as the alternatives at this juncture would be far, far worse... While I and every other American wants to see a bit of revenge for Perle's death, we would do well to not add any fuel to the fire in this situation. Musharaf must stay in power for the time being.

 

There is no reason in the world that can justify such a killing.
My prayers for the family of Mr.Pearl.
I hope the guilty are brought to justice.

 

+
My prayers go out to his wife and family

 

But wouldn't it be a better world if people lived for their passions, instead of dying for them?

 

It is very sad to hear about this. The guy's politics are irrelevant. I personally had never heard of him.

It is very unfortunate that Treeman tried to turn the thread into an attack on boy and Q8.

As far as I know there was no allegation of spying. I did, however, see an article somewhere that mentioned that the CIA should be forbidden by law from using journalists and clerics as cover for spying. Some Journalist Association was pushing for this as an additional protection for journalists. I believe the article was in the Chronicle.

 

glynch:

You've never heard of him? He's been all over the news for weeks now... You're just learning of this? Put down your communist Manifesto copy and turn on the TV for a change.

"Tried to turn this into an attack on boy and Q8"? Their attitudes and beliefs are what really caused this (along with the war in general). There's a reason I jump on them at every opportunity: they're terrorism supporters. You are too, by proxy.

If anything, your effort to make this a knock against me is despicable. Why don't you just stick to the issues, and call off the mindless slander?

Your last paragraph made no sense.

 

BTW, and not that it's really relevant, but apparently Pearl was killed on the 31st of January. He was told that he would be allowed a taped interview with a terrorist operative; while he was talking to the terrorist, another came up behind him, grabbed his hair, pulled his head back, and proceeded to cut his throat with a knife. At that point, several other people with knived proceeded to cut his head off with other knives - a collective effort, apparently.

This was all apparently caught on film. It was sent to a FBI point in Pakistan, and was forwarded to a State Dept. office, which is how they knew for sure he was dead...

Words can't even begin to describe the horror... So gruesome. And to think that one day this guy's kid will get to look at a flick of his dad's head getting sawed off...

Someone must pay for this.

 

But saying someone is a supporter of terrorism by proxy isn't despicable or mindless slander?

 

Not if true, Rm95.

If you are still equivocating at this point - much less trying to defend the opposition - then I'm inclined to think that you actually want the terrorists to succeed. You either fight them, or you are supporting them. They are counting on you to not be able to make up your mind.

If you don't recognize evil when it's staring you in the face, then you are probably just a little bit evil yourself.

 

But I think anybody with a brain should know that glynch doesn't support terrorism in anyway. Maybe I'm speaking too much for him, but I've never read anything that would lead me to believe that.

Regardless, you're not "sticking with the issues" either by calling him a supporter of terrorism.

 

<B>Not if true, Rm95. </B>

Has glynch stated he's a communist somewhere?

<B>If you are still equivocating at this point - much less trying to defend the opposition - then I'm inclined to think that you actually want the terrorists to succeed. </B>

You know, these are the kinds of mindless comments you expect from people can't make a reasonable argument. I would think with your background in this field, you would be able to stick with more factual analysis. "If you disagree with me, you're a terrorist supporter!" Grow up.

Maybe -- just maybe -- there is more than one solution to this. I believe the military solution is the way to go, but that doesn't mean there aren't others. Maybe the military solution is even the wrong choice, who knows -- it's been wrong plenty of times before, even when our national security has been threatened (see Cuban Missile Crisis). To dismiss other people as communists or terrorist supporters because their viewpoints differ from yours is childish, asinine, and doesn't really help your cause a whole lot.

 

Rm95 & Major:

Look, I don't know if glynch actually supports terrorism, but it's a bit odd that every single argument he makes works in the terrorists' interests.

Don't attack Afghanistan. Work witrh international courts to arrest Osama. Riiiight. End result: Al Qaeda and the Taliban survive in Afghanistan.

Remove support from Israel. Sure. Let the suicide bombers attack them indefinitely, and remove our only leverage over the Israelis. End result: WWIII, the Israelis/West against Islam. Nuclear war.

Don't attack Iraq and remove Saddam's regime. Let him keep his WMD, and let him keep supporting terrorists worldwide. End result: Saddam takes over the ME, and his WMD end up being used in Western cities.

Leave Iran alone, and let the mullahs stay there. Don't worry about their WMD or their terrorism support infrastructure, which makes Al Qaeda look like a choir boy outfit. End result: WMD used in Israel and the US - nuclear war again.

Whether he realizes it or not, he is arguing the terrorists' side. And BTW, he just tried to use this post to slander me; there's no question that Q8 and boy are terrorism supporters, as they actually support Iran's mullahs, Hamas, and Hizbollah. I will continue to point that out.

BTW, Major - for the hundredth time, I do not support a military course of action in every situation, so please stop implying that I do. I am getting tired of it. How would you like it if I continually insinuated that you always support a military solution because you just stated that you support it in this case?

 

But treeman, it seems like every argument you make leans pretty far right, and I don't think you would even argue with that...glynch's views are what puts him on the left, and yours puts you on the other side...

I don't think those arguments of his you laid out are fair, being that you don't KNOW (although I am sure you think you do...hell you might be right, I really don't know either way) that you would have been right about all those outcomes that would have helped out terrorist causes.

Another thing--you always seem to insinuate whenever you can that people on the other side of your arguments are communists...what's with that? Is the idea of communism evil to you, so you use it as an insult?

So if I'm a liberal, or I'm a communist, I'm a terrorist??? Very narrow-minded if you ask me, but this shouldn't surprise me, you FASCIST

 

Prempeh:

When are you dodos going to understand that as far as this war goes leftist or rightist idology should not matter a bit???

I have shown repeatedly that I am not nearly as far to the right as those of you who only read a few of my posts seem to believe. At the very most, I could be called a "centrist". I am admittedly to the right of many here on defense issues, because I simply find the idea of not defending yourself ridiculous -and I actually realize that we live in a dangerous world. Some of you still don't seem to get that... I wonder how many more buildings have to get knocked down for people like yourself to realize that?

I have not called anyone here except for boy and Q8 terrorist supporters, and I said that glynch - whether he realizes it or not - argues the terrorists' side.

I also do not think that everyone on the left is a communists - only glynch. Do you think everyone to your right is a fascist?

 

I guess 88 percent of the country is on the far right...

 

I think your an anti-Muslim/Arab racist who wants to see lil Iraqi and Palestinian kids be killed by hunger and thirst.

You support sanctions which have killed over 600,000 thousand Iraqi kids by now (UNESCO numbers) and you think Sharon is right in butchering kids by machine guns.

You support oppressing dictatorships in Egypt and the Shah of Iran back in the day. You also support cruel military dictatorships in Algeria, Turkey and Pakistan. Your not only anti Arab but also anti Democratic.

 

What you call <i>democracy</i> in Iran is not democracy.


Mango