|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Bombing in Pakistan - 9/21/2008 12:28:33 PM
|
|
|
litfire2000
Posts: 182
Joined: 7/6/2008
Status: offline
|
Do you think the bombing of the Marriott hotel in Pakistan will cause the Pakistani people and/or government to either take a strong stand against terrorism or capitulate to terrorist pressure?
_____________________________
Ps. 122:6 Pray for the peace of Jerusalem
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bombing in Pakistan - 9/21/2008 3:14:19 PM
|
|
|
leonfigg3
Posts: 331
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
|
I am not fully aware of this story but I would imagine the government's reaction would deoend on what kind of terrorist group has taken, ot will take responsibility fot the attack.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bombing in Pakistan - 9/22/2008 5:59:56 AM
|
|
|
TheosCentric
Posts: 1900
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: online
|
I suspect, and have suspected for a number of years, that there are top leaders in the Pakistani government affiliated w. ith Al Quaida and/or the Taliban. I believe that Musharaff himself is somewhat responsible for Bhutto's death.
None of that can be proven, but the Bush administration is scared to take a hard stance against Pakistan because their nuclear weapon capability. Pakistan is harboring Al Quaida and continues to Al Quaida. Where is our hardline stance against nations that harbor terroristic groups now? We cannot even do cross-border raids from Afghanistan without getting fired upon. The administration is chicken when it comes to a nation with nuclear weapons, but bold when the nation has no/little power militarily. I'm curious as to what is being done diplomatically.
_____________________________
"Missions exists because worship doesn't." -- John Piper, Let the Nations be Glad
God at the Center - Latest post - John 3:16 conference?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bombing in Pakistan - 9/22/2008 9:55:22 AM
|
|
|
cow451
Posts: 3966
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheosCentric
I suspect, and have suspected for a number of years, that there are top leaders in the Pakistani government affiliated w. ith Al Quaida and/or the Taliban. I believe that Musharaff himself is somewhat responsible for Bhutto's death.
None of that can be proven, but the Bush administration is scared to take a hard stance against Pakistan because their nuclear weapon capability. Pakistan is harboring Al Quaida and continues to Al Quaida. Where is our hardline stance against nations that harbor terroristic groups now? We cannot even do cross-border raids from Afghanistan without getting fired upon. The administration is chicken when it comes to a nation with nuclear weapons, but bold when the nation has no/little power militarily. I'm curious as to what is being done diplomatically.
What is it you suggest the US do about Pakistan?
_____________________________
Wenn Sie so intelligent sind, warum Sie hier sind?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bombing in Pakistan - 9/22/2008 10:06:41 AM
|
|
|
TheosCentric
Posts: 1900
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: online
|
That, my friend, is an excellent question, to which I don't have an exact answer.
Do we try diplomacy? I don't believe our current administration has any legs to stand on, considering the mess it made of Iraq. The diplomatic efforts with North Korea have now failed, with North Korea effectively flipping the administration off by turning their reactors back on.
We don't have anything left. I don't even believe a military option should be on the table. We're so stretched thin.
Iraq has distracted us so far from the true mission and stretched our military resources so thin, that there's nothing else we can do, but beg Pakistan to let us go after the groups being harbored in the northern mountains.
It's a sad day when the "great" United States of America has to get down on their own knees and beg to finish what they should've finished 7 years ago.
_____________________________
"Missions exists because worship doesn't." -- John Piper, Let the Nations be Glad
God at the Center - Latest post - John 3:16 conference?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bombing in Pakistan - 9/22/2008 10:31:42 AM
|
|
|
RichLP
Posts: 1623
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: litfire2000
Do you think the bombing of the Marriott hotel in Pakistan will cause the Pakistani people and/or government to either take a strong stand against terrorism or capitulate to terrorist pressure?
First of all, this is tragic. Pakistanis and foreigners both perished. The explosion left a 30-foot-deep crater directly under whether the vehicle was parked, and the blast hit a gas pipeline, which resulted in a huge fire that engulfed the hotel.
Now, as for what caused this.
The first post of this thread said, "Do you think the bombing of the Marriott hotel in Pakistan will cause the Pakistani people and/or government to either take a strong stand against terrorism or capitulate to terrorist pressure?"
This is a simplistic way to look at it, in my view, because it mirrors how we Americans have been viewing terrorism since 9/11. Proponents of Bush's war on terror state that firmness and resolve are needed, because the alternative is surrendering to fear. But that isnt' the case per se in Pakistan.
Pakistan is not waging a global war on terror. What Pakistan has to deal with are tribal warlords whose men operate in the loosely defined border area with Afghanistan. It has been said that Osama Bin Laden traveled into Pakistani territory to avoid US-led efforts to capture him in the aftermath of the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.
It's difficult to make even an educated guess as to who is behind this attack. But I will say this.
The armed forces of Pakistan have bombed the tribal area of Bajaur. About 300,00 civilians have fled their homes, and the Pakistani military strikes have killed many civilians. Furthermore, our own American forces have entered Southern Waziristan in efforts against the Wazirs.
Then, if one looks at this attack as an act of retaliation, it can be argued that this was an act by the Pakistani Taliban to avenge attacks conducted by Pakistan and the US on them and on their kinsfolk.
_____________________________
"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda" - G.W. Bush lies to America and to the world, 5/1/2003
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Bombing in Pakistan - 9/22/2008 12:55:43 PM
|
|
|
leonfigg3
Posts: 331
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheosCentric
That, my friend, is an excellent question, to which I don't have an exact answer.
Do we try diplomacy? I don't believe our current administration has any legs to stand on, considering the mess it made of Iraq. The diplomatic efforts with North Korea have now failed, with North Korea effectively flipping the administration off by turning their reactors back on.
We don't have anything left. I don't even believe a military option should be on the table. We're so stretched thin.
Iraq has distracted us so far from the true mission and stretched our military resources so thin, that there's nothing else we can do, but beg Pakistan to let us go after the groups being harbored in the northern mountains.
It's a sad day when the "great" United States of America has to get down on their own knees and beg to finish what they should've finished 7 years ago.
1. Diplomacy is a tricky business and does not always turn out as one would like. Maybe if the aggreements contained a penalty clause for any violations of the agreement, the agreements may have teeth.
2.The military option should never be left off the table since that may be the only tangible threat that may bring about a diplomatic solution.
Our military may be stretched thin, but I do not believe all diplomatic channels have been exhausted. ie North Korrea depends on China for its very existence. Noth Korea will not push an issue any further that China tells it to.
3. If denying terrorists, particularly Islamic extremists, the mere possibility of getting WMDs, is not the mission, what is the mission?
If denying Islamic extremeists of another country to control is not the mission, what is the mission?
As another thread pointed out that the Islamic world, as well as the West, was woken up on 911 to the reality and danger of Islamic extremeism. On that day, in the space of time The world finally came to acknowledge that there existed a group of people at war with the rest of the modern world. They are the enemy, not bin Laden. It is they that we have to deal with not someone who may or may not have outlived his importance.
4. We are a long way from having to get "down on our hands and knees and beg" Pakistan or anyone else. We do seem to be a long way from focusing on what we need to focus on. We need to focus on those that teach and spread extremism and terror. We need to come up with ways to help Pakistan and other countries, that have been havens for extremism, not punish them or make them do our bidding.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
