Getting a little hotter in Pakistan

Tobra · Tobra's Garage

Euphemistically speaking of course

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/11/03/pakistan.emergency/index.html

How far is it from Pakistan to Afghanistan again? Things are going to get more interesting over their in a bad way I suspect. How many nukes do the Pakistanis have?

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

It's only a matter of time before the religious wacko types over there either take over the country or get a government sympathetic to their cause - either of which will be bad.

India has the most to worry about from this.

tabs · 10:44 AM

WHY DO I WASTE MY TIME WITH YOU...U DON'T FKING LISTEN DO U. DO U NEED CNN TO SPELL IT OUT FOR U, BEfORE YOU CATCH ON...HOW FKING STUPID CAN U BE? U can go back in the files on this Board and see that I have been posting about the danger in Pakistan since September 2006. Not only on this Board but the Charlie Rose Board as well.

The following was posted by me on 10/20/07.. do a search on this Board for Tabs and Musharraf and you see what I have posted on this subject since 9/06.

Better Pay Attention To Pakistan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me be the first to lay it out for ya all. Better forget about Iraq, better forget about Iran, better forget about Turkey and better forget about the Dali Lama. We got a far bigger problem than that its called Pakistan.

Ever since Musharraf signed that peace deal with the NW Tribal leaders in Sept 2006 his power has been slippin. He had to let Bhutto come back because he needs the moderates support as a hedge against the Islamo Facists.

If the moderates and Musharraf fail and are overthrown the Islamo Facists will take over in Pakistan and there goes the hood...only these radicals will have their hands on Nuclear weapons.

I would venture to guess that if Pakistan goes Islamo facist boom goes Karchi, boom goes New Delhi, boom goes Islambad and boom goes Bombay...

I think that within 5 years your going to see war from India to Israel.

As an aside the only guy the USA has that has an understanding of how people outside the US think and would have a deft enough touch to put the fire out is Barrick Obama. I certainily don't see eye to eye with him on very much at all.

sjf911 · sjf911's Garage

red-beard · red-beard's Garage

When I lived in Pakistan, it was right after Zia died and Benizir took power. It was bad then. I was nearly blown up in a shopping mall. The mall blew up, I had left 15-30 minutes earlier.

There are 3 power factions, and you need to control 2 to rule.

1. The military (but also the Industrialists)
2. The Religious leaders (Mullahs, etc)
3. The Feudal land owners (THe guys that own the land and actually run the local areas. Basically, golden rule mayors.

Musharraf is part of the Military (so there is 1). He is not well liked by the religious community. So he needs the Feudal land owners on his side. This is where his power is shaky.

If the country is taken over by a combo of 2&3, were all are in trouble.

Mule · 08:53 AM

The answer is:

frogger · 11-05-2007, 05:12 AM

Bush's foreign policy is working brilliantly!

The Gaijin · 11-05-2007, 05:23 AM

Yes, let all make sure to blame Bush for all of Pakistan's problems. And those of the Indus Valley going back 4000 years...

Shaun @ Tru6 · 11-05-2007, 05:31 AM

I'm just glad we got our money's worth with the $8 Billion we've sent them since 9/11.

Tobra · Tobra's Garage

Tabs, please don't be tiresome and say, "I said this a year ago" This has been a rough area of the world since before George Harrison and his buddies were raising dough for Bangladesh.

frogger · 11-05-2007, 06:50 AM

It's entirely possible that Pakistan can emerge from the current turmoil as a more secular nation, one that is willing to take on the extremists. The odds are a bit long, but, who knows. My fingers are crossed.

KFC911 · 11-05-2007, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frogger

It's entirely possible that Pakistan can emerge from the current turmoil as a more secular nation, one that is willing to take on the extremists...

Like Iraq used to be?

masraum · 11-05-2007, 06:57 AM

This is what I was expecting.

frogger · 11-05-2007, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC911

Like Iraq used to be?

This is different. For one thing, we're not invading a country with the brilliant (

) Rumsfeld running the show.

rammstein · 11-05-2007, 07:02 AM

WOW. Middle Eastern women are beautiful.

Aside from their obviously hot women, it does look like its going to be dicey over there.

That all being said, the events in Pakistan were caused by President Bush. I was too lazy to put that in green.

svandamme · svandamme's Garage

well, i think they didn't have as much talibani's there before afghanistan was invaded and they got an eviction notice, and went across the border...

distance from afghanistan to pakistan being "zero"

after all, where is Osama hiding out these days again?? you know, the bad guy y'all wanted to capture in Afghanistan, but failed to do so , party because instead of chasing him down with US military, instead the US relied on local goons for hire, which kinda didn't work ( osama is still out on the loose )... and instead of sticking with Afghanistan, doing that properly, the ADD crew in the White House opted instead to divert attention to Iraq instead...

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

Just think, if we hadn't "blown our wad" in I-wreck and instead stayed focused on going after A.Q. in Afghanistan, we'd probably have a sizeable force in Afghanistan right now, right on the back doorstep of the tribal regions. Any destabilization of the government (or a request by Musharrif) would be a green light to plow into those areas and upend them, which would probably do a helluva lot more to root out Islamic extremists than the B.S. in I-wreck ever will.

Opportunity lost. Another one of many. Big surprise there.

Rick Lee · Rick Lee's Garage

I'm probably in the minority here, but I think $8 billion was a pretty good bargain for having kept Pakistan among our allies for the last 6 yrs. or so. How much would you be willing to pay to keep nukes out of al Qaeda's hands? How much would it cost us once they got them?

Of course, I'm no fan of Musharaf. He was the least bad of some pretty bad options and I'm surprised things there didn't get worse a long time ago. Maybe India will do some of our dirty work here. Then again, if Bhutto takes Musharaf's job and manages to not get assassinated for a while, maybe we really will be able to go after al Qaeda there. She says she'd invite us in. Who knows?

legion · 11-05-2007, 10:41 AM

Good post Rick.

Musharaf is a dictator, but it's either him (a secular dictator), a religious dictator, or a hopelessly corrupt democracy (which is what Bhutto had). Yep, he's the least bad option.

Shaun @ Tru6 · 11-05-2007, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

I'm probably in the minority here, but I think $8 billion was a pretty good bargain for having kept Pakistan among our allies for the last 6 yrs. or so. How much would you be willing to pay to keep nukes out of al Qaeda's hands? How much would it cost us once they got them?

Of course, I'm no fan of Musharaf. He was the least bad of some pretty bad options and I'm surprised things there didn't get worse a long time ago. Maybe India will do some of our dirty work here. Then again, if Bhutto takes Musharaf's job and manages to not get assassinated for a while, maybe we really will be able to go after al Qaeda there. She says she'd invite us in. Who knows?

You've been taken. And I know it makes you feel good that $8 billion was squandered on a dictator vs. $8 billion for childnren's healthcare.

For $8 billion, OBL's head better be on a pike on top of the White House and AQ erased from Pakistani territory.

That's getting your money's worth.