Pakistan
- Thread starter harry
- Start date
Terminally stupid response and no doubt with the usual tinge of anglophobia
but whats happening over there is probably not a bad thing if democracy wins out in the end. The fundamentalist element in Pakistan is a lot less powerful than often assumed here (it gets around 8% of the vote at best), so dire fears about a taleban takeover could be exaggerated (they are not so stupid as to see that neighbouring Afganistan was an absolutely horrible place under the taleban)
I suspect that under pressure from the west (and internally too of course) Musharraf will have to back down.
there are countries in a bigger mess
but whats happening over there is probably not a bad thing if democracy wins out in the end. The fundamentalist element in Pakistan is a lot less powerful than often assumed here (it gets around 8% of the vote at best), so dire fears about a taleban takeover could be exaggerated (they are not so stupid as to see that neighbouring Afganistan was an absolutely horrible place under the taleban)
I suspect that under pressure from the west (and internally too of course) Musharraf will have to back down.
there are countries in a bigger mess
Colin Phillips
At the Start
Smacks of de-stabilisation to me, but the Bush Government wouldn't be involved in something like that, would they.
Irish Stamp
Forum Moderator
Let Bhutto run the country - she did a good job last time so lets have some elections as originally planned.
There's a small matter of a pipeline the Americans want to run into India to consider remember. It has to come over land and there aren't too many compliant countries lying in its path, although I can't remember precisely what the proposed route for it is, but it involved Afghanistan, and its difficult to see how they can route around Pakistan without blowing up half the Karakoram. I'm strugling to believe the Indian's would really want their oil supply routed through Pakistan, but there seems little alternative. They've just about completed the Afghan part of the jigsaw I think? and so finding someone to secure the final piece needs doing. Mind you, Bhutto could always be bought off, she's hardly untainted in that department from her last foray in office, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if she's on some kick back from Haliburton, Chevron Texaco, Exxon or whoever (that's provided she's not dead within 12 months of course - or should that be weeks?). I'm struggling to believe there isn't some faction within the :suspect: that isn't capable and willing to do for her
The inference that the Afganistan war was all about this pipeline is one put about by conspiracy nuts, islamists and the usual bunch of far left/right american/jew haters
not you surely warbler?
Had a look at this one a while back. The pipeline is desirable rather than essential and was expected to carry (i think i worked out) less than 1% of the worlds gas production
Does anyone reallythink that america was going to sit on its hands after 9/11 and let a regime continue to harbour and materially support AQ?
not you surely warbler?
Had a look at this one a while back. The pipeline is desirable rather than essential and was expected to carry (i think i worked out) less than 1% of the worlds gas production
Does anyone reallythink that america was going to sit on its hands after 9/11 and let a regime continue to harbour and materially support AQ?
"Yeah, definitely pleased they're over there. Nutters.
Next thing you know, the police will be chasing around and shooting innocent people they somehow confused as terrorists...."
:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
I know, what they should do is stop and ask any people if they plan to detonate a bomb to kill people.
Or better still..don't bother
Next thing you know, the police will be chasing around and shooting innocent people they somehow confused as terrorists...."
:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
I know, what they should do is stop and ask any people if they plan to detonate a bomb to kill people.
Or better still..don't bother
Given the terrorist threat that has existed here since the early seventies, it is a credit to the forces that so few mistakes have been made (and i would never count gibraltar as a mistake...thought it was ratehr good actually )
Awful what happened to the Brazilian. Simply tragic and extremely badly handled, but ultimately the blame for that lies with those who created the climate of fear.
Awful what happened to the Brazilian. Simply tragic and extremely badly handled, but ultimately the blame for that lies with those who created the climate of fear.
Flagship uberalles
Journeyman
That would be the media and government then.
Two laughable attempts at sh1t stirring and no takers, maybe everyone is wise to you now clivey.
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
Bullshit. Mugabe is as bad and imo worse than any of the Islamic fanatics and i don`t see him being taken out any time soon. Wonder why.
trackside528
At the Start
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2006
- Messages
- 5,377
I can see your inference Euro, but at the same time it can certainly be argued that the difference was that Afghanistan posed a threat to the security of the United States, a threat that the likes of Mugabe, though most certainly a lunatic, clearly did not pose.. Like Clive said, to think that America would rest on its laurels in the aftermath of 9/11 is crazy..
Clive, I don't see where the relevance to Northern Ireland comes in and the reference to Gibraltar has a strong whiff of ######-stirring about it tbh..
Clive, I don't see where the relevance to Northern Ireland comes in and the reference to Gibraltar has a strong whiff of ######-stirring about it tbh..
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
I think the Yanks were correct in taking out the Taliban, but Saddam was no more of a threat than Mugabe. He wasn`t interested in religion, wasn`t harbouring any AQ and had no WMD.
trackside528
At the Start
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2006
- Messages
- 5,377
Completely different kettle of fish Euro I agree..
That has to be some sort of classic doesnt it?
What cave do you live in?
Mugabe is an idiot but he is not clearly stating that he desires complete genocide for christians and jews world wide. And even if he did...of forget it..cant believe im arguing this...
Saddam was a constant threat in the region. Perhaps you have heard of the previous Gulf war and his use of gas against the kurds? Whether you agree with teh status of Kuwait and Saudi or not, containment of the clearly dangerous regime was the least that was required.
The war was badly planned and handled. But getting rid of someone like that (something wlecomed by most states in the region...not least Iran) is definately no bad thing in itself
Trackside...N Ireland is bought up in repsonse to the sneering inference that the british security services are "nutters". Certainly have made mistakes, but in the context of 40 years...not so many i would suggest
If you want to talk about NI, the British security and intelligence forces made one error more serious and stupid than all the many others when they characterised the situation there as a 'war' between them and the IRA, thereby undermining the political process and delaying a solution for many years.
They and the Americans have been equally simplistic in their dealings with Iraq and Afghanistan and have created what appears to be an insoluble mess, at least in the short and medium term.
They and the Americans have been equally simplistic in their dealings with Iraq and Afghanistan and have created what appears to be an insoluble mess, at least in the short and medium term.
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
He`s killing his own people, just like Saddam did - hence the comparison. Ambitions outside his own border are irrelevent. People are people after all. I`d appreciate less of the patronising as well. Although being a Tory as you so clearly are i suppose that`s hard to do.
The Americans take out the Taleban? they bloody well created, trained and supplied them, when it suited. There's also some evidence to suggest that they could have captured Bin Liner on two occasions but have let him go (eye witness testimony) though I'd conceed I've only read the third hand account rather than seen any transcript. Essentially it suits their purpose to keep the spectre of this shadowy guy very much at the forefront of the western pysche. The guy whose out there somewhere, lurking and waiting, and can hurt you, unless of course you agree to all these measures that we, (your government and protector) wish to invoke to keep you save etc.
Unfortunately I still go back to October 1997. I know precisely what I was told, by whom, and where. Ultimately I can't ever get away from this. That's not say I'm begging to be believed, frankly I don't give a damn as its of absolutely zero consequence to me, but I'm more than happy to believe that something about 9/11 is not as is popularly presented. That leaves me with either conspiracy or cock up as the explanation, with my suspicion pointing more to the former.
I did push the person on the subject a bit and I should say, that he didn't point the finger at the often cited energy industry as being the influencer of the United States apparent acquiessence
Unfortunately I still go back to October 1997. I know precisely what I was told, by whom, and where. Ultimately I can't ever get away from this. That's not say I'm begging to be believed, frankly I don't give a damn as its of absolutely zero consequence to me, but I'm more than happy to believe that something about 9/11 is not as is popularly presented. That leaves me with either conspiracy or cock up as the explanation, with my suspicion pointing more to the former.
I did push the person on the subject a bit and I should say, that he didn't point the finger at the often cited energy industry as being the influencer of the United States apparent acquiessence
if it was a "conspiracy" how many people do yopu think would have need to be involved? Hundreds? thousands?
how on earth would they keep them all quiet ad infintum about what would be the greatest domestic crime against americans since ...well
Do you really think that the pwers that be would take that chance? they would be dead men in no time at all. they would take that chance for the sake of halliburtons share price? they couldnt even hush up watergate..which was atiny operation
the old saw that the americans "created" the taleban is tenuous to say the least. they didnt create it to blow up the twin towers. The whole business of enouraging them (more accurate description) on the rather stupid basis of thine enemies enemy clearly backfired. There was no direct linkage to AQ until much later in the equationand Bin laden adopted them rather than the other way round anyway (after being chucked out of Sudan). As vile as the taleban was, they werent obviously intent in waging war against the west. They were given every chance to hand over BL (difficult im sure) and be left alone in all probability, but refused to do so and thus were rightly seen as complicit
that could well be true, but given that he is hardly necessary to keep the nutters interested i dont think that the vast bulk of the popualtion would suddenly call for a lossening of security measures, whether you like them or not, if he was caught
Euny...you can guess all you like about might politics but the idea that isalmic fundamentalists are a more direct threat to the west than the horrible mugabe is hardly exclusive to tories
how on earth would they keep them all quiet ad infintum about what would be the greatest domestic crime against americans since ...well
Do you really think that the pwers that be would take that chance? they would be dead men in no time at all. they would take that chance for the sake of halliburtons share price? they couldnt even hush up watergate..which was atiny operation
the old saw that the americans "created" the taleban is tenuous to say the least. they didnt create it to blow up the twin towers. The whole business of enouraging them (more accurate description) on the rather stupid basis of thine enemies enemy clearly backfired. There was no direct linkage to AQ until much later in the equationand Bin laden adopted them rather than the other way round anyway (after being chucked out of Sudan). As vile as the taleban was, they werent obviously intent in waging war against the west. They were given every chance to hand over BL (difficult im sure) and be left alone in all probability, but refused to do so and thus were rightly seen as complicit
that could well be true, but given that he is hardly necessary to keep the nutters interested i dont think that the vast bulk of the popualtion would suddenly call for a lossening of security measures, whether you like them or not, if he was caught
Euny...you can guess all you like about might politics but the idea that isalmic fundamentalists are a more direct threat to the west than the horrible mugabe is hardly exclusive to tories
this is rubbish. Of course its relevant. A goverments first reponisb ilty is to its won poeople and then, like it or not, those counties where the interests affect their own people. I think they should have toppled mugabe and mao and pol pot and god knows who else...and my god...wouldnt the world be moaning about that if they had
How many people? In all honesty Clive, I've no idea. I suspect however, that it isn't a question of numbers but more likely to do with positions of power. Provided people with sufficient reach, and had a number of cunning cover explanations lined up I'd speculate it would require about a dozen to instigate it.
I should perhaps say that the explanation I was given didn't point the finger at the political administration either, and there was a suggestion that they were being manipulated a bit, or only fed info on a need to know basis. In this case of course, my timespan crosses two administrations as well, so there would be a bit of currency in this.
I wouldn't under estimate what America is capable of. We've seen small scale things before like plans to shoot down one of their own airliners full of school children in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. Similarly, they've sunk British ships in the Thames estuary who they thought were likely to trade with Cuba (or was it Japanese with British producs?). They've even drawn up plans to invade Canada, and in all probability shot their own President and a kind of President elect come to think of it
I should perhaps say that the explanation I was given didn't point the finger at the political administration either, and there was a suggestion that they were being manipulated a bit, or only fed info on a need to know basis. In this case of course, my timespan crosses two administrations as well, so there would be a bit of currency in this.
I wouldn't under estimate what America is capable of. We've seen small scale things before like plans to shoot down one of their own airliners full of school children in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. Similarly, they've sunk British ships in the Thames estuary who they thought were likely to trade with Cuba (or was it Japanese with British producs?). They've even drawn up plans to invade Canada, and in all probability shot their own President and a kind of President elect come to think of it