The Case for Invading Pakistan: A Grave and Gathering Threat

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
1. Pakistan is run by a military dictator who overthrew the elected government, this is not in doubt


2. Pakistan harbors and is THE major base for Al Qaeda and assorted other Islamic Fundamentalists, this is not in doubt

3. Pakistan along with Saudi Arabia is a major player in the spread of idealogical fundamentalist Islam including beingthe main sponsor and supporter of the Taliban, this is not in doubt

4. Pakistan at least indirectly supports terrorism against neighboring states., this is not in doubt

5. Pakistan has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be directly linked to the spread of the most dangerous WMD, nuclear weapons technology, and the above mentioned dictator reportedly knew about it and has engaged in a whitewash by pardoning the man chiefly responsible, this is not in doubt

6. Pakistans human rights record is dismal to say the least, torture, rape rooms, persecution of women, all there., this is not in doubt

7. Pakistans intelligence services and military are closely intertwined with Islamic militants and are of dubious loyalty to the dictator Musharrif if the proverbial sh!!t hit the fan, this is not in doubt


When does Pakistan join the Axis of evil? Does this not qualify as a grave and gathering threat?? I sure think so. I say we start by invading the border region with Afghanistan and dare them to challenge us? Who is with me???
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
I also want to point out that if we invaded Pakistan we would probably have no problem gaining the help of the Indians. Between us and the Indians we could easily crush them with the Indians taking most of the casualties.
 

tontod

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
3,244
0
71
I'm with you, but Pres. Bush is cozying up to Pakistan right now, due to them "helping" the U.S. with Al Qaeda. I have a feeling this relationship will come back to haunt the U.S. eventually.
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Personally I think we should have chased Al Qaeda into Pakistan and routed them. Then drive all the way to Islamabad with the Indians sweeping in on the other side. Crush them and completely cripple Al Qaeda, remove the Islamic Bomb, smash the Madrasas which even know turn out zealots to harm the US, and prove to the world that we are serious.

Instead we leave the fortress of the enemy intact. It baffles the mind.
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,198
4
76
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
I also want to point out that if we invaded Pakistan we would probably have no problem gaining the help of the Indians. Between us and the Indians we could easily crush them with the Indians taking most of the casualties.

India could crush Pakistan without our help.
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Originally posted by: Strk
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
I also want to point out that if we invaded Pakistan we would probably have no problem gaining the help of the Indians. Between us and the Indians we could easily crush them with the Indians taking most of the casualties.

India could crush Pakistan without our help.

Exactly, India has already proven it is willing to risk the consequences of all out war with Pakistan and they have proven they can beat Pakistan in two wars.

Imagine the sight of the worlds most powerful and the worlds largest democracy combining forces to crush an obvious and undisputable threat to the world. No one could deny that Pakistan was a threat.

We could repay them by working to get India a permament seat on the UN security council. The big unknown in this scenario is China.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,134
38
91
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Any war involving Pakistan would involve nukes. The reason you go into places like Iraq is that you overthrow the dictator before he grabs the world by the balls. But wait...that's preemption...so...hmm....ya...I say we go with your plan which means 10's to 100's of thousands dead...many many more if China or Russia get jumpy about nukes skimming their beards.
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

You don't think the ISS is actively supporting Al Qaeda and the Taliban?? Musharrif is an old sponsor of the Kashmiri sepratists and the Taliban who most certainly turned thier guns on us. Pakistan has also been unwilling or unable to to route out the Al Qaeda in that country, including most likely Saddam Hussein himself. Is it better to let them sit there and continue plotting against us and leave the security of the United States to a country like Pakistan?????????/

Thier is a lot more evidence and history of that than Saddam Hussein possibly maybe in some future scenario teaming up with Al Qaeda becuase thier was a terrorist group in the North and one guy went to Baghdad to get his leg amputated.

 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Any war involving Pakistan would involve nukes. The reason you go into places like Iraq is that you overthrow the dictator before he grabs the world by the balls. But wait...that's preemption...so...hmm....ya...I say we go with your plan which means 10's to 100's of thousands dead...many many more if China or Russia get jumpy about nukes skimming their beards.

I think the Indians have shown they are prepared for that, and is it not better that this great battle be fought over there rather than see a mushroom cloud over an American city??? Is it better that thousands of Indians die rather than Americans?? Is that not the core of pre-emption. Why do we not go after the state that has been proven to support terrorists and spread the most lethal of WMD. I have no confidence in the Pakistanis good intentions.

We can not leave the security of the United States to a dictator who harbors our enemies, has spread nuclear technology, and is one step away from being assasinated.
 

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
1. Pakistan is run by a military dictator who overthrew the elected government, this is not in doubt


2. Pakistan harbors and is THE major base for Al Qaeda and assorted other Islamic Fundamentalists, this is not in doubt

3. Pakistan along with Saudi Arabia is a major player in the spread of idealogical fundamentalist Islam including beingthe main sponsor and supporter of the Taliban, this is not in doubt

4. Pakistan at least indirectly supports terrorism against neighboring states., this is not in doubt

5. Pakistan has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be directly linked to the spread of the most dangerous WMD, nuclear weapons technology, and the above mentioned dictator reportedly knew about it and has engaged in a whitewash by pardoning the man chiefly responsible, this is not in doubt

6. Pakistans human rights record is dismal to say the least, torture, rape rooms, persecution of women, all there., this is not in doubt

7. Pakistans intelligence services and military are closely intertwined with Islamic militants and are of dubious loyalty to the dictator Musharrif if the proverbial sh!!t hit the fan, this is not in doubt


When does Pakistan join the Axis of evil? Does this not qualify as a grave and gathering threat?? I sure think so. I say we start by invading the border region with Afghanistan and dare them to challenge us? Who is with me???

I'm not.

You can make up lists like that for any country. Some of that stuff isn't even controlled by the government. Don't they have tribal areas that have some of their own laws? I believe Musharaff is trying to reform it, but it can't happen instantaneously. I even remember reading that when Musharaff took over, the people supported him.

You can make up some bogus list like that for the US: US is run by a man that wasn't elected by the majority of the people, US kidnaps people of other nationalities and hides them in a camp in Cuba, US supported terrorism (who doesn't? you support what's in your interest), our technology has surely leaked out & been given or sold to others, we have mad people that sniper people on highways and parking lots, have people practicing biological/chemical warfare in our own country (all that ricin/anthrax crap), etc.

Would India even want to be involved in an all-out war? Considering how many foreign companies are investing there, I'm sure they'll be concerned about losing their technological progress if they go in an all-out war with a nuclear power. Who would want to set up an office there if you're going to get nuked?
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,134
38
91
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

You don't think the ISS is actively supporting Al Qaeda and the Taliban?? Musharrif is an old sponsor of the Kashmiri sepratists and the Taliban who most certainly turned thier guns on us. Pakistan has also been unwilling or unable to to route out the Al Qaeda in that country, including most likely Saddam Hussein himself. Is it better to let them sit there and continue plotting against us and leave the security of the United States to a country like Pakistan?????????/

Thier is a lot more evidence and history of that than Saddam Hussein possibly maybe in some future scenario teaming up with Al Qaeda becuase thier was a terrorist group in the North and one guy went to Baghdad to get his leg amputated.

I started a thread on this a long time ago, discussing the inner workings of the ISI and it's links to Iran. Unfortunately I don't know how to find it. However, so long as they are working with us, and so long as they haven't violated any Article VII UN resolutions, I see no reason to become hostile towards Pakistan. Yes, they've done some dirt in the past. But we turned a blind eye towards them at the time. Today, the situation is totally different. Furthermore, they have helped us alot over the past couple of years dismantling Al Qaeda.

I know you were being cynical about American "hypocrisy" in global affairs. But there's no need to get the less-informed excited over fantasies.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,114
5,644
126
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

The Irony is thick here.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

The Irony is thick here.

Why would we want to invade a country that is generally being helpful with dealing with terrorist groups?
 

AnImuS

Senior member
Sep 28, 2001
939
0
0
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

The Irony is thick here.

Why would we want to invade a country that is generally being helpful with dealing with terrorist groups?

because invading it will give us complete controll and much better reach.

its actually cheaper if we just train indian troops and have them invade while we watch. alot cheaper.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,114
5,644
126
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

The Irony is thick here.

Why would we want to invade a country that is generally being helpful with dealing with terrorist groups?

The Irony thickens. ;)
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

The Irony is thick here.

Why would we want to invade a country that is generally being helpful with dealing with terrorist groups?

The Irony thickens. ;)

Care to explain what you find ironic?
 

Martin

Lifer
Jan 15, 2000
29,178
1
81
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

The Irony is thick here.

Why would we want to invade a country that is generally being helpful with dealing with terrorist groups?

The Irony thickens. ;)

Care to explain what you find ironic?

The irony being that you and Dari were huge fans of invading a country that had very little to do with terrorism, that was not spreading WMD technology and that did not posses any WMD, or had any active WMD programs. But now that someone points out a country that is guilty of the above, you don't support their invasion.

If you can't see the obvious irony, perhaps a trip to dictionary.com will help.

And FYI its been almost 2.5 years since AQ fled afghanistan. A helpful country would have done something to kill off AQ in that period, don't you think? 2.5a is a long time.

And btw, I would not support such an invasion, but I do appreciate justin's pointing out your inconsistency.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,114
5,644
126
Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

The Irony is thick here.

Why would we want to invade a country that is generally being helpful with dealing with terrorist groups?

The Irony thickens. ;)

Care to explain what you find ironic?

The irony being that you and Dari were huge fans of invading a country that had very little to do with terrorism, that was not spreading WMD technology and that did not posses any WMD, or had any active WMD programs. But now that someone points out a country that is guilty of the above, you don't support their invasion.

If you can't see the obvious irony, perhaps a trip to dictionary.com will help.

And FYI its been almost 2.5 years since AQ fled afghanistan. A helpful country would have done something to kill off AQ in that period, don't you think? 2.5a is a long time.

And btw, I would not support such an invasion, but I do appreciate justin's pointing out your inconsistency.

Someone gets it. :) :beer:
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

The Irony is thick here.

Why would we want to invade a country that is generally being helpful with dealing with terrorist groups?

The Irony thickens. ;)

Care to explain what you find ironic?

The irony being that you and Dari were huge fans of invading a country that had very little to do with terrorism, that was not spreading WMD technology and that did not posses any WMD, or had any active WMD programs. But now that someone points out a country that is guilty of the above, you don't support their invasion.

If you can't see the obvious irony, perhaps a trip to dictionary.com will help.

And FYI its been almost 2.5 years since AQ fled afghanistan. A helpful country would have done something to kill off AQ in that period, don't you think? 2.5a is a long time.

And btw, I would not support such an invasion, but I do appreciate justin's pointing out your inconsistency.

Pakitstan has allowed us work inside their borders when needed. They have handed over al queda suspects. Pakistan has generally worked with the US. But i guess you want to overlook that.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,114
5,644
126
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Dari
What's the point of this stupid thread? What has Pakistan done to the US that would cause us to harm her? She has been an ally, although a nominal one, for decades. Unless she turns her guns towards us or her gov't actively supports terrorist attacks against the US and her interests, I see no reason to attack her.

The Irony is thick here.

Why would we want to invade a country that is generally being helpful with dealing with terrorist groups?

The Irony thickens. ;)

Care to explain what you find ironic?

The irony being that you and Dari were huge fans of invading a country that had very little to do with terrorism, that was not spreading WMD technology and that did not posses any WMD, or had any active WMD programs. But now that someone points out a country that is guilty of the above, you don't support their invasion.

If you can't see the obvious irony, perhaps a trip to dictionary.com will help.

And FYI its been almost 2.5 years since AQ fled afghanistan. A helpful country would have done something to kill off AQ in that period, don't you think? 2.5a is a long time.

And btw, I would not support such an invasion, but I do appreciate justin's pointing out your inconsistency.

Pakitstan has allowed us work inside their borders when needed. They have handed over al queda suspects. Pakistan has generally worked with the US. But i guess you want to overlook that.

Haha, relax, no one is seriously suggesting we invade Pakistan. tnitsuij's merely pointed out how much of a stronger case exists to do so.
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
"The world's a better place without Saddam, that's all the justification that's needed."

If you believe this...and how many dozens of members have said this....than you support invading Pakistan and ousting Musharraf. To say that all the other offenses listed by Justin are offset by the supposed cooperation regarding terrorists is BS.
 

Shad0hawK

Banned
May 26, 2003
1,456
0
0
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
1. Pakistan is run by a military dictator who overthrew the elected government, this is not in doubt


2. Pakistan harbors and is THE major base for Al Qaeda and assorted other Islamic Fundamentalists, this is not in doubt

3. Pakistan along with Saudi Arabia is a major player in the spread of idealogical fundamentalist Islam including beingthe main sponsor and supporter of the Taliban, this is not in doubt

4. Pakistan at least indirectly supports terrorism against neighboring states., this is not in doubt

5. Pakistan has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be directly linked to the spread of the most dangerous WMD, nuclear weapons technology, and the above mentioned dictator reportedly knew about it and has engaged in a whitewash by pardoning the man chiefly responsible, this is not in doubt

6. Pakistans human rights record is dismal to say the least, torture, rape rooms, persecution of women, all there., this is not in doubt

7. Pakistans intelligence services and military are closely intertwined with Islamic militants and are of dubious loyalty to the dictator Musharrif if the proverbial sh!!t hit the fan, this is not in doubt


When does Pakistan join the Axis of evil? Does this not qualify as a grave and gathering threat?? I sure think so. I say we start by invading the border region with Afghanistan and dare them to challenge us? Who is with me???

we should just let india take them out. they want to, the muslims and hindu's have been going at it for ages.

in fact an article on the pakistan india conflict is where i first read about hindu militants and hardliners.



linky