New ground war with Pakistan

[billwald]

Bush Admin admits we have been in a ground war in Pakistan for 2 months. No one cares.

 

[Vylo]

Dude, didn't you hear? Palin's 17 year old daughter is Pregnant, DUDE! Obama slipped and said "his muslim faith"! DUDE. DUUUUUDE

 

[Avatar]

Flatten Pakistan. Should have been done 7 years ago.

India will help.

 

[Vylo]

Or do it themselves. I think they are itching to.

 

[Verv]

It is because Waziristan harbors terrorists and is chalk full of Islamic fundamentalists. It is an area that spills their wars over to Afghanistan all the time.

Barack Obama caused a state of emergency in Pakistan by speaking extremely harshly of it.

And no one cares.

 

[Vylo]

What I don't get is much of the population is at odds with the taliban, fighting them, and the taliban is fairly isolated in those mountains. The US want's Bin Laden. Why not let us go in there guns blazing? I guess it is a matter of national pride. They want to show they can do it themsevles?

 

[Avatar]

What I don't get is much of the population is at odds with the taliban, fighting them, and the taliban is fairly isolated in those mountains. The US want's Bin Laden. Why not let us go in there guns blazing? I guess it is a matter of national pride. They want to show they can do it themsevles?

Yeah, that's it.

Pakistan's security and intelligence forces have supported the Taliban since their inception (before 9/11). Pakistan wanted Afghanistan as a vassal state, to strengthen themselves in their regional jockeying for power with India.

Pakistan continues to support the Taliban (not Al-Quaeda),

Once you make a deal with the Devil, you break it at your own peril.

 

[ArnautDaniel]

Bush Admin admits we have been in a ground war in Pakistan for 2 months. No one cares.

This puts me in mind of Nixon's illegal excursions into Cambodia.

But hey, we've got to the point where you say "Hey Bush invaded another country!" and everyone says "Oh, what's for dinner?"

 

[Douger]

The US involvement in Afghanistan and Pakistan is stupid, stupid, stupid. The guys they're fighting aren't going anywhere and they can't all be killed. Even if the Americans stays 100 years, eventually the Americans will leave.
This kind of thing happens, over and over, and over, all through world history, but there's always someone dumb enough to think they're the ones that can do it (TM) and off they go.
Too bad it had to be the USA this time. It's a nice country with a good history.... kind of.
It's very, very sad, watching this all happen, to the Afghans, Pakistanis and Americans.

 

[ArnautDaniel]

The US involvement in Afghanistan and Pakistan is stupid, stupid, stupid. The guys they're fighting aren't going anywhere and they can't all be killed. Even if the Americans stays 100 years, eventually the Americans will leave.
This kind of thing happens, over and over, and over, all through world history, but there's always someone dumb enough to think they're the ones that can do it (TM) and off they go.
Too bad it had to be the USA this time. It's a nice country with a good history.... kind of.
It's watching this all happen, to the Afghans, Pakistanis and Americans.

It is some sort of strange great power right-of-passage...the British, the Russians, now the US.

 

[TheNewWorldMan]

I'm no fan of George Bush, but to play devil's advocate for a moment...

One of the responsibilities the government of any nation has is to secure its own territory and to prevent it from being used by groups who are belligerent against the legitimate government of neighboring countries. Either that, or declare war on the neighbor.

Imagine if radical groups in Montana had bases they were using to carry out attacks against Canada and Canadians. We couldn't just say, "Oh, that's bad but there's nothing we can do," or "that's Canada's problem." If they are using American soil as a base from which to attack, it is our problem, and we are bound by international law to do our utmost to put an end to the attacks and bring those responsible to justice.

Pakistan has failed to shoulder its responsibility to prevent its territory from being used for hostile acts against the government and people of Afghanistan. So yes, there does get to be a point when Afghan forces gain the right to attack inside Pakistan to defend the security of its own nation.

 

[Vylo]

I'm no fan of George Bush, but to play devil's advocate for a moment...

One of the responsibilities the government of any nation has is to secure its own territory and to prevent it from being used by groups who are belligerent against the legitimate government of neighboring countries. Either that, or declare war on the neighbor.

Imagine if radical groups in Montana had bases they were using to carry out attacks against Canada and Canadians. We couldn't just say, "Oh, that's bad but there's nothing we can do," or "that's Canada's problem." If they are using American soil as a base from which to attack, it is our problem, and we are bound by international law to do our utmost to put an end to the attacks and bring those responsible to justice.

Pakistan has failed to shoulder its responsibility to prevent its territory from being used for hostile acts against the government and people of Afghanistan. So yes, there does get to be a point when Afghan forces gain the right to attack inside Pakistan to defend the security of its own nation.

Well stated, I would have to agree.

It appears that at least 22 B-2 bombers have been outfitted to carry 30 ton bunker buster versions of the MOAB. Wonder what that might be for .

 

[ArnautDaniel]

I'm no fan of George Bush, but to play devil's advocate for a moment...

One of the responsibilities the government of any nation has is to secure its own territory and to prevent it from being used by groups who are belligerent against the legitimate government of neighboring countries. Either that, or declare war on the neighbor.

Imagine if radical groups in Montana had bases they were using to carry out attacks against Canada and Canadians. We couldn't just say, "Oh, that's bad but there's nothing we can do," or "that's Canada's problem." If they are using American soil as a base from which to attack, it is our problem, and we are bound by international law to do our utmost to put an end to the attacks and bring those responsible to justice.

Pakistan has failed to shoulder its responsibility to prevent its territory from being used for hostile acts against the government and people of Afghanistan. So yes, there does get to be a point when Afghan forces gain the right to attack inside Pakistan to defend the security of its own nation.

On the other hand a person can walk up stark naked with no weapons to a hornets' nest and think he is going to be able to take out the hornets.

That doesn't mean it is going to do anything but get him stung a lot.

...

But to be more serious, this looks like the typical thing governments do when they are losing a war - expand the theater.

It has a certain desperation about it.

 

[Saving Hawaii]

Working around on Google for a brief bit and finding what I could (it really didn't break much news), it is my understanding that US military actions in Pakistan are pretty much limited to special forces assignments, potentially with support. This sounds like an intelligent decision in effectively fighting terrorist entities who are pretty well understood to be using northern Pakistan as a holdout. Loosening that border for limited American interventions allows us to strike those targets. If we were rolling armored columns into Karachi would be an entirely different story as its painfully obvious that this conventional warfare tends to create problems while taking out few of the people we actually wanted to eliminate in the first place. But using very precision-oriented special forces units to take out specific targets? This should be the focus of the War on Terrorism, and in a lot of respects it seems that the military is developing a better understanding of how to use these forces in counter-terrorism roles with maximal effectiveness.

 

[Douger]

It is some sort of strange great power right-of-passage...the British, the Russians, now the US.

And it strangely coincides with the downfall of the empires of the British, the Russians, and now...oh darn.

 

[TheNewWorldMan]

On the other hand a person can walk up stark naked with no weapons to a hornets' nest and think he is going to be able to take out the hornets.

That doesn't mean it is going to do anything but get him stung a lot.

...

But to be more serious, this looks like the typical thing governments do when they are losing a war - expand the theater.

It has a certain desperation about it.

Perhaps...but what else can be done? An enemy can't be allowed to have an inviolable base from which to strike with impunity.

 

[ArnautDaniel]

Perhaps...but what else can be done? An enemy can't be allowed to have an inviolable base from which to strike with impunity.

Well this is Central Asia, and two great powers (Britian and the Soviets) have already foundered trying to control it.

I seriously question whether all the technology the US has at its disposal is going to allow it to fare any better.

Maybe I'm wrong and this is a brilliant move.

I suspect it is going to be a waste of blood an treasure.

At some point a good commander recognizes some things are impossible and changes strategy to live with reality where a bad commander tries to make the impossible change.

Again, maybe I'm wrong.