War against terror

[Necromancer- 0]

I fear that it only takes time till Musharaff takes the next bullet, which in result a muslim extremist takes his place.

This is a doom scenario where I fear of now.

Muslim extremist government capable of launching nuclear strikes.

[shinRaiden 0]

Bhutto was hardly more of a saint than Musharraf was. Bhutto bought her role after her husband, the prior comrade leader, died after siphoning off untold billions. She was out of the country only because there was an arrest warrant for her for supporting and continuing his corruption. That said, her business is no long in this world, and may the innocents also killed be at peace.

The mess in Pakistan is currently a three-way chaos. Bhutto represented the corrupt, but west-friendly business and political groups, as well as a certain set of clans. Musharraf represents a different set of clans, who use the army as their fist to be strong-man of the day. The third element is the clerics with the clans in the north backed by money, guns, and foreign radicalization.

The real effect is that this will put the Bhutto-biased elements in the US/UK State Department and Foriegn Office into a confused panic, and will be neutered for a time from adequately balancing the Musharraf-biased defense/intelligence community. Both of those element pairings are opposed to the rabble-rousing of the northwestern radicals and clans, but their operational approaches to managing the entire country have subtle differences. Musharraf wields an iron fist over the mess Bhutto built.

Each time that Musharraf has gotten in trouble in the past, Bhutto's raised her head threatening to overthrow the country. Each time that's happened, Musharraf has suddenly cracked down and 'toed-the-line' and busted up the trouble makers with a worrying heavy hand.

BUT... before any of you equally biased trolls goes off saying that my indications of bias in DC would be resolved by actions that would warrant you a visit from the Secret Service, bear in mind that what you are seeing at least in US policy is the culmination of over 250 years of institutional policy, not just the actions of one administration. There are tens and hundreds of thousands of people involved in the bureaucratic and myopic leviathan that is charged with policy. Changing one or two people at the top will not change anything. Changing all their minions will not change anything. So freaking out about one thing or another is not going to change anything at all, other than your blood pressure, which is certainly not going to help you or those around you.

[Spokesperson 0]

"War on Terror". The only terrorists here are the US government and its soldiers. May they rot in hell.

"Operation Iraqi Liberation" - OIL. "Liberation" here means liberation of oil and money.

Democracy? Western democracy is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Bhutto wasn't pro democracy. She was pro business and pro west. That's why western capitalists and the media they have in their pockets likes her.

"Democracy don't rule the world, You'd better get that in your head; This world is ruled by violence, But I guess that's better left unsaid."

-Bob Dylan

Some people actually work for democracy and freedom. It's not Bush or west. First we need economic democracy, then we can talk about political democracy and democracy as a whole.

[shinRaiden 0]

"War on Terror". The only terrorists here are the US government and its soldiers. May they rot in hell.

"Operation Iraqi Liberation" - OIL. "Liberation" here means liberation of oil and money.

Democracy? Western democracy is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Bhutto wasn't pro democracy. She was pro business and pro west. That's why western capitalists and the media they have in their pockets likes her.

"Democracy don't rule the world, You'd better get that in your head; This world is ruled by violence, But I guess that's better left unsaid."

-Bob Dylan

Some people actually work for democracy and freedom. It's not Bush or west. First we need economic democracy, then we can talk about political democracy and democracy as a whole.

Quoted for shame...

1 - If you talk to Bin Laden, this war goes back to the Caliphate. That's not Bush's problem. If you talk to the analysts, this war dates back to '79, or '48, or '39, or '18, or '14, or any arbitrary date in history, but in any case all of them agree that the present mess predates 9/11 by the number of years of your IQ, which isn't very difficult.

2 - http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/a-thank-you-letter.htm

3 - Nice of a myopicly naive socialist like you to observe that I made the exact same point, but for entirely different reasons/context previously. If you want to provide cake for everyone, where is that cake going to come from? Who pays for the cake? Why should they pay for someone else's cake? How do you plan to encourage the compulsory providing of cake for others who might not want cake in the first place? Corruption is often the price of freedom, it is a potential occurrence when people have both means and opportunity. You wish that we enjoy neither.

4 - The only reason Bob Dylan had the money to smoke whatever dope he did backstage was because of the capitalistic democracy you despise. You can either chose to make the world a better place cheerfully by whatever opportunities you create - which is a very bourgeoisie idea - or you can sit on your rear end and complain about the life imposed on you by your idealists.

[Heatseeker 0]

Benazir in 3 words. Smart, brave, corrupt << (family tradition? )

Can anyone put democracy and Pakistan in the same sentence and conclude: "It would work!"

With or without Benazir Pakistan is decades away from democracy.

[sanctuary 19]

Certainly Bhutto is no saint at all, none claimed otherwise, the corruption of her group was well known, as mostly everything political in that country.

The dark future for Pakistan is not linked to her death as an individual, there are tons of people way more innoncent than her murdered by terrorists but unfortunately as they are not famous their names don't make it to the media.

But the problem is that the Pakistan political history is full of political murders and other kind of putsches. Bhutto murder is just proving that Pakistan history continue to run in circle.

So that's why this murder is announcing more problem for Pakistan stability, it proves that nothing really changed there at all.

How can a country become really stable if potential leaders and their alternatives continue to be butchered, military leader got the major powers by just having the bigger guns and fanatics are roaming as easily ?

It is not an Iraq situation for now, but it is not very far from it.

[chops 111]

It's frightening to think that this chaotic country has missile-delivered nuclear weapons. I don't know how easy it would be, but, if the crazies get their hands on them... I don't even want to think about it.

[MehMan 0]

It's frightening to think that this chaotic country has missile-delivered nuclear weapons. I don't know how easy it would be, but, if the crazies get their hands on them... I don't even want to think about it.

That's what kinda worries me, even though the chances are so slim that we shouldn't, it still isn't a pleasant thought. Nothing to be really overly concerned about. I doubt a Peacemaker situation is possible.

[DBO_ 0]

The west once again try to manipulate politics in the world, Bhutto was only going to be another saddam with nukes in a few years anyway, we sponsored her to go back and fight the elections , we promised her support and probably arms when /if she won. The fundamentalists saw her has a western puppet and saw fit to do what they did before she got any power.

The west is to blame for Pushing for democratic elections and using a carrot and stick to entice bhutto back ,elections would have took place anyway and waiting for it to happen would have been so much the better option than to openly bait the terrorists by sponsoring bhutto.

The outcome of all this is that the likelihood of a fundementalist government having its finger on the nuke button has probably been delayed for a year or two , the problem is they now have sharraff (sp?) who is not very stable at all anyway.

whichever way you look at it India is fucked.

[Mr_Tea 0]

The US Army has many highly trained troops, that are only waiting for their call.

They are on standby for some time now, to "secure" the Pakistani nuclear weapons. And to secure does in this case not mean secure the position where the weapons are stored, it`s get them out of the land by ANY cost.

[franze 196]

Spokesperson, +1WL and a 7 day vacation for flame baiting. Get your butt in gear during that period.

[Baff1 0]

Benazir in 3 words. Smart, brave, corrupt << (family tradition? )

Can anyone put democracy and Pakistan in the same sentence and conclude: "It would work!"

With or without Benazir Pakistan is decades away from democracy.

I can't really think of any democracy that hasn't been installed at gunpoint. Historically speaking.

If the army can't control Pakistan there won't be any kind of centralised government.

Democracy is the least of anyones worries.

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

mis-post, sorry

[Jimbo762.au 0]

Quote[/b] ]I can't really think of any democracy that hasn't been installed at gunpoint. Historically speaking.

Australia.........

[chops 111]

Quote[/b] ]I can't really think of any democracy that hasn't been installed at gunpoint. Historically speaking.

Australia.........

Might be a few Aborigines that would disagree with you there, only a few though, most were culled.

Pakistan seems relatively calm for now, looks like it's Kenya's turn to descend into tribalism for a while. They don't have nukes, but I reckon those Massai fellas could do some damage .

[HotShot 0]

IRIN posted an article on Kenya today which is interesting

It’s the economy, stupid (not “tribalismâ€)

They seem to be saying it was increasing inequalities across the board that led to the uprest, but that "Ethnicity came into play during the election violence because of the widespread perception that those who fared best under Kibaki were his own Kikuyu group".

Also, relating to Pakistan, I saw a press conference yesterday by Bilawal Bhutto. I must say, for 19 and in the first year of uni he did damn good, I would have shat myself, and I felt sorry for him as everytime he looked up he got automatic fire from the camera flashes. However, I believe I am correct in saying he is now the head of the PPP? If so, what the hell are they thinking?! I know first year of university is fairly laid back but how is he going to spend enough time this year, and even more so the following 2 years to make an effective leader?! It's crazy! But maybe he's worried if he doesn't take the reins now someone else will take hold and kick him to the sideline in later years when university is finished?

[jaakko 0]

The western democracies didn't rise by thanks of some other countries intervening with their affairs.

I say live and let live, eventually they (whatever countries we consider undemocratic) will grow up and maybe find a solution that surpasses our "democracy".

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

The western democracies didn't rise by thanks of some other countries intervening with their affairs.

I say live and let live, eventually they (whatever countries we consider undemocratic) will grow up and maybe find a solution that surpasses our "democracy".

[martinovic 0]

IRIN posted an article on Kenya today which is interesting

It’s the economy, stupid (not “tribalismâ€)

They seem to be saying it was increasing inequalities across the board that led to the uprest, but that "Ethnicity came into play during the election violence because of the widespread perception that those who fared best under Kibaki were his own Kikuyu group".

That's 100% tribalism... one tribe making the economy shitty for another is tribalism...

[baddo 0]

The western democracies didn't rise by thanks of some other countries intervening with their affairs.

I say live and let live, eventually they (whatever countries we consider undemocratic) will grow up and maybe find a solution that surpasses our "democracy".

http://orly.yarly.org/orly.jpeg[/mg]

Espectro, so you think it's obvious... well there are apparently a lot of people in the World who do not agree with jaakko's and my opinion about this.

I've said that if democracy is that good, then it spreads by itself and does not need to be enforced with violence. Some people like to go around the World and attempt to make other countries 'democratic' no matter what it costs. That kind of behaviour generally in life is arrogant and insulting. But it's practiced and supported by so many, that it certainly is not at all obvious that they agree with what jaakko and I think about it.

Please do notice that this is not a comment about democracy being good or bad.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

The western democracies didn't rise by thanks of some other countries intervening with their affairs.

I say live and let live, eventually they (whatever countries we consider undemocratic) will grow up and maybe find a solution that surpasses our "democracy".

I've said that if democracy is that good, then it spreads by itself and does not need to be enforced with violence. Some people like to go around the World and attempt to make other countries 'democratic' no matter what it costs. That kind of behaviour generally in life is arrogant and insulting. But it's practiced and supported by so many, that it certainly is not at all obvious that they agree with what jaakko and I think about it.

Please do notice that this is not a comment about democracy being good or bad.

I believe we can all agree that something will surpass democrazy some day.

Eternity is a pretty long time http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif' alt='wink_o.gif'>

[CyDoN 0]

what exactly is in your terms democracy cause i have understoud

[Israelieagle 0]

LOL i hope i don't ofend anybody but here is the irony

europe and NATO always talk about war against terror

when they actually fund terror not too long ago they gave the PLO terrorists 7 billion dillars(phh like this money would go to medicine food and water as they claim) it will go to weaponry who will be pointed against israel as usually

and don't tell me that theyre not terrorists and they want peace because they don't they just take advantage of the west

yesterday mahmud abas talked against the "brutal zionist attack on 15 palestinians"

and before that "palestinian police(PLO) killed a few israeli soldiers while they were dressed as civilians

now about american war on terror i think america should leave iraq as soon as possible because nothing good from this is coming out but american bodies and a bad name to the republican party

soldiers are dying for nothing in iraq

but

i think the US should keep fighting in afghanistan to find the responsible for 9/11

LOL i hope i don't ofend anybody but here is the irony

europe and NATO always talk about war against terror

when they actually fund terror not too long ago they gave the PLO terrorists 7 billion dillars(phh like this money would go to medicine food and water as they claim) it will go to weaponry who will be pointed against israel as usually

and don't tell me that theyre not terrorists and they want peace because they don't they just take advantage of the west

yesterday mahmud abas talked against the "brutal zionist attack on 15 palestinians"

and before that "palestinian police(PLO) killed a few israeli soldiers while they were dressed as civilians

now about american war on terror i think america should leave iraq as soon as possible because nothing good from this is coming out but american bodies and a bad name to the republican party

soldiers are dying for nothing in iraq

but

i think the US should keep fighting in afghanistan to find the responsible for 9/11

about russian and checnya

i think that russia should bomb the living hell out of chechnya as a revenge for all the russian soldiers died there like soviets bombed alot in afghanistan

and then get out of it because i don't even know what they are looking for up there in the mountains of qavqaz

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]i think the US should keep fighting in afghanistan to find the responsible for 9/11

I guess this sentence alone pretty much sums up your knowledge

on international affairs and terrorism.

[Israelieagle 0]

Quote[/b] ]i think the US should keep fighting in afghanistan to find the responsible for 9/11

I guess this sentence alone pretty much sums up your knowledge

on international affairs and terrorism.  

explain please