Should Pakistan be Invaded?

Question

They are the main source of funding and arming terrorists. Even the U.S has made arrests of terrorist who revealed that they had been trained in Pakistan. India and Afghanistan are continuously complaining about the Pakistani support to Militants and Taliban. Infact most of the Taliban are based in the Pakistani territory and continue to reign havoc amongst the coalition forces. Even President Bush has said that Pakistan needs to do more in stopping cross border attacks.

Answer 1

For the US, Pakistan is a two headed monster. First of all, it's current dictatorship is friendly to the US, so it offers further complications for us to act like a bull in a china shop. We realize that bin laden is probably holed up somewhere in Pakistan, but we've been close before. Hell, clinton had him in his sights a couple of times and let him get away. But, we all know about, 'can't pull the trigger' willie, don't we?

It is in everyone's best interest, for us to kick the sh it out of the Taliban and bin laden, but that would take cooperation from Musharraf. It would mean sending UN troops into Pakistan with Musharraf's approval, which would probably cause civil war.

Maybe it's time we dusted off a few daisy cutters, and made a new wasteland of that Afghanistan/Pakistan border region!

Answer 2

Pakistan shares close borders with Afghanistan and therefore that part of Pakistan is influenced by Taliban. The rest of the Pakistan is quiet moderate. Most Pakistanis that live in USA are muslims but quiet moderate. Pakistani president and his government helped expose and fumble the terrorist plot in England, although they were not given any credit. Pakistan also helped USA during the Afghanistan and Iraqi invasion. I am sure Pakistani government thinks with friends like USA who needs enemies!

Answer 3

First, they are not the "main" source. There are many other sources of funding, and no one knows for sure how much money Pakistan is funding, or if any at all. Countries in the Middle East are not particularly open about such subjects. If we were to invade Pakistan, then we might as well invade the whole Middle East. Terrorists are not grounded, if a country is invaded, they simply move to another one. Even if we are to invade Pakistan, it would simply involve the already stretched and weary US military in another hugely unpopular quagmire since the citizens of the area are not easily appeased. Second, Pakistan is quite coopertive in terms of counter-terrorism. Pakistan helped foil the plot to bomb British aircraft over the Atlantic. Most importantly, Pakistan is a sovereign nations with their own government. We have no right to tell them how to run their government and what laws to inact.

Answer 4

It is a question begging for an answer. Pakistan would definately be attacked someday in future. The fact is there is no Muslim dominated country that condone what the US led coalition is doing to Islam and Muslims worldwide. The level of aggression against US and its interest would continue as long the present policy thrust of fighting Muslims by America persists. There is no Muslim today that is not sympathetic to the plight of other Muslims in other parts of the world. And this would spun them to act at all times.

Pakistan is not a question now because at least it formed part of the US coalition of terror. The moment they are done with other Arab countries the next targets would be Pakistan and Indonesia. So just like Saddam, Pervez Musahrraf and his countrymen are only playing with the tail of a tigger, only time would tell when the predator would turn it to its prey and subsequently devour it.

Answer 5

I think that there is more of a complex dynamic going on and that it's not as simplistic as you make it. The government has been openly supportive, but they do have a more radical populace and have to walk a very fine political line to avoid a potentially explosive situation. The problems you mention are based primarily in the rugged mountainous region of western pakistan where the government has little control and the region is governed by radical Mullahs sympathetic to Bin Ladin's agenda. Maintaining order and control in that terrain with the system of caves and tunnels would be difficult at best and result in great loss of life in a ground campaign to take the region. Remember what happened when teh government was pushed out of southern Lebanon? Imagine that on hyper-steroids, and that's the situation in Western Pakistan. The government of Lebanon wanted a solution and control of the region, and I believe that the same political dynamic is functioning in Pakistan.

Answer 6

No way.We do not want another war,much less a nuclear confrontation with disastrous consequences for both nations. We can not choose our neighbors. So we can not stop talking to them either. It is a difficult path ahead. Coaxing,diplomacy,international pressure, incentives on trade with India involving Pakistani business increasing their stakes are some of the ways to try. More so We have in Musharraf the best man to negotiate.Our troubles will be quadrupled in case we have to negotiate with a die hard fundamentalist in case the general is thrown out. It is in our interest to strengthen General's hands to the extent that he continues in office. Only time will tell what is in store for the future.

Answer 7

Are you mad, in the modern age, you cannot quarantine masses of civilians, and as such, there will always be terrorists in other countries. Best thing you can do is help that country if it needs help, and if it doesnt, just protect yours.

Also you cant nuke em in modern times. (Wow the UN would turn against the US, welcome WW3). And may you realize that the US isnt the only country with nukes :O Just because you can blow up the entire world doesnt mean they cant blow up a couple of ur main cities.

Is it really worth millions of deaths and massive nuclear fallout across the US(Even worse than what it already is, go Nevada Test Range), just to prove ur pride?

Answer 8

Should the US be invaded?

It is a main source of funding and supply of arms for Israelis blowing up Palestinians and providing the root cause for terrorism in the first place.

If you attack injustice that will kill terrorism in its tracks. Invasions and military actions will make it worse. Please try to understand the issues at the deepesst level.

Answer 9

Yeah that's we need, let's invade yet another country! How about we just go ahead and attack the rest of the world and get it over with? Hell if we kill everybody we won't have to be afraid anymore right??? Let's all blindly follow Bush's "us against the world" mindset. It's working so well...........

Answer 10

From a completely pragmatic standpoint.....No Way in H*ll!

They have nuclear weapons and have been an ally for years! Granted, I would like to see them be a little more cooperative.

Seriously, we aren't invading any country that has nuclear weapons!