1) If he cuts off aid to the moderate President Musharraf trying to force him to get the terrorists who are training in Pakistan then the radicals in the Pakistani Govt. could easily take over.
2) If the radicals take over that means that they will also take over Pakistan's nuclear weapons & that would mean Al Qaeda could easily gain access to them as well.
3) But if Bush doesn't threaten Musharaf with cutting off US aid to Pakistan then Al Qaeda will have a permenent training ground in Pakistan & you can't have that.
What is a foreign policy expert like Bush going to do? I don't think he has any choice but to invade Pakistan, regime change & start a new democracy? It was so easy to do in Iraq why not Pakistan?
2007-02-26 04:20:36 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Are you nuts? Invade Pakistan?
Do you think that a country that has over 100 million people will just roll over? Do you know what kind a nightmare you are asking for?
President Musharraf is doing what he can with the little he has got. He is not a popular President but he has hung in there. However, he cannot change the hearts and minds of all who live in that area.
Bush should not cut the aid. However, he can begin to push troops to the borders between Afghanistan and Pakistan to cut off anyone crossing over. That is about the only thing he should be doing.
Invading Pakistan would not be easy as Iraq (the verdict on the success of that is still out) and will include Russia and China as I do not think they want NATO forces on their back door. And they have many nuclear weapons if you know what I mean.
2007-03-05 23:33:03 · answer #1 · answered by Randy P 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What has been easy about Iraq? Tell that to the loved ones of the more than 3,000 we have lost there, not to mention all those who have come home with heinous and life-altering injuries
And, what makes you believe that the new democracy has been firmly established in Iraq?
When is the realization going to hit that the Middle East is a tribal society, and that it needs a different approach to make this whole thing work? A democracy requires the cooperation of the people as a whole, but between religious and tribal differences, it is a near impossibility in the Middle East
We just dropped Pakistan from our attention like a hot potato, and the Taliban just moved right in, thank you very much. Of course, they tell us that they are in our court, but has anyone noticed how many of the terorists who have been arrested are Pakistani?
The only thing the world at large wants from the US - with the possible exception of England and Australia and Canada, is money. We have major problems brewing in Russia, North Korea, Afghanistan, Kashmir, India, Pakistan, Venezuela and other powder kegs, and they will all call the good old USA when trouble hits, but the rest of the time, it is "Yankee Go Home".
Anyone who thinks that ANYONE in the Middle East , or the rest of the world for that matter, is being completely up-front with the US should know that I have some beach-side property in Arizona for sale.
2007-03-04 21:16:11 · answer #2 · answered by Sweet Lady Mom 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I just don't know how to say it -- the invasion Iraq was such a stupid blunder and it has left the entire middle east is such a horrendous mess we cannot pursue the strategy(ies) necessary to solve the problem. We cannot now regain stability in Afghanistan, pursue the terrorist into Pakistan, stop the flow of arms and explosives from Iran, or determine which of the countries there are funding all of this (some say Arabia). Democracy in a country that has not known what it is in it's entire history ? we need baby steps there. God what a mess!-
2007-03-04 17:12:25 · answer #3 · answered by pilot 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In my humble opinion, The folks in Pakistan, and the Middle East have never had peace since origin, they never will as long as the very deep rooted religious beliefs are so different and no democracy will EVER take real hold because the religious leaders are not willing to permit it,,,,,
2007-03-06 10:09:10 · answer #4 · answered by John F 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Another claim that Bush will invade another country..
Haven't the Libs/anti-war people claimed he was going to invade Iran or Syria for the past 5 years??
Based on their predictions.. I wouldn't hold much weight with this post
2007-03-06 09:32:09 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pakistan will have to make up its own mind what they want to do, and so far they seem to be holding their own no matter what the U.S. does.
That is the same for all the territories in the middle east, that they will make their own choice of what is good for their country no matter where the U.S. or its Allies stand.
All Bush can do is to either support what is good and object to what is bad.
There is not going to be an invasion of Pakistan, but thanks for the scare tactic. They are doing just fine.
2007-03-05 10:56:20 · answer #6 · answered by ringolarry 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Who cares about Pakistan!
2007-03-03 14:09:01 · answer #7 · answered by edward m 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Bush himself is a MESS the drunkin terrorist
he's a bigger threat then Bin ladin
2007-03-06 08:22:05 · answer #8 · answered by kinkodaclown 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pakistan is the 53rd State of America.
2007-02-27 06:07:18 · answer #9 · answered by Talha 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i am glad you noticed that pakistan and saudi arabia are pressure cookers on high heat
http://ca.360.yahoo.com/antiwar_girl
2007-03-03 00:17:38 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋