will the us send troops to Pakistan to destroy weapons of mass destruction?

Question

the religious clerics of Pakistan are making innocent girls and boys as weapons of mass destruction. the capture of students in lal maszid proves this. Pakistan had become a training center to recruit terrorists and has become a problem to india. recently the religious fundamentalists kidnapped some Chinese people and due to high level of influence exerted by the Chinese government, they were released.

Answer 1

No , Bush's mission is to free Iraq ! He has even ignore capturing Osama Bin Laden and all the other terrorists in Syria. He could care less about weapons of mass destruction in Pakistan now that he has the oil in Iraq.... He could care less if US citizens are wiped out from paying too much in high gas prices , let alone giving illegal immigrants all their rights to come in a country without paying U.S Taxes .

Answer 2

Short answer is No, the US will not be sending troops into Pakistan. Even though Pakistan is a recognized nuclear power, the country is known to not have a nuclear explosive device. As for the weapons of mass destruction you refer to, I doubt the US considers this an issue seeing that they have granted Pakistan Major Non-NATO Ally status and recently sold Pakistan a missile arsenal valued at $370 million.

Pakistan has been a major player in the United State's war on terror... they have captured over 500 Al-Qaeda operatives as well as allow the US to utilize Pakistani military bases and equipment to develop tactical and assault plans. The US has given Pakistan over $4 billion in military aid within the last 3 years to develop new military technologies.

So all military and political signs show that the US will not be sending troops... nor does the US have any right to send troops to invade Pakistan since India-Pakistani relations has nothing to do with the US.

Answer 3

If the Bush administration wouldnt raid Iran upon discovering they have been helping the insurgency, there isnt a raffle in hell the Hussein Obama administration might raid Pakistan. it somewhat is purely an empty risk and yet yet another liberal attempting to look annoying on terror who if this conflict were entrusted in 03, wouldve cut back and run by now and wouldnt be everywhere close to Iraq and Afganistan no longer to indicate Pakistan. Democrats are unwilling to committ to protection tension operations for greater desirable than a million-2 years. They cant abdomen being on the unpopular facet of a conflict and that they actually cant abdomen troop loss. even however statistically we've lost the fewest volume of troops ever given the quantity of time we've been engaged.

Answer 4

Pakistan can fend for themselves. They don't have the resources to build, much less deliver a WMD to North America. Additionally, leaving the middle east now would greatly reduce the liklihood that they would want to.
As soon as we get a new President, troops will come home to defend our borders, which is what troops should do. I empathize with the plight of the rest of the world, but our government takes my tax money to make America a better and safer place. They need to get back to doing that, and the rest of the world will leave us alone. We can't be the world police. All we can do is wish everyone had things the way we used to.
However, I would support an effort to reignite the search for bin laden. He deserves to get a goat horn up his **** way more than any American should find satisfaction in knowing w put a noose around Saddam's neck.
Basically, the US needs to worry about the US. If we did that, the rest of the world, capable of causing us harm, would no longer have the motivations nor the means to do so.
If someone were to shoot w in the face tomorrow, though, that would greatly speed up the recovery effort. Not that I am advocating it...just stating the obvious.

Answer 5

Given that Pakistan is a single bullet or bomb away from become a nuke armed muslim republic one has to worry about what our response will be. There's no point in pretending that the US will be able to control the entire area of that part of the world or for that matter have any real influence. It's time to get all ground troops the hell out of all muslim areas. The US isn't a land power, it's a sea and air power.....unless the US wants to go into these countries and kill just about everyone on sight in the most ruthless manner possible, there's no way to control this part of the world. Facts is facts, folks.....we don't have the money, the manpower or the will.....it's time to bring the legions home! We may have to go to war at some point, but let's do it on our terms, not theirs.

Answer 6

This is a joke, isn't it?

Pakistan is a confirmed Nuclear Power and a key partner in the region, what make you think Bush and his gang will take on Pakistan?

Beside Pakistan is the US only land access to Afgan. Without Pakistan, Afgan will be another West Berlin only many time bigger and is in active combat mode.

Answer 7

the weapon of mass destruction in Pakistan is Islam ! it destroys the ability of folk to think logically that is why nothing useful comes out of Pakistan except rice and cheap t-shirts

Answer 8

If it weren't for the fact that the Pakistani Government weren't already addressing that issue and taking action, I would think we would. However, Pakistan is still an US ally (to some extent).

I do wish we would attack the Waziristan region, however.

Answer 9

better yet will we ever stop sucking on Saudi Arabias oil titty and ask some questions about the majority of the 9/11 hijackers?

Answer 10

If Pakistan can't handle it, then we would have to send troops now wouldn't we?