Also isnt this a dangerous position to take noting that Pakistan has nuclear weapons and dont you think this was just BS to try and make himself look macho?
2007-08-04 00:38:43 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Pakistan does have nukes but they do NOT have the capabilitiy of an ICBM launch. Osama is hiding in that country and whe should send a covert team in there to kill him (aka Iran in the 80's) there was someone that had the poower to kill him years ago but he rather would hump sea cows and not inhaling than killing Osama.
2007-08-04 00:42:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, Obama is too weak to attack anyone. Besides, it's a bad idea. If we attacked Pakistan, Musharraf would be overthrown and replaced by a jihadist, something that has been only narrowly avoided in the recent past. Then we'd be facing a jihadist state with nuclear weapons.
2007-08-04 01:10:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
CHARITY G: Potentially, any President elected will have to "attack" Pakistan. They are an immediate threat to global security (unlike Iran).
------
Absolutely the worst answer I've ever heard. Since when is it America's job to provide "global security", WTF even *is* "global security"?
America should not be the police man of the world, least we become an empire like Rome.. always "liberating" others in an act of "defense" until one day.. we will wake up with more enemies than we can count.
To answer the question, Yes, I think any of the main line candidates are in fact stupid enough to do something like that..
2007-08-04 02:54:47 · answer #3 · answered by k X 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wouldn't surprise me. Just goes to show you can't trust ANY poiliticians. Destroy a country and the US only ally in the region just to try to kill one man who's probably already dead. Pakistan is not a country you want to cross - especially as the US has just spent so much money helping out India. Pakistan would likely see India as complacent in the US' agression, and if they didn't use their nuclear weapons to defend themselves from the US (i.e. on the invading troops - not sure if they could get them as far as Iraq, definately not to the US) then they'd launch them at India.
And of course it would mean Iran would be justified in making nuclear weapons to defend themselves from US agression.
2007-08-04 01:08:30 · answer #4 · answered by Mordent 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Do you have any surely information that Osama replaced into taken out on would 1st 2011? tutor me the physique. Oh i'm sorry they dumped him into the sea 6 hours after his dying. Then the seal team that supposedly have been given him have been given blown up in a helicopter top after it handed off. And the FBI has "no information of his dying" Come on all and sundry is we that gullible? awaken.
2016-10-13 22:34:16 · answer #5 · answered by dunston 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't believe he should have said what he did. As far as if he would have attacked Pakistan is debatable seeing I really do not know him personally. For all we know he could be just as stupid has Hitler was.
2007-08-04 00:44:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Its not like he said attack pakistan itself
2007-08-04 04:18:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Frankly I do not see obama doing anything against the terrorist. In fact i would say he has a hidden desire to see them tear this nation apart. I do not think for one second, he wants to be president for the betterment of this nation.
2007-08-04 03:12:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You surmised correctly when you defined it a b.s..
He said it to try to make his next stronger opponet, Hillary Clinton look like she's not ready to stand up..
But it's typical of the democrats to do stuff like that.
2007-08-04 00:44:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Potentially, any President elected will have to "attack" Pakistan. They are an immediate threat to global security (unlike Iran).
2007-08-04 00:42:18 · answer #10 · answered by CHARITY G 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋