Should America now send forces to pakistan to take control?why not?

Answer 1

Why does the US think that it has the right to go where ever it wants. As someone mentioned above the Pakistan is large country of 174 million people. Look what is happening to US in Iraq. What US can do is to stop supporting Musharaf (the Pakistani Military) who have destroyed Pakistan.

Answer 2

NO. What we should do is withdraw any further aid to the dictator Musharaf. Any aid should go to the Pakistani people--and to the pro-democracy activists who seek the freedom Bhuto risked--and gave--her life to achieve.

And--since the Musharaf government is illegitimate to start with, we shuld disregard any further protests from that source, and use our air--but not ground--power to wipe out the al-Caida strongholds that Musharaf has been protecting.

It's not like Musharaf is actually an ally--he has made no effort to fight the terrorists--he's used the money simply to bolster his illegal and brutal dictatorship. And the last time--when Bhuto first returned to Pakistan--terrorists tried to kill her--what was Musharaf's response? He lifted not a finger to retaliate against the terrorists--instead he used the attack to attack pro-democracy activists, shut down the free press, placed Bhuto under house arrest, and so on.

And the terrorists--whom Musharaf (that Bush calls our "ally") is supposed t obe "fighting." If Musharaf were fighting the terrorists--they'd be attacking him, not his opponents. Musharaf and the terrorists are working together. We need to stop supporting him and his friends--and start suporting the people of Pakistan.

Answer 3

Oh, please....every problem isn't necessarily solved by the gun.

Number one, why should the USA intervene in Pakistan, to what is essentially a domestic political matter in Pakistan? What is our interest in doing so? And also, sending troops there may complicate matters even more and make a bigger mess of what is already a tough situation.

Heck, Musharraf, is in a real quandry even though one of his political opponents (Bhutto) is now gone - it also means that Sharif, a politician that he detests even more than Benazir Bhutto, may stand to gain politically in the near future. If he moves too far it may touch off a backlash, and there is a lot of suspicion in Pakistan that he let this happen.

Answer 4

I don't think so. Our troops are stretched very thin and the last thing we need is another conflict. We need to give the country and it's people a chance to solve their own problems first. The UN and NATO need to be the ones to become involved if things become out of hand or if assistance is needed.This would be a world problem not just an American problem. I think the US should just keep a watchful eye for now.

Answer 5

Will you be going as volunteer to go and suit up at the Recruiter's Office to ship out, will you ?. If not why would we want to stick our nose in another country's business, We have to many troops to go start another preemptive strike against another country. If your talking about the killing this morning , she knew when she went in there that more than likely she would be assassinated. Do you want to go and be killed because of what she took a chance on and be killed in return?. We need to take care of of our on, the vets that are kicked out of hospital because of no funds. Let the United Nations take care of that not us. We aren't the police of the world. That is reason all the other hate us is butting in to something that we had nothing to do with us at all.

Answer 6

not even on the table...we are so overextended militarily, the most mobilization we could come up with is a strike force.

side note...we can only hope plans are available to take out Pakistan's nukes by special forces should Pakistan unravel.

Answer 7

there are countless motives: at the beginning this could probable reason the Pakistani government to interrupt down and an Islamic fundamentalist government taking on. as nicely this could bring about a warfare with Pakistan. In different words - all this could do is make the venture worse.

Answer 8

Heck no!!! I’m not American but I’m pretty sure they have enough on their plate without having to convince the American public that their sons and daughters should risk their lives for an event that has very little actual effect on the lives of the average US citizen. It is sad (understatement) but this should be handled by neighbors in the region. I’m a Canadian living in Europe and although I have my small problems with some American policy, I hate having to defend this “we are the world’s savior” attitude.

Answer 9

Because it is none of our business!!! Is France sending troops to the U.S. to protect the borders of the United States and Mexico? We are not the police of the world and should not be. Are you willing to go Pakistan and get killed for fighting a fight that doesn't belong to you?

Answer 10

To answer your question;

I think the UN or NATO (with some US forces), will have to move troops into Pakistan to secure the 100 nuclear weapons they have. I think this is a world problem now.