U.S. 'extremely concerned' about Taliban movements in Pakistan
by ArrogantlyBluntMay 6th, 2009 at 10:04 PM
Filed under: Politics
 |
|
I am sure we all have heard the news about the fighting in Pakistan. This future loss of Pakistan can be seen as a great defeat for the new tone in Washington. We are now looked upon as one big joke in most of the world. We are not prepared to defend ourselves nor are we prepared to defend our friends. Mr. "Joe Bid.his.time" was right, 'Within the first 6 months ... there will be an International Crisis ... and you will think we are not doing the right thing ... stand by us/him'. Are we to late to keep the nukes from the Taliban? I have no idea, but will we even try? We know that they will never use the nukes, or so we are lead to believe by the current government. I for one am not sure about Mr. Bare.rock Who.sain Oh.bomb.ah II's ability to know a friend from and foe, a problem from a task, a nuke from and AK-47. Only time will tell. It is a good thing they do not have rockets to carry the nukes to us. Oh, you say they do have the rockets! Time will tell. How many will die now? It will be a lot more then the 3 thousand on 9-11. Hey, but I am just paranoid and fear mongering. Mr. "Junior" is shaking every ones hands and they love "The Big Satan", America now, don't they? Well, time will tell. Time will tell. |
 |
Rate this Article
Submit a Critique
Critiques
Show Oldest First
I read in the Sun Times and Tribune ( 2 papers I read daily) that Pakistan killed or captured 700, and had the Taliban on the run. For whatever that's worth.
OH, I thought the US was worried about the Taliban's bowel movements After all, we do want to be sensitive and caring so the world will like us. Pres BO is probably practicing his bowing techniques. As they say when dancing the limbo, "How low can he go?"
It is a shame a lot fo our forces of being held up in Iraq fighting a war we have no biz being in.
Ryan29
Sounds like a good way to say, 'To bad, so sad', we cannot protect our friends, we got no 'forces'. Good way to not do anything. I love progressives/Democrats, they blame everything on someone else. Mr. "Junior" Bare.rock Who.sain Oh.bomb.ah II, has had 100 days to get them out. Why are they still there? I guess I would say, you are right, "Obama's fault". You have to stop blaming Mr. W.baa.U sooner or later. Mr. "Junior" is the "man" now, or is Karl Christian Rove still the man in charge?
I agree with you that it might be time to go into Pakistan. That country is on the verge of being a failed state. It is a shame a lot fo our forces of being held up in Iraq fighting a war we have no biz being in. Is that Obama's fault as well?
oops, Subs for off shore, US Attacks. Oh, but I am just paranoid
We are so safe here in the United States:
They just have Missles,
and aircraft,
and more different aircraft,
and ships,
and don't forget the Subs, they can sit right of the coast and,,, I guess you get the idea. Maybe we are not so safe over here after all.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/OuessantBrest2005.jpg
I am sorry. One of the links in there is wrong. The one on, "Oh, you say they do not have the rockets!" I wanted to put in one about Pakistan and put the one about Iran.
Here is the right link:
Pakistan and Weapons of Mass Destruction.
To shed a little light on the issue regrading to Pakistan Ryan29 I must say you have very little understanding in dealing with this issue and international security. You think that the USA can go in this area? Wrong. Think again. Since I have operated in Afghan I can tell you that conventional forces will not work in this area but I will get into this later.
First of all you think that an unstable Pakistan is a problem for the US? Yes, it is... but it is nothing compared to what the Indian nation will have to worry. You need to research the fact that India has more at stake in Pakistan then the USA, you forget that in the 90s these two nations were on the verge of a nuclear halocaust. India and Pakistan do not have very good relations between the two nations.
Second, in order to respect the sovereignty of an ally the USA can not get involved directly with military action (conventional forces)unless requested by the Pakistan government. The USA provides plenty of support/ logistics, intelligence and even training to the military.
3rd and finally do you have any idea how many resources it takes to even mobilize a garrison from the state to that area? Let me answer that for you. No you don't. The US military is incapable of a third military front. If the US was to deploy troops into Pakistan it would have to start calling on selective reserves in order to meet the man power issues. We would need bases of operation in the country and not divert the FOBs, and Airbases in Afghan to run missions all in Pakistan. The US Airforce Air Mobility Command (your heavy lifters, C-5,C-17, and C-130s) are completely occupied with flight missions alone to Iraq, and Afghanistan and normal military airlift around the world. More than 70% of the air lifters are occupied by these missions and another front would not be possible. Are you aware that our military is only about 1/3 combat arms role? Yeah thats right 2/3s of our military is support role which means we lack the manpower to conduct more ground fighting. All at the same time the "wise" Obama is cutting back on the military budget as normal for a democratic president. We are reducing our air force, the navy is smaller then ever now. From 800 ship navy in the 80s to approx 318 ships our navy today in the next decades will be only about 150-200 ships.Also just to let you know that 25% of our surface ships in the navy are unfit for combat due to cuts on repairs. The army and marine corps are stretched thin some guys are experiencing their 4th or even 5th deployment into the area.
Bottom line the US military in stretched too thin.
Oh and by the way for your information the Pakistan government is know to exaggerate intelligence reports that paper article smells like B.S.