Welcome to PatsFans.com

Failing Pakistan Policy? Yup, it's Cheney

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PressCoverage, Jun 18, 2007.

  1. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    more evidence that this jaggazz simply wants perpetual war at all costs... war means profit...

    Failing Pakistan Policy ‘Essentially Being Run From Cheney’s Office’

    The extremely close U.S. partnership with Pakistan’s General Musharraf has come under increasing scrutiny, as Musharraf continues to crack down on the country’s civil society and a new generation of al Qaeda leaders under Osama bin Laden have led a resurgence in Pakistan.

    [​IMG]

    The Bush administration “has put itself in the embarrassing position of propping up the Muslim world’s most powerful military dictator as an essential ally in its half-baked campaign to promote democracy throughout the Muslim world,” the New York Times editorialized last week. “Washington needs to disentangle America, quickly, from the general’s damaging embrace.”

    In yesterday’s Washington Post, respected Pakistan analyst Ahmed Rashid explained a key problem with current U.S. policy:

    The problem is exacerbated by a dramatic drop-off in U.S. expertise on Pakistan. Retired American officials say that, for the first time in U.S. history, nobody with serious Pakistan experience is working in the South Asia bureau of the State Department, on State’s policy planning staff, on the National Security Council staff or even in Vice President Cheney’s office. Anne W. Patterson, the new U.S. ambassador to Islamabad, is an expert on Latin American “drugs and thugs”; Richard A. Boucher, the assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, is a former department spokesman who served three tours in Hong Kong and China but never was posted in South Asia. “They know nothing of Pakistan,” a former senior U.S. diplomat said.

    Current and past U.S. officials tell me that Pakistan policy is essentially being run from Cheney’s office. The vice president, they say, is close to Musharraf and refuses to brook any U.S. criticism of him. This all fits; in recent months, I’m told, Pakistani opposition politicians visiting Washington have been ushered in to meet Cheney’s aides, rather than taken to the State Department.​

    Cheney’s office has been linked to some of the most damaging and reckless policies carried out under President Bush, including the origins of the war in the Iraq, warrantless domestic spying, the historic expansion of executive authority and the sanctioning of torture. It’s no surprise to find Cheney’s fingerprints on the failing U.S.-Pakistan policy as well.

    UPDATE: Harper’s Scott Horton has more.
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2007
  2. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Maybe he should take Musharref on a drinking...umm...hunting trip.
  3. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,289
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +30 / 0 / -1

    Aren't you guys the same people who've said Pakistan isn't doing enough, or that we should have invaded them?
  4. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    hello? exactly ... well, minus the overdramatic invasion part at the end...

    are you missing the point? your president said we'd "make no distinction"... meanwhile, Palpatine is giving Musharraf a reacharound instead of a mandate... meanwhile, bin Laden and his gang are much stronger than they were in 2003...
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2007
  5. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0


    On this thread there was a national geographic special on last month that talked about Green Berets in afghanistan, essentially there are 24 special forces soldiers trying to control the taliban in an area the size of RI. It was well done and fairly objective, but the reality is that they can only do so much in such a large area. These guys were professionals, doing a great job, but it was an overwhelming task and there was just too much to do. The reality is that we are overextended in the never ending war in Iraq and do not have enough resources to do what needs to be done in Afghanistan.
  6. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,671
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    That was me. I wanted Bin Ladin - still do. I'm one of thosde nutjobs that think we need to kill the guy responsible for 9/11...call me crazy.
  7. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    it remains a simple question... why were troops PULLED from afghanistan? why did the Vulcans "draw down" and order redeployment to Iraq?... i'm still waiting for someone, anyone, to explain -- with some rational and substance -- why the diplomatic and military logistical effort to neutralize our real attacker went bye-bye....
  8. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,582
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    Silly RW. Don't you know that if someone in the Bush administration so much as says it's sunny out today it's so his oil buddies make a profit and poor people won't eat? Somehow it's racist as well but I haven't figured out how yet. Also you must not forget Bush is personal friends with Bin Laden so he's been protecting him along. I don't know what all the fuss is over us getting him anyway. After all he didn't have anything to do with 9-11. Everyone knows Bush planned that thing all out for greed, power and profit.
  9. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,289
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +30 / 0 / -1

    Well, I know you and I have discussed it, but these guys were saying the same things. I told you all that Pakistan was a very fragile situation, and strong arming the government there would be risky, and dangerous for both the region, and the world. Apparently our VP seemed to be listening to the the strong arm people, and now some of those strong armers are criticizing him for doing exactly what it is they had wanted to.
  10. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,289
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +30 / 0 / -1

    Force size in Afghanistan has not decreased in any year since we've been there. I've told you that already. I guess if you keep saying it enough times, someone might think what you're saying is true.
  11. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,289
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +30 / 0 / -1

    It was an inside job I know. They are framing an innocent man in UBL. :eek:

    Seriously though, this is a dangerous track the VP is taking. Mushareff is in an unenviable position of trying to moderate and mixed populace of secularists and radicals. Anyone who has a remote clue about the history of the region, and the population there, would understand this. In all honesty, we're fortunate to have Mushareff on our side. If he flashed us the finger, we'd be blind in Pakistan, and there would be nothing we could do about it. Just cuz we're the US fukcing A, it doesn't mean that we can tell people what they have to do for us, and that they better do it with a smile. I don't think people realize how primitive most radicals are. I say that with the upmost seriousness. Remember, all it takes is a handful of radicals to destroy the peace of tens of thousands of citizens. In Pakistan, that populace is mixed. We need to be careful there.
  12. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,235
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3

    Especially since they have nikes and their friends in India are right enxt door. If the radical Islamist took over things could get ugly.
  13. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,289
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +30 / 0 / -1

    I thought they made nikes in China? :D

    Sorry, I couldn't resist! ;)

    This reminds me of the movie The Siege, when Denzel is in the coffee shop with Annette Benning and she says "in this fight, only the most committed wins". To think that movie was made well before anyone of us really thought about terrorism as a distinct threat.
  14. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,509
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    Please Help Me I'm Falling
    In Love With You
    Close The Door To Temptation
    Don't Let Me Walk Through
  15. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    first, i don't remember you telling me that... if you did, did you provide a link, or did you expand your chest and speak as if you're the authority again?

    because here's what i remember reading...

    U.S. To Reduce Afghan Troop Level
    Rumsfeld Says NATO Forces, Afghan Army Enable 3,500 Troop Decrease

    further, even back in late 2001- early 2002, before the Vulcans got their Iraq permission, they were "redeploying special forces" from Afghanistan to Iraq... watch from 3:25 on...

    Narrator: "on the ground in Afghanistan, CIA officers say they noticed a shift toward Iraq."

    Gary Schroen, 35-year CIA officer, led the first trip into N. Afghanistan: "you could see changes being made in U.S. military staffing in Afghanistan; that the Green Beret Units, the 5th Special Forces Group were being pulled out to refit and get ready for Iraq. ... and it was clear that the kind of guys that a lot of us believed were essential personnel with special operations capabilities were being pulled away... "​
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2007
  16. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,289
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +30 / 0 / -1

    I know your an intel specialist, and a military expert, of which I am not, as I only know whatever it is my brother has taught me, and what I read in books, or see on TV. However, I think, and I might be wrong on this, that redeploy, and reduce, are not one and the same.

    Yes I have told you this before, probably about 5 or 6 times, when I used to answer your questions (over and over again), and I always provided links.

    BTW, is Schroen the guy that insists he heard UBL on the radio at Tora Bora? That is a serious question. I think I saw him on Frontline (maybe THC).

Share This Page