Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.
Pakistan: Give Us Liberty or Give You Shaira Law
zardozz.com — What a potential prize for radical Islam! A state with nukes already at their disposal! The new end game in Pakistan, a much bigger prize for al-Quaeda than Iraq...as cross posted at ZZ News and Satire with editorial comments
ugotz2- 41 diggs
- digg it
- scotty777, on 11/05/2007, -0/+9Interesting article. Will the democrats HELP Musharruf or throw him under the bus because he took bold action. That's the question I will be watching to see how its answered in the coming debates in both parties. Let's see what side of the line the democrats will fall on this one !
- thotpoizn, on 11/05/2007, -0/+7Partisan politics aren't going to help anything if militant Islamic radicals come to power in Pakistan. Being on the red team won't make you any less irradiated than being on the blue team, and vice-versa. I hope Mush can keep it together, but it is really looking like we have far better chances that flying space monkeys will attack the planet with weapons that shoot flowers and rainbows.
- ugotz2, on 11/05/2007, -0/+10Both parties better get their act together and become a force that pull together a community of nations committed to support STABILITY in the Middle East -- Pakistan falling into the hands of Radical Islamists is clearly NOT an acceptable option !!
- kazamx, on 11/05/2007, -2/+1So does this mean that the Us will be bombing Pakistan before or after Iran? I know that they still haven't finished in Afghanistan or Iraq but at this rate the US could be at war in 4 countries at once. is that a record?
- readwriteblue, on 11/05/2007, -0/+3No, I think their have been many times that one state has had to fight off several other states that formed alliances to attack them....
- ugotz2, on 11/05/2007, -0/+2kazamx -- No I don't think so either. In fact the relationship between Pakistan and the U.S. is more about the alliance to fight a mutal enemy intent on overthrowing BOTH governments. External threats make strange bedfellows. Out problem is that we have a policy (that we sometimes follow and sometimes ignore) that we don't provide aid to dicatorships that oppress their own citizens. Our policy allows us to support "benevolent" military dictatorships. Musharruf took power by military coup several years ago. They claim they will hold elections in January. Until then he has declared Marshal Law to control the population (and imprision islamic dissedents). He is trying to avoid a repeat of what happened in Palestine where Hamas was put on the ballot. There are very fewo real democracies in that part of the world.
- kazamx, on 11/05/2007, -2/+1So does this mean that the Us will be bombing Pakistan before or after Iran? I know that they still haven't finished in Afghanistan or Iraq but at this rate the US could be at war in 4 countries at once. is that a record?
- jim1s, on 11/05/2007, -6/+1Somehow, I believe, it will end up where the U.S. will be put in another precarious position, because that is what Bush and all his other fellow conspiritors want. They LOVE this turmoil in the Mideast. It allows their conquest of the middle east to be furthered. Bush's "war on terrorism" in and of itself is not limited to any one country, that is Iraq, but ANY country that holds "terrorists". They have their sights on Iran, why not Pakistan too. He knows we can't afford this "war" in Iraq. And he wants one now with Iran. He wants this country bankrupt. He shouild be tried for treason. HE declared war on Iraq first, then Congress gave it the OK. But that IS NOT how it is supposed to happen. The U.S. Constitution says so. Congress is to declare war, not the president. And we have a little over a year left of this guy. God help us. Right Gotz :^)
- skyhawk8, on 11/05/2007, -0/+5"They LOVE this turmoil in the Mideast." (Meaning Bush and company) Clearly your own personal opinion... which is fine. However it's not in anyone's best interest (including GWB's) for the turmoil to spread to countries that are helping to eradicate the plaque that is radical islam. Bush is NOT running in 2008.... We have still to hear what startegy will be used by Democrats if they gain control of BOTH the White House and Congress. Sorry to bust any leftist balloons... but it won't look much different than what you are seeing today. You are just getting a good taste of pandering from the front runners.
- skyhawk8, on 11/05/2007, -0/+4Musharraf finds himself in a situation where he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. The military control is the key to stability... he who controls the military controls the agenda. The question is always about the loyalty of the senior commanders...
- ugotz2, on 11/06/2007, -0/+3It's looking bad for Musharruf. Stuck between a rock and a hard place. He needs to form a coalition ruling agreement with Bhutto to try and hold the government together. The problem he has is within his judicial branch of government. It would be like the Supreme Court Justices in the U.S. attempting their own coup... The problem is that he is now close to violating his own country's Consitution regarding presidential terms. Sounds a bit Chavez, or Putinish to me...
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is