Round 2?
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Round 2?

  1. #1
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,599

    Default Round 2?

    If evidence uncovered during the raid on bin Laden leads to other top Al Queada officials hiding out in Pakistan, should we go in again to take them out?

    Does Pakistan owe us cooperation for the Billions of dollars of aid we are giving them?

    As Pakistan cries foul over the U.S. raid on Usama bin Laden's compound, President Obama could once again be forced to decide whether to go over the Pakistanis' heads -- or, under their radars -- to capture or kill another high-value terror target.

    Evidence from the scene where bin Laden died -- described as the largest intelligence find ever from a senior terror leader -- could lead the United States to other terrorists on Pakistani soil.

    With analysts combing through the files for clues on the whereabouts of Al Qaeda's Ayman al-Zawahiri or Taliban chief Mullah Omar, some are calling on Obama to strike while Al Qaeda and its allies are staggering.

    "We have no right to keep our troops on the defense dying, when we know where some of the highest-ranking people in the Taliban are," Bing West, former assistant defense secretary, told Fox News on Monday.

    Former CIA Director Michael Hayden said that if the U.S. gets bin Laden's deputy -- presumed to be al-Zawahiri -- in its sights, "the same calculus" that was used on bin Laden should apply.

    But if high-value terrorists are discovered to be in Pakistan, Obama could be forced to order a strike on that territory, and the thought already has Pakistani leaders fuming.

    Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani defended his country in an address Monday, suggesting that while Pakistan is relieved bin Laden is dead, the U.S. had better not try another raid like that without first informing the government in Islamabad.

    He said his country would not relent in rooting out terrorists, but warned any "overt or covert" attack against its assets would be met with a "matching response."

    "Pakistan reserves the right to retaliate with full force. No one should underestimate the resolve and capability of our nation and armed forces to defend our sacred homeland," he said.

    One senior Pakistani government source told The Telegraph newspaper the country would act if there is another "violation" of its air space. "We'll take appropriate action if any further violation takes place. We will defend our air space by any means we have," the source is quoted saying.

    Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S., also told "This Week" that the Pakistani government wants to continue "joint operations," but is concerned about the nature of the raid last weekend.

    "Nobody said that we didn't want Usama bin Laden taken out. What we are offended by is the violation of our sovereignty," he said. "Now, we've heard the American explanation. But at the same time, try and put yourself in the position of a Pakistani leader who has to go to votes from the same people who will turn around and say, 'You know what? You can't protect this country from American helicopters coming in.'"

    He said America "has a selling job to do in Pakistan" to convince its people the U.S. is their "ally."

    So far, the White House is not pushing back on these calls.

    U.S. officials say the burden is on Pakistan to take action, particularly considering the billions in U.S. aid going toward Pakistan, but barring that, the United States will act.

    The president reserves the right to enter Pakistani territory to act against terror suspects if Pakistan will not, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said last week.

    National Security Adviser Tom Donilon told ABC's "This Week" that another unilateral stealth raid would "depend on the operation" and the risk involved.

    Obama, in an interview with CBS' "60 Minutes," confirmed that he did not inform Pakistani officials of the raid in advance, though he praised Pakistan's cooperation considering "we've been able to kill more terrorists on Pakistani soil than just about any place else."

    However, Obama also questioned whether anybody inside the Pakistani government might have known about bin Laden's location all along.

    "We were surprised that he could maintain a compound like that for that long without there being a tip-off," Obama said. "We think that there had to be some sort of support network for bin Laden inside of Pakistan. But we don't know who or what that support network was. We don't know whether there might have been some people inside of government, people outside of government, and that's something that we have to investigate and, more importantly, the Pakistani government has to investigate."
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...error-targets/
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  2. #2
    Posting Addict Rivergallery's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    9,766

    Default

    Good thing I am not in charge.. what a pissing match. I don't handle this sort of thing very well. If this was a neighbor doing such things and hiding serial killers in their basement while I bring over a potroast, and find them and execute them.. and they whine that I should have notified them first.. HELL I wouldn't be bringing them no damn potroast anymore.
    DH-Aug 30th 1997 Josiah - 6/3/02 Isaac 7/31/03

  3. #3
    Community Host wlillie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    6,469

    Default

    1. We should definitely go in and take them out.
    2. They don't "owe" us anything except gratitude, but they should think long and hard about trying to pretend like we aren't "allies."

    Why is the Pakistani Government investigating? Wouldn't that be like having a CEO investigate the accounting department after a tax discrepancy is found?

  4. #4
    Prolific Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,334

    Default

    1. No
    2. No


    There are international laws for a reason.

  5. #5
    Posting Addict fuchsiasky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    5,925

    Default

    No and No.

    It seems to me that if a nation is taking military action on the soil of another nation and expect their cooperation that they should probably tell them. How do you think the US would react if Pakistan took military action against a terrorist on US soil without informing anyone? It wouldn't go over well. I completely understand why Pakistan would be pissed. If you are allies act like it and share this kind of information.
    Me- Fuchsia
    My Wonderful Partner - Rob
    DD - December 17 2008
    DSD 15
    DSS 18
    Feline Furbabies - Sophie and Indigo

    Little Babe 22/12/05


  6. #6
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    I'm trying to imagine the reaction were a French military kill squad go on a raid in the US killing people left and right. Yes, they are our allies. That does not supersede international law! I'd totally be pissed if France did that in my country.

  7. #7
    Super Poster b525's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    774

    Default

    I understand that they would be angry, but I also see the other side of it. The U.S. has been searching for Bin Laden for 10 years, trying to do it "appropriately," working with Pakistan. Then, suddenly, the U.S. does it without them and actually finds him. And, he was in a very obvious camp near government buildings, right? That's an interesting coincidence.

    If the French government worked with the U.S. for years to find a terrorist that was hidden in our borders and finally, after ten years, sent a group to take out that one person, I'd think they were justified. I would also think they might be justified in questioning U.S. motives if they found the terrorist in a compound just down the street from the Pentagon or the NSA.

    Now, I'm not sure I agree with the U.S. going in again, without Pakistani cooperation. Bin Laden was the main target. I think the U.S. should be able to expect cooperation on following up the leads that were discovered on the BL raid. And, I would hope they would consider Pakistani motives if they're unable to find anyone else when Pakistan is helping.
    Becky

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions