Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 39 of 39

Thread: Pakistan mocks Bush

  1. #21
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=chicadeel;2200250]Here's my guess-
    Bhutto will appear to put pressure on Mushariff to reinstate the constitution and give up his military position. She will appear to be the voice of reason. Mushariff and Bhutto will share power as was already planned. Europe and the US will be happy with the results.[/QUOTE]


    your guess would be a good plan of action....

  2. #22
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;2200328]not surprising a lunatic leftist like yourself claims the present situation in Pakistan is a mocking of GWB.....[/QUOTE]

    yeah and... what is he gonna do about it?

    im tired of waiting for the next president to get elected before someone does something positive

  3. #23
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=bitonti;2200355]yeah and... what is he gonna do about it?

    im tired of waiting for the next president to get elected before someone does something positive[/QUOTE]

    it's up to GWB to do something about it??? you sound like a beligerent 13 years old on a school yard....

  4. #24
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;2200389]it's up to GWB to do something about it??? you sound like a beligerent 13 years old on a school yard....[/QUOTE]

    it's more up to him than hillary, obama, rommney or whoever else

    i just want competance from the Presidency, why is that too much to ask?

  5. #25
    No action means he (GW) can't fail again.

    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;2200389]it's up to GWB to do something about it??? you sound like a beligerent 13 years old on a school yard....[/QUOTE]

  6. #26
    What exactly do you want GWB to do?

    Be Specific Please.

  7. #27
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2199989]Invasion of another Nation is invasion. If he were in say, Russia, would you feel the same? Mexico? The UK or Germany?

    No, of course you wouldn't. I would have hoped for better from you nuu, but the hypocricy is really quite stunning, whine endlessly (does the left) about so-called "illegal invasions", yet you (and they) seem to have no quams about a millitary invastion of a nuke holding Pakistan? Really?

    Do I want Osama Bin Laden dead? Yes. Do I want to make an already very bad situation for the US Worse, and open up yet another front of warfare? Hell no. No invading Iran, no invading Pakistan, not unless one of them is literally about to launch a Nuclear strike, or can be proven to some legitmate degree to be giving nukes to terrorists. And then I do not invade and occupy, I invade and obliterate. Period. **** hearts and mind.

    But invading Pakistan now, to get an apparently no-longer-relevant OBL? Yes, I want him dead as much as anyone, but not at that cost.[/QUOTE]


    Well, for starters, you are literally wrong. Bombing is not invading. We did not "invade" Afghanistan in the 1990s when we fired a cruise missile at Bin Laden.

    All Obama has argued is that, if we have specific, exact inteligence on the location of Al Qaeda's leadership, we take it out, whether Musharaf wants us to or not. If he is our ally, he'll be ok with this move anyhow.

    The fact is, he needs us as much as we need him, and probably moreso. And, were he to feign outrage at such a strike (in a basically unpopulated area he doesn't control anyhow, I might add), it might actually help him politically at home.

  8. #28
    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2200490]Well, for starters, you are literally wrong. Bombing is not invading. We did not "invade" Afghanistan in the 1990s when we fired a cruise missile at Bin Laden.

    All Obama has argued is that, if we have specific, exact inteligence on the location of Al Qaeda's leadership, we take it out, whether Musharaf wants us to or not. If he is our ally, he'll be ok with this move anyhow.

    The fact is, he needs us as much as we need him, and probably moreso. And, were he to feign outrage at such a strike (in a basically unpopulated area he doesn't control anyhow, I might add), it might actually help him politically at home.[/QUOTE]


    2 Things:
    1.Intelligence is never exact and there will most likely be civilian casualties from an air strike.

    2. Pakistan is a sovereign nation and you should not launch attacks against a sovereign nation. The pakistani military on the afghan border could quickly turn their weapons on allied force in that border region.

    and i think the whole bombing isnt invading and invading isn't bombing is really semantics. Both are attacks on a nation.

  9. #29
    Exactly JetFan, no matter how you cut it, it is an invasion!

  10. #30
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,802
    I'm glad to see you Iraq war supporters have finally come to your senses and oppose military action.

  11. #31
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,802
    'Pakistan mocks Bush' makes me think of 164 million people wearing big fake ears, big silver belt buckles and over sized cowboy boots.

  12. #32
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=MnJetFan;2200487]What exactly do you want GWB to do?

    Be Specific Please.[/QUOTE]

    specifically?? they want him to do something they can blame him for again....as usual this is another joke of a thread from a BDS sufferer....

  13. #33
    [QUOTE=Jetfan_Johnny;2200514]2 Things:
    1.Intelligence is never exact and there will most likely be civilian casualties from an air strike.

    2. Pakistan is a sovereign nation and you should not launch attacks against a sovereign nation. The pakistani military on the afghan border could quickly turn their weapons on allied force in that border region.

    and i think the whole bombing isnt invading and invading isn't bombing is really semantics. Both are attacks on a nation.[/QUOTE]

    You know who else is a soviergn nation? The United States. Our stated policy is that we will hold nations who harbor terrorists who attack us responsible for the attacks they have carried out.

    The people hiding on the Pakistan side of the border are the exact same people who attacked us. Not the BS-fake-Iraq war version, but the actual people who planned 9/11.

    I would hope that, if we knew their location, Pakistan itself, being our ally and all, would happily take out Al Qaeda, the folks who already attacked us. But they refuse to. And it is a virtual certainty that, if we did notify Pakistan that we knew AQ's location, AQ would somehow get tipped off and blow town before we had a chance to hit them.

    The bare minimum we should expect from an ally is to not harbor people who have already played a direct role in the killing of thousands of our citizens. Pakistan has not even come close to meeting that threshold.

    Obama is not talking abut nukes. Obama is not talking about ground forces. He is talking about targeted missile strikes on largely unpopulated areas in the (granted unlikely) event that we know the exact location of AQ camps. Civilian casualties would be minimal because there simply aren't many civilians in those areas, and the gain would be killing people who are --at this exact moment-- plotting attacks against our forces and civilians, as they have done in the past.

  14. #34
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;2200389]it's up to GWB to do something about it??? you sound like a beligerent 13 years old on a school yard....[/QUOTE]

    Lets see. According to CBNY we are a country at war. We are "taking the fight to the enemy" he says. This so called "War on Terror" is not limited to Iraq, right?? Pakistan is a major player in the WOT and is home to some of the terrorist who , unlike Iraq, actually attacked us.

    Being that Bush is the commander in chief at a time of war (the war for our survival no less)...you know a "wartime president"...i find it incredibly funny that CBNY would question "its up to Bush to do something about it?" If not the commander in chief at a time of war, then who should do something about it?

  15. #35
    specifically I want Bush to live to his word

    he said he wanted OBL dead or alive

    we know where he is

    what's the problem?

  16. #36
    How exactly do we know where he is. He doesn't answer the phone!

  17. #37
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,710
    Semantics or not, bombing isn't invasion. We bombed Japan so we wouldn't have to invade. I don't support Obama, but insisting that he wants to "invade" Pakistan is wrong.

    I still don't understand why we haven't found bin laden yet. If Pakistan is about the size of Texas & Oklahoma then how long should it take? If bin laden is there, then obviously Pakistan isn't doing all they could to help us, imo. How much of an ally are they?

  18. #38
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=kennyo7;2200700]Lets see. According to CBNY we are a country at war. We are "taking the fight to the enemy" he says. This so called "War on Terror" is not limited to Iraq, right?? Pakistan is a major player in the WOT and is home to some of the terrorist who , unlike Iraq, actually attacked us.

    Being that Bush is the commander in chief at a time of war (the war for our survival no less)...you know a "wartime president"...i find it incredibly funny that CBNY would question "its up to Bush to do something about it?" If not the commander in chief at a time of war, then who should do something about it?[/QUOTE]

    let's see....kennyo continually whines like a b!tch about America being involved in other countries affairs....he whines about trying to spread freedom and democracy...he now whines GWB is not intervening in another countries affairs....hysterical....

  19. #39
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;2201282]let's see....kennyo continually whines like a b!tch about America being involved in other countries affairs....he whines about trying to spread freedom and democracy...he now whines GWB is not intervening in another countries affairs....hysterical....[/QUOTE]

    Whats hysterical is that yu dont see your own hypocrisy. I dont want Bush to innvade Pakistan just like we shouldnt have invaded. But when you get on your soapbox and shout that we are "taking the fight to the enemy" and trying to "bring democracy to those who have none" then you need to be consistant.

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
  •  

Follow Us