UPDATE… Beginning to throw caution to the wind now. Think this might be legit. I’m linking to the Free Republic link, as their link is in the original French. Obviously, all unconfirmed, the Saudi police would have no obvious……

Wow! All kinds of reaction on the peace agreement between Pakistan and the Taliban this morning. Raw Story quotes ABC news as reporting that Major General Shaukat Sultan Khan, press secretary to the president of Pakistan, as stating Osama bin Laden …

Musharraf is heavily criticized for fighting alongside (to a degree at least) the US against Muslim extremists. This could be a solution that will result in a win-win situation: the US takes out Bin Laden, Musharraf remains in power of Pakistan….

Those posting on latest terrorist propaganda stories: Hot Air: Pakistani military withdraws, cedes tribal areas to jihadis…

I seem to recall someone who once said, “”You’re either with us or against us in the fight against terror.” Now, five years later, Pakistan surrenders to al-Qaeda … So, since they are no longer “with us,” does this mean Pakistan has now joined …

Updated with more from Hot Air below that lends support to the stragtgic approach. It would be easy to dismiss the newly announced Pakistani Taliban truce as a bitter failure and perhaps it is. But there are other elements to…

By the way, read the crawl on Fox News, everyday they tell us how many talibanis/A.Q.s we’ve killed that day. Sweet.

The webmaster’s blog-within-a-blog. Continuously updated and bumped, newest items at the top. 16:38 Pakistani military withdraws, cedes tribal areas to jihadis Smells like disaster, but it might not be. First, from the Blotter: … The AP corroborates…

You’re right that this admin. doesn’t communicate well and clearly. On the other hand, I’m glad they don’t put all the cards on the table.

One of my favorite warriers of all times is Genghis Khan – surprise was part of his best strategy. His sons then destroyed it all…

There have been a large number of us crazy blood soaked wingers arguing for taking on the Saudis, Egypt, Pakistan, etc. Given Mush’s behaviour post 9/11 it is obvious that we weren’t the only ones. He had a frank and open discussion with the US that mentioned America’s interest in taking out the Taliban, our need to go through Pakistan, and how maybe we would let the Indians ensure our way through. In return we’ve guaranteed his regime and have effectively seized his nukes. Mush is stuck between a rock, a hard place, and a US with annihilation on the brain… not somewhere I’d like to be, and results in only one possible reaction.

The goal with Mush is to go Pinochet/Franco style, a supported ally who eventually transitions back to a stable liberal democracy (no jihadis, just as the commies were kept out of Chile and Spain, until recently at least).

We stabilise Iraq and deal with Iran and Syria, that allows us to take on Saudi and Egypt. There’s a grand strategy, and a very good reason why all 4 of the above are trying to keep Iraq stirred up. Too bad the administration isn’t discussing this more.

Incidentally, one of the arrested trans-Atlantic plotters was related by marriage to Bugti and that may be why Pak intel got so quiet on the disposition of their prisoners in that plot. They may have made some kind of trade for intel or were afraid intel they recieved would leak before they could act. Anyway, I trust you, Shackleford, and the Pajamahadeen can run down the connections here. I think the truce is an internal Pakistani matter and I don’t think it has much to do with us. Unless our guys in Defense and Intel just got more competent and imaginative by leaps and bounds in the last couple days and applied the right kind of pressure to an already desperate Mushy. I doubt it though. They’re more re-acters than pro-acters.

“That bloody genius (genious), that Rummy. What’s he up to next, that senile fool?”

“If only we and the U.N. wouldn’t have gone along we wouldn’t have had:

a country decimated by 10 years of crippling embargoes, a no fly zone and a military that had, for all intents and purposes, been crushed by a massive coalition.

…and Sadaam (or Sedam, as Bush 41 and Mark Steyn would say) would be one of our allies today…if only, if only we’d wise up. If only Al Gore would have won, it would all be so different”. /sarc off

On a serious note:

The question is simply this: are the Pakistanis getting out of the Taliban’s way? Or are they getting out of the way of the U.S. military?

It’s the latter. Also, there won’t be any regime change in Pakistan any time soon, for obvious reasons.

Note how selectively the Left wants regime change? I haven’t heard them wishing for one in Venezuela, Cuba, Myanmar, North Korea, etc. yet…

For objectivity, I haven’t heard the Right wishing for one in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan either.

On a more serious note, I think Mushy has now given himself some cover internally to allow forces to pursue the Taliban. If he does not have forces there, what can he do? Lodge a protest or two and we can acknowlege and let him rattle his sabre a bit to keep peace at home.

I think this buys him a great deal of time at home.

The Nukes and Regime change – tough one. (See Above)

Make sure your answer accounts for the disposition of Pakistani nukes in the event of regime change.

posted at 2:21 pm on September 5, 2006 by Allahpundit

In other words, we’re not talking about a country decimated by 10 years of crippling embargoes, a no fly zone and a military that had, for all intents and purposes, been crushed by a massive coalition. Nope, not a helpless Iraq upon which Rumsfeld can once again demonstrate his tactical genious.

The US now has come up with a plan to confront the strategic arm of the Taliban based on the Pakistani side of the border…

I like it. Is it wrong of me to assume the opposite of whatever the Times editors think?