Messiah: Hey, let’s invade Pakistan

posted at 11:35 am on August 1, 2007 by Allahpundit

Or “Afghania.” Whatever. McQ is aghast but then he’s always been queasy about irresponsible statements from warmongering unilateralist cowboys. I think it’s brilliant. Once we pull out of Iraq we’re going to have a huge manpower surplus from all the leftist cretins who’ve spent the last four years chanting “chickenhawk” running off to enlist so they can live out their dream of fighting the “real war on terror.” Put ‘em to use. There’ll be casualties and, yeah, an incursion into another Muslim country will hurt America’s “global image” and, sure, there’s a significant risk that it would push Pakistan’s moderate population into the radical camp — a point the left grasps in the context of attacking Iran, ironically, but not here — but they’ve been positively itching for this fight. It seems cruel to deny them.

Snark aside, here’s what he actually said (or planned to say per prepared remarks):

I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges. But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will…

Beyond Pakistan, there is a core of terrorists — probably in the tens of thousands — who have made their choice to attack America. So the second step in my strategy will be to build our capacity and our partnerships to track down, capture or kill terrorists around the world, and to deny them the world’s most dangerous weapons.

I will not hesitate to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America. This requires a broader set of capabilities, as outlined in the Army and Marine Corps’s new counter-insurgency manual. I will ensure that our military becomes more stealth, agile, and lethal in its ability to capture or kill terrorists. We need to recruit, train, and equip our armed forces to better target terrorists, and to help foreign militaries to do the same. This must include a program to bolster our ability to speak different languages, understand different cultures, and coordinate complex missions with our civilian agencies.

Sounds like he’s looking to invade a lot more than just Pakistan. Is the left prepared for U.S. special ops incursions into various sovereign countries to attack AQ leadership? They seemed a little jumpy about the operations in Somalia in December, notwithstanding the fact that four of the 1998 embassy bombers were in the crosshairs. And secondly, does everyone realize that Bush has already promised to send troops into Pakistan if they’ve got a bead on Bin Laden? Obama’s not breaking any new ground here unless he means to suggest something grander than a surgical strike of a few hundred troops. Which, given his specific mention of the 2005 shot at Zawahiri that Rumsfeld passed on, he probably doesn’t.

Update: Silky’s spoiling for a fight too, but his is with the Real Enemy.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Once again, the wishes of the Democrats roughly coincide with the wishes of al Qaeda. You’d think people sheeple would start picking up on that little inconvenient truth.

Laura on August 2, 2007 at 7:17 AM

He hasn’t lost the Kos vote.
They are spinning over there so hard they look like the tilt a whirl ride!
They are saying that he didn’t mean he would invade.
Apparently they are willing to believe “it all depends on what the meaning of “invade” means” or some other such bullshit.
Obama just made Hillary look like the sanest loon in the room.

ArmyAunt on August 2, 2007 at 8:09 AM

where did my comment go?

ArmyAunt on August 2, 2007 at 8:13 AM

Obama did not lose the Kos vote.
They are spinning over there so hard that I thought I was on the tilt a whirl.
Apparently he didn’t mean he would invade.
Just use special ops or an air strike.
Of course that isn’t what Obama said, apparently they are psychic over there and he is telling them this telepathically.
Hillary now looks like the sanest loon in the room.

ArmyAunt on August 2, 2007 at 8:16 AM

I watched him make these goofball comments on the news yesterday and I am still scratching my head trying to figure out why voters in my home state put him in the Senate to begin with. The man has absolutely no credibility whatsoever, other than he can make flowery speeches and look statesmanlike. He may talk the talk, but when it comes to walking the walk, he is tripping up and landing on his face all over the place!

pilamaye on August 2, 2007 at 8:25 AM

C’mon, guys, this man has TEN years of political experience: seven years at the state level, three in the Senate. I think he knows what he’s talking about. But more importantly, he’s so photogenic, so articulate…

I feel safer already…

Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 8:28 AM

I wish I could have been a fly on the wall in his headquarters when he came up with this dipsh*t strategy.

B.Hussein: I’ve got to butch up. We need to say we want to kill somebody to keep America free.

Advisor #1: How about Dick Cheney?
Advisor #2: No, too white.
Advisor #1: How about all non white Republicans?
Advisor #2: No, it should probably be another country.
B. Hussein: Got it! Texas!
Advisor #1: Sorry sir, Texas isn’t another country yet. And besides, we wouldn’t want to antagonize the Mexicans.
B. Hussein: Albania?
Advisor #2: No, should be somewhere in the middle east.
Advisor #1: How about Israel? They’ve got it coming.
B. Hussein: Too obvious. How about Pakistan?

Think of the movie possibilities. The story of the US invasion of Pakistan that touched off a nuclear war, coming soon to theaters near you; starring Denzel Washington in the most challenging role in his career, as Supreme Leader B. Hussein Obama…

austinnelly on August 2, 2007 at 10:22 AM

I guess his campaign slogan should be:

Vote Hussein Obamam and Pack a Pak

When did these cretins decide you have to publish war plans as part of an election campaign? Even elected Presidents of the United States, Commanders in Chief, do not publish their bombing targets in advance.

I am trying to understand what he thinks the Presidency is – a segment of American Idol?

Vote Hussein, no fuss, no pain
he will toss those bombs
in safe terrain
he won’t hit Iraq, he won’t touch Iran
Hussein will put those Pakis into the can

Vote Hussein for no surprises
He don’t think, he fantasizes
Obi wan Hussein won’t cut and run
He found enemy number one

Musharraf had better stand aside
or Obi wan Hussein will tan his hide
etc etc

Kind of like, the battle Hymn of the Republic sung backwards

entagor on August 2, 2007 at 2:19 PM

austinnelly on August 2, 2007 at 10:22 AM

You have missed your calling. Great stuff.

Jaibones on August 2, 2007 at 4:18 PM

Most of the comments in this thread are pretty disingenuous. Obama isn’t talking about invading and occupying, as is the case in Iraq, but talking about pursuing HVTs across the border into Pakistan IF intelligence says they are there AND Pakistan won’t act on said intelligence. I think this is fairly consistent with Bush’s stance as there has been plenty of discussion about where to pursue HVTs…into Iran, into Pakistan, etc…Obama’s comments are no big divergence from any previous discussions that have been had in this administration or in public about pursuing terrorists.

Constant Parrhesia on August 3, 2007 at 9:35 AM

Constant Diarrhea,

You may think “this is fairly consistent with Bush’s stance” but so is the surge and the continued battle in Iraq and Afghanistan and electronic surveillance. Maybe you somehow miss the point that our Hyde Park socialist has made his entire campaign out of leftist anti-war blather.

And so far, that has earned him second place in the Moonbat party, a mere 21% behind the leader. So, maybe what we have here is a late, desperate attempt to tweak his public image from pro-infanticide pacifist to strong-on-GWOT Iraq war critic.

You want disingenuous? Follow some of Obama’s positions…

Jaibones on August 3, 2007 at 11:17 AM

Constant Diarrhea,

You may think “this is fairly consistent with Bush’s stance” but so is the surge and the continued battle in Iraq and Afghanistan and electronic surveillance. Maybe you somehow miss the point that our Hyde Park socialist has made his entire campaign out of leftist anti-war blather.

And so far, that has earned him second place in the Moonbat party, a mere 21% behind the leader. So, maybe what we have here is a late, desperate attempt to tweak his public image from pro-infanticide pacifist to strong-on-GWOT Iraq war critic.

You want disingenuous? Follow some of Obama’s positions…

Why is the ad hominem necessary here? It’s just a user name.

I think you missed my point. I fully understand that Obama is running on an anti-war platform. However, he is not talking about occupation in this instance. Merely about chasing down known terrorists, based on good intelligence, when Pakistan won’t act on (which he hasn’t said is a problem, the question was hypothetical). I’m not defending him, I think most of the responses here missed the point, is all.

And again, making fun of me or my user name is really unnecessary.

Constant Parrhesia on August 3, 2007 at 11:25 AM

Comment pages: 1 2