Pakistan to U.S.: Cross our border again and we’ll blow you out of the sky
posted at 3:42 pm on September 16, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The perfect excuse for me to re-link Hitchens’s piece yesterday in Slate reminding The One how much rhetoric he’s devoted to telling us where the “real terrorists” are and what he’s prepared to do to go get them once he’s free and clear of that irksome Mesopotamian distraction. Here’s his chance: Not only won’t Pakistan address the problem, they continue to actively aid and abet the enemy. So now we’ve taken matters into our own hands, in fulfillment a promise Bush made two years ago but refrained from taking seriously until now. Which brings us to today’s news. Quoth Hitch: “American liberals can’t quite face the fact that if their man does win in November, and if he has meant a single serious word he’s ever said, it means more war, and more bitter and protracted war at that—not less.”
Of course they can face it. They simply don’t believe he’s serious.
On the eve of a meeting with the top U.S. military commander, Pakistan upped the ante in its standoff over U.S. troop incursions, saying its soldiers had orders to open fire on American troops if they crossed from Afghanistan on raids…
A Pakistani military spokesman said Tuesday that the nation’s troops have been ordered to open fire if U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan launched another raid inside Pakistan, raising the prospect of a clash between Pakistani and U.S. forces on the border. Pakistani military officials have repeatedly emphasized that they consider such incursions — made permissible for U.S. troops by secret orders issued by U.S. President George W. Bush in July — to be a violation of territorial sovereignty.
“No incursion will be tolerated anymore,” said Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, chief military spokesman. The prospect of allies fighting each other as they hunt down Islamist militants still appears remote, given the Pakistani government’s desire to receive billions of dollars in aid from the U.S. But the repeated warnings against U.S. troop raids reflect the strong anger felt among Pakistan’s senior ranks that the U.S. is overstepping its bounds with a close ally.
Adm. Mullen’s in Islamabad as I write this, hopefully giving them an updated version of Armitage’s alleged warning to Musharraf after 9/11. I can only assume Abbas’s statement is pro forma tough talk designed to save face with the public after the U.S. raid two weeks ago, not unlike Maliki ushering the U.S. towards the door with an eye to Iraq’s eventual provincial elections. Surely the Pakistanis understand what the consequences would be if America’s hit again by an attack planned in their country; better to let us deal with it quietly now if they’re unwilling or unable to, lest events ultimately require a more “vigorous” response. In the meantime, though, since the 18 different permutations of the Bush Doctrine are suddenly in vogue among the media, how about this for a question at the next pressers given by Obama and McCain: Does the doctrine promulgated after 9/11 about holding states responsible for acts committed by the terrorists they harbor still apply? That was the rationale for knocking the Taliban out of power in Afghanistan, after all. What are we to make of Pakistan’s “protective custody” of the Taliban now, then?
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















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 Next »
Logically, I can’t blame Pakistan for doing this.
YellowDawg on September 16, 2008 at 3:44 PM
And yet, the Bush administration is urging Congress to use counter-terrorism funds to upgrade Pakistan’s F-16s on our dime.
flipflop on September 16, 2008 at 3:45 PM
We will shoot you if you cross our border in x area that is 3 miles square wink wink”
William Amos on September 16, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Hmmm.
With a new leader you would think that Pakistan would want our HELP, not tell us we are going to take you out.
Interesting…
I guess it is time to stock up on water and food and get radioactive gear from Army Navy stores.
upinak on September 16, 2008 at 3:46 PM
I hope Pakistan takes care of the family of the soldier who fires on a bunch of SEALs coming at him.
Star20 on September 16, 2008 at 3:47 PM
I sure as heck can.
I have friends in the little strip of North Afghanistan and they are CONSTANTLY dealing with people from Pakistan.
Maybe is Pakistan had some steel ones instead of beta ones, they wouldn’t be in this mess.
upinak on September 16, 2008 at 3:47 PM
Actually, they just didn’t hear it in the first place. Anything The One says that’s not hopey and changey they just tune out.
flipflop on September 16, 2008 at 3:47 PM
Good luck with that new policy Pakistan. ~B
Brian on September 16, 2008 at 3:47 PM
Yes, and now can we stop giving them money?
4shoes on September 16, 2008 at 3:47 PM
His lunatic left base knows Barry isn’t serious about this, he just makes it up as he’s going along.
More importantly, the Pakistanis know he isn’t serious. He’s a gelded donkey in the headlights when it comes to military matters.
NoDonkey on September 16, 2008 at 3:48 PM
Bush Doctrine: If you’re not with us, you’re against us.
Suck it, Pakistan.
fossten on September 16, 2008 at 3:48 PM
The US will have to blink. There is no way we go into Pakistan uninvited if the consequences mean open conflict with them.
csdeven on September 16, 2008 at 3:48 PM
Well well well. I wonder what The One will do if he actually becomes president. hmmm. My guess is jump on his unicorn and ride through a field of singing flowers and dancing butterflies into a magenta sunset.
In other words, wuss out.
Terrye on September 16, 2008 at 3:49 PM
So we’re doing the ’stanis job for them and this is how they thank us??? Nice.
bryan2369 on September 16, 2008 at 3:49 PM
Pakistan’s gotta do what they gotta do. I just wish all this crap had remained secret and our guys could still operate in full freedom.
BadgerHawk on September 16, 2008 at 3:49 PM
Control your border and your citizens and we won’t have to do it for you.
Iblis on September 16, 2008 at 3:50 PM
No kidding. Or tell them we’re going to shift the money we give them to India. We have some cards to play.
BadgerHawk on September 16, 2008 at 3:50 PM
You know as well as I, that it would have gotten out sooner or later.
upinak on September 16, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Maybe Gibson will ask Biden about the Obama Doctrine.
faraway on September 16, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Now if they were only serious about enforcement on the Mexican border..
DaveC on September 16, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Pakistan’s leaders have a lot of domestic anti-American sentiment to deal with, not to mention a lot of Taliban supporters in its military and intelligence service. Who knows what the people in power really think.
Cicero43 on September 16, 2008 at 3:50 PM
I do have to wonder however, if Pakistan really wants us out of there, why don’t they clean it up themselves. If the Taliban and their friends would just leave us and the Afghanis alone…….
Terrye on September 16, 2008 at 3:51 PM
This just shows that Obama’s unilateral talk is just dumb. If we’ve learned anything, it’s that we need to win the hearts and minds of the locals. Had Obama recognized the success of the surge, he’d realize that. More is accomplished with bags of tea than with bombs.
If BO becomes president, and god forbid we’re attacked again, he will be more hawkish than GWB because it would be about him.
pt on September 16, 2008 at 3:51 PM
Money…. American Money.
upinak on September 16, 2008 at 3:51 PM
NOTE ONE MORE DIME MFS!
McCain had it right when he said no more dough for people who hate us.
JustTruth101 on September 16, 2008 at 3:52 PM
If Barry wins, will he reinstate the draft? Who is going to break the news to KOS, Code Pink, MoveOn.org and the other assorted followers or should I say leaders?
bloggless on September 16, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Doesn’t this lead to another implication of the recently much discussed quote unquote “Bush Doctrine”?
Specifically: wouldn’t this put Pakistan in the position of, effectively defending, or at least providing military protection to the Taliban, perhaps some branches of Al Qaeda and terrorists in general? Doesn’t the “Bush Doctrine” put states acting in such a way in the same position as the terrorists themselves? Wouldn’t this require Pres. Bush to take “steps” (I hesitate to describe the steps) against Pakistan? (at least if the “Bush Doctrine” actually means anything)
Just askin’.
Blaise on September 16, 2008 at 3:52 PM
More Bush Doctrine:
Fool me once, shame on me
Fool me twice shame..on..uh..
You can’t get fooled again…
BobMbx on September 16, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Well yeah Pakistan dropped the ball big time on it, but realistically they’re a sovereign nation, so I can’t blame them for saying this.
YellowDawg on September 16, 2008 at 3:53 PM
I am hoping that this statement was just for public consumption.
If he is serious he has just signed a bunch of Pakistani death warrants.
Drill_Thrawl on September 16, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Dear Pakistan,
Thank you for contacting us with your concerns about our recent raids on Al Qaeda in your territory. We regret that you feel misused, especially since we have taken it upon ourselves to do your job for you. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience and we welcome you to actually enforce your own laws and honor your commitment to our nation.
We must however, express our confusion about the tone and implications of your response; as our country had your authorization to conduct cross-boarder raids on our mutual enemy with advance notice. To eliminate any confusion is this regard, consider this letter to be notice- if we find any terrorists in your country that you are not shooting with the weapons we provided, we will do so.
One other matter- if you attempt to shoot at any American solider or asset, we’ll take away the bullets we gave you.
Have a nice day!
US Citizens
Damiano on September 16, 2008 at 3:53 PM
I say to Pakistan, “Go for it, if you think you can handle the repercussion of a million bombs landing on your heads.” Or, in short, “Make my day”.
RWLA on September 16, 2008 at 3:53 PM
As George Stephanofolus said of Bill Clinton when he reneged on the middle class tax cuts in 1992:
Obama will “keep all of the promises he intends to keep.”
PackerBronco on September 16, 2008 at 3:53 PM
They’ve been promising to do this to the Taliban and al-Qaeda for years. What makes anyone think they’ll be able to do this to us?
Red Cloud on September 16, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Tell you what Jackie the Paki…you start firing on us we start aiming hellfires at you.
sven10077 on September 16, 2008 at 3:54 PM
It was kept secret for a couple months, and would still be secret if it weren’t for a certain American newspaper…
Of course Pakistan was going to be aware of it. But we could have handled all the dealings in secret.
BadgerHawk on September 16, 2008 at 3:55 PM
I am sure that BO can handle this, afterall doesn’t he have a lot of contacts in Pakistan?
bloggless on September 16, 2008 at 3:55 PM
true dat!
upinak on September 16, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Eh, these statements are for domestic consumption, IMO. They know we’re in there and what we’re doing, more or less.
When news gets leaked regarding strikes in Waziristan by the jihadist-fellow-travellers in our own press Pakistan has to trot out this little dog and pony show about giving us a stern warning.
Sound and fury, et cetera.
Citizen Duck on September 16, 2008 at 3:56 PM
You mean in the areas that the Pakistani military does not control? If there are any Pakistani soldiers there, the question is, who’s side are they on?
rbj on September 16, 2008 at 3:56 PM
My understanding of the Bush Doctrine (not to argue with Krauthammer) is that if you hide or harbor anyone that has struck the USA, we will come and kill them and anyone that stands in our way. If Pakistan wants to front terrorists, they suffer the same way the Taliban did. Meanwhile, the Taliban is killing Pakistani soldiers daily.
Pakistan is its own worse enemy, and Ghandi was an idiot for giving birth to s country that have spawned so much violence and terror.
Hening on September 16, 2008 at 3:57 PM
If Pakistan wants to allow terrorists to openly train there, then they have to be prepared to pay the consequences…who are they? All of them…
right2bright on September 16, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Pakistan? That’s like goin into Wisconsin.
I keed, I keed…….
bbz123 on September 16, 2008 at 3:58 PM
I would like to see the faces of the first Paki soldiers who decide to fire on our men…that won’t be a thrill running down their pants.
right2bright on September 16, 2008 at 3:59 PM
Who knew Pakistan has a military??
AubieJon on September 16, 2008 at 3:59 PM
Yes, however notice that all so-called “conservative” candidates say this until they actually get into office. At that point it’s simply business-as-usual at the State Dept.
CliffHanger on September 16, 2008 at 4:02 PM
Cut off the billions in funding. Start handing out travel pamphlets of the Kashmir region to India. Watch how quickly Pakistan changes its mind.
amerpundit on September 16, 2008 at 4:02 PM
This whole mess is because of a piece of shyte American journalist / paper publishing secret info, causing severe diplomatic fallout and endangering the lives of American special forces going after AQ.
That journalist should be tried for treason. What the hell is wrong with the media? This isn’t even a hyperbolic rhetorical question anymore… :(
AlexB on September 16, 2008 at 4:02 PM
All hocus-pocus by the Pakistan govt. to cover their behinds.
Let the people think the Govt. is acting tough, but let the U.S. sneak in at will, zapping high level al Queda & Taliban. Maybe even get lucky and take out a Pakistan Intelligence operative working against the Pakistan govt. and for the Taliban.
———
The question to Obama, which the press won’t ask, is what would Obama do now in regards to him invading Pakistan? What is his response to this Pakistan move?
albill on September 16, 2008 at 4:02 PM
I wouldn’t be surprised if the US soon reports it was shot at and retreated. This is for domestic Paki consumption only.
gmoonster on September 16, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Can we stop pretending these scumbags are our friends and just bomb them into submission already? Maybe get India to get off their lazy butts and make a contribution to the war on terror?
SuperCool on September 16, 2008 at 4:04 PM
The Obama Doctrine was written in invisible ink on the teleprompter.
Got whiteout?
beatcanvas on September 16, 2008 at 4:05 PM
Required Reading:
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/
Micahel Yon is no longer in Iraq. He is now in Afghanistan.
“The soldiers are living like animals at a little rat’s nest called FOB Gibraltar. They call it “Gib.” Named after the lynchpin of British naval dominance in the Mediterranean, this cluster of mud huts in the middle of hostile territory is more like Fort Apache, Afghanistan. The British soldiers from C-Company 2 Para live in ugly conditions, fight just about every day, and morale is the best I have seen probably anywhere.” -Michael Yon Dispatch; Death in the Corn Part I of III
Mr_Magoo on September 16, 2008 at 4:05 PM
As far as the “Bush Doctrine” goes, there are plenty of tools in the toolbag, including sanctions. Remember, one of the first counter-attacks the US launched was done by the treasury, when they froze the assets of the financiers.
I remember the story from 2001 when a local tribal leader in Afghanistan was offered $$ to assist the US. He said he’d think about it. That night his town was bombed. The next day he was offered 20% less than the day before. He accepted the offer.
This is subtle game of carrots and sticks on a grand scale. It’s quite complex and where only few people will play very significant roles.
pt on September 16, 2008 at 4:05 PM
But they need our help and support, just like Iraq!
The audacity of these countries not wanting us to come and
overthrowliberate their governmental systems and culture!!We’ll show ‘em, boys.
Lock & load.
an_abstraction on September 16, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Send Rambama in. Obama vs. Osama. Just the two of ‘em, mano a … um, whatever.
Cicero43 on September 16, 2008 at 4:09 PM
I see two strong possibilities:
1. The Pakistan army is embarrassed than it can’t control its territory so when it became public that Americans have been crossing the border without permission they felt they needed to make a big production of warning us off.
2. The Pakistan army is contaminated with terrorist sympathizers that are trying to protect a base of operation for the Taliban.
Sounds like a state department problem to me. Send a diplomat to smooth things over with Pakistan and get some kind of joint operation agreement from the civilian government. Meanwhile we should continue to hit Taliban targets whenever we have the opportunity regardless of which side of the border they’re on.
Browncoatone on September 16, 2008 at 4:11 PM
What are you talking about? We’re not seeking an overthrow of the Pakistani government, we’re seeking the ability to capture Bin Laden and his associates. People on both sides agree that OBL is likely in Paki and the government there isn’t cooperating enough.
amerpundit on September 16, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Thank goodness Petraeus is running CENTCOM, he’s probably on the border drinking tea with our allies over there now. They’re probably hoping that Barry doesn’t screw them over and delay progress until Barry’s in office and gets all the credit. He’d never do anything like that…(hint, Iraq.)
pt on September 16, 2008 at 4:13 PM
I though Bin Laden was at the Gates of Hell, and not in Pakistan?
an_abstraction on September 16, 2008 at 4:13 PM
Does this mean that the price of a Charelston Chew is going to skyrocket at the 7-11 down the street?
leetpriest on September 16, 2008 at 4:14 PM
A real mature one, aren’t you?
amerpundit on September 16, 2008 at 4:16 PM
If Pakistan has a huge swath of land which they are unwilling to police, then FUCK THEM for trying to pretend it is somehow wrong for us to want to police it. I say bring ‘em on.
jimmy the notable on September 16, 2008 at 4:17 PM
Wait a minute: we’re going after AQ in Pakistan. If Pakistan knew where AQ was, it would (presumably) be going after AQ itself. But it can’t find AQ. But it will fire on us if we find and attack AQ. Does that mean that Pakistanis will be waiting for us when we get there? Does that mean Pakistan knows where AQ is and has soldiers there with AQ that will shoot at US troops sent to shoot at AQ?
Makes too much sense to be true.
Akzed on September 16, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Ahem…Gandhi was against its creation. That was done by the Islamophilic British, who were sympathetic to the idea that no Muslims could get a fair deal as a minority in a Hindu majority India.
Fortunata on September 16, 2008 at 4:19 PM
A pretty good one, too (comparatively for the region). They also have nukes. They also aren’t so “understanding” about military border violations as say, the Soviet Union was. The Ruskies would shoot down our plane and never say a word. The Pakistani’s would be “screaming for vengance”. If we need to put Pakistan in a pickle, we need India. What a web the world is, eh?
BobMbx on September 16, 2008 at 4:20 PM
Pakistan abrogated their sovereign status when they tolerated Al Queda hiding in their country. I have no respect for a country that allows such a thing…. again, I’ll say what I’ve said before… I don’t care if anyone likes us, but they’d better fear us at worst and respect us at the least.
MNDavenotPC on September 16, 2008 at 4:21 PM
Are Pahkeeestawn soldiers bigger, then say …. a moose?
Palinize ‘em.
fogw on September 16, 2008 at 4:22 PM
One thing to consider when planning to spank Pakistan:
They sit at the Nuclear Table.
BobMbx on September 16, 2008 at 4:23 PM
amer, I believe this will clear everything up:
an_abstraction
For better forum combat.
SuperCool on September 16, 2008 at 4:27 PM
BobMbx
I’m well aware of their ownership of such weapons…. but it wouldn’t be a deterrent. it would be Pakistan’s mistake. One and only mistake.
MNDavenotPC on September 16, 2008 at 4:27 PM
A real mature one, aren’t you?
amerpundit on September 16, 2008 at 4:16 PM
Give the kid a break, he’s been waving his arms and stamping his feet trying to get noticed by the adults on just about every thread today.
Bishop on September 16, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Having sovereignty over an area means that you as a nation control its borders — nobody goes in or comes out without your permission.
Given that definition, Pakistan has no real sovereignty over the Waziristan area. The tribal chiefs in that area wield the real sovereignty.
It’s sort of like our southern border area.
unclesmrgol on September 16, 2008 at 4:32 PM
“Pakistan to U.S.: Cross our border again and we’ll blow you out of the sky.”
That’s pretty straightforward. fogw has it right: “Palinize ‘em”.
“They simply don’t believe he’s serious”…It’s the ol’ ‘wink, wink, nudge, nudge, know what I mean?’ schtick in which his followers know that he isn’t serious, he just needs to lure in the independents who are smart enough to know that military force is necessary sometimes… I just wish McCain wasn’t serious about amnesty.
Christine on September 16, 2008 at 4:33 PM
Hand over OBL and his ‘officers’ and we won’t be at your bleeping border anymore. How’s that, pain in my bleep-bleeps?
Christine on September 16, 2008 at 4:39 PM
Am I the only one who finds this story suspicious:
Gitmo Prison Guard Speaks Out (my title)? “They’re just sitting in their cells. You give them food, and if they get crazy, you spray them with this terrible oil-based chemical. Then you send these five guys in to beat the sh** out of them.”
Something weird about this. He mostly talks about how beautiful the Muslim “call to prayer” is, and stuff like that.
capitalist piglet on September 16, 2008 at 4:42 PM
Pakistan’s nukes must not fall into the hands of terrorists, and all of our actions need to be taken with this at the front of our minds.
WisCon on September 16, 2008 at 4:45 PM
Pakistan’s territorial integrity should be respected.
Pakistan should also be responsible for stopping raids into Afghanistan from tribes in Pakistan.
Just so happens those two expectations are in conflict, so it’s … complicated.
So basically, If Pakistan can’t stop Al Quaeda in Pakistan from joining raids into Afghanistan, then they’ll have to make allowances for US troops crossing the border on their way back.
Their problem is they’re too weak to control Al Quaeda or to offend Al Quaeda. They’re also too weak to oppose the US, but at least they’re free to offend us, within limits.
theregoestheneighborhood on September 16, 2008 at 4:46 PM
So wait, is this Bush Doctrine or Obama Doctrine at work?
Could someone please get Teh Messiah on the line. I’m sure he had thought about this possibility when he suggested going after the terrorists in Pakistan.
BohicaTwentyTwo on September 16, 2008 at 4:48 PM
When they do their part to deter terrorism and those who plot against the US and its allies then maybe we can talk, til then.. tough shit.
Viper1 on September 16, 2008 at 4:49 PM
Okay, he’s a big champion on the left, and Iraq Veterans Against the War, etc. – MSN is running his story along with the point of view of what it’s like to be a prisoner in Iraq (two sides of the story and all that…ahem). Just wondered if anyone caught that besides me, and this is the closest to an appropriate thread to ask on.
capitalist piglet on September 16, 2008 at 4:50 PM
If Pakistan has money enough to develop and build nuclear weapons and their delivery systems then why do they need anything from us?
Oldnuke on September 16, 2008 at 4:50 PM
The roar of a paper tiger. Pakistan doesn’t have troops in these areas and can’t control the area. Just what forces are going to react to another incursion?
On another angle I thought International Law allowed the pursuit of hostiles into another country such as Turkey killing the PPK fighters in Northern Iraq.
TooTall on September 16, 2008 at 4:51 PM
If you’ve got the brass and bombs to back it up international law says whatever you want it to.
Oldnuke on September 16, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Open fire on the soldiers of NATO? I have so much problem to believe this news. Did we talk to their friendly Eastern neighbor yet?
Monas on September 16, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Mr. Citizen of the World can fix it. He knows that war, not talking, can solve this Pakistan thang.
He told me so…
locomotivebreath1901 on September 16, 2008 at 4:54 PM
Pakistan you have to ask yourself do we feel lucky did they fire 5 rockets or 6 .Go ahead make our day.
thmcbb on September 16, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Heard the phrase “Been there, done that”?
Anyway, that guy that resembles Senator Obama sitting near what appears to be an old M60 isn’t going to shoot down much of anything….
CC
CapedConservative on September 16, 2008 at 5:00 PM
Simple solution, we only cross over the border on “man love Mondays” the Paki’s will be too busy with their lady boys to bother playing soldier.
Alden Pyle on September 16, 2008 at 5:01 PM
They’re not dealing with the serious issue of terrorism — murderers are finding refuge and launching attacks from inside their border…do you recall the last time a country had terrorists among them from which a major attack was planned?
Forget the logic — what about what’s right?
Richard Romano on September 16, 2008 at 5:01 PM
Pakistans’ acquisition of nukes was entirely due to India. Neither country was concerned in the least with the Cold War. They have their own border dispute. Both countries acquired their weapons because the other one was doing it too. Didn’t make sense then, either. They aren’t vast arsenals. Pakistan can barely afford to maintain and secure the ones they have. India is in much better shape (as far as protecting them goes). I don’t know exactly how many each has, but Pakistan has one less now than they did a couple of years ago. You have to respect a country that has the balls to “test” a nuke in a place so close to the enemy that they could feel the ground wave when it detonated.
Gutsy. Especially when the enemy has nukes of their own.
BobMbx on September 16, 2008 at 5:01 PM
That’s Ruskie hardware not a 60.
Alden Pyle on September 16, 2008 at 5:04 PM
Then it definitely won’t shoot down anything….
CC
CapedConservative on September 16, 2008 at 5:07 PM
Idiot troll forgets his boy Obama wants to invade Pakistan.
fossten on September 16, 2008 at 5:11 PM
First of all, you need to learn how to pronounce it properly if you’re gonna play for Team Arugala.
It’s Poh-kee-ston. Not Pack-is-tan.
That’s too Dubya. Too Wal-Marty.
Yeah, we want our Whole Foodsy, America Sucks, Pohkeeston. Boy, we sure love our ’stons’.
Secondly, how many of Hussein’s 300 (plus) advisors did you need to come up with that little diddy anyhow?
Or does he still need all of them to try and figure out wtf language it is they’re speaking in Afghanistan these days?
Teddy on September 16, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Not Russian…GERMAN.
It’s a West German MG-3, license-built in Pakistan.
pseudonominus on September 16, 2008 at 5:13 PM
I was being a little facetious there Bob, I’m just getting tired of Pakistan’s posturing, but I’ll get over it. I also understand that their government is walking a razor’s edge by helping us. They’ve got to at least put on a show to save face even if they can’t match deed to word. I’m not sure “Gutsy” is a descriptor I’d use in regard to that test.
Oldnuke on September 16, 2008 at 5:20 PM
Sen. Obama thought the biggest obstacle of US pursuing OBL hiding in Afghan/Pakistan border was Gen. Musharraf. He was gloating when Musharraf resigned, and promised to ‘put pressure’ on the new Pakistan administration, and work with the new PM.
Check out the Obama interview with O’Reilley (segment 1, national security).
Sir Napsalot on September 16, 2008 at 5:26 PM
why cant we do this on our border.
koypop on September 16, 2008 at 5:44 PM
US forces have been taking out a lot of terrorists hiding in hard-to-get-at mountain areas recently. Imagine what they could do to nice fat juicy Pakistani army bases, columns of vehicles and aircraft.
And yes, American should also step up arms shipments to India. Pakistani intelligence is suspected of being behind terror attacks in India, so they’re probably ready for some pay-back.
It’s proxy war time.
EnglishMike on September 16, 2008 at 6:01 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »