| TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! | ANSI |
| echo: | |
|---|---|
| to: | |
| from: | |
| date: | |
| subject: | The bad news is... |
Well, we see the president of Pakistan is claiming he supported
the US in the war on terror because of threats from the US. He
claims Powell threatened him with "If you're not with us, you're
against us."
He also claims Armitage threatened the General in charge of
Pakistani Intel with either join us or get bombed back to the
stone age.
Armitage denies this, Powell hasn't said anything I've seen yet.
So, the questions are:
1: Who do you believe?
2: Why is he saying this?
On a scale of 1 to 100 Armitage would have gotten 98 points or
more a few months ago. However, since he trashed his own
crediblity with the Wilson/Plame/Novak issue, to the point where
even Novak turned on him, he has between zip and zero
credibililty.
However, I still believe Armitage for two reasons.
One:
Musharraf is making his claims in terms too deritive of US
history. The "with us or against us" line was Bush's after 9-11.
That Powell would use just those words seems unlikely, but it
does look like something Musharraf would use to his audience,
the Pakistani people, and who would be much more likely to
believe them just because they are Bush's words. And the 'bombed
back to the stone age" is from Barry Goldwater and the Vietnam
war. Which Musharraf would be pretty likely to know of. Even
Armitage would not be likely to be that blunt.
Two:
The second reason I believe Armitage is the far more important
reason from the American point of view. The Pakistani military
just fought a campaign in their Northern provinces, to root out
the Taliban. They got their asses kicked. Musharraf is not all
that popular to begin with, and Pakistani Intel worked closely
with the Taliban. There is even strong indications that they
never stopped.
This leads to the possibility that Musharraf is inventing these
stories to deflect from his govenment. If he fears he may soon
fall from power, he may be trying desperately to save himself.
That is important from the US point of view because it's a very
risky proposition. Joining with the US against Al Qaeda and the
Taliban might pass with the masses, if he could claim that
Taliban and Al Qaeda just went too far and have to take their
punishment. Caving into the US makes him look weak. In a country
where a strong arm is the greatest qualification for leadership,
and concern for human rights is a disqualification, that's not
good.
What makes this risky is that Pakistan is a nuclear power. If
Pakistan falls, the Taliban, or their Pakistani soul brothers,
will have nuclear weapons.
Here the Bush administration lies really do bite us in the ass.
The BS that Saddam might give WMds to terrorists was so stupid
as to be ludicris. That Pakistan might let it happen is a very
real risk. After all, Pakistan was the nuclear supermarket of
the third world before 9-11. And the man in charge was pardoned
by Musharraf.
We truly are not safer, and we may be entering a time of extreme
danger.
BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn
... There are so many things I have left unsaid, so many things left undone.
* Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)SEEN-BY: 633/267 270 @PATH: 123/140 500 379/1 633/267 |
|
| SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com | |
Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.