Bombs in Pakistan blow up Iowa

December 28, 2007 at 10:18 am (POLITICS)



  1. Jersey McJones said,

    If Pakistan were to fall to Islamist fanatics, India, Israel, and maybe even China, would remove Pakistan from the map. That is the worst thing that can happen, and that’s very bad. Pakistan is an existential threat to itself, but not so much anyone else. Still, that is bad. Fortunately, the Pakistani military, and a big, tough, smart force it is, seems to grasp all this quite firmly. They aren’t going to let that happen. Period.

    As for “who did this,” well, that guy blew himself to bits. So that’s that. The other people involved should be “brought to justice,” but none of this will change the reality on the ground. It’s time Pakistan claimed it’s contiguous integrity by pacifying it’s hinterlands – disarming, mainstreaming, public investing in infrastructure, etc. We should help, if and any way we can. Pakistan is on the verge of civil war of the kind any aficionado of American history should know quite well. This must be averted and averted strongly. Lincoln’s great mistake was not understanding the will and resolve of the Confederacy and the effects modern weapons and tactics had on war. We should not make that same mistake (like the Iraq mistake).


  2. micky2 said,

    Hmmm, I thought the left and even Ru Paul said we should butt out of middle eastern affairs ?
    Now we are supposed to help them put there selves back together ?
    Which is it ?
    The last time we helped in this magnitude was in Iraq while they were fighting Iran. That worked out real well.
    Maybe we should expect Musharraf to actually “DO” something about the extremist in his country, then he would be believable.
    A huge sign of compliance would be to execute A.Q Khan for treason , but not untill he tells us everything he said and sold to Iran, Libya and North Korea.
    The only help Pakistan needs is a leader who will start kicking some asses.

  3. Jersey McJones said,

    When I said “help” them, Micky, I meant help them in a positive way. I didn’t mean invade and occupy them and make things worse – or God forbid kill them en mass. I’ll leave that to you cons.


  4. micky2 said,

    Lets play stupid here, alright !
    It has long been known thet the left has consistantly said we should mind our own business and get out of the middle east.
    But its O.K. if we are going to hand out charity right ? Its O.K. in the case with Kuwait , right ?
    It was O.K. when we helped Saddam arm himself against Iran , right ?
    Its O.K. when earthquakes and Tsunamis wipe out millions , right ?
    We have our interests also. And in the case with Pakistan and the middle east we are justified in expecting certain terms in return for our assistance.
    We already have given billions of dollars in aid in various forms to Pakistan from military funding to food and flat out cash.
    Its not Americas fault that they cant makes use of the help and opportunitues we have given them already.
    Musharraf needs to get busy, period.
    I say we just turn the whole northern section into a dust bin.
    If the majority of radical islam is stupid enough to all hang out there together, oh well.
    Its time we start fighting a war the way it was supposed to be fought. All those who are living in close proximity are well aware of the risk involved in living next to a hornets nest.
    Take them out. Badda bing ! , screw the badda boom

  5. micky2 said,

    And by the way Jersey.
    I dont know where you get the idea that I was talking about invading and occupying.
    I never suggested , implied or even hinted at any such thing.

  6. micky2 said,

    “Edwards may be Matlock, given that they both played lawyers and had ties to North Carolina, but on foreign policy he is more a member of the Andy Griffith Show, specifically Barney Fife.”
    I always thought Ron Paul had that role ? He even looks like him.

    “A caucus is not a primary. It is a zoo. Few people understand how it works, and few people vote.”

    I’ve read the rules, all 73 pages. I still dont get it. And if I did it would be like playing pixie sticks blindfolded.

    Bhuttos assasination should by all intelligent process cause the war on terror to become the main talking point with all the candidates for a decent span of time.
    Lets see who focuses on it and who doesnt.
    I think that will be an indication of truly worthy candidate.
    Not one who dodges and would rather talk about health care for illegal homosexual immigrants.

  7. Mike O said,

    Hillary may have hit the right notes, but missed a few significant facts. Bhutto’s father was hanged, not assisnated and she has three kids, not two. She certainly was trying to make it sound like she was a closer acquaintence of Bhutto than she was. Not a great sin. Paul blamed U.S. Policy, as he does for everything bad in the world; typical.

    All of this is a blow to the War on Terror and makes Pakistan a very dicey situation, increasing the scary (but long) odds of a large, glowing hole in New York within a decade.

    In the short term, expect that the ‘hawks’ on the GOP will get a minor bump up from this in Iowa: McCain, Giuliani and Fred Thompson. Every one of them would pass on that bump in a heartbeat to have this not to have happened.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: