Comments for BREAKING! Pakistan on verge of collapse as Taliban surge towards Islamabad (PHOTOS) »
Posted By pc25 8 months, 2 weeks ago in NewsThe capital of Pakistan was under threat last night after Taliban fighters threatened to overrun the volatile country and came within 60 miles of Islamabad.
It is feared the state is on the brink of collapse as Taliban fighters get closer to the nuclear powers of the country.
As violence broke out in the north-west corner of the country, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said PAKISTAN POSED A MORTAL THREAT TO THE WORLD.
Read Full Story at dailymail.co.uk »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 50
-
89%
k9kssr8 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It appears that the Pakistani government has no real inclination to stop the taliba from taking control. If their military is proving ineffective in stopping the take over they could ask for assistance. I would hate for us to be drawn into another middle east mess.
Reply-
25%
hyperbola8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
More scaremongering from the same sources that were anxious to shanghai Americans into mideast wars for the sake of zionist crimes against humanity. After 50 years of meddling in Pakistan, complete with our usual puppet dictatorships, the best thing we could do is get out of Pakistan altogether. We are only reinforcing the growing resistance to our military imperialism.
Reply
Does the threat from al Qaeda justify a major escalation in Central Asia?
Does the threat of international terrorism -- specifically al Qaeda -- justify a costly, long-term engagement in Afghanistan and Pakistan? President Obama and his advisors think so, but I'm still not convinced. I certainly understand that we have a terrorism problem; I just don't believe that it is serious enough to warrant the level and type of effort the administration is proposing. And if the results of the recent NATO summit are any indication, our NATO allies seem skeptical, too.
Just how serious is the threat? According to the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center,.... In America, the danger of drowning in a bathtub is greater than the risk of dying in a terrorist attack. And that would be true even if the United State were to suffer one 9/11-scale attack every ten years. Given these numbers, does it really make sense to double down in Central Asia?
In short, my concern is that we are allowing an exaggerated fear of al Qaeda to distort our foreign policy priorities. Having underestimated the danger from al Qaeda before 9/11, have we now swung too far the other way? I am not arguing for a Pollyanna-like complacency or suggesting that we simply ignore the threat that groups like al Qaeda still pose. Rather, I'm arguing that the threat is not as great as the administration -- and most Americans, truth be told -- seem to think, and that the actual danger does not warrant escalating U.S. involvement in Central Asia.
...I can think of at least three counter-arguments to my position.....
... None of this is to say that we should ignore al Qaeda or any other terrorist group that is bent on attacking the United States, or that we should not sometimes act assertively to protect Americans at home and abroad. But the threat from al Qaeda does not justify increasing our military presence in Afghanistan, and certainly does not justify major military operations in Pakistan.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/04/13/does-the...
-
-
78%
pc258 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
I think the Pakistani government is basically abdicating to the Taliban and the extremists,' she added.
And White House spokesman Robert Gibbs echoed her concerns. He said last night: 'The news over the past several days is very disturbing.'
Dozens of militants armed with guns and gasoline bombs blew up five tankers carrying fuel to NATO troops in Afghanistan.
Taliban fighters have also set up checkpoints and are patrolling roads.
Many police and government officials appear to have either fled or are keeping a low profile.
Taliban agree to 'permanent ceasefire' in Swat valley ... but only if Sharia law is imposed
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-...-
-
89%
Dionys8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I think the Pakistani government is basically abdicating to the Taliban and the extremists,' she added.
Reply
And White House spokesman Robert Gibbs echoed her concerns. He said last night: 'The news over the past several days is very disturbing.'"
That's not echoing her concerns. It's noting that the news is disturbing. Which it is.
But laying this at the feet of Obama when Bush largely ignored this situation in favor of an endless and useless war in Iraq -- where there was no al-Quaeda previous to the US invasion and a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 is disingenous at best. -
-
50%
hyperbola8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Over the past 60-70 years we have been meddling in countries throughout the mideast. Our record of failure is by now more than clear. We have produced several failed states (Afghanistan, Somalia), installed dictatorships in several more (Iraq, Egypt, Jordan), played "divide and conquer" in others (Lebanon), played "oil games" throughout the region (Azerbaijan, Georgia), etc. On top of that we have supported severe zionist crimes against humanity in Palestine. It is no wonder resistance to our military and economic imperialism is growing.
Reply
I am often reminded of the words of a Ugandan foreign minister: "thank god no one was interested in our civil war - it would have been much worse". We should leave these countries alone instead of making matters worse.
U.S. Lacks Capacity to Win Over Afghans and so Bombs Them
President Barack Obama and other top officials in his administration have made it clear that there can be no military solution in Afghanistan, and that the non-military efforts to win over the Afghan population will be central to its chances of success.
The reality, however, is that U.S. military and civilian agencies lack the skills and training as well as the institutional framework necessary to carry out culturally and politically sensitive socio-economic programmes at the local level in Afghanistan, or even to avoid further alienation of the population. ...
...Barno recalled that he dramatically reduced reliance on airpower, because he regarded the Afghan tolerance for the U.S. military presence as a "bag of capital" that was used up "every time we used airpower or knocked down doors or detained someone in front of their family".
Barno’s policy of curbing airpower was abandoned by his successor, Gen. Karl W. Eikenberry, from 2005 to 2007, and the number of airstrikes has continued to grow exponentially since 2005. Eikenberry was nominated by Obama to be ambassador to Afghanistan – an indication that the broad outlines of U.S. strategy in Afghanistan will continue to emphasise air attacks on suspected Taliban targets.
...Growing Afghan anger at the hundreds of civilian casualties from U.S. airstrikes, often based on bad intelligence, has been exploited by insurgents across the country.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/04/22/us-lacks...
-
-
55%
pc258 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
it took 4 days to take action on 4 little pirates (Nengue mboko & Lionel Joseph from Cameroon "we have much fun there") from somalia......who knows how long any response on this will take
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LgQyxS4-Os
scene 7 from the 3:04 mark-
100%
Shixa_Reborn8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BREAKING
Reply
NOW WITH PHOTOS
It only took 1 day to get these photos developed from the Republican Teabagger Bash.
http://xs138.xs.to/xs138/09175/vxpjjbw4l1jq7v82gid...
-
-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive1 Reply
-
-
38%
BB648 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, I'm not sure if they're surging yet but it's clear the liberals in control of Pakistan are fully prepared to lose this fight. The Taliban are a major problem that we will need to deal with. If we don't India might and that could provoke a nuclear exchange.
Reply
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5...-
80%
quackpot8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wrong yet again, BB64. Bush let the Taliban regroup while he put the major percent of U.S. forces into his aborted quest for oil in Iraq.
Reply
The Taliban is yet one more unfortuante problem that Obama inherited from the Bush administration.
-
-
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned2 Replies
-
-
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
-
100%
hyperbola8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually the current political leadership of Pakistan was installed with the connivance of the Bush administration in 2008 - after it became obvious that the dictator (Musharraf) that bushie had been supporting was a failure and the stability of Pakistan was weakening.
Reply
-
-
100%
aceofspades18 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Well, I'm not sure if they're surging yet but it's clear the liberals in control of Pakistan "
Reply
HUH?? maybe you should send Rove over to take care of the "liberals" - has "liberal" become the catchall word for you BB?
WTF are you talking about? -
100%
pcknowledge8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"If we don't India might and that could provoke a nuclear exchange."
Reply
I don't foresee India getting involved in Pakistan's internal affairs. At least not to the level which could lead to a nuclear standoff between the two.
There was an article in the Times of India during the beginning of Bush's second term in office that Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud was staging bomb attacks in Pakistan, & taking control of the Afghanistan/Pakistan mountain areas. Bush
and his Administration completly ignored Mehsud and his Taliban followers.
Now Pakistan is one more problem President Obama inherits from Bush. -
100%
pcknowledge8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Pakistan was holding its own until Obama took over."
Reply
I suppose you think Pakistan was "holding its own" when PM Musharraf was facing unrest among his people, the ISI and the Taliban. I suppose you think Pakistan was "holding its own" when Bhutto got killed there as well.
Can you explain what "holding its own" means to you?
Cause Pakistan has been facing problems with Baitullah Mehsud & his Taliban followers since Bush's second term in office, if not before that. -
100%
Dionys8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BREAKING!
Reply
BREAKING!!!!!!!! (!)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/801594...
"Taleban announce key withdrawal"
"The Taleban say they are withdrawing from a Pakistani district where their consolidation of power this week has caused deep concern in the US."
"Taleban spokesman Muslim Khan said: "Our leader has ordered that Taleban should immediately be called back from Buner."
The move came after Maulana Fazlullah had met the commissioner of Malakand.
The Taleban should be gone by Saturday, their spokesman said
Administration officials in NWFP have confirmed that Taleban fighters have started to leave."
"But the BBC's Syed Shoaib Hasan in Islamabad says circumstances suggest the militants are now under pressure and that a national consensus is building among the public and political parties that they must be challenged with force.
Pakistan's government has clearly stated that unless the Taleban lay down their arms, other options will be considered."
Now is your face red, or what?
Or just your arse.-
-
-
0%
pc258 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.casavaria.com/cafesentido/2009/04/24/23...
Reply
Islamabad Deploys 300 Paramilitaries to Combat Taliban Incursion into Buner
The central government of Pakistan has reportedly deployed 300 paramilitary soldiers to Buner district to counter a Taliban incursion from their recently consolidated stronghold in the Swat Valley. International media today reported that the first Taliban soldiers began withdrawing from Buner, which they had overtaken with no police resistance.
The paramilitary effort may be seen as a model for targeted interventions and for a policy of aggressive containment, seeking to limit Taliban influence to specific areas with no real chance for expansion. But the US and other foreign powers have warned that the situation in Pakistan’s northwest provinces is alarming and poses a grave threat to international peace and security.
small wonder
-
-
33%
Klarissa8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama's College Trip to Pakistan
Reply
April 08, 2008 8:27 AM
"At a fundraiser in San Francisco, Ca., Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., claimed he had more world experience than his rivals, Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and introduced a new bit of biographical information.
"Foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain," Obama said, according to the Huffington Post.
"You do that in eighty countries," Obama said, "You don't know those eighty countries. So when I speak about having lived in Indonesia for four years, having family that is impoverished in small villages in Africa --knowing the leaders is not important -- what I know is the people...I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college -- I knew what Sunni and Shia was [sic] before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.". . .
Apparently, according to the Obama campaign, In 1981 -- the year Obama transferred from Occidental College to Columbia University -- Obama visited his mother and sister Maya in Indonesia.
After that visit, Obama traveled to Pakistan with a friend from college whose family was from there.
The Obama campaign says Obama was in Pakistan for about three weeks, staying with his friend's family in Karachi and also visiting Hyderabad in Southern India." -
-
33%
Klarissa8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama
Reply
Wed Aug 1, 2007 7:26pm EDT
By Steve Holland
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama said on Wednesday the United States must be willing to strike al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan, adopting a tough tone after a chief rival accused him of naivete in foreign policy.
Obama's stance comes amid debate in Washington over what to do about a resurgent al Qaeda and Taliban in areas of northwest Pakistan that President Pervez Musharraf has been unable to control, and concerns that new recruits are being trained there for a September 11-style attack against the United States.
Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region.
The Illinois Democrat is trying to convince Americans he has the foreign policy heft to be president after a rival candidate, New York Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton, questioned his readiness to be commander in chief.
Obama said he would make hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional on Pakistan making substantial progress in closing down training camps, evicting foreign fighters and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks on Afghanistan.
Obama criticized President George W. Bush's emphasis on al Qaeda in Iraq and said as president he would end the war there and refocus efforts on the al Qaeda threat in Afghanistan and Pakistan by sending at least two additional U.S. brigades to Afghanistan.
He said that "because of a war in Iraq that should never have been authorized and should never have been waged, we are now less safe than we were before 9/11." -
100%
pcknowledge8 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"The United States Government and President Pervez Musharraf appear to have had a common interest in no doing anyting to curtail Al-Qaeda or finding Osama bin Laden. For President Bush, the continued presence of bin Laden assured that the "Global War on Terror" for which the Pentagon has been issuing war medals for the last years, would continue unabated, justifying every form of destruction of human rights and American civil liberties. For Musharraf, the fact that bin Laden was never found allowed him to milk the United States for billions of dollars of military and civilian aid, something that continues to the present day. Gareth Porter now shows us that the Bush administration was completely aware of Musharraf's ties to the Taliban and al-Qaeda and just didn't bother to tell Congress or the American public."
Reply
http://www.wbeeman.blogspot.com/2008/08/gareth-por... -
100%
aceofspades18 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Taliban agree to retreat from Pakistan's Buner district
Reply
Pakistan News.Net
Friday 24th April, 2009 (IANS)
Taliban militants Friday agreed to withdraw from Pakistan's northwestern Buner district that they had captured earlier this week, a government official said
SHOVE IT pc25 -
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.