Malaysia Star: "Obama said he would as president send US forces to Pakistan"

[bidenista]

Seems Senator Obama's call for a US military intervention in Pakistan is attracting attention oversees, and if the Malaysia Star's any indication, it's not very positive attention.

After eight years of Bush, it'd be good if Mr Unity thought a little more about uniting in peace with the rest of the world, rather than proposing how best to continue BushCo's disastrous legacy:

War on terror backfires again

BEHIND THE HEADLINES
By BUNN NAGARA

When US presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama said he would as president send US forces to Pakistan against al-Qaeda even without Pakistani government approval, it seemed like he was prepared to break with current practice respecting Pakistani sovereignty.

The reality, however, is that CIA and US special forces units have been operating secretly on Pakistani territory near the Afghan-Pakistani border for some years already, without the open approval of Pakistani authorities and sometimes even without their knowledge.

The question is when or if a US administration would openly acknowledge that reality. That the presence of Pakistani forces is minimal or non-existent in these tribal areas may seem to vindicate a gung-ho US approach, but it does nothing to alleviate local fear and hatred of US action....

More: http://thestar.com.my/columnists/story.asp?file=/2008/2/3/columnists/behindtheheadlines/20219018&sec=Behind%20The%20Headlines

[thunder rising]

1. Get a clue.

[bidenista]

4. good rebuttal. nt

[JackORoses]

2. you might as well change your name to Hillarista

why even pretend anymore?

[bidenista]

5. who's pretending?

I said days back that with Biden out, I'm backing Hillary. I'm still hoping Joe gets VP.

Is my sig not clear enough?

[Thrill]

3. Clinton Supporters must be worried

[bidenista]

9. well, i'm worried

I don't want Obama as nominee. Pretty straightforward.

[ellacott]

6. He never said he'd send troops into Pakistan n/t

[H2O Man]

7. True. n/t

[bidenista]

8. better send a memo to the international press. they seem to have misunderstood

http://www.google.com/search?q=obama+troops+pakistan

"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-Qa'eda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will." - Barack Obama

[ellacott]

10. Maybe you can shoot them an email

Where in that quote does he say he will send troops?

[bidenista]

11. well, i guess he could use the sheer force of slogans to effect military results

...but I doubt it.

[ellacott]

13. No, he can use a targeted missle strike

This is already established U.S. policy. It was done by Clinton when he bombed the aspirin factory and the Repubs accused him of "Wag the Dog" during the Lewinsky scandal. It's what Reagan did when he bombed Libya.

Biden has also confirmed that this is official U.S. policy and has always been.

[bidenista]

15. targeted missile strikes on terrorists hiding out in pakistani communities?

Wow, the strategy gets more alarming by the second. Why not just nuke them and be done with it?

HAVE WE LEARNT NOTHING FROM THE LAST EIGHT YEARS?

[ellacott]

16. The key word is "actionable"

It's not just the last eight years. This is U.S. policy. Always has been and always will be.

[bidenista]

17. well, given that some of the best newspapers in the world thought he was talking about troops

...maybe the Golden-Tongued Communicator of the Millennium needs to be a bit more careful with his words. The last thing we need is another slack-tongued goof in the White House.

[ellacott]

22. Even newspapers in this country get stuff wrong.

As President I will condition future American aid on progress by Pakistan, including strengthening the reach of police forces, and working more effectively with tribal leaders and their members to ensure their acceptance of the government. But I want to be clear about one thing: if we have actionable intelligence about imminent terrorist activity, and the Pakistan government refuses to act, we will.

John Edwards 9-7-07
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/09/_edwards_echoes_obamas_gettough_rhetoric_on_pakistan.php

Hillary Clinton also said at the ABC debate in January that she would also strike if they had actionable intelligence.

[Renew Deal]

12. Man you're desperate

You go all the way to Malaysia to attack Obama. Pathetic, but hilarious.

[bidenista]

14. i care what the rest of the world thinks

Maybe you don't. Maybe people like you are why these last few years have been such a disaster.

[ellacott]

20. John Edwards and Hillary Clinton have said the same thing

Hillary said it in a January debate and Edwards said it in a foreign policy speech. Joe Biden has said that this is not new, it's established U.S. policy.

[bidenista]

21. sources please

I'd like evidence that Hillary and Edwards said they'd take military action in Pakistan - against the will of the government.

[ellacott]

27. Sources

Hillary at the debate:

We did take action similar to what has been described about 10 years ago, based on what was thought to be actionable intelligence, sending in missiles to try to target bin Laden and his top leadership who were thought to be at a certain meeting place.

They were not taken out at the time.

So we have to be very conscious of all the consequences.

Now, as far as I know, there are, like, five things quickly that we should be looking at.

Bin Laden has in large measure regrouped because we did not put in the troops and make the commitment to aggressively going after him inside Afghanistan when we had a chance. Therefore, we need more NATO troops and a faster effort to train the Afghan army so that we do have the personnel and the technology, including the Predators, to be able to be on the spot at the time to try to move as quickly as possible.

Secondly, I think it's imperative that any actionable intelligence that would lead to a strike inside Pakistan's territory be given the most careful consideration.

CLINTON: And at some point -- probably when the missiles have been launched -- the Pakistani government has to know they're on the way. Because one of the problems is the inherent paranoia about India in the region in Pakistan, so that we've got to have a plan to try to make sure we don't ignite some kind of reaction before we even know whether the action we took with the missiles has worked.
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/democratic_debate_new_hampshire_120507.html?wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter


John Edwards at a Foreign Policy speech:

But I want to be clear about one thing: if we have actionable intelligence about imminent terrorist activity, and the Pakistan government refuses to act, we will.
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/09/_edwards_echoes_obamas_gettough_rhetoric_on_pakistan.php

[Renew Deal]

23. So do I, and the rest of the world wants Obama.

Hate to break it to you.

[bidenista]

24. wow, must be awesome to be the Infallible Representative of the Rest of the World

Do you get a good hat for the job?

[Renew Deal]

25. Is that all you got?

[bidenista]

26. well, in the absence of any evidence that your claim is true, yes. nt

[jillan]

18. Great minds think alike

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4354003

[bidenista]

19. they surely do!

:D