The head of US spying operations says the leaders of al-Qaeda have found a secure hideout in Pakistan from where they are rebuilding their strength.
National Intelligence Director John Negroponte said al-Qaeda was strengthening its ties across the Middle East, North Africa and Europe.

Pakistan rejected the comments, which are the most specific on the issue yet.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6254375.stm

Discuss.

1/14/2007 12:28:55 AM

Pakistan = lying
United States = letting them lie so that we don't get pulled into another murky situation.

Truth = Pakistan could give a fuck less about the US

Solution = discuss

I'm not going to comment on any hindsight, I'm just gonna say what I think given the situations we are in right now. I would say that we take over Iraq temporarily as if it were an American Territory. From there mount anti-terrorist operations in Afghanistan and drive them into Pakistan. Set up another forward point in Afghanistan and give Pakistan the "my way or highway" speech. Have India for support to put pressure on Pakistan.

I also dare say we call this war what it is, a war between two ideologies. Modernism and Islam. I say Islam because their fight is over religions whereas ours is against their backwards-ass thinking. I'd love to be able to say ours is a religious fight as well but i'm not so convinced.

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 12:38 AM. Reason : jank]

1/14/2007 12:35:42 AM

Quote :

"From there mount anti-terrorist operations in Afghanistan and drive them into Pakistan. Set up another forward point in Afghanistan and give Pakistan the "my way or highway" speech. Have India for support to put pressure on Pakistan."

I don't know if you follow much about whats going on in Afghanistan, but the US now under NATO has been conducting these anti-terrorist operations for quite some time now. The regions along the pakistani border have seen some of the most intense fighting in the country. We've also conducted at least a few strikes inside Pakistan as well. Suggesting that we get India involved to convince Pakistan to comply quite possibly tops the list of 'really not smart things to do'

1/14/2007 8:41:15 AM

As a dot-head, I'd love to see pakistan turned to glass!








(ok not really, just kidding, before y'all freak the fuck out)

1/14/2007 8:55:13 AM

this is old news.

Quote :

"I also dare say we call this war what it is, a war between two ideologies. Modernism and Islam. I say Islam because their fight is over religions whereas ours is against their backwards-ass thinking. I'd love to be able to say ours is a religious fight as well but i'm not so convinced."

because the entire religion is opposed to modernism. right? right? shit.

1/14/2007 8:59:05 AM

i honestly believe so. people can keep claiming "oh the majority of islam is peaceful." "oh the majority of islam doesn't condone this" blah blah blah. but have you EVER seen moderate to pacifistic muslims on tv condeming what their fellow members have been doing?

i've seen a few instances sure. guess what else i've seen though. i've seen the very same people condeming it, showing up in public with terrorists and extremists.

so yes, i do believe the religion is not a peaceful one. their fear is that modernism will separate the public from god and that is what they are fighting over. they are against modernism, for religious reasons. and because of that, we have to deal with their backwards way of thinkin.

1/14/2007 1:56:48 PM

Quote :

"I don't know if you follow much about whats going on in Afghanistan"

no i have been, i know they have. i was saying that i'd maintain that, but also start putting pressure on pakistan, which we haven't done

1/14/2007 1:57:20 PM

Quote :

"i honestly believe so. people can keep claiming "oh the majority of islam is peaceful." "oh the majority of islam doesn't condone this" blah blah blah. but have you EVER seen moderate to pacifistic muslims on tv condeming what their fellow members have been doing? "

have you ever actually *talked* to a Muslim, or bothered to get to know some? cuz the "majority of Islam" is never going to be on tv.

1/14/2007 2:03:26 PM

Quote :

"i've seen the very same people condeming it, showing up in public with terrorists and extremists. so yes, i do believe the religion is not a peaceful one. their fear is that modernism will separate the public from god and that is what they are fighting over. they are against modernism, for religious reasons. and because of that, we have to deal with their backwards way of thinkin."

so you admit you have never actually talked to anyone who is muslim?

1/14/2007 3:26:32 PM

We're going off-topic I guess. The real question is - why does US chose to do little knowing well that Osama/alQaeda is entrenched in Pakistan.

1/14/2007 4:42:05 PM

well truthfully, the answer to that is simply because we are bogged down in iraq. bush thought we could fight the two front war over there so he allocated resources accordingly, thinking that a small contingent of soldiers was plenty to apprehend osama. now that iraq has turned out the way it has he has to spend all of his resources there because, quite frankly, in terms of human life and stability, iraq is more important (now) than osama. doesn't excuse him making the decision in the first place though

Quote :

"so you admit you have never actually talked to anyone who is muslim?"

this is another problem, and it's not a problem with you, it's a problem with the way people think. people think that if you talk to at least one person who is the exception, then that excuses the rest of his colleagues. i'm sure i could find 4000 peaceful muslims, but they are by no means the majority. and if they are hiding and not condemning, then all that is doing is perpetuating

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:03 PM. Reason : jank]

1/14/2007 7:02:02 PM

^^ OK, assuming that we know 100% that he is in the Peshawar/waziristan region of Pakistan, does it really make a lot of sense to invade another sovereign country (one that has nuclear capabilities and who's populations is not particular friendly towards the US) in a highly mountainous region that the Pakistani government doesnt even control to fight in some of the harshest terrain in the world against a highly motivated enemy? Not to mention that the difficulty dramatically increases if we don't know exactly where he is located at a given time (which I suspect is the case since the CIA has conducted attacks from UAVs in Pakistan that were not targeting OBL). I want to see OBL taken out of the picture as much as the next guy, but under the current circumstances invading Pakistan to get him isn't my idea of a good decision.

^ I would argue that Iraq has nothing to do with why we arent overtly going into Pakistan to get OBL. Entire brigades of conventional forces would likely not be employed in that type of scenario even if they were readily available. The majority of fighting in Afghanistan has been relatively low intensity conflict with Special Operations Forces shouldering a large amount of the workload. Quite simply, they are the ones best suited to operate under such conditions and in such environments.

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:09 PM. Reason : 0]

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:14 PM. Reason : i]

1/14/2007 7:05:53 PM

Quote :

"and if they are hiding and not condemning, then all that is doing is perpetuating"

Did you ever publically condemn the inhuman treatment of Iraqi prisoners at the hands of some inhuman US soldiers and private contractors? Abu Ghraib ring a bell?

If not, you are only "perpetuating" that mentality.

1/14/2007 7:12:27 PM

^you're assuming im against the so-called "inhumane" treatment that occurred there

and you people so gung ho about war sure do make it difficult for our country to conduct a winning strategy when you complain about stuff like that

getting off topic though

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:15 PM. Reason : jank]

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:17 PM. Reason : bork]

1/14/2007 7:15:10 PM

^ It is somewhat difficult to make a solid case condemning muslims for not being peaceful when you apparently support the inhumane treatment of others by your own countrymen. It makes absolutely no sense to me really. I hope that I am reading your comment wrong

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:20 PM. Reason : o]

1/14/2007 7:18:48 PM

so is this for real or is this another WMD fairy tale to invade yet another country?

maybe bush is the reincarnation of Alexander or Julius Ceaser.

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:21 PM. Reason : fda]

1/14/2007 7:20:40 PM

they had food, they had water, they had shelter

THOSE are defined as the basic needs for survival

anything else that happened to them was simply attempts at disorientation, embarrassment, mental and physical stress, in order to get them to break. you want intelligence? motherfuckers have to get hurt sometimes

i was completely against this iraq war, but once you're in a war, you fight it to win. and that is one thing that pisses me off: not letting soldiers/operatives do what it takes to win the war

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:21 PM. Reason : bork]

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:22 PM. Reason : grr]

1/14/2007 7:21:07 PM

^ well fair is fair...so stop your bitching everytime a US soldier gets captured and tortured for information. At least he's still getting food, water, and shelter

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:23 PM. Reason : fda]

1/14/2007 7:23:09 PM

I'm all for making a person uncomfortable in captivity, but there is a distinct line that has to be drawn. There are quite a few more effective means to gather human intelligence than straight up torture.

1/14/2007 7:24:53 PM

you don't seem to get it do you?

if one of our soldiers is captured, it is HIGHLY assumed that they WILL go through torture. that is why they have training for that, to be aware that it will happen

whether we torture people or not, it's going to happen to us. accept it. deal with it.

now, that is torture. you call abu gharib torture? you have to be kidding me

look up torture during vietnam and world war 2. then compare that with what you read or heard about during the present war.

notice a difference?

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:26 PM. Reason : bork]

1/14/2007 7:25:16 PM

Cherokee, based on your posts, I officially condemn you.

I hope and pray that you get hit by a truck, or fall into a sewer tonight, because the less people lile you in the world, the better.

But hey, look at the positive side:

You can try to hunt down OSAMA as much you like, in HELL.

1/14/2007 7:25:46 PM

don't believe in hell, ppreciate the thoughts though

and i don't think i really said i was all about getting osama. i responded to a thread that asked for our ideas as to what we could do and i proposed something we could do

1/14/2007 7:27:03 PM

Quote :

"you don't seem to get it do you? if one of our soldiers is captured, it is HIGHLY assumed that they WILL go through torture. that is why they have training for that, to be aware that it will happen whether we torture people or not, it's going to happen to us. accept it. deal with it. now, that is torture. you call abu gharib torture? you have to be kidding me"

oh no, i get it. I am all for torture. I am just telling you to STFU when US soldiers get tortured because its all part of the game. Bush has proven time and time again that the US is no different then any other country when it comes to 'freedoms' and 'doing whats right' so why should we expect them not to use inhuman practices.

but then again...isn't that what saddam just got hung for? :shrug:

1/14/2007 7:28:06 PM

No, i generally do not think that what we saw in the photos from abu ghraib constitutes torture, i consider the soldiers to have been acting very unprofessionally and it leads me to be interested as to what else was happening in that prison at that time. As and examply, there are a number of alleged abuses that occured at the hands of contract interrogators that surpass the uncomfortable photos taken. (off topic- did anyone notice the 'abu ghraib' man in the background of a scene in Children of Men?)

1/14/2007 7:30:22 PM

Quote :

"I am just telling you to STFU when US soldiers get tortured because its all part of the game. Bush has proven time and time again that the US is no different then any other country when it comes to 'freedoms' and 'doing whats right' so why should we expect them not to use inhuman practices."

umm for the first part, what are you talking about with regards to me?

for the rest of it, the US is fundamentally no different than any other country fighting to survive with limited resources allocated throughout the globe. this isn't a story book where the noble character who doesn't lie or steal saves the day. we can't be the 100% perfect model for how to live because if we were we would be a 100% perfect model of how to get destroyed by other countries who have no problem stooping to different lows.

and bush and torture are by no means the only points on which we aren't a beacon of light

we are also one of the only modern countries to have the death penalty, even though we cherish life soo so much.

Quote :

"No, i generally do not think that what we saw in the photos from abu ghraib constitutes torture, i consider the soldiers to have been acting very unprofessionally"

ok just making sure. by the way, a large number of american soldiers didn't act professionally during the american revolution

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 7:34 PM. Reason : jank]

1/14/2007 7:32:52 PM

Yeah, they may have acted quite unprofessionally which would be somewhat expected given that a professional army wasn't established until after the war began. Currently we have a standing professional army with defined regulations and a clear chain of command. The chain of command was clearly lacking in this case. I realize that bad things will happen during wartime and even the most squared away soldier may act unprofessionally at times, but that does not mean that it should be tolerated.

1/14/2007 7:39:18 PM

I knew OEP would end up winning the thread.

1/14/2007 8:53:31 PM

Looks like military leaders read TWW-

Pakistan strikes militant camp in S. Waziristan

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070116/wl_nm/pakistan_attack_dc

Quote :

"A resident of Zamzola raised the possibility that U.S. drone aircraft helped identify the target in the forested mountains, 60 km (40 miles) north of Wana, the main town in South Waziristan, and close to the boundary with Afghanistan and North Waziristan."

Quote :

"A Reuters reporter saw seven helicopters including at least two U.S.-built Cobras leave from Tochi Fort's helipad in Miranshah less than an hour before the attack and returned shortly after."

1/16/2007 1:39:53 AM