Home of the The Hall of Ma'at on the Internet
Home
Discussion Forums
Papers
Authors
Web Links

May 4, 2024, 11:31 am UTC    
September 18, 2001 08:18AM
<HTML>According to an interview I watched last night on Rivera live, the supposed sympathies of the Pakistani people for the Taliban have been greatly exagerated. This interview was with an individual who was living in Pakistan. I do not recall his specific credentials.

I found him credible.

He says that the pro-Taliban demonstrations in Pakistan have been very small, and that the vast majority of Pakistanies would support a passive stance toward US action.

Moreover, the decision by the Pakistani government to support the US position was apparently unanimous. Of course, it is a dictatorship so we can't rely upon such a "vote" as a true guage of government or public feeling.

Ultimately however, despite the fact that the US has made it clear that it is in Pakistan's interests to support the US., the events of last week have made it absolutely imperitive that the US do whatever is required to exact punishment upon all those who share in the responsibility. To fail in this, is to invite perpetual attacks of this kind - each one progressively worse than the last. The potential of the enemy to retaliate must be eliminated.

This means that, should the Pakistanies have chosen to stand against us, they too would make of themsevles enemies of the United States of America. Would this mean a direct military confrontation with Pakistan?That option would certainly be there - but probably a last resort (given Pakistan's limited nuclear capability).

Who can guess what veiled threats were made implicit to the Pakistanies by the US state department when their assistance was requested? Should Pakistan have resisted *militarily* US aims in the region, their forces could be nuetralized by America in a matter of minutes. Certainly the Pakistanies realize this - and Americans have *never* rattled the sabres louder than they are today.

The seriousness of the threat against the United States and the entire free world can hardly be exagerated. There is no response that would be unjustified in pursuit of our future security.

ISHMAEL</HTML>
Subject Author Posted

Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

Don Holeman September 17, 2001 07:47PM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

Anthony September 17, 2001 08:51PM

Lady Hawk

Katherine Reece September 17, 2001 08:53PM

Of course it is feasible Kat it just will not be quick or easy or painess (nt)

D.Przezdziecki September 17, 2001 09:11PM

Never said otherwise Darius n/t

Katherine Reece September 17, 2001 09:14PM

Re: Lady Hawk

Don Holeman September 18, 2001 12:36AM

Re: Lady Hawk

ISHMAEL September 18, 2001 05:16AM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

D.Przezdziecki September 17, 2001 09:07PM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

Katherine Reece September 17, 2001 09:24PM

Let's hope so Kat, for all ours sake (nt)

D.Przezdziecki September 17, 2001 09:45PM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

ISHMAEL September 18, 2001 05:21AM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

Derek Barnett September 18, 2001 07:54AM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

ISHMAEL September 18, 2001 08:18AM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

Derek Barnett September 18, 2001 08:43AM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

Anonymous User September 18, 2001 09:18AM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

Katherine Reece September 18, 2001 09:38AM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

ISHMAEL September 18, 2001 10:15AM

Re: Tonight's poll from www.cnn.com

ISHMAEL September 18, 2001 10:15AM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login