Pakistan and the War on Terror

[Imran Siddiqui]

at Afghanistan and Iraq being means to take over Iran. That's quite amusing. You'd have assume the administration compatent of putting together a long term plan for that to even begin to sound plausible.

[Arcite]

Don't worry, its all going according to plan

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Arrian
@ techumseh. You really are a loon.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Arcite


Don't worry, its all going according to plan

I'm not the slightest bit surprised. They (Rummy, et al) greatly underestimated how big these projects really are.

Militarily, to defeat the Taleban or Saddam's army in the field, we didn't need a vast force. But occupation is another matter. And reconstruction is expensive... even if it isn't mucked up by constant attacks (and profiteering contractors).

So the plan was to do it on the cheap, which worked OH so well.

-Arrian

[techumseh]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
The U.S. doesn't need a years old diversion of Iraq to attack Iran. Don't be stupid.

No, you're the one who's being stupid. The US doesn't have unlimited power. It's military resources are already stretched with the 2 front war in Asia.

Iran is a far tougher nut to crack than Iraq. It's a larger country, has larger armed forces, much tougher terrain, and a better organized and more militant population.

While control of Iran has always been the ultimate goal of the Bush administration, the US needs, above all, bases and logistical infrastructure. The ongoing successes of the resistance in Iraq make that uncertain.

[Arrian]

The US doesn't have unlimited power. It's military resources are already stretched with the 2 front war in Asia.

Which is precisely why you're a loon if you think that attacking both Afganistan and Iraq were part of a masterplan to attack Iran.

edit: I'm sure, however, that at least some people in the Admin and/or the Pentagon figured that having Iran "surrounded" by Coalition-occupied Iraq, NATO-occupied Afganistan and US "ally" Pakistan would increase their leverage on Iran. I'm thinking anyone who thought that may now be rather unhappy.

-Arrian

[techumseh]

Originally posted by Flip McWho

One final thing.

Why do you believe that the administration is doing this?

To reestablish control over most of the available oil reserves in the world, not only to secure them for the US, but to deny them to China.

[lord of the mark]

This is Dick Armitage we're talking about. Powells right hand man, not a "neocon". Almost certainly did put the squeeze on after 9/11. Language like that seems uncharecteristic, to me.

Pakistan an ally - thats complex. Prior to 9/11 the Pakistani military and ISI were about as close to the Taliban, and AQ, as any regime in the world. The secular elements in Paki had just been overthrown. Perv switched sides, cause of US pressure. Thats not news. Since then hes had to deal with containing reducing the most hardline pro-AQ elements within the Paki army and ISI. And with AQ revenge plots that extend to attempts on his life. At this point Perv is certainly an ally of the US - its too late for him to flip back, his die is cast. But he continues to resist the kind of political realignment that would cement that. And as Arrian says there are elements in Paki that are NOT our ally. Not just ordinary folks, from the NWFP to Karachi, but elements in the Paki military and ISI that never really accepted Pervs flip, and look to Hamid Gul as an alternative. Perv, faced with these conflicting pressures, tries to stay on our side, but by doing the minimum he can get away with. And, sans doubte, reminding us constantly that hes the best we can expect.