vote for your favorite liberal

[LordShiva]

I voted for Night Owl, but who is Heartland Eater?

[Sava]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Dude, Pakistani intelligence created the Taliban. It would be amazing if they weren't friendly to the Taliban given that fact, don't ya think?

You talk about an entire organization as if it's a single entity, thinking and working in complete harmony. I find that amusing.

And I would think (but obviously other people don't) that attitudes about the Taliban within Pakistani intelligence changed on 9-11 considering the Taliban had just made an enemy of the United States.

But... whatever.

[Drake Tungsten]

And I would think (but obviously other people don't) that attitudes about the Taliban within Pakistani intelligence changed on 9-11 considering the Taliban had just made an enemy of the United States.

ISI certainly can't be as openly supportive of the Taliban as they used to be, but that doesn't mean that they can't still support the Taliban on the down low and refuse to support any real crackdown on Taliban/Al Qaeda strongholds within Pakistan's tribal territories.

[SlowwHand]

The USA is the only country able to work in total tandem. Didn't you know that?

[Drake Tungsten]

Musharraf's anti-Taliban credentials...

Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, Musharraf sided with the United States against the Taliban government in Afghanistan after an ultimatum by the United States. Musharraf agreed to give the United States the use of three airbases for Operation Enduring Freedom. Secretary of State Colin Powell and other administration officials met with Musharraf. Musharraf's reversal of policy and help to the U.S. military was necessary in the U.S. bombing that rapidly overcame the Taliban regime. On September 19, 2001, Musharraf addressed the people of Pakistan and stated while he supported the Taliban, unless Pakistan reversed its support, Pakistan risked being endangered by an alliance of India and the USA.[10]. In 2006, Musharraf testified that this stance was pressured by threats from the U.S.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pervez_Musharaff

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I don't know what's up with Oerdin. He mouths leftist platitudes most of the time, but every once in a while he goes off on fascist rants.

Originally posted by Oerdin
I'm pretty centrist on everything except for the death penalty (I'm for it so that's rightist)

Including the summary mass-execution of Parisian rioters, IIRC. I think that thread went some way to exerting your occasional ultra-rightist credentials.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
Including the summary mass-execution of Parisian rioters, IIRC. I think that thread went some way to exerting your occasional ultra-rightist credentials.

And that definitely was not a troll, either.

[Cort Haus]

My vote is shared between Arrian and Zkribbler. These guys come across as genuine moderates, and not zealots like many of the more "illiberal liberal" types on here - who can be liberal today, but neocon tomorrow.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Musharraf's anti-Taliban credentials...

Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, Musharraf sided with the United States against the Taliban government in Afghanistan after an ultimatum by the United States. Musharraf agreed to give the United States the use of three airbases for Operation Enduring Freedom. Secretary of State Colin Powell and other administration officials met with Musharraf. Musharraf's reversal of policy and help to the U.S. military was necessary in the U.S. bombing that rapidly overcame the Taliban regime. On September 19, 2001, Musharraf addressed the people of Pakistan and stated while he supported the Taliban, unless Pakistan reversed its support, Pakistan risked being endangered by an alliance of India and the USA.[10]. In 2006, Musharraf testified that this stance was pressured by threats from the U.S.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pervez_Musharaff

That was basicly it. Bush's famous "Either you are with us or against us" speech was aimed solely at Pakistan. The US told the Pakistanis point blank either they gave up support for the Taliban and helped over thrown the Taliban or the US would ally with India and invade Pakistan as well as Afghanistan.

The Indian government was just all to egar to help in any way they could. It was unpopular in India but the Indian government didn't want a chance to conclusively settle their dispute with Pakistan in a favorable manner pass by. Musharraf dumped the Taliban though so there was no need for an American-Indian Alliance to invade Pakistan. In retrospect I halfway wish it had occured because Pakistan hasn't been that good at holding up its end of the bargin.

That wish is tempered with the knowledge that the Bush administration has literally screwed up everything it has touched.

[Aeson]

I vote for SlowwHand. It was his revolutionary spirit which lead to the current spate of poster acknowlegement threads. Quite forward-thinking (though perhaps in a direction I don't care for...) and liberal if you ask me!

Also I suspect he is very liberal in regards to gun distribution, loving Texas, and BBQ's (or is that all redundant?).

[TCO]

The Pakis did not agree to the overflight, etc. out of the goodness of their hearts. There was a threat against them (which would have been carried out) if they had not allowed some level of access.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Oerdin
You're honestly attempting to defend the posting of highly charged political statements IN THE OP and then whining when people respond?!

That's a bit much even by your standards. If the purpose was just as a memorial thread then avoid the political spin doctoring and just make it a memorial thread but stop the assinine political nonsense in the OP and then whining when someone responds.

Its not whining as much as an expectation I have of you. Given every other post in that thread up until yours at that point had recognized a certain amount of decorum. Comments from all polytubbies were along lines of RIP, he was a good man etc. (I even give props to Drake who complained the tone of the article wasn't in keeping with the decorum required of an obit.) BUT nooooo, leave it to some axe grinding fanatic to not only turn the discussion to matters politic but also take the opportunity to give the ole thumb of disapproval to boot. Good show. Classy in all ways there O'. Just as I come to expect.

[Cort Haus]

FYI - The word 'Paki' in the UK is not an acceptable abbreviation for 'Pakistani', it is one of the worst words in the language, and is considered a highly racist and inflammatory pejorative. I just thought people might like to know that.

[Cort Haus]

dp

[Last Conformist]

Meh. The Pakistanucks couldn't be bothered to give a real name to their country, so why should we extend them any nomenclatural respect?