Still, the latest news is already weakening international efforts to isolate Iran, which are absolutely critical to implementing a policy of containment and avoiding what happened in the 1990s with Pakistan—a now rarely discussed catastrophe in which American diplomacy failed to stop the first "Islamic bomb", with dire consequences that we see to this day with the open sanctuary given bin Laden.So that's how come them Indians are Hindu and them Pakis is Muslim. Fuck me.
-Victor Davis Glory Hallelujah Faithful Yeller Megatron Massimo Hanson
This does, however, remind me of one of my favorite films.
9 comments:
Also,
what "happened with Pakistan" was the US GAVE the nuke to it, when Pakistan was very useful in the Afghanistan war of independance.
THEN, when the war was over and the US couldn't give a shit what happened to Pakistan, the same country sold the nuke to ... North Korea !
So really, to speak of an American failure to stop the first islamic bomb... dude you GAVE IT TO THEM.
"a now rarely discussed catastrophe in which American diplomacy failed to stop the first "Islamic bomb", with dire consequences that we see to this day with the open sanctuary given bin Laden."
Well I've been to one world's fair, a picnic and a rodeo and that is the craziest thing I've ever heard come over a set of headphones.
So Pakistan's nuke caused bin Laden to seek Pakistan as a hideaway? That's the cause-effect chain that Invictus Hanson wants us to follow? Because ... huh?
It's not juste that Bin Laden sought Pakistan as a hideaway. He was given this hideaway, because of the nuke, or so the quote implies.
We can all unite in outrage over fact that Matthias von Fistenberg doesn't have an IMdB page.
I meant IMDb of course
I think it possible that VDH is referring to the fact that the bomb paralyzes Musharaff, or whomever is in charge, because he can't risk losing the government to the crazies, which means that he has to tolerate the crazies, who in turn give sanctuary to Bin Laden.
There's a plethora of mistaken assumptions in there, but at least its an ethos.
la rana -> The crazies as you call them are a minority in the country. How Musharraf would "lose" the government to them i wonder, especially with all the powers he has.
I hear the crazies are especially strong on the northern side of Pakistan, and Musharraf as you say, tolerates them, or more accurately doesn't do a single thing against them.
How this relates to the emprisonment of human rights activists and judges and lawyers, I really don't know. It's like there's no link at all and Musharraf uses the crazies -against which he doesn't do anything anyway- as an excuse for more unlimited power.
In other words, your claim that Musharraf needs to have a dictature to deal with the crazies' threat of over-throwing and ruling the country [which is very unlikely anyway] is completely bogus.
Sorry :D
Goodness, I thought I made it clear at the end that there are a lot of errors in the argument. But since you are so eager to overturn an applecart, even if none there be, if the human rights people took over, goes the argument, they would pose a serious risk of being overthrown by the crazies. Musharaff keeps the crazies pacified, but also contained.
Oh ok ! Sorry.
Post a Comment