Defending the Truth

Aight people, i posted this on another thread but it wasn't relevant so i figure di would put it here.

This is in response to Obama's strong words regarding intervention in Pakistan:

Well seeing i live in the nation you guys are talking about invading i figured i might add my two cents.

I think its a horrific idea.. While it may make great political sense for Obama.. i mean this talk of pakistan allows him to keep pushing for an Iraqi pullout, but it also alows him to come across as "tough on terrorism"... it will have extremely damaging repercussions on the democratization and liberalization process going on in Pakistan at the moment. Allow me to explain:

Pakistan is experiencing the greatest social and economic upheaval since Bhuttos regime in the 70s. Bhutto was the first to give credence to the fundamentalist right, and his pandering to the clerics was continued by Zia, Nawaz and Benazir. The past 3 decades have been spent in solidifying the power of the clerics.

Since Musharraf took power, he has taken one step after another to neuter the religious fundos. His biggest step in this direction has been liberalizing the media. For the first time in Pakistani history, we have a media policy that allows the media outlets to monitor their own content.. the media is now more independent than was even thought possible.

THis has had the result that clerics have steadily been losing support. This is a natural repercussion of having to rationally explain something that is fundamentally irrational and self-contradictory ( the mullahs say "peace" with guns in their hands ).

Apart from this, the independent coverage given to the excesses of the mullahs such as the Red Mosque debacle, has done much to lose them popular support. Even in the bastion of mullah support ( the North West Frontier Province which borders Afghanistan) is set to vote against the clerics in the upcoming election.

The tide against the mullahs has been turning. And it will continue to turn. Already bills have been passed that break with the Hudood Ordnance. Likewise the madrassas are going through another phase of reform to root out those who sow hatred in the hearts of their students.

The common man is finding his voice in the media, which allows him to criticize the fundo clerics as well as those polticians who have treated the pakistani government as their own personal ATM. I cannot tell you how big a change this actually is..

One of the reasons these changes have been coming about, is that the clerics have continuously been trying to garner support around irrelevant and often directly harmful things. First they tried garnering support in opposition to the Women's protection bill. After that they tried to garner support against the Madrassah reform. that was followed by introducing the Hasba Bill ( which would have created a parrallel "religious legislature" with its own policing force.. sort of like the Taliban "ministry for the prevention of vice and promotion of virtue"). This bill was not received favorably, as the local population was more concerned with improving infrastructure than with what people were wearing. Then the mullahs went on to openly support the firebrand clerics of the Red Mosque, when they were burning CDs and closing down shops unde tht hreat of violence.. of course they also abducted both local and foreign citizens and finally they wound up holding thousands of innocent women and children hostage as they proceeded with armed resistance to the government. Even now, the mullahs are supporting those nutjobs.

These are all bad political choices, that are digging them deeper into the ground. The common man is much more interested in feeding himself, about having the opportunity to work, about having the opportunity to educate himself and his sons and daughters, about proper civil infrastructure and about individual rights than he is about the required length of his beard. These are all positive changes in priorities that have come about as a result of the media.

HOWEVER, if the US unilaterally moves into pakistan against the government's wishes, the mullahs are going to be served the country on a platter. Just as in Iraq ( which was the most secular of the ME countries prior to invasion) the mullahs are going to be able to garner unlimited support against the outside invader. I can assure you that even those who completely disagree with the mullahs, may find themselves supporting them simply because they will IMMEDIATELY call to arms against the invader ( nothing gels a population like opposition to a common enemy.. and let there be no mistaking.. should the US invade it will NEVER be viewed as friendly "assistance"). Even the government will not be able to garner support, because they can never call for armed opposition.. IF they do, then you have a full-scale war with a nuclear power which has the patronage of China, the Middle East and Iran.

WHATEVER direction it goes in, the US will be responsible for international chaos, for destroying yet another national infrastructure AND they will be responsible for giving AQ more recruits and plunging the nation into another era of fundo rule. It does not matter if you wipe out OBL & Co a thousand times over. AQ is a social phenomena that does not require OBL to be alive. In fact when you "martyr" him, TENS of THOUSANDS will immediately present themselves to take his place.

What people don't seem to understand is that to people in this corner of the world AQ represents more than just the evil terrorist. It also represents a bastion of opposition to US hegemony. Many will support AQ for no other reason than opposition to the US. Now mind you opposition to the US is NOT equivalent to supporting Taliban style governance ( you really have to get past that black or white mentality )... HOWEVER it may be a sacrifice many are willing to make for the sake of their national sovereignty... I mean you guys are willing to sacrifice your own rights in the Patriot Act for the "security" of your sovereignty. Do not underestimate the number of things people are willing to give up for the sake of their independence.

I have said earlier on this forum that very often US actions PUSH the moderate muslim into AQs corner. That is because unsavory as AQ ideology is, it is still LESS unsavory than sitting back and allowing a foreign power to enter your territory with impunity. US actions like this leave the moderates with only 2 options. Either they swallow all feelings of national pride and independence and allow a foreign power to enter and do as it pleases... OR they can fall in behind the group that opposes such a violation of sovereignty. This is PRECISELY what has happened in Iraq. Now many will say that there is a third option of peaceful opposition to the US without support for AQ. Well that is not an option. If the US is entering the nation armed and ready for conflict, "peaceful opposition" is a just a fart in a hurricane. Completely irrelevant. The US will focus its attention on the violent opposition, and the peaceful dissenters will be relegated to irrelevance..

All changes in the religio-political and socio-political arena will be null-and-void. The detrimental effect on the economy will invalidate the trend of prosperity. It will make people poorer and more angry. It will PROVE THE CLERICS RIGHT.

And i will then be posting on this forum from denmark because i cannot live a country run by religious nutjobs.

As much as i have supported Obama's bid for the presidency, this stance on Pakistan will be a mistake of the same order as Iraq. While it may not mire down the US in as costly a war, it WILL create an enemy with nuclear capability and with a fundamentalist regime and it WILL cause relations with China, the ME and Iran to deteriorate even further.

The concern about AQ sympathisers hiding in Pakistan IS valid, but it is NOT the US's place to enter the sovereign territory of another nation to root them out.

The BEST the US can do , it to go on the offensive on the SOCIAL front. The better the living conditions are for the average citizen, the more education that is available to them, the MORE advantages they see in resisting the mullahs, the better it will be for the US.

Mind you, NOT INVADING PAKISTAN will also not be seen as a "favor", it will not be considered a "benefit", nor will it be given any sort of importance by the local population. That is because they are not US citizens, and their sovereignty as a nation is an inalienable right that not even the US is entitled to question or violate.

DO NOT ENTER PAKISTAN UNILATERALLY. It will be a supremely unwise choice. It will only perpetuate the "Global Bully" image that the US has so dilligently managed to create, It will nullify any steps we have taken towards a more liberal society, and it will reduce your security as more terrorists will INVARIABLY be created.

Damn...

“There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again . . . If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”
-Barack Obama

I would have expected that quote to maybe come from Bush.

I think Obama just lost any chance for the Democratic nomination.

Just like the "accountable intelligence" that Iraq had WMDs?

Honestly... I think this a bluff gone bad from Obama. I think it is a proactive move so the opposition can't say there isn't a clear plan or that he is only pointing at the republicans follies and not coming up with ideas of his own.

I don't know if it is that damaging, but I agree that the Dems are likely too stupid to see the plain truth before them... We can hope that the American public sees the truth though. Our enemies are in Pakistan, we need to hunt them down and destroy them. They were never in Iraq...

Hopefully it's not a bluff...

I feel like more aggression will only create more enemies at this time... but I guess like Obama says, if there is credible information leading to the capture or destruction of the true enemy I guess action should be taken. It is just now that the Iraq disaster has taken place it seems like too much time has passed to act like aggressors.

I didn't see the story, so I learned about this statement here.
I agree, this does not sound like something ANY Dem candidate would say.

Hmm... then again, is it a calculated move to attract some of those stubborn 28% for whom Bush can do no wrong?

-edit-

Sorry, I know I sound very jaded here. But it seems clear, moreso now than ever, that US wars continue these days not until they are won, but until they are no longer politically useful tools.

Dude.. did you read the threadstarter?

I can certainly understand this point of view. But I do feel as though we have failed to find Justice. I think we need to capture Osama (should only take about a month once his friend is no longer our President) and kill him. After that, we can focus on rebuilding Afghanistan, and helping Pakistan in whatever way they need (nothing by force).

As for Iraq... as shitty as it is that we brought them to this stage, we need to realize it is now beyond our control and that it is no longer about us. We need to come home, and let them have their civil war, then try to open relations with what ever government forms...