What? All the money we gave them and they won't give us the humble gift of one terrorist this year?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/15/wo....html?ref=asia
Printable View
What? All the money we gave them and they won't give us the humble gift of one terrorist this year?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/15/wo....html?ref=asia
Why is the NYTs exposing this sensitive material which may jeopardize our troops?
Because the New York Times is staffed with liberal pinko idiots.
But you knew that, CC.
God, Cc, your partisan idiocy knows no bounds or limits, does it?
You're worried about a news article which a) doesn't reveal anything about our troop movements, strengths, or strategy and b) doesn't tell the enemy anything he doesn't already know.
You fear this will "endanger the troops", but you fail to endorse the only sure method of keeping them safe, which would be bringing them home. Talk about straining at a flea but swallowing an elephant whole...
Perhaps the New York Times just has a grudge against the so-called terrorists of the Haquanni Family, who are not only connected with the kidnapping of a NYT Reporter last year, but also have links to the CIA. Perhaps the Haquanni Family, some of whom are part of a network of social conservatives once called "The Moral Equivalent of our Founding Fathers" by conservocrite icon Ronald Reagan, simply are patriots fighting the influence of the liberal media in their country. Perhaps the Pakistani Government resents being pressured by the Obama Admin, which seems to be demanding action on the part of the Pakistanis, after years of receiving funding with few strings attached from the previous US admin.
WWSPD? Nuke Pakistan.
It reveals discord with the host nation directly over the objective in the area [[fighting terrorism).
The same nation that Conservative Icon, George W. Bush said on numerous occasions, is a friend and ally of the U.S.?
Why the double speak on the part of right wing kool-aid drinkers?
Nice dodge and/ or word play by the right wingers who have a selective memory.Quote:
Originally Posted by ccbatson
Pakistan, recipient of billions of dollars in US aid under criminally incompetent Bush Admin, is harassing US diplomats:
Pakistan Reported to Be Harassing U.S. Diplomats
By JANE PERLEZ and ERIC SCHMITT
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Parts of the Pakistani military and intelligence services are mounting what American officials here describe as a campaign to harass American diplomats, fraying relations at a critical moment when the Obama administration is demanding more help to fight the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
The campaign includes the refusal to extend or approve visas for more than 100 American officials and the frequent searches of American diplomatic vehicles in major cities, said an American official briefed on the cases.
The problems affected military attachés, C.I.A. officers, development experts, junior level diplomats and others, a senior American diplomat said. As a result, some American aid programs to Pakistan, which President Obama has called a critical ally, are “grinding to a halt,” the diplomat said.
American helicopters used by Pakistan to fight militants can no longer be serviced because visas for 14 American mechanics have not been approved, the diplomat said. Reimbursements to Pakistan of nearly $1 billion a year for counterterrorism have been suspended because the last of the American Embassy’s five accountants left the country this week after his visa expired.
“There’s an incredible disconnect between what they want of us and the fact we can’t get the visas,” the diplomat said.
Pakistani officials acknowledged the situation but said the menacing atmosphere resulted from American arrogance and provocations, like taking photographs in sensitive areas, and a lack of understanding of how divided Pakistanis were about the alliance with the United States.
American and Pakistani officials declined to be identified while speaking about the issues because of their senior positions and the desire not to further inflame tensions.
The campaign comes after months of rising anti-American sentiment here and complaints by the military that the government of President Asif Ali Zardari has grown too dependent on a new $7.5 billion, five-year aid plan from Washington.
It also appears to be an attempt to blunt the planned expansion of the United States Embassy to 800 Americans from 500 in the next 18 months, growth that American officials say is necessary to channel the expanded American assistance.
“They don’t want more Americans here,” another American diplomat said. “They’re not sure what the Americans are doing. It’s pretty pervasive.”
The harassment has grown so frequent that American officials said they viewed it as a concerted effort by parts of the military and intelligence services that had grown resentful of American demands to step up the war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/17/wo...ef=global-home
And you're afraid this revelation of "discord" will somehow endanger the troops more than the discord itself already does?Quote:
Originally Posted by ccbatson
So if no one talks about the problem then it's not a problem? Is that your contention?
LOL! Or perhaps Antarctica. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by East Detroit
In a word, yes, of course the release of this to the public undermines moral and compounds the problems. THe people on the ground need, and do know the situation, however, revealing it to John and Mary non radical Pakistani or Afghanistani citizen put in the position of choosing sides with their very lives at stake...it undermines our position to cast doubt while we are in the process of advancing towards our goals.
While examining our position relative to the other positions discussed, we need to refine that position such that it reflects a position that puts us in a position of positive position. Further, the extremist positions relative to the middle position are extreme in their very nature and we need to exact a decisive action to relegate our position to one of a proper alignment to the situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by ccbatson
I used the word exactly twice..is that your counter argument East Detroit? that I used a word 2 times in a a paragraph? If so, don't you think it is a weak argument? [[oops, I did it again, didn't I?)