Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: HG who wrote (4167)	10/10/2001 9:54:47 PM
From: Area51	Read Replies (1) of 281500

The difference between Iraq and Pakistan is that when forced to choose between supporting terrorism or to support the fight against terrorism, Pakistan made the choice to fight against terrorism. There is no doubt that Musharraf put his leadership at some peril by making this decision (albeit not at as much peril as if he had made the wrong choice). Therefore it would be silly for us to do India's dirty work at this stage and attack Pakistan. If we want to find another enemy Iraq is a much better choice IMO. Of course many Indians would like us to take this opportunity to lay waste to Pakistan but as George Bush's father would say "Not gonna do it". Making Pakistan a parking lot might be an alternative but that requires overwheming military superiority and the stomach (or is it immoral fortitude?) to do it. In Iraq once Iraq could not offer any resistance the U.S. stopped attacking, and I think it is difficult to lay waste to the land at that point. To continue to fight against an enemy that is unable to resist seems ruthless and immoral to me. Best Regards, Area51

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next