Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (9474)	11/8/2001 10:36:39 PM
From: Mark Adams	Respond to of 281500

I understand that Turkey, without any overflight privileges, leaves a supply/logistics problem. I was thinking a flight route over the Caspian Sea. Yes, that would require permission for use of airspace from certain 'stan governments. I feel that it might be more tenable for the 'stans to grant this right, as opposed to rights to base and stage military attacks on a neighboring muslim country. I also felt that having multiple approaches allowing use of airspace of more than any one particular 'stan, improved the position of both the US and the 'stans that would like to help, despite facing internal issues fearing retribution. As you've correctly identified, IMO, we have issues in pursuing the stated military objectives relying soley on Pakistan as an avenue of approach. I've held some concern about Pakistan's participation in support of the Taliben and radical Islamic forces from day one. I've expressed on SI prior to now my belief that Pakistan might be the 'hidden party' using Afghanistan as a scapegoat in pursuit of it's own objectives. I feel less strongly this way than during the final weeks of September, but I still see evidence that Pakistan might be an ally today but could be an enemy tomorrow. I don't think the US can afford to allow itself to be put at the mercy of Pakistan, or the other 'stans for that matter, in pursuing the objective of removing this stronghold of terrorism. For that matter, I don't know that Pakistan can survive being the only source of US support against the Taliben forces. Therefore, I think the US must pursue alternatives that allow it to pursue the stated goals, regardless of which allies are prepared to step up to the plate and what privileges they grant. That said, I doubt a military confrontation will be the most successful way of managing the longer term objectives of dealing with covert radical movements. As to building a base, I understand a Daisy Cutter can be used to clear potential mines. Do we not have heavy transport helicopters that can deliver bulldozers? Under enemy fire should not be much of a problem, if the correct spot is chosen for the initial forward base.