To: Geoff Altman who wrote (29985 ) 12/2/2008 3:38:34 PM From: DuckTapeSunroof Respond to of 71588 No Geoff, not the same thing exactly.... Peter CLAIMED that Obama had specifically proposed the "invasion" of "sovereign ally(s)". I pointed-out that no such quote ever passed his lips , the word (invasion) had NEVER been used, nor had "allies" (multiple) ever been specifically threatened with "invasion" (which has very straight-forward meanings). Pinpoint attacks against terrorist targets can hardly be called an "invasion".... I wrote that what Obama had said (numerous times, and clearly!) was "If the United States has al Qaeda, bin Laden, or his top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act , then we should act to take them out." I also noted that --- since mid-summer of this year, when President Bush signed an order specifically authorizing the same --- this has been precisely the national policy of the United States of America. (So, you could say that President Bush *adopted* the same policy that Obama said he supported). Since mid-summer, the United States has ALREADY STRUCK at terrorist targets INSIDE THE TERRITORY OF PAKISTAN more than a dozen times. (And, at least one of the attacks involved Special Forces 'boots on the ground' in Pakistan... while yet another manned assault turned it's helicopters back after coming under fire.) As far as is known, these American attacks against terrorists harboring on Pakistani soil have been very successful (some top al Qaeda and Taliban leaders have been killed) and it is reported that al Qaeda and Taliban are 'feeling the heat' and in some instances have been forced to pull back deeper into Pakistan for protection from American attacks.