Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

on dailykos, Obama confirms my fears, believes in GWOT, is for unilateral invasion of Pakistan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
jsamuel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:18 AM
Original message
on dailykos, Obama confirms my fears, believes in GWOT, is for unilateral invasion of Pakistan
Edited on Wed Aug-01-07 10:47 AM by jsamuel
Barack Obama Might Invade Pakistan to Seek Terrorists
Is Obama Suggesting War within Pakistan?

This story is being reported in the Washington Post as part of Obama's speech.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070801/ap_on_el_pr/obama_terrorism

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Wednesday that he would send troops into Pakistan to hunt down terrorists even without local permission if warranted — an attempt to show strength when his chief rival has described his foreign policy skills as naive.


Updated:
Obama's full statement:
http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php

Also Jerome on Mydd.com:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/8/1/111853/1460

...

So, there's a caveat of saying "if we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets," before it's OK to launch a pre-emptive strike/invasion-- it's the smarter-stick of Obama rather than the dumb-club of Bush. But this is basically a continuation of the Bush-Cheney doctrine of endorsing pre-emptive military attacks abroad, lighter perhaps, but certainly not the mentality that would pull us out of the mideast quagmire.

...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
1. Did Obama accidentally pour kool-aid on his Wheaties this morning?
:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stellanoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
2. Holy crap
When the heck are people gonna get it through their thick crania that wars are now unwinnable in this still new millennium. . .?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
3. Obama is for nuclear energy as well...Beware of him

And, Hilliary.

They are too corporately tied to truly represent us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BonnieJW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. I agree completely.
Edwards/Richardson. The pukes are terrified of Edwards and are constantly bad mouthing him. They praise O and C because that's who they want to run against
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spoony Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #3
11. I don't think the two are comparable
Invading a country is nowhere near the same as people having legitimate opposing points of view about nuclear energy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cgrindley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
4. Well, it sort of has to happen
Pakistan's not doing shit owing to the fact that the government is terrified of an Islamic uprising. Pakistan has to NOT do anything because if it did, then the Islamists would have more reason to attempt to seize power.

Bush co are so terrified of losing Pakistan (even though Pakistan is not terribly friendly) that it is also refusing to act.

Obama's solution, and it is the right solution, is to attack the terrorists in the tribal areas, and risk either a) plunging Pakistan into a civil war that could end in a militant islamist government, or b) alienate Pakistan altogether regardless of who's running the place.

The way I see it, those risks are less irritating than the current condition, and I would rely on India to keep Pakistan under control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
5. I'm hoping this story is untrue. It wouldn't be the first time. Otherwise,
if true, it's a clear example of his being NRFPT, Not Ready For Prime Time. Please, someone, post a refutation of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
6. "WOULD" "IF WARANTED" Is not the same as....NOT NEARLY THE SAME AS
beign for a Unilateral invasion of Pakistan.


Listen to the Speech before you spread the BS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. CLOSE ENOUGH!!!!! END DAYS!!!!!
:rofl:

Drama queen DUers slay me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
7. I don't think Obama wants all out war. I think he is just trying to
get people excited about his candidacy once again. Maybe he has a viable point but not invasion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
9. Oh shit
Well this narrows my choices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
10. Before we get hysterical, we should read Obama's full statement
On his website, read "remarks of Senator Obama:The War We Need to Win"
http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsamuel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. updated op
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. It's a good speech. He's talking about raids into Pakistan, it looks like
Some special forces to do raids to capture or kill terroists, that sort of thing, in the areas that Mussarrif can't or won't exercise control over.

Hell of a different thing than invading and occupying a nuclear-armed Pakistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsamuel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
13. updated with Jerome from mydd
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dk2 Donating Member (174 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
15. Bad planning
This will surely cause him some Poll points......... many poll points, if I were an Obama supporter right now, I would be worried.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-01-07 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. The Busholini Regime is propping up Musharef with $Billions.
The Pakistan Military is the group that is keeping him in power. Without the Pakistan Military approval of US air attacks and some ground forces into the tribal territories a US attack could have a serious backlash in Pakistani Govt. which is shaky already. Obama should be careful with his pronouncements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:32 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC