Catalyst Records

Catalyst Records Discussion Forum
It is currently Wed Sep 02, 2015 11:27 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 70 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: the election
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:14 pm
Posts: 26
Kurt,

i'm only addressing what you said in your previous post. From what I read, it seems to me like you would advocate that people simply become living examples since the "system isn't going anywhere." You called yourself a realist, saying you know the system isn't going to change overnight, so instead you live your life responsibly hoping to make a positive impact on others. No where in your post did I see that you think this alone won't change anything.

So maybe we should clarify? If you want to work on being a "living example," thats great. Just as long as there's understanding that alone will never cause anything to change.

And I don't see how anything I said is "weighted language." To me it seems like you're just deflecting from my point and attacking semantics and me pesonally. What does it mean to lift a finger to fight back? A lot of things. A lot things that work hand in hand with others. But if we start asking people to simply become positive examples, well thats a fucking cop-out.

Nowhere in my post did I say I had to decide what's effective. Thats twisting my words around. Let the 200 different species that faces extinction daily decide. You can continue wishing and hoping and thinking positive thoughts, but I bet you it won't stop the mass slaughter of the planet. How do we decide what IS effective? Look around you. Find tangible, material results. If its not there, we're losing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the election
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:18 pm 
Offline
i need some fresh air
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:51 pm
Posts: 2188
Location: Broad x Ripple
cri_sis wrote:
politicians have never ever in all out history really made a difference because of this system! and this is not going to change!...no country is happy with their politicians...which means, every politician is just motivated by one thing.
be it more money, status or in the us the white house.
it´s all over the world the same. and politicians have been the same ever since they came up with this fucked up idea of voting and opressing people with hirarchies.
the us will still play the role of the world police and tell everyone what to do or not.
...and he will not play against the economy! so, no difference.


"politicians" are not aliens or robots. they are human beings. trying to say that all politicians have the same motivations (whether you are talking about Hitler, Chuchill, Bush, Stalin, or Obama) is pure ridiculousness.

and plenty of politicians have made HUGE differences, just see the list above. you think that Hitler being in power made no difference to Jewish people (as one example).

Quote:
kurt wrote:
Afghanistan: regardless of whether i think the US should be in Afghanistan or not, because of 9-11 it is seen as a national security issue and there are concrete ties to Al Quaeda and The Taliban in Afghanistan, and as an area that harbors "terrorists".


fuck national security. where is security for the people in afghanistan when the us troops bomb the rest of what´s left from there cities?!? even though, there has never been a thread to the us ever from taliban or al quaeda, accept americans been in the middle east. 9-11 was an inside job get over it people.
it´s horrible to tell it´s ok to go down to another continent and kill people there because they drove plains in 3 or 4 buildings...because it never happened!!!


i'm not saying that I believe this, i am saying it is a reality that Obama has to deal with.

i would say that there has been a proven threat (and a well documented one) from Al Quaeda. there is no reliable evidence that 9-11 was an inside job.

either way, i don't condone the US policy in Afghanistan. the point was that Obama has to deal with the reality of the opinions of the US public that elected him. pulling out of Afghanistan is not a possibility for his administration, at least not at first.

Quote:
kurt wrote:
1. we don't know what form the "war on terror" will take under Obama. my best guess is that it will be vastly different than that of the Bush administration, primarily because the Bush admin, was primarily motivated by the oil industry, and using fear tactics to maintain population control. this is in stark contrast to the mood that Obama has already set.


i think you´re hoping this. obama has nothing to say when the oil companies talk.

Quote:
2. as a president of the US i don't think it would really be possible for Obama to also just abandon military operations in Afghanistan, too many people in the US see "fighting terrorism" there as necessity.


they see it?!?...how many have been there?!? and saw IT?!?
necassity?!? so, obama is still the same as bush, cause he can not or does not want to convince people that this is wrong.
i assume he sees it as the right thing to do?!?!?!...thats stupid. really.


again you are misunderstanding my point. there are direct connections between the oil industry and the Bush administration (among others). they are very strong connections.

there may still be some connections with Obama, and regardless, securing energy sources will remain a "national security interest", again, not an opinion i necessarily agree with, but a political reality.

one thing we DO know, is that Obama deliberately sought donations for his campaign from individuals and not from lobbying groups, which lessens the debt he owes these groups when he is in office. that in and of itself is a big step in the US political process.
Quote:
kurt wrote:
yes of course i know all of this, i am very familiar with the region and the Pashtun tribes. i don't think you can jump to conclusions about Pakistan, and with Obama's stress on international diplomacy i don't believe that his administration would be interested in starting an international conflict with a nation like Pakistan, which has both a large military and nuclear weapons, and who has been an ally of sorts in recent history. especially since Pakistan is a Muslim nation, and the US needs all of the support we can get in that area.


especially because they do have!!!!!!...the us government is afraid of other countries useing nuclear arms.
you know, fear is a crazy thing, makes people and governments do crazy stuff.
obama is with the government now and he´s most likley crazy like every other politician!! :wink:


the evidence says otherwise, the US has never invaded any nation that has nuclear weapon capabilities. the US government has over and over again been willing to deal carefully and diplomatically with nuclear nations, N. Korea and Iran are great examples of this. having nuclear weapon capabilities is actually one of the best deterrents to prevent US intervention.

and again, politicians are merely human beings, they aren't a maniacal race of beings that somehow happen to gain power.
Quote:
kurt wrote:
do you have any evidence that Obama will support Turkey in persecution of the Kurdish minority? actually, one thing that Obama has said is that he will recognize the Armenian genocide in Turkey, which is not a popular move for Turkey at all. In addition Biden has been pretty involved in propositions for Iraq that include a Kurdish state. i think you are just guessing here and assuming the worst possible. of course the worst may come true, but i don't see evidence at this point to think that Obama will give blanket support to Turkey in the matter of the Kurdish independence movement there.


sure i´m just assuming and guessing!!...what else to do, call the white house and ask for the next move?!?
it´s just looking at governments all over the world how they fooled people just to gain more and more profit for them selfs.
that´s what makes me write this things.


what should you do?
you should gather reliable evidence and collect information on an individual's past and public statements and policies.

if you want to know what my opinions and possible future actions are the best place to look would not be a gossip magazine, or or some random person posting a blog on the internet. might as well believe a blog that says Obama is an alien.

Quote:
you don´t need evidence in this case now to overthrow obama or what ever. the situation the world is in right now, should be evidence enough that this system and all their collaborators are full of shit and don´t give a damn!
i really hope this will change but until i don´t see change i will not infavor anyone. and i will not go to vote for people who don´t care about life on this planet.


ok, good for you. don't vote if you don't want to.
my point is not that Obama is going to change the world in some big sense, it is that Obama being president has the possibility of making some people's lives better.


Quote:
kurt wrote:
i also think you underestimate the degree that most Americans dislike the war in Iraq, and how much they would rather have the military home. in addition, as a purely political situation, the nation can't afford to keep troops in Iraq indefinitely for a number of reasons, or even in another new area in the region (Iran/ Pakistan/ Syria).


maybe. but i think aswell bush tried to bring the people home, but this could have been done long time ago.
if the military is home in the beginning of next year as obama is in charge, i believe you! otherwise some, a whole lot of them will stay in the region!


Obama has a plan for withdrawal from Iraq, it's on the campaign website, i think it is supposed to be a 16 month plan, leaving a small amount of military there to protect US citizens, and provide limited aid to the Iraqi govt. but with no plans for permanent military bases.


Quote:
overall:
yeah, sure some things, maybe many things aren't going to change that much. BUT to say that there is/ could be no difference between Obama as president and Bush as president doesn't make sense.


there are differences between all politicians...befor an election .....[/quote]

again, politicians are human beings.
to some extent i agree, there are policies that many will keep a lid on to enhance their electability, for instance even though i agree with a lot of the policies of Nader or Kucinich, they would never have a chance of getting elected. we will have to see how "socialist" Obama really is once he gets into office.

xvx


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the election
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:35 pm 
Offline
i need some fresh air
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:51 pm
Posts: 2188
Location: Broad x Ripple
ikilledlatin wrote:
Kurt,

i'm only addressing what you said in your previous post. From what I read, it seems to me like you would advocate that people simply become living examples since the "system isn't going anywhere." You called yourself a realist, saying you know the system isn't going to change overnight, so instead you live your life responsibly hoping to make a positive impact on others. No where in your post did I see that you think this alone won't change anything.


no one tactic is going to bring change, and all tactics together may not bring change either. we live in a pervasive system that touches every area of our lives. i also think there is a much greater chance for change in areas that are less immersed in the system than we are in the US / Europe, etc.

Quote:
So maybe we should clarify? If you want to work on being a "living example," thats great. Just as long as there's understanding that alone will never cause anything to change.


see above.

Quote:
And I don't see how anything I said is "weighted language." To me it seems like you're just deflecting from my point and attacking semantics and me pesonally. What does it mean to lift a finger to fight back? A lot of things. A lot things that work hand in hand with others. But if we start asking people to simply become positive examples, well thats a fucking cop-out.


it is weighted language because it makes implications without addressing things in a concrete manner. it uses an imagery without attaching substance.

like i said, we should be clear, obviously you have a definition in mind as to what "lifting a finger to fight back" does and does not entail. or at least a hierarchy of actions that are more or less valuable or worthy, yet you don't clarify what you really mean by the statement.

Quote:
Nowhere in my post did I say I had to decide what's effective. Thats twisting my words around. Let the 200 different species that faces extinction daily decide. You can continue wishing and hoping and thinking positive thoughts, but I bet you it won't stop the mass slaughter of the planet. How do we decide what IS effective? Look around you. Find tangible, material results. If its not there, we're losing.


of course you didn't SAY you had the right to decide what is and is not effective, you merely implied that some are and that some are not, but without saying which is which.

you bet it won't stop the mass slaughter of the planet? please tell me how one person can do this and i'll gladly step up. this is what i mean by weighted language, it sounds nice but it lacks substance. it oversimplifies - so what WILL stop the mass slaughter? and is it in any of our reach to make it happen?

i do find tangible, material results on a daily basis. even so, we're still losing. i just think its ok to accept the tiny victories we do get and keep moving forward.

xvx


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the election
PostPosted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 10:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:20 pm
Posts: 194
Quote:
"politicians" are not aliens or robots. they are human beings. trying to say that all politicians have the same motivations (whether you are talking about Hitler, Chuchill, Bush, Stalin, or Obama) is pure ridiculousness.

and plenty of politicians have made HUGE differences, just see the list above. you think that Hitler being in power made no difference to Jewish people (as one example).


aliens...sure, they are reptiles!! haven´t you seen this awesome footage:

http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=t_e7Rx8vG ... re=related


Quote:
i'm not saying that I believe this, i am saying it is a reality that Obama has to deal with.

i would say that there has been a proven threat (and a well documented one) from Al Quaeda. there is no reliable evidence that 9-11 was an inside job.

either way, i don't condone the US policy in Afghanistan. the point was that Obama has to deal with the reality of the opinions of the US public that elected him. pulling out of Afghanistan is not a possibility for his administration, at least not at first.


did your great president show you the well documented files of al quaeda threats?!? why don´t the us military doesn´t invade austria?!?...they are just putting a muslim couple into jail because of threats and connections to al quaeda!
there are people all over the world threatening america and the former president. so what?!?

the us are so deep in shit they´d do anything to start a war if they benefit from it.
why did they invade iraq?!?...because they had some mysterious dangerous wapon there?!?
they had well documented evidence!!!!!!!!!!!!! come one, believe them one more word?!?!? serious?!?!?


Quote:
again you are misunderstanding my point. there are direct connections between the oil industry and the Bush administration (among others). they are very strong connections.

there may still be some connections with Obama, and regardless, securing energy sources will remain a "national security interest", again, not an opinion i necessarily agree with, but a political reality.

one thing we DO know, is that Obama deliberately sought donations for his campaign from individuals and not from lobbying groups, which lessens the debt he owes these groups when he is in office. that in and of itself is a big step in the US political process.


i see!

kurt wrote:
the evidence says otherwise, the US has never invaded any nation that has nuclear weapon capabilities. the US government has over and over again been willing to deal carefully and diplomatically with nuclear nations, N. Korea and Iran are great examples of this. having nuclear weapon capabilities is actually one of the best deterrents to prevent US intervention.

and again, politicians are merely human beings, they aren't a maniacal race of beings that somehow happen to gain power.


i see that aswell!...but, the terror threats from al quaeda!!!??!!!
...what i say is, maybe the us gaovernment is talking the pakistani government into some
kind of a deal. war on pakistani ground to wipe out the evil terrorists ...and so on!!??!!!
another country destroyed and in ashes.

ok, to end this fucked up "politicians are human beeings"...

...yes, they are ...human beeings!!...maybe now, any idea why the people, the land and animals should be afraid to be lead by ONE of them?!?!??!?!?!?!?



kurt wrote:

what should you do?
you should gather reliable evidence and collect information on an individual's past and public statements and policies.

if you want to know what my opinions and possible future actions are the best place to look would not be a gossip magazine, or or some random person posting a blog on the internet. might as well believe a blog that says Obama is an alien.


evidence, evidence....make up your own mind, i talk about what i think is most possible happening. if this stands in a blog or a friend comes up with it, i don´t care. check out what happend in the past, see where the world is now.
the future will tell. if there is a future for us.



Quote:
ok, good for you. don't vote if you don't want to.
my point is not that Obama is going to change the world in some big sense, it is that Obama being president has the possibility of making some people's lives better.


good point!!...every president does that!....he makes the lives of SOME, VIEW a little bit better!!
most of the time this are the people that hold big companies and provide nice gifts to the ones in office! :lol:


Quote:
again, politicians are human beings.
to some extent i agree, there are policies that many will keep a lid on to enhance their electability, for instance even though i agree with a lot of the policies of Nader or Kucinich, they would never have a chance of getting elected. we will have to see how "socialist" Obama really is once he gets into office.

xvx


we´ll see!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the election
PostPosted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 11:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:20 pm
Posts: 194
kurt wrote:
by the way:

cri_sis wrote:
Domestic Policy
- Both support the Patriot Act


Obama actually opposed the reauthorization of the Patriot Act, which would have made most of its provisions permanent.

and after looking at this list again, it is obvious that it comes from someone involved in a fringe group of conspirationists / fundamentalists.

for example:
some random blogger dude wrote:
- Both pay lip service to our continued support of Israel, while not mentioning the fact that we give 3 times as much monetary aid to its enemies
- Neither has mentioned the idea of not sending any monetary aid to other countries while the People of America suffer the consequences of a $1 trillion deficit and a $10 trillion + debt
- Both took an offensive stance against Russia, while supporting Georgia, the true aggressors in the Russian/Georgian conflict.. and of course neither has talked about just staying out of the situation all together

...

- Both support the construction of hundreds of FEMA controlled detention camps across the US
- Both support amnesty for illegal immigrants

...

- Neither have alternative plans for the future of welfare programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicade but will both continue or even expand these programs that are bankrupting our nation


make it pretty clear what kind of politics the author is in favor of.

xvx


i don´t know, maybe my english is really bad(it is, i know) or other wise i see alot of writing about what stupid american people care about?!? the only thing i have a problem with by going over it the 4th time is the "our nation" in the end.
for example, i don´t see evidence that stating " both support amnesty for illegal immigrants" is judging or meant one way or the other?!?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the election
PostPosted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 11:30 am 
Offline
i need some fresh air
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:51 pm
Posts: 2188
Location: Broad x Ripple
cri_sis wrote:
kurt wrote:
by the way:

cri_sis wrote:
Domestic Policy
- Both support the Patriot Act


Obama actually opposed the reauthorization of the Patriot Act, which would have made most of its provisions permanent.

and after looking at this list again, it is obvious that it comes from someone involved in a fringe group of conspirationists / fundamentalists.

for example:
some random blogger dude wrote:
- Both pay lip service to our continued support of Israel, while not mentioning the fact that we give 3 times as much monetary aid to its enemies
- Neither has mentioned the idea of not sending any monetary aid to other countries while the People of America suffer the consequences of a $1 trillion deficit and a $10 trillion + debt
- Both took an offensive stance against Russia, while supporting Georgia, the true aggressors in the Russian/Georgian conflict.. and of course neither has talked about just staying out of the situation all together

...

- Both support the construction of hundreds of FEMA controlled detention camps across the US
- Both support amnesty for illegal immigrants

...

- Neither have alternative plans for the future of welfare programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicade but will both continue or even expand these programs that are bankrupting our nation


make it pretty clear what kind of politics the author is in favor of.

xvx


i don´t know, maybe my english is really bad(it is, i know) or other wise i see alot of writing about what stupid american people care about?!? the only thing i have a problem with by going over it the 4th time is the "our nation" in the end.
for example, i don´t see evidence that stating " both support amnesty for illegal immigrants" is judging or meant one way or the other?!?



the person who wrote it is against "illegal immigration" and against the plan to give amnesty to currently illegal immigrants working in the US.

the person who wrote it is also against any kind of socialized health care that would benefit working class or poor people.

he/she is against paying any taxes, even though this provides a means to fund programs that are beneficial to many disadvantaged people.

he/she believes that the US is planning to have large scale detention camps (another ridiculous conspiracy theory) for american citizens.

he/she wants to discontinue financial aid to other nations.

he/she thinks the US should give unconditional support to Israel, and that we should give no financial aid to its "enemies" - aka any Arab/Muslim nation.

basically, you are using the propaganda of the same people you are trying to argue against.

xvx


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the election
PostPosted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 11:51 am 
Offline
i need some fresh air
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:51 pm
Posts: 2188
Location: Broad x Ripple
cri_sis wrote:
did your great president show you the well documented files of al quaeda threats?!? why don´t the us military doesn´t invade austria?!?...they are just putting a muslim couple into jail because of threats and connections to al quaeda!
there are people all over the world threatening america and the former president. so what?!?


the evidence available, including independent sources around the world, suggests that al Quaeda has had a long term goal of attacking US targets, both in the US and outside. they claimed responsibility for the USS Cole bombing, a previous bombing of the WTC, and later the 9-11 attack.

I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE INVASION OF AFGHANISTAN, OR THE "WAR ON TERROR"
regardless, whether i agree or not, the majority of the US public sees it as essential, and understands a connection between al Quaeda and Afghanistan/ the Taliban. even though they do NOT see the connections between "terrorism" and US foreign policy.

ANY US president will have to deal with that reality.

the US doesn't invade Austria because there is not an implicit agreement between the government of Austria and "terrorist organizations". the Austrian government is not allowing al Quaeda to operate training camps in Austria.


cri_sis wrote:
the us are so deep in shit they´d do anything to start a war if they benefit from it.
why did they invade iraq?!?...because they had some mysterious dangerous wapon there?!?
they had well documented evidence!!!!!!!!!!!!! come one, believe them one more word?!?!? serious?!?!?


there was a plan by the Bush administration, and it's leading allies (many in the oil industry) to invade Iraq for many years. the people in charge of the Bush administration are the same people who were in charge of the country for every Republican president from Pres. Nixon to the present.

I agree, the war in Iraq was totally fabricated.
saying that because one piece of evidence was fabricated proves that another is also fabricated is a logical fallacy. of course we should be critical of all evidence, but that includes being critical of things on both sides of an argument.


cri_sis wrote:
...what i say is, maybe the us gaovernment is talking the pakistani government into some
kind of a deal. war on pakistani ground to wipe out the evil terrorists ...and so on!!??!!!
another country destroyed and in ashes.

ok, to end this fucked up "politicians are human beeings"...

...yes, they are ...human beeings!!...maybe now, any idea why the people, the land and animals should be afraid to be lead by ONE of them?!?!??!?!?!?!?


of course the US government is talking to the govt of Pakistan about controlling the Tribal border areas, this is also important for Pakistan as well, since al Queada would also like to see a fundamentalist Islamic state in Pakistan as well (and there have been many terrorist attacks in Pakistan like there were in Afghanistan in the past).

BUT Pakistan is much different than Afghanistan, which was already a "failed state" from the time of the Soviet occupation and resistance movement. though it has its problems (internally, and with India) Pakistan is in a much different situation.

about politicians, i kept saying they are human beings because you keep saying "THEY'RE POLITICIANS!!!!" as if that explains anything. all politicians are not necessarily the same, or are motivated by the same things. if i ran for political office tomorrow i would not automatically turn into someone who only cared about power and being elected.



cri_sis wrote:
evidence, evidence....make up your own mind, i talk about what i think is most possible happening. if this stands in a blog or a friend comes up with it, i don´t care. check out what happend in the past, see where the world is now.


sure, but many things have happened in the past, many terrible, some better. you are painting everything with broad black and white strokes, which is unrealistic.

everyone has opinions. that is fine. but i'm not just going to believe anything someone writes without there being some kind of substance to back it up.

Obama is an alien from the lower fourth dimension? ok, show me the proof.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the election
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:20 pm
Posts: 194
http://www.mail.com/Article.aspx?articlepath=APNews\General-World-News\20081119\AS-Pakistan.xml&cat=world&subcat=&pageid=1

Officials report US missile strike in Pakistan
Mittwoch, 19. November 2008 08:33:41
By MUNIR AHMAD
Officials report US missile strike in Pakistan

A suspected U.S. missile strike hit a village well inside Pakistani territory Wednesday, killing at least six alleged militants in an attack that could raise tensions between the anti-terror allies, officials said.

The missile struck a house in Bannu district, which is a part of northwest Pakistan where al-Qaida and Taliban have found refuge, but does not directly border Afghanistan.

Two Pakistani intelligence officials said their agents reported foreigners from Central Asia were among the dead. The intelligence officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media.

The U.S. is blamed
Other World Photos
Indian navy says it fought off pirate ship
100
in around 20 missile strikes in northwest Pakistan since mid-August against al-Qaida and Taliban militants blamed for rising attacks against foreign forces in Afghanistan.

The missiles are believed fired from unmanned planes launched in Afghanistan, where some 32,000 U.S. troops are fighting the Taliban and other militants.

Pakistan has loudly protested the strikes as violations of its sovereignty, but the attacks have not stopped, leading to speculation by some analysts the two nations have a secret deal on the attacks.

All the attacks since August have been in villages in north and South Waziristan, two semiautonomous tribal regions where the government has a very limited presence.

Bannu is considered a "settled area", which means it falls under the control of the regional government, and as such Monday's attack could provoke more anger among by Pakistan's leaders. It begins roughly 18 miles from the frontier.

Pakistan has insisted it does not get advance warning of such attacks and has demanded the U.S. share intelligence and let Pakistan go after targets on its own.

The United States rarely confirms or denies the strikes, which are believed to be carried out by CIA.

Even as the strikes have picked up, U.S officers in Afghanistan have stressed improved day-to-day Pakistani cooperation in squeezing militants nested along both sides of the lengthy, porous border.

U.S. military officials said troops in Afghanistan coordinated with Pakistan on Sunday in shelling insurgents inside Pakistan who were launching rockets at the foreign troops. Pakistan's official statement on the matter referred only to militant activity in Afghanistan.

In the past month, NATO and Pakistan also have cooperated in so-called Operation Lion Heart -- a series of complementary operations that involve Pakistani army and paramilitary troops, and NATO on the Afghan side, said Col. John Spiszer, U.S. commander in northeast Afghanistan.

.........


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the election
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:28 am 
Offline
i need some fresh air
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:51 pm
Posts: 2188
Location: Broad x Ripple
cri_sis wrote:
http://www.mail.com/Article.aspx?articlepath=APNews\General-World-News\20081119\AS-Pakistan.xml&cat=world&subcat=&pageid=1

Officials report US missile strike in Pakistan
Mittwoch, 19. November 2008 08:33:41
By MUNIR AHMAD
Officials report US missile strike in Pakistan

A suspected U.S. missile strike hit a village well inside Pakistani territory Wednesday, killing at least six alleged militants in an attack that could raise tensions between the anti-terror allies, officials said.

The missile struck a house in Bannu district, which is a part of northwest Pakistan where al-Qaida and Taliban have found refuge, but does not directly border Afghanistan.

Two Pakistani intelligence officials said their agents reported foreigners from Central Asia were among the dead. The intelligence officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media.

The U.S. is blamed
Other World Photos
Indian navy says it fought off pirate ship
100
in around 20 missile strikes in northwest Pakistan since mid-August against al-Qaida and Taliban militants blamed for rising attacks against foreign forces in Afghanistan.

The missiles are believed fired from unmanned planes launched in Afghanistan, where some 32,000 U.S. troops are fighting the Taliban and other militants.

Pakistan has loudly protested the strikes as violations of its sovereignty, but the attacks have not stopped, leading to speculation by some analysts the two nations have a secret deal on the attacks.

All the attacks since August have been in villages in north and South Waziristan, two semiautonomous tribal regions where the government has a very limited presence.

Bannu is considered a "settled area", which means it falls under the control of the regional government, and as such Monday's attack could provoke more anger among by Pakistan's leaders. It begins roughly 18 miles from the frontier.

Pakistan has insisted it does not get advance warning of such attacks and has demanded the U.S. share intelligence and let Pakistan go after targets on its own.

The United States rarely confirms or denies the strikes, which are believed to be carried out by CIA.

Even as the strikes have picked up, U.S officers in Afghanistan have stressed improved day-to-day Pakistani cooperation in squeezing militants nested along both sides of the lengthy, porous border.

U.S. military officials said troops in Afghanistan coordinated with Pakistan on Sunday in shelling insurgents inside Pakistan who were launching rockets at the foreign troops. Pakistan's official statement on the matter referred only to militant activity in Afghanistan.

In the past month, NATO and Pakistan also have cooperated in so-called Operation Lion Heart -- a series of complementary operations that involve Pakistani army and paramilitary troops, and NATO on the Afghan side, said Col. John Spiszer, U.S. commander in northeast Afghanistan.

.........


i don't see the relevance of posting this.
1. it is not evidence that the US is looking for a war with, or invasion of Pakistan
2. this is still the Bush administration, not the Obama administration


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the election
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:20 pm
Posts: 194
Quote:
cri_sis:...what i say is, maybe the us gaovernment is talking the pakistani government into some
kind of a deal. war on pakistani ground to wipe out the evil terrorists ...and so on!!??!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 70 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by Vegan Straight Edge