The New 'Forgotten War'

Mr. Toradze, you are using a great deal of sophistry to try to counter some of my points.
It won't work.
Though I am open to criticism, these points are clear and I will clarify them again:

1) It is imperative that the 2 longest standing conflicts in the world (and on the books of United Nations resolutions) be solved.
2) If someone denigrates the religion or ethnicity of one of my friends (or toward anyone in a public forum), be they Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, Christian or otherwise, I will immediately defend them and make common cause with them.

Mr. Toradze, I apologise for calling you a bad name.

Mr. Toradze: I agree with you, it is a disease which must be adressed in solving the 2 major conflicts. But the conflicts themselves have become like festering sores and I am in no way branding the 99% of Muslims as a disease nor is their religion a disease. The conflicts themselves also have a non-religious component. Yes, the terrorists are infected with the disease of madness and are using the non-resolution of these 2 conflicts toward their twisted religious thinking. But these 2 conflicts are not an "us vs. them" issue, these 2 conflists should be solved because it is the right thing to do.

I have a strong conviction that these 2 conflicts resolved will have a beneficial effect on the fight against international terrorism and can bring about a world more peaceful no matter what religion you are.

There is a subtilly annoying little fact that everyone seems to forget. It is the fact that neither the President or The Vice President can start a war before consulting Congress. Congress is and where we need to concentrate our efforts for re-election, not the President. All these comments are cicumstantial until we have conformation from Congress.

Prediction: After 2 more long and mixed years of war in Afghanistan the US will be forced to "do something" about the Pakistan tribal areas. This will raise hell in Pakistan which will be beset by bombings and kidnappings. This will further descend into an all out civil war with elements of the military playing both sides and the civilian government helpless and sidelined. Then attacks in India will increase over the Kashmir situation. India may become involved on the ground in Pakistan.

So: Afghanistan - still facing attacks with NATO and Karzai getting tired. Pakistan - civil war a la Iraq complete with suicide bombs and beheadings, but this time with India and US trying to defend and quell the situation. Also a question of nukes gone missing. India - war in Kashmir and northern districts with Pakistani/Kashmiri militants.

Wild cards: Will Iraq be stable or fall apart. Will Iran stay out of it or try to destabilize Iraq. What, if anything will Isreal do.
Nuclear clock set to 3 min to midnight. Chance of WWIII - 65%

Then the nuclear deal should not be offered to either India or Pakistan! It has upset the balance there and caused a souring of the atmosphere conducive to prosecuting the war on international terrorism.

Also, Basedrum's very stipulation that the same nuclear deal not be offered to Pakistan proves the point that the "deal" will give enhanced military advantage to India (or hypothetically, to Pakistan) and not the enhanced "peaceful" dividends the U.S. says it will give.

Pakistan's dictators have all come to power by using Islamic militants willing to die for Jihad. Musharraf did the same thing. Once in power, they then turn the militants loose on their nieghbors. This keeps the militants occupied. This is why, if India gave Kashmir away, the war would simply move into the next boundary region on the next ridiculous pretext.

The "democratically elected" leaders, like the Bhuttos were corrupt beyond imagination. Benazir made off with 4% of the GNP of her country. Small wonder she lived well when she fled. She was but a criminal.

The problem in Pakistan is not going to be "solved" because at its root the problem exists because of the ideology of Islam which must make war. Even when most do not war, the militants will always turn it to war. As political allies, they are far more useful than the unmotivated slackers who make up the body of most democratic societies.

The solution the USA needs to come to must be inexpensive. That means that India is the primary partner, because India waits in the wings to roll over Pakistan and wipe out the population there, once and for all - which is something the USA cannot do. Since Pakistan's politics cannot produce anything but war with its nieghbors and support for jihadist creeps, that is how it must be played.

The USA should ignore Pakistan's borders and launch a major offensive to surround and clean house in Darra, Quetta, and the rest of the Taliban region. That will make whoever is dictator very clear about the position of Pakistan on the world stage.

My only issue with offering a country like Pakistan a deal equal to that of India is that India has a much longer tradition of being stable than Pakistan does. Are they not at this very moment still debating whether their supreme court can be disbanded by a military "president" who we happen to be in favor with currently? I think the American people will always lean towards stability in these situations. Especially where Nukes are at stake.

This article is more GOP propaganda trying to put McCain on the same playing field as Obama. This is utter nonsense in the reporters' mind since Obama has been after Pakistan all along. I tell you, the GOP make me laugh everytime they have one of their surrogates speak for them, such as Hirsh.

I think it is a bit negligent to put Sen. Obama on the same level as Sen. McCain on this issue. I see you tried to add in, almost as an after thought, that Sen. Obama has been talking about Pakistan since last year - which would indicate that he hasn't 'forgotten' about Pakistan.

Now it IS important to note that he wasn't saying much about it until Sen. Biden and I think Dodd brought up the issue in the democratic debates. It was one of the the things that made me respect Biden in the first place. And under which President do you think it more likely to see Biden on the cabinet or even as VP. I doubt you need more than one guess.

Sen. Obama has been talking about Pakistan and part of dealing with Pakistan is getting back to Afghanistan - you know, the other 'Forgotten War'...

Pakistan is the forgotten country right now. It will only take another terrorist attack on U.S soil for it to become the next Afganistan. As President Bush said right after 9/11, the U.S. cannot tolerate a state that is supporting Islamic terrorism. Pakistan might not have a target on its back right now, but sadly it takes the death of innocent U.S civilians for the U.S to take a more aggressive stance against this so called "ally".

And what's really scary is the fact that the Pentagon is pushing to upgrade Pakistan's F-14 fighter jets so they (the Pakistanis) can better fight the Taliban. Duh....they'll use them on India first.