arisbe | Spring Offensive Planned

Spring Offensive Planned

Thousands of U.S. forces would be involved, as well as Pakistani troops, planners said. Some of the 10,600 U.S. troops now in Afghanistan would be shifted to the border region as part of regular troop movements; some would be deployed within Pakistan.

"Before we were constrained by the border. Musharraf did not want that. Now we are told we're going into Pakistan with Musharraf's help," a well-placed military source said.

Spotted by

mrdankelly

Mr. Bush may feel he needs a full scale world war to get elected this time. Of course he may think he can pick Osama up as easily as he did Saddam. But Saddam was handed over by the Kurds. But there is nobody, nobody I know of, in Afghanistan or Pakistan remotely analagous to the Kurds.

This may be the main reason Musharraf is so willing to bury the hatchet with Mother India.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Fucking WONDERFUL.

Full scale civil war in Pakistan?.. eck eck eck eck eck....

... okay, i was wrong. We may not survive the next couple of years after all. THESE PEOPLE HAVE NUKES, and they HATE EACH OTHER, and they AREN'T AFRAID TO USE THEM.

What's next, Mr. Fucking Brilliant Bushy Baby? Decide that Osama has fled to Taiwan, and we need to "marshall forces with or without the assent of China"?

... I feel like I'm going to cry. Seriously. This is frightening me far more than the useless slaughter waste of our involvement in the Mid. East. fuck.

For some reason, this just brought 2 Samuel 11:1 to mind. "And it came to pass, after the year was expired, at the time when kings go forth to battle..." (And of course the Jewish year begins in the springtime.)

Honestly, though, I don't think Mr. Bush needs a new war to be re-elected.

...if Mr. Dean is the Democrats' nominee, because, in that unlikely event, there will actually be a great national debate on the ISSUES, rather than the personalities--to the press's great consternation--and this issue of our great ill-conceived CRUSADE AGAINST ISLAM (which is exactly how the Pope and his advisors in the Vatican perceive it, and HAVE SAID SO, whether you like it or not) is THE most important political issue of our time.

Dean is just as much a flake as all the other candidates in both parties. And in any event, he won't be the nominee.

What makes you so sure? Are you a member of the media, pray tell? Are you a part of the media establishment that's decided to give us his "yell" in Iowa until we decide that he's unbalanced, and go away from him? You might be interested to know that I and a few other friends just gave our second $100.00 checks--to at least ensure that the debate continues!

What makes you so sure?

It's my opinion, just like your opinion is yours, and I'm sure they are of equal worth.

My opinion is based on the fact that Dean doesn't have broad appeal; furthermore, after the nomination, both parties run hard to the center, and if Dean does that (which I'm not sure he can) then he will lose his base, such as it is.

You're quite mistaken about his followers, I believe. One of my own "litmus tests" in politics has heretofore been opposition to capital punishment, but I'm willing to forego it, in Howard's behalf, because I believe he's sincere. I also don't like it that he "balanced" so many budgets in Vermont on the backs of the poor. He's NOT a doctrinaire leftist and most of us who are further to the left than he is know it. What he is, however, is a man who speaks his heart. The bit about "civil marriages" in Vermont and how God wouldn't have created so many "gays" if he hated 'em shows it.

I reserve my prediction that the Democratic Party will not support him, but rather, a milder candidate who will have no chance whatsoever against Bush's popularity.

But then, I'm a Libertarian, so I lose either way.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Spring Offensive Planned

no subject

no subject

no subject

No, he does...

no subject

Political pundit, are you?

no subject

Wrong about that, too...

no subject