U.S. Military Action Against Pakistan
That’s what was missing — the United States doesn’t have quite enough wars to get quagmired in. Let’s see, who’s been looking at us funny — Pakistan!
Senator Lindsey Graham (R—Armchair Warrior) said the U.S. should consider military action against Pakistan if their government continues to support terrorist attacks in Afghanistan:
“The sovereign nation of Pakistan is engaging in hostile acts against the United States and our ally Afghanistan that must cease.”
He said the U.S. might need to “elevate its response” and that “all options” should be considered.
OK, time to dust off the pre-Iraq invasion playbook: Pakistan has Weapons of Mass Destruction! Most of the 9/11 hijackers were from Pakistan. Etc.
Hmmm, now wasn’t there something about a huge deficit that was about to engulf the whole country? Some sort of “crushing debt” that our great-grandchildren’s great-grandchildren will still be paying for? An international financial crisis that was just about to derail the global economy?
Oh well, that was yesterday. Now, suddenly we’ve got a few hundred spare billions lying around, just waiting to be used for our next invasion.
Maybe the “deficit hawks” and “Austerians” could get together with the armchair warmongers; as in “right hand, meet the left hand.”
Labels: Austerians, deficit hawks, Lindsey Graham, Lindsey Graham Pakistan, military action against Pakistan
posted by Tom Harper @ 1:32 PM
7 Comments:
Weren't most of the hijackers from Saudi Arabia?
Jerry, I think you are right... but that doesn't matter! If some punk kid like Pakistan disobeys us then by God, we had better punish the kid!
One problem with looking at all the other countries of the world as disobedient children (as most conservatives tend to do) is that at home, paddling your kids is free. But when you translate that outlook to foreign policy, you find that punishing others becomes expensive. Yet you want to keep doing it anyway, because it's all you know to do.
Sen. Graham should just STFU. If not, then someone with conservative "values" ought to paddle his butt.
Pakistan was always a mess, we were warned to avoid it, because there is no chance of reforming it, and nothing has changed no matter how many billions we have already bribed them with...
So Grahams speech was a revelation because?
Erik
17 of 19 of the fake cave dwellers, Jerry.
Many of whom are still alive.
I think its a signal to the Pakistani leadersip to get back in line and SHIP THOSE DRUGS!!!
Jerry: When Dumbya was drumming up support for invading Iraq, a lot of Fox listeners started believing that most of the 9/11 hijackers were from Iraq.
Snave: Damn right. When foreigners are primitive AND swarthy, they'd better behave and do what we tell them. Or else it's time for the belt buckle. Or an air raid, or something.
Erik: General MacArthur must be screaming from his gave, "I said 'never get involved in a land war in Asia!'"
Suzan: LOL, can't keep the drug lords waiting now, can we.
Old crackpot crusaders never die and take forever to fade away.
This is just what we need — another Mideast war. And with a nuclear-armed nation of 170 million people. Brilliant.
Graham has a point that Pakistan can be considered guilty of an act of war against the U.S. and Afghanistan. The wisdom of firing up a shooting war against Pakistan is another matter.
What we should do is cut Pakistan out completely as an ally. Doing that might at least deny the country's anti-American, pro-terrorist intelligence agency some information of possible use for future attacks against us.
SW: The main reason (IMHO) America keeps getting into these international crises is our numerous wars and our constant support of global corporations that exploit everything and everybody that can possibly be exploited. I'm all in favor of cutting aid to Pakistan.
Post a Comment
<< Home