Violent Clashes in Pakistan.
September 21, 2001 6:29 AM   Subscribe

Violent Clashes in Pakistan. This is bad news. Previous BBC reports dramatically highlight the folly of having a leader who is not well read enough to recognize the historical connotations of the word "crusade". For background context the Economist has a good article on Pakistan's dilemma.
posted by talos (17 comments total)
why is pakistan's internal stability being treated as a martyr to the cause of 'infinite justice'?
i have yet to hear a televised news reporter asking whether it is fair, right or acceptable to put pakistan in such a difficult position.
Has Musharraf been promised CIA assistance in combating internal 'enemies'?
posted by asok at 10:03 AM on September 21, 2001

"Evidence or no evidence. Americans have made up their mind to get Bin Laden." - President Pervez Musharraf (Pakistan).

Bring it on. Lets see how many humans survive this one.
posted by adnanbwp at 10:03 AM on September 21, 2001

You've said that before. What's gotten into you, Adnan? It's as if someone recently stole your username and started posting in quite a different style...
posted by fooljay at 10:22 AM on September 21, 2001

No kidding--it's like he's given up on humanity altogether.
posted by fusinski at 10:26 AM on September 21, 2001

Of course the coalition can forget Pakistan now that we're such great mates with Iran.
posted by Summer at 10:31 AM on September 21, 2001

seems a realistic assessment of the possible outcome of such a war. esp. given the populistic fever for bloodshed lately.
posted by fishfucker at 10:32 AM on September 21, 2001

There's a great social theorem (and corollary) that I can't remember the attribution for.

Theorem: Never throw shit at a man with a flamethrower.
Corollary: Never stand next to somebody throwing shit at a man with a flamethrower.

The US supported bin Laden in the 80s, and now has to face the consequences of what they have done. The Pakistani government supported bin Laden last month, and now must do likewise. The US would be wise to do as much as possible to preserve Pakistani stability, but in the end I believe that this is of secondary importance.
posted by jaek at 10:45 AM on September 21, 2001


when and how did the pakistani government support osama bin laden, may i ask?
posted by moz at 10:55 AM on September 21, 2001

When: over the past several years. How: intelligence information, paying him to train Pakistani-backed militant groups, etc etc. Read this article and scroll down about 80%. This is just the first relevant article that came up from Google.
posted by jaek at 11:03 AM on September 21, 2001

When all this started, the entire world sided with the U.S. vs. the terrorists.

It seems it will soon be untenable for Pakistan to actively support us. (Some proponents of democracy we are -- we want the Pakistani government to suppress its people's outrage, right?)

Who's next? How long before our posturing and war chants alienate the next nation who sees us as a more dangerous monster than some malnourished zealots cowering in the mountains of Afghanistan?
posted by mattpfeff at 11:41 AM on September 21, 2001

Anyone else see a potential Machievellian repeat of past mistakes with accepting help from Pakistan--a military dictatorship?? Am I mistaken about the form of gov't there?
posted by fooljay at 12:06 PM on September 21, 2001

fooljay, fusinski :

No one has stolen my username. What is happening can change any one. I am not saying that I have given up on humanity. But all this talk of war and revenge and blood has taken away my sleep. I am a Pakistani-American. Ofcourse a Muslim too.

I am reacting to a barage of events. Starting from that horrible horrible Tuesday. Loss of so much life. Threats on the road. Friend being pulled out of a departing plane. Another friend canceling his wedding because he is not going to Pakistan for the fear of war. My voice chats and phone calls with fearful, paranoid parents and brothers.

I havent changed. The world around me has changed.
posted by adnanbwp at 12:36 PM on September 21, 2001

The U.S. is already losing the chess match against bin Laden, it seems, and it has yet to make its first move.

Instead of thinking two and three moves ahead, we are consumed by image: our need to talk tough and act fast.

The Taliban requests information to justify handing over their guest and we say: Do it because we told you so.

Point: bin Laden. "The American ogre and hater of Islam shows its true stripes," the mullahs tell their nodding disciples.

Pakistan asks for the evidence to justify allowing the U.S. to use it to attack bin Laden, its student and ally, and possibly the Taliban, virtually a client state.

The U.S. says: Do it. The Pakistan government (the one it has today at least) says: Okay, we have no choice.

Point: bin Laden. Fundamentalist Pakistanis take to the streets.

In a cave somewhere, bin Laden rubs his hands. Once he has his hands on Pakistan's nukes, he won't need Boeing 767s any more.
posted by sacre_bleu at 12:51 PM on September 21, 2001

Actually, sacre_bleu, the U.S. is handing over evidence to Pakistan. You can bet that that information will make it through the regular channels to the Taleban. You'll remember that we relayed our demands initially through Pakistan, so all of this is kind of pointless.

Adnan, but you can't really be serious about the wide-ranging war that you are now espousing. That's sarcasm right?
posted by fooljay at 1:01 PM on September 21, 2001

Yeah, but when I read comments like these, I dont see any sarcasm. I see a war that when analyzed under a microscope, will show that blood is red in all humanity.
posted by adnanbwp at 1:11 PM on September 21, 2001

mattpfeff, sacre bleu:

Isn't the Pakistani government a lost cause anyway? What actions could the U.S. government have taken that would have assuaged the extremists?
posted by argybarg at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2001

Adnan, there are always idiots in the world. Giving up tilts the balance farther in their favor...

I myself am desperately trying to learn that no matter how many ways I try to explain something to someone, which is so obviously right and without any direct counter-argument from them, some people will not use the brain that God gave them.

Me: "We helped create the environment of anger that boosted the anti-American fervor, which is what led to the terrorists"

They: "So what you're saying was that it was okay for the Columbine kids to kill the bullies?"

Me: "No, it wasn't alright and neither was this attack, and that's not what I said."

Ugh. I'm so tired of fighting this battle, so I know what you're feeling. Just remember that sarcasm is often not apparent in writing...
posted by fooljay at 9:42 PM on September 21, 2001

« Older Arab-Americans kicked off NWA flight.   |   Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments