Obama vows to hit al-Qaeda in Pakistan

#1
Obama vows to hit al-Qa'eda in Pakistan
Daily Telegraph
Link
Barack Obama yesterday staked his claim to be the next United States commander-in-chief, rebuffing accusations of naivety from his rival Hillary Clinton by vowing to send extra troops into Pakistan to hunt al-Qa'eda.

Obama vows to hit al-Qa'eda in Pakistan
Barack Obama reminded Democrats that he spoke out against an Iraq invasion in late 2002

In a bold speech in Washington, the Illinois senator, trailing Mrs Clinton in the race to become Democratic nominee but gaining in polls in key primary states, said he would dispatch forces to Pakistan's tribal areas even without the permission of Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf.

Laying out his foreign policy framework, he said financial aid to Pakistan should be linked to co-operation in the battle against al-Qa'eda and criticised the Bush administration for abandoning a planned military strike there in 2005 for fear of alienating Gen Musharraf.

"There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans," Mr Obama said, adding that Iraq was "the wrong battlefield" and "the war the terrorists want".

"It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qa'eda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not act, we will." He warned: "They are plotting to strike again."

Mr Obama's speech came as new polls by the American Research Group showed him drawing level with Mrs Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, in New Hampshire, and ahead by four per cent in South Carolina.

The two states are key battlegrounds in the race to become Democratic presidential nominee for the 2008 campaign.

Although Mr Obama was widely believed to have made an error by agreeing in last week's YouTube debate to meet - with conditions - American enemies such as President Mahmoud Ahmad-inejad of Iran and Cuba's Fidel Castro, many Democrats appear to agree with him.
Operation Pakistani Freedom?
 
#2
Thats what I'm promising in my election campaign, and you know it's got to be true then. Or am I talking shit to make me seem hard line??......
 
#4
Up until today I thought this fella might actually be an improvement on the current crop of US politicians.... :roll:

To some extent I imagine he's behaving much as Brit politician would have done in the 19th century. There's a lesson there for the US - your time in the sun doesn't last forever...

lancslad
 
#6
I haven't seen this yet but I must say I'm disappointed. I too imagine he is talking tough to win political points but I'm tired of this shi'it. I would have expected that from Hillary as she wants to prove she has balls. I was hoping he would take the high road and avoid this kind of crap.
 
#7
lancslad said:
Up until today I thought this fella might actually be an improvement on the current crop of US politicians.... :roll:
I had the same notions. Whilst I sure that this latest act of bravado is supposed to entice the average American and show he's tough on al-Qa'eda , he seems to, like alot of American politicians, not understand that whilst their remarks may well be for domestic consumption those same remarks are broadcast outside of the US. It also shows a complete lack of understanding about a country's sovereignty and international law. Not that it's stopped them in the past.
 
#9
Garhwal said:
lancslad said:
Up until today I thought this fella might actually be an improvement on the current crop of US politicians.... :roll:
I had the same notions. Whilst I sure that this latest act of bravado is supposed to entice the average American and show he's tough on al-Qa'eda , he seems to, like alot of American politicians, not understand that whilst their remarks may well be for domestic consumption those same remarks are broadcast outside of the US. It also shows a complete lack of understanding about a country's sovereignty and international law. Not that it's stopped them in the past.
I agree. His was an irresponsible remark and showed a lack of understanding in diplomacy that the US really needs right now. If you think the US is myopic and introspective only now, watch what happens if Hillary ever gets in.

Watching this run up to the election is like having 300 channels on the tele and nothing on. So many candidates and so much crap. Our choices at this point are: Would you like the brown poo, or the green poo? Or if you're a democrat, the black poo or the yellow poo.

In the end, it's still all just a pile of excrement.
 
#10
Now you understand why so many of us over here in the States have been as wary of Obama as any other jackarse who's in the running for POTUS. What a plan... pull out of Iraq then invade Pakistan. Even our current administration hadn't came up with that insane contingency.
 
#11
Khyros said:
Now you understand why so many of us over here in the States have been as wary of Obama as any other jackarse who's in the running for POTUS. What a plan... pull out of Iraq then invade Pakistan. Even our current administration hadn't came up with that insane contingency.
BO has always had neocon instincts. The response from Hills.
Obama ruled out the use of nuclear weapons to go after al Qaeda or Taliban targets in Afghanistan or Pakistan, prompting Clinton to say presidents never take the nuclear option off the table, and extending their feud over whether Obama has enough experience to be elected president in November 2008.
 
#12
What the hell is Clinton on about?!

Mad Cow said:
...prompting Clinton to say presidents never take the nuclear option off the table
This is ridiculous! So she's suggesting that a Nuclear device is a good tool to combat the Taliban and Terrorist threat?

She's too mad even for the US, she needs locking up!
 
#13
Oh yes that will certainly end terrorism a small yield nuke dropped on them, or invade Pakistan with a U.S force, by heck i can see at one stroke thats the end of terrorism, and we will all be living in a peaceful world.

If either of those mad plans happen, were all Fcuked, seriously fcuked
 
#14
The_Goon said:
What the hell is Clinton on about?!

Mad Cow said:
...prompting Clinton to say presidents never take the nuclear option off the table
This is ridiculous! So she's suggesting that a Nuclear device is a good tool to combat the Taliban and Terrorist threat?

She's too mad even for the US, she needs locking up!
She is, in the narrow context of US politics, entirely rational. If she were to say, "No I won't conduct national policy as a bout of willy-waving", she'd kiss a substantial amount of support goodbye and gift the Republicans a PR opportunity they'd be after like... well, like Halliburton after a government contract.
 
#15
Although Mr Obama was widely believed to have made an error by agreeing in last week's YouTube debate to meet - with conditions - American enemies such as President Mahmoud Ahmad-inejad of Iran and Cuba's Fidel Castro
Knob -

a) US governments have chosen to be Cuba's enemy, not the other way around.

b) Cuba's head of government is Raoul Castro.
 
#16
When Hilary Clinton said presidents never take the nuclear option off the table, I think she was talking about the microwave…
 
#17
Khyros said:
Now you understand why so many of us over here in the States have been as wary of Obama as any other jackarse who's in the running for POTUS. What a plan... pull out of Iraq then invade Pakistan. Even our current administration hadn't came up with that insane contingency.
You have said it well. Obama in reverse is Am abo not the Oz type. His hot air output is to look better the Hillary, she will beat him for the top job i sorry to say, American politics, the Muppets are better :lol:
 
#18
Imagine if he did win, it'd be like some incredibly funny carry on film with obama being misheard as osama and terrorist alerts pretty much everyday at the whitehouse, people asking what the US president is doing in the afghan mountains, other people asking why the US thought it'd be a good idea to just hand the entire country over to the most wanted man in the world...the mind boggles at the bargan-bin comedy movies to be had.
 
#19
Still it's odd that the world's sole hyperpower in hot pursuit of the murderers of a couple of thousand of its citizens pulls up hard on the Durand Line, starts leafing through the treaty of Westphalia and wringing its hands helplessly. Only to charge into Iraq on the thinest of pretexts a few months later.

Even stranger that near six years later Bin Laden is still strolling dreamily round Waristan glad handing the natives while al-Zawahiri plots further carnage.

I don't think you can put this down to A.Q Khan's nukes either or the Pakistani military. Cold warrior attachment to barmy Pakistan as back door into China and counter balance to bolshie India is more likely.
 
#20
John McCain:
McCain said the situation in Pakistan is "very delicate," since the country's leader, General Pervez Musharraf, is an American ally with a tenuous hold on power. The Arizona senator says a direct American attack on the country could cause a backlash that might topple Musharraf.
Mitt Romney:
Instead of issuing threats, the U.S. should work with nations to root out extremist forces which may exist, Romney said.

"We want as a civilized world to participate with other nations in this civilized effort to help those nations reject the extreme within them," Romney said. "That doesn't mean that our troops are going to go all over the world."

Romney said the remarks were not helpful to the American effort.

"I think his comments were ill-timed and ill-considered," Romney said.

Obama's aides issued a statement Friday evening, criticizing Romney for supporting the Iraq war "but not believing we should take out Osama bin Laden if we had him in our sights."
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top