WTF

[bronnyelsp]

Missile attack in Pakistan, Obama? SRSLY?

You were doing so well with signing the order for Guantanamo to be closed, and lifting the global gag rule, and all.

Can someone explain to me? (Not Vox, I know what you think!)

Comments

[lukalew]

From what I know: Terrorists are supposed to be hiding in Pakistan. He said all throughout the campaign that he would use force in pakistan because of that. My knowledge of it is fuzzy, but that's what I know from everything that was said during the campaign.

[bronnyelsp]

I know. I guess I wasn't expecting him to act so quickly. There was also a certain amount of spin in the campaign about using a violent assault being the last resort.

I always thought it was WTF dumb. The way to get Pakistan to help is not to bomb them.

[bronnyelsp]

No, I haven't followed it since the day I made this post. Things have been a bit crazy. On that day, the article that I read indicated that the strikes were weakening confidence of Pakistanis in their government. Which in my view, is not a great thing to do when they've only just managed to elect one. If I remember correctly, it also made it fairly clear that the Pakistani government wasn't happy about strikes within their territory, although it did mention that Bush did the same thing.

I think Bush was wrong; I think Obama is wrong. On this one.

[firenightingale]

It may even wind up being done with the support of the Pakistan government. There are areas that have been taken over by the Taliban and all government officials have been killed (that place where they murdered the dancing girl). So it wouldn't necesarily be against the will of the Pakistani people/rulers.

[krakelwok]

Monday there was a report of a bicycle bomb killing five in north-western Pakistan. Some time ago my newspaper had a comment on Hamas which I think translates well to the Taliban and similar organisations - despite anything they might say, they have no real interest in peace because conflict is the most potent thing fuelling their cause.
As far as Obama goes, I suppose him acting quickly in such a way has to do with image as well. Although he announced his political course to be vastly different, he can't afford to be viewed as entirely passive in the charged atmosphere Al Qaida, the Taliban, Bush and several other governments created in the Middle East.

[bronnyelsp]

A bicycle bomb is kind of a domestic issue. Unless it killed US servicepeople, which is kind of unlikely, give that there aren't any on the ground in Pakistan.

[bronnyelsp]

Also, al Qaida is al Qaida, the Taleban is the Taleban, and Hamas is very definitely Hamas. We don't do ourselves any favours by making "the enemy" seem more potent by conflating them all into one Giant Ball of Ebul.

[voxsjournal]

How do you know what I think? I don't recall writing about the bombing of Pakistan, though I may have. I'm pretty mouthy. (For the record, I'm very troubled by Pakistan and think we seriously blew it when Musharraf was still in power. When we invaded Afghanistan after 9/11 we had a perfect opportunity to transform Pakistan, to stabilize it a bit more and, perhaps, allow Musharraf to reform the ISI, but that's not at all what happened. Instead, we bombed a nation that had nothing left to bomb and promptly took off for Iraq, a nation that had never once threatened the USA or any of its allies. I'll stop there, but my thinking on Pakistan is a bit nuanced.)

[bronnyelsp]

I know what you think about Obama and figured reiteration of how bad he is would figure largely in your answer.