NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215141,00.html I often wondered what Bush said to Musharraf to get him to help us out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 That's our best alliance? The man who won't let US forces in Northern Pakistan to hunt down taliban bases and Al-Qaeda bases which are known to be there? The guy who's protecting AQ Khan? The only thing keeping Pakistan out of the Axis of Evil is that it's a nuclear state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted September 22, 2006 Author Share Posted September 22, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Sep 22, 2006 -> 07:36 AM) That's our best alliance? The man who won't let US forces in Northern Pakistan to hunt down taliban bases and Al-Qaeda bases which are known to be there? The guy who's protecting AQ Khan? The only thing keeping Pakistan out of the Axis of Evil is that it's a nuclear state. Perhaps best was a poor choice or words. They are certainly doing a bunch of shady stuff in the background. Still, they have done quite a lot to help us out since 9/11. This deal they made with the tribes in the border region f***ing sucks though. They should be going through there with a fine tooth comb looking for Bin Laden if they wont allow our guys in there. However, methinks that we already have SF teams hanging around in Pakistan looking for a sniff to where OBL or Mullah Omar are hiding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Sep 22, 2006 -> 08:36 AM) That's our best alliance? The man who won't let US forces in Northern Pakistan to hunt down taliban bases and Al-Qaeda bases which are known to be there? The guy who's protecting AQ Khan? The only thing keeping Pakistan out of the Axis of Evil is that it's a nuclear state. I am sure he is just preventing the creation of more terrorists... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 (edited) more importantly, im wondering if musharref is indicating by deduction that would the threat not have been made, that he would not have gotten on board with us? musharref has been walking a tightrope for many years, muslims in southern asia on one side and the US on the other. the fact that he is a dictator is the only reason he's still around, in my opinion. were it a democratic society there would surely be a typical hardline muslim fundamentalist in office right now. my bet is that he's covering his angles with the muslims in pakistan and the surrounding regions. though you would think he is realizing that by painting himself as a puppet of the US, he is weakening his standing with pakistani muslims. i guess that still doesnt explain why he waited so long to say this. i think hes making some kind of move the US isnt going to like, so he's playing a card to keep us off balance. Edited September 22, 2006 by samclemens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 So are you saying muslims don't deserve democracy? Because a lot of the political parties that are extremely religious conservative tend to win because of corruption within the existing system. Palestine didn't vote for terrorism with Hamas. They voted against corruption. Iran didn't vote for a crazy guy who wanted to wipe Israel off the map. They voted against an ineffectual moderate who had no luck improving the economy for the everyday Iranian. Muslims, like most voters in Democratic processes, tend to vote out of their pocketbooks and about issues that affect them locally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Sep 22, 2006 -> 04:35 PM) So are you saying muslims don't deserve democracy? Because a lot of the political parties that are extremely religious conservative tend to win because of corruption within the existing system. Palestine didn't vote for terrorism with Hamas. They voted against corruption. Iran didn't vote for a crazy guy who wanted to wipe Israel off the map. They voted against an ineffectual moderate who had no luck improving the economy for the everyday Iranian. Muslims, like most voters in Democratic processes, tend to vote out of their pocketbooks and about issues that affect them locally. if thats to me, no, im not saying muslims dont deserve democracy at all. im saying that the only reason someone friendly to the US is in power is because he is able to use some force to keep himself there. and theres no denying that most elected officials in majority-muslim countries are islamic fundamentalists to a large degree. before anyone tries to counter me with examples, i dont count dictators (yes, assad in syria is a dictator), and turkey would be an outlier- in fact i personally consider turkey more european that middle eastern islamic. that's why im saying generally. i dont know how you are getting what you think i was saying out of that. all i was doing was making guesses as to mushareff's play here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 Indonesia is an islamic country. It's the biggest in the world. It is a democracy not controlled by islamic extremists. Please name one muslim country that has an islamic extremist head of state that was Democratically elected besides Iran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Sep 22, 2006 -> 07:52 PM) Indonesia is an islamic country. It's the biggest in the world. It is a democracy not controlled by islamic extremists. Please name one muslim country that has an islamic extremist head of state that was Democratically elected besides Iran. thats the problem, so few are actually elected. i can think of two, one being iran, and i would have to say the other is egypt, because of the fundamentalist law that is enforced there (per their constitution, laws must agree with islamic law; non-muslims who advocate other religions can be punished under egyptian law)- given, mubarek doesnt flaunt like amenamejad (sp) but the people there live under islamic fundamentalist law, and are oppressed just the same. we just dont hear about it because mubarek smartly doesnt rattle his sword at the west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Egypt is the only arab country that recognizes and has diplomatic relations with Israel. Islamist parties are by and large banned. Their constitution says that laws that Egypt passes must implicitly comply with Sharia is by no means adopting Sharia. That's like saying that laws we pass must implicitly comply with the Ten Commandments. There's a lot of latitude with words like implicit. Egypt is not a state run by islamic extremists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Sep 23, 2006 -> 01:10 AM) Egypt is the only arab country that recognizes and has diplomatic relations with Israel. Islamist parties are by and large banned. Their constitution says that laws that Egypt passes must implicitly comply with Sharia is by no means adopting Sharia. That's like saying that laws we pass must implicitly comply with the Ten Commandments. There's a lot of latitude with words like implicit. Egypt is not a state run by islamic extremists. apparently thats your opinion, we disagree here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 I would put Egypt on the more moderate side of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted September 23, 2006 Author Share Posted September 23, 2006 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Sep 23, 2006 -> 10:21 AM) I would put Egypt on the more moderate side of things. Calling Egypt extremist isin't right at all. They are among the most moderate of the Islamic countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts