Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky_Shorz
In public he has to stand up and say it is wrong, but the non-actions by Pakistan's army is showing what their true stance is... He's no different than the leader of Syria, sitting on a powder keg with only a squirt gun to put out the burning fuses.
The Pakistan army is now coordinating with NATO on attacks inside of Pakistan. Which goes back to exactly what I said (about 10 threads ago, I couldn't even find it.. we don't need new threads for every update to the story... hint hint)
We had Drones flying over 15 villages today inside Pakistan without one shot fired...
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky_Shorz
In public he has to stand up and say it is wrong, but the non-actions by Pakistan's army is showing what their true stance is... He's no different than the leader of Syria, sitting on a powder keg with only a squirt gun to put out the burning fuses.
The Pakistan army is now coordinating with NATO on attacks inside of Pakistan. Which goes back to exactly what I said (about 10 threads ago, I couldn't even find it.. we don't need new threads for every update to the story... hint hint)
We had Drones flying over 15 villages today inside Pakistan without one shot fired...
|
I acknowledge up front that you may be proven right. However "In public he has to stand up and say it is wrong" only shows what is obvious, that a spokesman is going to speak in a way that obfuscates the truth for the sake of "perception". What is not up for debate is the fact that the last time soldiers crossed the border, they were fired upon. Don't forget the fact that the "apparent" change in attitude came after the Indian air force flew over Kashmir territory. In other words, there is more going on here than meets the eye, and I find it very unlikely that the Pakistani government "loves" NATO, "supports" the U.S.'s war against Al Qaeda/ Taliban, "acquiesces" to foreign troops entering their territory, fundamentally "allies" itself with the Western viewpoint, or "celebrates" the commitment of the U.S. to root out terrorists NO MATTER where they geographically decide to do so.
Comments from ministers and government spokesmen neither prove nor disprove either of our viewpoints, no more than Rice and Cheney's condemnation of Russia's actions in Georgia eliminate the fact that they support the U.S. acting similarly (to put it most mildly) when they see fit.
Again, I fully acknowledge that you may have the better read on this situation. I still maintain that the original U.S. - Pakistani "alliance" was false, or rather, one born of temporary mutual benefit, that was destined to fall apart from its inception. Note - Musharaff is gone - not inconsequential or irrelevant. Note - post Musharaff the Pakistani government has not "played ball" as usual with Musharaff.
In addition, you have to look at the larger pattern very recently developing, unseen heretorforenow, of nations OPENLY siding against the Bush/Cheney/Israel, cabal - e.g. Latin America, South America, Russia, Pakistan - joining in with Iran et alia. China behind the scenes, playing the situation carefully and mostly silently - only threats coming from their alliance w/ Russia vis a vi Iran, via the Shanghai Cooperative, and subtle, but most devastatingly real economic threats via their state newspaper -
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020404, as an example. I see Pakistan's obvious "change" in approach to the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Ahfganistan situation must represent something different than the previous mode of "cooperation".
Please continue to update me with information on this area, and please don't take my responses as a refutation of your ideas. I value your thoughts here,
Z