Pakistan Pissed: "Obama Ignorant"
Pakistan Slams Obama's 'Ignorant' Attack Warning
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan accused Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama of "sheer ignorance" on Thursday for threatening to launch US military strikes against Al-Qaida on Pakistani soil.
Obama warned on Wednesday that if he is elected president, he would order US forces to hit extremist targets on Pakistan's frontier with Afghanistan if embattled military ruler President Pervez Musharraf failed to act.
"Such statements are being made out of sheer ignorance," Pakistan's Minister of State for Information, Tariq Azeem, said.
"They are not fully apprised about the ground realities and not aware of the efforts by Pakistan."
Islamabad has bristled against a string of similar threats in recent weeks by the administration of US President George W. Bush, whose top counter-terror official in July refused to rule out US strikes in Pakistan.
Musharraf, struggling to contain a wave of Islamist violence unleashed by the army's bloody storming of the radical Red Mosque in Islamabad three weeks ago, last week firmly rejected any US action.
"We have said before that we will not allow anyone to infringe our sovereignty," Azeem said.
"If there is any actionable intelligence they should tell us, and only our forces will take action on it and they are quite capable of it."
The Minister suggested that Obama's comments were prompted by Washington's inability to curb the ongoing Taliban insurgency in neighbouring Afghanistan, where US-led forces toppled the hardline regime in late 2001.
"This seems to be a reaction to their own failure in Afghanistan to control the US casualties and instead of addressing the situation there, they are finding scapegoats and damaging their own cause," Azeem added.
Pakistan Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam on Wednesday warned against "point-scoring" by US presidential candidates on vital security issues.
Musharraf abandoned Islamabad's support for the Taliban in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on the United States.
He has said that a top US official warned that Pakistan would be bombed back to the "stone age" if it failed to join Washington's "war on terror".
Story Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Way to go Obama! Way to treat an ally! At the rate he's going we will be at war with Pakistan before we are out of Iraq. Can anyone shut this Lunatic up?
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan accused Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama of "sheer ignorance" on Thursday for threatening to launch US military strikes against Al-Qaida on Pakistani soil.
Obama warned on Wednesday that if he is elected president, he would order US forces to hit extremist targets on Pakistan's frontier with Afghanistan if embattled military ruler President Pervez Musharraf failed to act.
"Such statements are being made out of sheer ignorance," Pakistan's Minister of State for Information, Tariq Azeem, said.
"They are not fully apprised about the ground realities and not aware of the efforts by Pakistan."
Islamabad has bristled against a string of similar threats in recent weeks by the administration of US President George W. Bush, whose top counter-terror official in July refused to rule out US strikes in Pakistan.
Musharraf, struggling to contain a wave of Islamist violence unleashed by the army's bloody storming of the radical Red Mosque in Islamabad three weeks ago, last week firmly rejected any US action.
"We have said before that we will not allow anyone to infringe our sovereignty," Azeem said.
"If there is any actionable intelligence they should tell us, and only our forces will take action on it and they are quite capable of it."
The Minister suggested that Obama's comments were prompted by Washington's inability to curb the ongoing Taliban insurgency in neighbouring Afghanistan, where US-led forces toppled the hardline regime in late 2001.
"This seems to be a reaction to their own failure in Afghanistan to control the US casualties and instead of addressing the situation there, they are finding scapegoats and damaging their own cause," Azeem added.
Pakistan Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam on Wednesday warned against "point-scoring" by US presidential candidates on vital security issues.
Musharraf abandoned Islamabad's support for the Taliban in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on the United States.
He has said that a top US official warned that Pakistan would be bombed back to the "stone age" if it failed to join Washington's "war on terror".
Story Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Way to go Obama! Way to treat an ally! At the rate he's going we will be at war with Pakistan before we are out of Iraq. Can anyone shut this Lunatic up?
Labels: Nitwits, Obama, Unbelieveable
posted by Marie's Two Cents | 3:50 PM
11 Comments:
hiya Marie..I think he wants to attack Canada next..LOL
Angel,
LOL! Obama has left the reality plantation!
I'm getting ready to post on this and hadn't heard about Pakistan's response. So thanks for updating me. I don't know what to call Obama except for maybe schizophrenic.
This is Obamma Hussein's feeble attempt to look like he's strong on defense. It's a joke, Obamma isn't going to attack anyone, that would be politically incorrect.
Way to work the "plantation" crack in there. You take the debate to a new low. Kudos!
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/20/bush.intv/index.html
Bush would send troops inside Pakistan to catch bin Laden
POSTED: 1:44 a.m. EDT, September 22, 2006
NEW YORK (CNN) -- President Bush said Wednesday he would order U.S. forces to go after Osama bin Laden inside Pakistan if he received good intelligence on the fugitive al Qaeda leader's location.
"Absolutely," Bush said.
The president made the comments Wednesday in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer. (Watch Bush state his position on Iran and the war on terror -- 18:06)
Although Pakistan has said it won't allow U.S. troops to operate within its territory, "we would take the action necessary to bring him to justice."
But Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, told reporters Wednesday at the United Nations that his government would oppose any U.S. action in its territory.
"We wouldn't like to allow that at all. We will do it ourselves," he said.
A January airstrike on suspected al Qaeda figures on the Pakistan border provoked protests by tens of thousands of Pakistanis and complaints by Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, who said U.S. officials launched the attack without consulting his government.
Bin Laden's followers killed nearly 3,000 Americans in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001. In response, the United States and its allies overthrew Afghanistan's ruling Taliban, which had allowed al Qaeda to operate within its territory -- but bin Laden slipped the U.S. noose and is believed by many to be hiding in the rugged mountains along the Afghan-Pakistani border five years later.
Pakistani authorities recently signed a peace agreement with pro-Taliban tribal leaders in the country's restive northwest after two years of clashes with the traditionally autonomous tribes that left more than 600 Pakistani troops dead. But Aziz told CNN earlier this month that top terrorist leaders like bin Laden would have "no immunity" under the agreement.
"This notion that anybody who has a record as a terrorist will get safe haven -- we would not even think of doing that," he said.
U.S. and NATO troops are now battling a Taliban resurgence in southeastern Afghanistan, and both Afghan and Pakistani officials have accused each other of not doing enough to capture pro-Taliban militants sneaking across the border.
Bush: Ahmadinejad 'knows the options before him'
Bush on Wednesday also defended his decision not to meet with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the United Nations this week, telling CNN that Ahmadinejad "knows the options before him." (Watch President Bush explain why he takes Ahmadinejad's words seriously -- :27)
The U.N. Security Council has called on Iran to stop its uranium enrichment efforts, which the Bush administration says are aimed at developing nuclear weapons. Iran says it wants to produce fuel for civilian power plants, and it has so far refused to halt enrichment.
Bush said the United States has agreed to talks with Iran "only if they verifiably suspended their enrichment program.
"He knows the options before him. I've made that very clear," he said. "In order for there to be effective diplomacy you can't keep changing your word."
European negotiators are trying to reach an agreement with the Iranians that will stay the threat of U.N. sanctions against Iran for flouting the Security Council's demand while talks toward a permanent resolution continue. But Bush said that "time is of the essence," and he is concerned that Tehran is "trying to buy time" in the dispute.
Both Bush and Ahmadinejad addressed the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday -- Bush in the morning, Ahmadinejad in the evening.
Bush addressed the Iranian people directly during his speech, telling them that Americans "respect" their country and that they "deserve an opportunity to determine your own future.
"The greatest obstacle to this future is that your rulers have chosen to deny you liberty and to use your nation's resources to fund terrorism and fuel extremism and pursue nuclear weapons," he said. "Despite what the regime tells you, we have no objection to Iran's pursuit of a truly peaceful nuclear power program."
The United States and Iran have not had diplomatic ties since 1979, when Iranian militants, who had overthrown the U.S.-backed Shah Mohammed Palavi, seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held American diplomats hostage for more than a year. Bush labeled Iran part of an "axis of evil" in 2002, along with Iraq -- which the United States invaded the following year -- and North Korea.
In his speech, Ahmadinejad criticized what he called the "abuse" of the Security Council by "hegemonic powers." He mentioned the United States by name only once during his speech, but criticized major powers he said "seek to rule the world relying on weapons and threats.
"All of our nuclear activities are transparent, peaceful and under the watchful eyes of the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] inspectors," he said. "Why, then, are there objections to our legally recognized rights? Which governments object to these rights? Governments that themselves benefit from nuclear energy."
The White House said Bush did not watch the Iranian leader's speech. Asked whether he found anything encouraging in it, the president said, "Not really."
Ahmadinejad's speech was more restrained than previous addresses in which the Iranian president has questioned the existence of the Holocaust and called for the Israel's eradication.
Referring to those comments, Bush said, "My judgment is you've got to take everybody's word seriously in this world.
"You can't just hope for the best," he said. "You've got to assume that the leader, when he says that he would like to destroy Israel, means what he says. If you say, 'Well, gosh, maybe he doesn't mean it,' and you turn out to be wrong, you have not done your duty as a world leader."
The president is not the highest authority in Iran, which is an Islamic republic led by religious clerics.
Well anonymous beat to it. I also wanted to post the article where President Bush said he'd go after bin Laden in Pakistan with or without permission. If you believe Senator Obama is dumb for saying that, then what is President Bush?
And then there's this from two Republican candidates for president:
When Giuliani was asked about Obama's comments on the day of the speech, he did not criticize Obama, but rather echoed his position: "[W]ould that be an option that's on the table, which is we have a chance to catch bin Laden and we have got to do it ourselves because we're not sure if somebody is going to do it correctly -- yeah, I think I would take that option."
Both Romney and Giuliani affirmed during the debate that they would retain the option of acting against Osama bin Laden over Pakistan's objections, if necessary.
Stephanopoulos challenged Giuliani's criticism of Obama's August 1 statements, noting that Giuliani had also said that he would retain the option of going into Pakistan over Musharraf's objections:
Then he challenged Romney:
STEPHANOPOULOS: Governor Romney, you said you didn't agree with Obama's plan. You called it ill-timed and ill-considered. Mayor Giuliani, on Charlie Rose the other night, you said, "I would take that option." Why don't you guys take two minutes and debate this issue out.
GIULIANI: Well, I believe -- I believe that that is an option that should remain open. I think the senator didn't express it the right way. I think the senator, if he could say it over again, might want to say that we would encourage Musharraf to allow us to do it if we thought he couldn't accomplish it. But the reality is America should not take --
STEPHANOPOULOS: But if he said no, you'd go in.
GIULIANI: I didn't say we'd go in, I said I wouldn't take that option off the table.
STEPHANOPOULOS: No, well, you actually said, "I would take that option."
GIULIANI: I said I would keep that option open.
STEPHANOPOULOS: No, you said --
GIULIANI: In any event --
STEPHANOPOULOS: -- "If we had a chance to take bin Laden, we've got to do it ourselves, because we're not sure if someone else is going to do it correctly. Yeah, I think I would take that option."
GIULIANI: Well, I would take that option if I thought there was no other way to crush Al Qaeda, no other way to crush the Taliban, and no other way to be able to capture bin Laden.
Romney followed Giuliani by stressing that "America always maintains our options to do whatever we think is in the best interests of America," but simultaneously criticized Obama for articulating the option he had just said must remain on the table:
The point is, Marie, that PRESIDENT BUSH, GOVERNOR ROMNEY AND MAYOR GIULIANI all said essentally the same thing Senator Obama said, but you guys criticize ONLY Senator Obama.
Very, very, very strange.
I would disagree with anyone regardless of party who would actually go along with this plan. Dang, Marie... I hate "anonymous" comments. People should have enough guts to at least post a phony name! Anonymous is so... "anonymous" and always reminds me of the NYT's saying their sources must remain anonymous!
Of course Obama is simply talking out of his behind. I don't believe he would ever attack anyone either. You have to have at least one cajone to do that!
Blessings. I hope you're having a great weekend. :)
Where's the link to the blog entry ripping Bush for saying the exact same thing? Scrolling but can't find it...
LOL !!!
Bush ordered drones to bomb inside Pakistan in late January! Without Pakistan's knowledge! Way to go Bush, it was about time you took Obama's idea and put it into action!
Nice Job!
(Pssst...where's the outrage?)
Post a Comment
<< Home