Was Obama prepared to go to war with Pakistan?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • tooblue
    Senior Member
    • Nov 2008
    • 5138

    #1

    Was Obama prepared to go to war with Pakistan?



    Obviously, you have to read into that a bit, but it’s not unreasonable to draw several conclusions from Brennan’s words. The U.S., knowing full well Pakistan’s considerable military capability and aware that bin Laden’s home of Abbottabad is quite close to the contested province Kashmir — occupied by both Pakistan and India — was “watching” the event. It wouldn’t be surprising at all if they were watching with one of their AWACS aircraft, which carry sophisticated radar and communications gear that allow them to monitor a huge chunk of sky and co-ordinate a battle within it.

    Monitoring such an event is of course useless unless one also possesses the means to get actively involved. Early reports indicate that the raid was carried out by Navy SEALs carried by Blackhawk and Chinook helicopters, which would have been easy prey for any Pakistani fighter jet that the Americans detected approaching bin Laden’s compound, or that tried to pursue the helicopters as they returned to Afghanistan.
  • jay santos
    Senior Member
    • Nov 2008
    • 13652

    #2
    Better question. Was pakistan prepared to go to war with us?

    Comment

    • FMCoug
      Senior Member
      • Nov 2008
      • 6825

      #3
      Originally posted by jay santos View Post
      Better question. Was pakistan prepared to go to war with us?
      Obviously not. Here's what I think. Pakistan knew he was there. No way they could not have. But they had already decided that if/when we came after him, they weren't going to get involved. Lessons learned from Afghanistan and the Taliban.
      "It's true that everything happens for a reason. Just remember that sometimes that reason is that you did something really, really, stupid."

      Comment

      • happyone
        Board Bookworm
        • Mar 2009
        • 5398

        #4
        Originally posted by FMCoug View Post
        Obviously not. Here's what I think. Pakistan knew he was there. No way they could not have. But they had already decided that if/when we came after him, they weren't going to get involved. Lessons learned from Afghanistan and the Taliban.
        I think this is a pretty reasonable interpatation of the facts that the public knows.

        I may be small, but I'm slow.

        A veteran - whether active duty, retired, or national guard or reserve is someone who, at one point in his life, wrote a blank check made payable to, "The United States of America ", for an amount of "up to and including my life - it's an honor."

        Comment

        • TripletDaddy
          sweet triple
          • Nov 2008
          • 58186

          #5
          That article lost me at "pakistan's considerable military capability."

          The same considerable military capability that has been fighting India's military for decades without resolution (India!!) and that wasn't aware that the US had slipped right into its backyard.

          Pakistan doesn't even qualify as a paper tiger, let alone a real one.
          Fitter. Happier. More Productive.

          sigpic

          Comment

          • Surfah
            Where's Wallace?
            • Nov 2008
            • 33726

            #6
            Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post
            That article lost me at "pakistan's considerable military capability."

            The same considerable military capability that has been fighting India's military for decades without resolution (India!!) and that wasn't aware that the US had slipped right into its backyard.

            Pakistan doesn't even qualify as a paper tiger, let alone a real one.
            Considering they have an estimated 100+ nukes I'd call that considerable.
            "Nobody listens to Turtle."
            -Turtle
            sigpic

            Comment

            • FMCoug
              Senior Member
              • Nov 2008
              • 6825

              #7
              Originally posted by Surfah View Post
              Considering they have an estimated 100+ nukes I'd call that considerable.
              Here is the thing though. They know very well that if they were to use nukes agains the US, we would retaliate in kind. Their country would be a sea of glass. They are not stupid.
              "It's true that everything happens for a reason. Just remember that sometimes that reason is that you did something really, really, stupid."

              Comment

              • Surfah
                Where's Wallace?
                • Nov 2008
                • 33726

                #8
                Originally posted by FMCoug View Post
                Here is the thing though. They know very well that if they were to use nukes agains the US, we would retaliate in kind. Their country would be a sea of glass. They are not stupid.
                I understand that. My point was the fact they're 1 of 9 countries that possesses nukes and a nuke makes any army considerable in my estimation.
                "Nobody listens to Turtle."
                -Turtle
                sigpic

                Comment

                • FMCoug
                  Senior Member
                  • Nov 2008
                  • 6825

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Surfah View Post
                  I understand that. My point was the fact they're 1 of 9 countries that possesses nukes and a nuke makes any army considerable in my estimation.
                  Agreed.
                  "It's true that everything happens for a reason. Just remember that sometimes that reason is that you did something really, really, stupid."

                  Comment

                  • old_gregg
                    scaly man fish
                    • Nov 2009
                    • 16915

                    #10
                    Originally posted by FMCoug View Post
                    Here is the thing though. They know very well that if they were to use nukes agains the US, we would retaliate in kind. Their country would be a sea of glass. They are not stupid.
                    MAD is undermined by desperate (and deluded) countries with nothing to lose. a post-u.s. attack pakistan would fit this description.
                    Te Occidere Possunt Sed Te Edere Non Possunt Nefas Est.

                    Comment

                    • TripletDaddy
                      sweet triple
                      • Nov 2008
                      • 58186

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Surfah View Post
                      Considering they have an estimated 100+ nukes I'd call that considerable.
                      Nukes? Speaking of a paper tiger.

                      How have the nukes helped out in Kashmir?

                      Also, how did nukes help us on 9/11? We have plenty of them.
                      Fitter. Happier. More Productive.

                      sigpic

                      Comment

                      • il Padrino Ute
                        Junior Member
                        • Nov 2008
                        • 19161

                        #12
                        Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post
                        Nukes? Speaking of a paper tiger.

                        How have the nukes helped out in Kashmir?

                        Also, how did nukes help us on 9/11? We have plenty of them.
                        I agree with you that we should have used the nukes against the terrorists no matter where they were in the middle east. They were very successful the last time we used them. Japan hasn't been a threat to the US for almost 70 years now.
                        "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill


                        "I only know what I hear on the news." - Dear Leader

                        Comment

                        • RobinFinderson
                          Banned
                          • Nov 2008
                          • 10548

                          #13
                          Originally posted by il Padrino Ute View Post
                          I agree with you that we should have used the nukes against the terrorists no matter where they were in the middle east. They were very successful the last time we used them. Japan hasn't been a threat to the US for almost 70 years now.
                          Yes, and maybe in the future the terrorists will make our electronics and cars.

                          Comment

                          • FMCoug
                            Senior Member
                            • Nov 2008
                            • 6825

                            #14
                            Originally posted by camleish View Post
                            MAD is undermined by desperate (and deluded) countries with nothing to lose. a post-u.s. attack pakistan would fit this description.
                            Yes but what I'm saying is I don't think nukes come into play in the "should we tangle with the U.S. discussion".
                            "It's true that everything happens for a reason. Just remember that sometimes that reason is that you did something really, really, stupid."

                            Comment

                            • TripletDaddy
                              sweet triple
                              • Nov 2008
                              • 58186

                              #15
                              Originally posted by RobinFinderson View Post
                              Yes, and maybe in the future the terrorists will make our electronics and cars.
                              And hipster comic books!
                              Fitter. Happier. More Productive.

                              sigpic

                              Comment

                              Working...