It would be human nature to think a President must take immediate action in light of the assassination of Pakistan's former Prime Minister Bhutto....condemnation in the press, sending of foreign attaches, maybe even Condi, but don't rush to judgement. You, and your administration are a walking talking foreign relations nightmare. You are to diplomacy what the Miami Dolphins are to football (o wins and 15 losses so far this year).
Obviously, your boy (Musharraf) has misbehaved (numerous claims have surfaced as to the party responsible), but what can you do? Your hand picked heir successor to Musharraf is now gone, and with her death comes the realities of diplomacy with Pakastan, at a time when anti-west sentiments run very high. Time to go to plan "B".
The question does beg the asking, how can a murderer, an assassinator get so close to Bhutto, to have shot her at point blank range (see the quote from Husain Haqqani at the end of this post)? So to the administration, I say stand down and resist all urges militarily. We have seen your "knee jerk" reactions, and they do not bode well for our nation, or the world. Gather the intel, and what and see, at least for the immediate future.
Here is the story according to today's New York Times.....An attack on a political rally killed the Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto near the capital, Islamabad, Thursday. Witnesses said Ms. Bhutto was fired upon by a gunman at close range before the blast, and an official from her party said Ms. Bhutto was further injured by the explosion, which was apparently caused by a suicide attacker. Ms. Bhutto, a former prime minister of Pakistan, was declared dead by doctors at a hospital in Rawalpindi at 6:16 p.m. after the doctors had tried to resuscitate her for thirty-five minutes. She had suffered severe shrapnel injuries, the doctors said. At least a dozen more people were killed in the attack at the rally, which was being held ahead of elections scheduled for January, at a popular park in Rawalpindi, the garrison city adjacent to the capital."
"How can somebody who can shoot her get so close to her with all the so-called security?" said a distraught Husain Haqqani, a former top aide to Bhutto, shortly after news of her death flashed around the world. Haqqani, who served as a spokesman and top aide to Bhutto for more than a decade, blamed Pakistani security, either through neglect or complicity, in her assassination. "This is the security establishment, which has always wanted her out," he said through tears.
Correction: Now that we are receiving more accurate accounts of the incident (?), it has been determined that Prime Minister Bhutto was not shot. Her unfortunate death was the result of the bomb blast knocking her backwards and suffering a life ending fractured skull, amongst massive cranial damages.
LINK TO VIDEO OF EVENT: CLICK here
9 comments:
.
One commentator mentioned that Al Qaeda is one step closer to nuclear weapons.
She would have been a great force for the moderate Muslims to finally show a strong stance.
No mas.
.
All the more reason to stay in Afghanistan (which was working, and they actually welcomed us there), strongly support Pakistan, and monitor Iraq (and Iran).
It seems we are in a chess game with Al Qaeda, and we just lost our Queen.
Kimba, I understand your sentiment but am temped to dissent. United States has no business being the world police. We cannot win a cat and mouse strategy. Our hope is full transparency and allowing other nations who have neighborly vested interest be heros. Basically and sadly it comes down to the fact that President Bush has so blundered foreign policy these last 7 years with the consequences of America now weaken. It might be better for us to leave, lick our wounds and later respond when other nations ask rather than forcing ideals. Interestingly, decades of U.S. clandestine operations have been a blueprint for covert organization to excel. And because we are no longer first in science with lack of moral discipline and compass, Why should a nation who has lodged lazily indulgent push over the top cowboy politics?
Stay in Afghanistan? Maybe, but only with a new President that can teach step by step why where are there and where we are going instead of just telling us.
... radar
Radar... please expand on what you mean by "moral compass." What morals should we increase? Secular morals (sort of an oxymoron), or religious?
Honesty!
... radar
Pwerhaps it is a "golden compass?"
.
Radar, honestly!
Please explain more. Has Bush been dishonest about something? And do you think you get honesty more from secular values or the Judeo-Christian worldview? (You may have people in both amps who are dishonest, but considering the two worldviews in conflict... which worldview grounds honesty better in an explanatory way?)
.
Bush lied five years ago about Saddam Hussein’s possession of weapons of mass destruction to justify the invasion of Iraq.
Bush has been lying about Iran’s nuclear-weapons program in an attempt to stampede the US into military action against that country. Bush knew the Iranians were not on the verge of nuclear capability by October, when he issued his coming-world-war warning.
How about when he said "Mission Accomplished?"
How about this nugget from two years ago..."President Bush said in an interview on Thursday that he would withdraw American forces from Iraq if the new government that is elected on Sunday asked him to do so, but that he expected Iraq's first democratically elected leaders would want the troops to remain as helpers, not as occupiers. . . . But asked if, as a matter of principle, the United States would pull out of Iraq at the request of a new government, he said: "Absolutely. This is a sovereign government. They're on their feet"
Under Bush’s tenure, the nation has been misled about the truth about new HIV cases. “This is a typical response of this administration,” says Rebecca Haag, executive director of the AIDS Action Committee. “Underestimate the problem, underfund the solution, and blame the victims. Sounds like Katrina all over again!”
Thanks to President Bush and the until-recently-Republican-controlled Congress, more than $200million has been squandered on faith-based abstinence programs at the expense of scientifically proven methods, such as safe-sex initiatives and needle exchanges.
President Bush riddled his 2006 State of the Union speech with dishonest presentations, and he failed to adequately address the crucial issues facing this country.
On Iraq, Bush said “we are winning” and we are on “a clear path to victory.” Saying so doesn’t make it so.
Casualties keep mounting, with 2,237 U.S. soldiers killed and more than 16,000 wounded (2006 estimates). The casualties among Iraqi civilians are magnitudes higher.
“We’re on the offensive in Iraq,” Bush said. But U.S. troops increasingly are retreating to fortified bases.
We are “continuing reconstruction efforts,” Bush said, though the United States has diverted much of the money earmarked for reconstruction and used it instead for security purposes (that is, when the money wasn’t squandered or skimmed).
And, as he is wont to do when he is losing ground, Bush conjured up the image of bin Laden, saying that Osama and Zarqawi would take over that “strategic country” if the United States were to pull out suddenly.
This, too, is a falsehood.
On the NSA spying scandal, Bush was even more dishonest.
He said: “If there are people inside our country who are talking with Al Qaeda, we want to know about it because we will not sit back and wait to be hit again.”
But no one is suggesting that the United States “sit back.”
All critics want is for Bush to follow the law and to go to the FISA court to get a warrant to wiretap that call. The FISA court has granted 99.997 percent of Bush’s requests for such warrants. What’s so hard about asking for a warrant?
Bush received an August 6, 2001 memo entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” which mentioned bin Laden’s desire and capability to strike the US possibly using hijacked airplanes. The CIA warned that bin Laden will launch an attack against the US and/or Israel in the coming weeks that “will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against US facilities or interests.”
Then he said....
President Bush: “Had I known that the enemy was going to use airplanes to strike America, to attack us. I would have used very resource, every asset, every power of this government to protect the American people.” (03.25.04)
TORTURE
We are finding terrorists and bringing them to justice. We are gathering information about where the terrorists may be hiding. We are trying to disrupt their plots and plans. Anything we do ... to that end in this effort, any activity we conduct, is within the law. We do not torture." - President Bush (Nov. 7, 2005).
I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees. President Bush (09/01/05)
Two Days Warning. The White House situation room received a report at 1:47 a.m. the day Katrina hit, predicting that Katrina would likely lead to severe flooding and/or levee breaching. Two days before Katrina hit FEMA predicted that Hurricane Katrina could be worse than Hurricane Pam. [MSNBC 1/24/06]
BUT, LET'S BE FAIR....
“I am not a crook,” Richard Nixon;
My administration “did not – repeat, did not – trade weapons or anything else for hostages,” Ronald Reagan;
“Read my lips: no new taxes,” George H.W. Bush;
and
“I did not have sexual relations with that woman – Ms. Lewinsky,” Bill Clinton.
WOW
Post a Comment