What happened to Bush’s macho speech that there would be no sanctuary for al Qaeda anywhere in the world? Now one of our “allies” is an untouchable sanctuary. Pakistan may be a sovereign country but when one third of the area of that nation is controlled by outlaws Pakistan hardly has sovereignty over its own national borders. Meanwhile al Qaeda is using this Sanctuary to train and plan for world war against the West. Either Pakistan needs to deal with its own problem quickly, ask for help to deal with it from NATO. Or NATO and India have to deal with the world security threat themselves.

“There are concerns now about how much [al Qaeda] turned inward, literally, inside Pakistan, as well as the kind of planning, training, financing and support that the worldwide effort is,” Adm. Mullen said.
“So, [the Pentagon is] extremely, extremely concerned about that, and I think continued pressure there will have to be brought,” he said. Adm. Mullen added, however, that “Pakistan is a sovereign country and certainly it’s really up to … President Musharraf and certainly his advisers and his military to address that problem directly.”

We have a whole new crop of nuts growing on those Middle East and Pakistani trees.

clipped from blogs.abcnews.com Baitullah Meshud, also known as the emir of South Waziristan, is described by Pakistani authorities as a brutal but able leader who commands thousands of followers. Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf blames him for the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, as well as a spate of recent attacks here that have left more than 400 dead. NATO authorities in Afghanistan have offered a $50,000 reward for his capture. “I think he is now a much bigger threat than bin Laden and al Zawahri in this part of the world,” said ABC News consultant Rahimullah Yusufzai. “He seems to have a large reservoir of suicide bombers, and he is a bigger threat in this region, in Pakistan and certain border provinces of Afghanistan than even the al Qaeda leadership,” said Yusufzai.

Taste it, we will all be drinking it in 2008.

Lets see… Bhutto’s daughter took over for her old man and now her 19 year old son and her criminal husband is going to take over from her. Is this a democracy or a Mafia dynasty? Bhutto robbed billions from Pakistan and her husband is no slouch either . I suppose the US will not have any problem supporting woman, children and criminals to continue to lead Pakistan to “democracy”. What a Joke!

NAUDERO, Pakistan (AP) - Benazir Bhutto’s 19-year-old son—a student with no political experience—was named symbolic leader of her party Sunday, while her husband took effective control, extending Pakistan’s most enduring political dynasty. The major parties appeared to agree that the elections should take place as scheduled on Jan. 8 despite street violence and political turmoil triggered by the assassination of Bhutto. The Election Commission is to discuss the timing of the polls Monday. A successful vote would bolster U.S.-backed plans to restore democracy”

“The appointment of Bhutto’s husband, Asif Ali Zardari, was not without its own complications. A former Cabinet minister who spent eight years in prison on corruption accusations, he is known as “Mr. 10 Percent” for allegedly taking kickbacks and is viewed with suspicion by many Pakistanis.”

Schippert does not paint a pretty picture in this interview. He implies we may be soon fighting a war in Pakistan but if al-Qaeda gets control of Pakistan that has 80 nukes what choice do we have?

FrontPage Magazine:

“Schippert: For the US going forward, we may be approaching a time where the US needs to determine if it is going to continue to support Musharraf wholly and stay largely out of Pakistan or confront the danger full-on and unleash a full assault on the tribal regions held by al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Perhaps a recognition that at the end of the day there truly is no defeating al-Qaeda within Pakistan by Pakistan, and that it will require American boots on the ground and assets in the air - whether convenient or not, pleasant contemplation
or not. We may be nearing that crucial decision point.”

History can tell us many things. But what it cannot tell us is often more
troubling. We are now in uncharted waters with an increasingly unstable nuclear power while a bloodthirsty international terrorist organization thrives within its borders. Not even the fall and breakup of the Soviet Union can compare in potential perils. The coming week is critical, and all events in Pakistan warrant the closest attention.

If that poll is anywhere near correct Pakistan is in big trouble and so are we.

“It may be that the assassination of Bhutto is part of this jihad, and part of a larger effort to institute Islamic rule in Pakistan. That movement has broad popular support. According to a September CNN poll, in Pakistan “bin Laden has a 46 percent approval rating. Musharraf’s support is 38 percent. U.S. President George W. Bush’s approval: 9 percent.”

It looks like the US has make plans to have forces in Pakistan by early next year to continue to fight World War III against the radical Islamic groups. With the Bhutto assignation that even looks more likely.

“Beginning early next year, U.S. Special Forces are expected to vastly
expand their presence in Pakistan, as part of an effort to train and support indigenous counter-insurgency forces and clandestine counterterrorism units, according to defense officials involved with the planning.”

The killing of opposition leader and former Prime Minister Bhutto is going to make an unstable situation in Pakistan much worse. Things can out of control there rather quickly. I would think that Pervez Musharraf will declare emergency powers and the situation will get even worse than it was several weeks ago.

Much might depend upon who gets the blame for this assassination. If it is linked with Musharraf there will be a uprising against him. If Musharraf can convincing link this with Islamic terrorism Musharraf might soon have to take major military action against their strongholds in the western territories. Keep in mind that the Pakistan government and military is infiltrated with radical Islamics making widespread military operations difficult. Also keep in mind that Pakistan possesses a nuclear arsenal that the Islamics want control of. If the nukes seem to be in danger of falling into the hands of radicals NATO will take them out.

FOXNews.com - Deadly Homicide Bomb Blast Targets Former Pakistan Interior Minister - International News News of the World Middle East News Europe News

SHERPAO, Pakistan — A suicide attacker detonated a bomb packed with ball bearings and nails amid hundreds of holiday worshippers Friday at the home of Pakistan’s former interior minister, killing at least 50 people, authorities said.
It was the second suicide attack in eight months apparently targeting Aftab Khan Sherpao, who escaped injury. One of his sons was wounded.
Suspicion will likely focus on the pro-Taliban or Al Qaeda militants active in the northwestern region of the country where the attack occurred. It deepens the sense of uncertainty in Pakistan as it heads into Jan. 8 parliamentary elections.
The bombing, which came during the Islamic holy day of Eid al-Adha, created a scene of carnage at the mosque at Sherpao’s residential compound in Sherpao

WorldNetDaily: Al-Qaida targets Pakistan nukes: “WASHINGTON – Osama bin Laden’s quest for a nuclear weapons arsenal now focuses on al-Qaida efforts to destabilizing Pakistan, plunging the nation into civil war, seizing power in conjunction with other radical jihadists and grabbing control of the world’s first Islamic bombs, according to a report in a West Point anti-terrorism journal.”

ANALYSIS: Iran laughing at U.S. lack of nuclear intelligence - Haaretz - Israel News
The noise that was heard last night in Tehran, according to credible reports, was a hearty Persian laugh after looking at the U.S. intelligence service’s website. The unclassified document that Director of National Intelligence, Adm. Mike McConnell published, titled “Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities,” as a laundered version that faithfully represents the greatest secrets collected by the CIA and the other U.S. intelligence services, can appropriately be called “much evaluation on no intelligence.”

“Behind the heap of words, presented as “a low or medium level of certainty,” the differences between the worst-case and the best-case views on when Iran will be capable of producing a nuclear weapon are not that great. These range from somewhere between 2009 and the following five years, starting in 2010. Even McConnell’s intelligence officers agree that Iran can buy nukes off the shelf - from Syria, North Korea and maybe Pakistan - and that the renewal of the program, if it is indeed on a coffee break, depends only on the intentions of the rulers, and those intentions will change only when the rulers are replaced. The CIA is so angry with Bush, it seems, that it is ready to go to great lengths in order to help another president.

Iran is right, we do not have a clue. Why publish a report so the Leftist media can make a big deal about how long it will really be before Iran can go nuclear when the report itself says it only has a low or medium level of certainty? Even Israel says the report is wrong.

This was obviously designed to play into the democrats and embarrass the President. The intelligence heads play it safe and take themselves off the hook if Bush should order a strike on Iran. If Bush is right then they can just tell the new administration that the report had a low degree of certainty. If things go wrong after a Bush strike they can tell the new administration that they told Bush there was no reason to launch an attack. It is a win win situation for them but the “intelligence” report totally fails the country. If the combined intelligence of 16 intelligence agencies is nothing more than a guess what good are they? I am not impressed and neither is Iran.

FrontPage Magazine: “Why did our leaders evade Pakistan’s true nature? Faced with the need to do something against the totalitarian threat, it was far easier to pretend that Musharraf was a great ally who would help rid us of our problems if we would only uncritically embrace him. To declare Musharraf’s regime evil, albeit the lesser of two evils, would have required a deep moral confidence in the righteousness of our cause. The Bush administration didn’t display this confidence in our own fight against the Taliban, allowing the enablers of bin Laden to flee rather than ruthlessly destroying them. Why would it display such confidence in dealing with Pakistan? But no matter how much one pretends that facts are not facts, eventually they will rear their heads. This is why we are caught so unawares by the crisis in Pakistan. Our blindness was self-induced.”

FOXNews.com - America Has Failed Our Veterans - FOX Fan: “We gave $10 billion to Pakistan since 9/1, we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars — that’s hundreds of billions in Iraq — you would think a few billion could be set aside for the men and women making it all possible. A few billion to ensure that this nation does what it promised and takes care of those who have taken care of us. For my disconnected, disinterested uncaring friends, it’s not about the damn money. We have the damn money, it’s us, we suck, we do not care. We do photo ops with soldiers standing behind us, we walk in parades and shake hands on the appropriate holidays. Some of us wear flags in our lapels, but we are all collectively allowing out government to perpetuate this crime, the crime of not taking care of soldiers. We need a revolution of care and competence, we need a political action committee, we need something powerful outside the government to make this government keep its sacred promise to our soldiers. I am telling you — we have lost our way. I am hoping it’s not too late.”

Just throw money at poor men and women in order to get them to sign up for foreign wars. Then be miserly toward their needs when they come back in pieces. We could call them our disposable soldiers.

Pakistan’s Collapse, Our Problem - New York Times: “AS the government of Pakistan totters, we must face a fact: the United States simply could not stand by as a nuclear-armed Pakistan descended into the abyss. Nor would it be strategically prudent to withdraw our forces from an improving situation in Iraq to cope with a deteriorating one in Pakistan. We need to think — now — about our feasible military options in Pakistan, should it really come to that.

WorldNetDaily: Musharraf: The Tolstoy of the Zulus: Media darling Bhutto returned to Pakistan after fleeing the country following her conviction for corruption as prime minister. Her conviction was later overturned by the corrupt Pakistani Supreme Court, leaving me to ponder, which is worse: being convicted of corruption in a Pakistani court or being exonerated of corruption in a Pakistani court? She was again convicted in a Swiss court of money laundering.
The media adore Bhutto because she went to Harvard and Oxford, which I consider two more strikes against her. A degree from Harvard is prima facie evidence that she’s on the side of the terrorists. I note that Bhutto demonstrates her own deep commitment to democracy by giving herself the title “chairperson for life” of the Pakistan Peoples Party.

“Pakistan doesn’t need Adlai Stevenson right now. It needs Mustafa Kemal Ataturk to impose military rule and drag a country of Islamic savages into the 19th century, as Ataturk did in Turkey. Pakistan’s Ataturk is Gen. Musharraf. To try to force democracy on the differing ‘I hate America’ factions in Pakistan at this stage would be worse than Jimmy Carter’s abandonment of the shah in 1979. It would result in what former Assistant Secretary of State Edward Djerejian called: ‘one man, one vote, one time.’ The difference is: Instead of scimitars, this den of al-Qaida-supporting pederasts will have nukes. “

Caroline B. Glick: America’s strategies for victory — and defeat: “Two conclusions can be drawn from contrasting America’s victory in Iraq with its failures in so many other theaters. First, the only way to successfully fight your enemies is to fight them. And second, basing policies on pretending to deter leaders who are not deterred is a recipe for failure. Until the Americans accept these lessons, Iraq aside, the international environment will grow ever more threatening. “

She is correct, American foreign policy with Muslim nations has been a disaster ever since Jimmy Carter.

Pakistan political instability raises nuclear risk - Yahoo! News: “A senior U.S. general this week said the Pentagon was worried about the security of Pakistan nuclear weapons after Musharraf declared a state of emergency on Saturday, prompting protests and arrests. But on Thursday, other U.S. defense officials backpedaled, saying the weapons are under the military’s full control. They said the Pakistani military was a responsible steward of the arsenal and would stay out of the current political conflict. ‘From the Army’s standpoint, from the military’s standpoint, the confidence remains high,’ one U.S. military officer said. ‘There has been no break in that control,’ the officer said about the Pakistani military’s control over the weapons. U.S. lawmakers, however, expressed more uncertainty about the security of the weapons.”

Wider Iranian threat is feared - Los Angeles Times “Wider Iranian threat is feared template_bas template_bas Many U.S. officials believe small conflicts on the ground or at sea are potentially riskier than a nuclear program.”

Frankly, we need to quit playing these stupid silly fantasy games made up in the minds of naive people in the State depart. Either deal with Islamofascism now throughout the world or do what Ron Paul says and go home and let the rest of the world worry about it. Let those that live in the area deal with their own problems. They will then certainly soon use their weapons on themselves. Israel will have the Iranian nuclear threat against them settled by noon. Pakistan will either deal with their terrorists or India will.

This tired game where we pretend that we can solve irrational issues of hate by ratcheting up diplomatic pressures and appeasement has no basics in reality. Neither does thinking they we can make the Middle East in our own image. It is only buying them more time to set up new Islamofascism alliances and to get backing from Russia and China. Without dealing with Islamofascism It does not even matter what we do in the Middle East because unless Islamofascism is crushed throughout the world and rejected by Islam the violent agenda is only going to spread to Europe and beyond.

American Thinker Blog: Report: Taliban Preparing an “End of Ramadan” Offensive: “Report: Taliban Preparing an ‘End of Ramadan’ Offensive

“This disturbing report in the usually reliable Asia Times paints a picture of renewed activity of the Taliban along the border with Afghanistan with as many as 20,000 armed fighters - many of them suicide bombers - preparing to enter the country:”

As long as we allow sanctuary and training camps in Pakistan these things are going to happen.

Critics blast Norwegian aid to ‘Koran schools’ in Pakistan - Aftenposten.no: “‘At a time when people all over the globe are working to fight fundamentalism and terror, the Norwegian authorities chose to sponsor the type of schools known for breeding fundamentalism,’ Høglund claimed. ‘That must end immediately.”At a time when people all over the globe are working to fight fundamentalism and terror, the Norwegian authorities chose to sponsor the type of schools known for breeding fundamentalism,’ Høglund claimed. ‘That must end immediately.’”

Abizaid: World could abide nuclear Iran - Yahoo! News: “John Abizaid, the retired Army general who headed Central Command for nearly four years, said he was confident that if Iran gained nuclear arms, the United States could deter it from using them. ‘Iran is not a suicide nation,’ he said. ‘I mean, they may have some people in charge that don’t appear to be rational, but I doubt that the Iranians intend to attack us with a nuclear weapon.’ The Iranians are aware, he said, that the United States has a far superior military capability.”

We already have been told by the leaders of Iran what they believe and what they will do with nuclear weapon if they obtain them. Martyrs are not going to be deterred by the US. It is not a matter of what the Iranian people want, it is what those who control the nukes in that nation will do. It is also not a matter of what the Iranians could do to the United States, although an EMP would be possible and disastrous for the US. Iran could also give nuclear devices to terrorists.

Israel is not going to allow Iran to have nukes in any case, and if Iran somehow got nukes, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and others will also develop them. Is that what you want in the Middle East? Just because we had to live with those who had nukes in the past does not mean that we should not prevent new threats against civilization in the future when we have that ability. The US and Russian almost used nukes against each other as did India and Pakistan. China still threatens us with them and Russia is again emerging as a threat. Now you wish to add Iran to the mix, a nation controlled by wacko religious nut cases?

There is only one sane course of action and that is to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. That could be done in one week. Sure, the world could abide nuclear Iran until they used them but then it would be a little too late. Its amazing that we had people who think like Abizaid leading our military. It is more amazing that anyone would give any credence to what he said.

Chuck Baldwin — 9/11, Six Years Later: “Yet, President Bush would have us believe that he is fighting a ‘war on terrorism’ by invading Iraq, a country that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. However, the war in Iraq has done little to fight terrorism, and has done much to assist it.

Instead of invading a country with no ties to 9/11, we should have followed Ron Paul’s advice. Congress should have passed H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001, and sent our forces on a specific and narrow mission to take out bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

Chuck Baldwin has a short memory. We did not invade Iraq to fight against the same terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attack. Those who say this are revising history for their own propaganda. We went into Iraq to take out Saddam and his butchers who were terrorists of another type. We went in because all intelligence told us they had WMD capabilities. Almost all Americans were behind this US action.

Even in hindsight we had to invade. If Bush did nothing against Iraq and Saddam had still been in power at the next national election Americans would have dumped Bush and elected someone who would invade Iraq. You probably would have been all for it as well.

If Saddam were still in Iraq today the problems in the Middle East would be worse not better. The terror threat to the US and Israel would be worse not better.

As a Christian, I do not know why you cannot understand that the root evil is Islamofascism and it must be defeated. It does not matter what country the Fascists reside in. Islamofascism must be defeated as an ideology throughout the world or we will have a clash of civilizations that will make World War II look like a small pilot project.

We made some huge mistakes in Iraq just after the invasion and we are paying for those mistakes but the invasion was justified as almost all Americans agreed at the time.

Since you do not seem to know it, we have had a mission to take out Bin Laden and al-Qaeda ever since 9/11. Just passing a bill in Congress does not accomplish this task. If you are implying we can just invade Pakistan without their permission it would make the war in Iraq seem mild in comparison.

It is easy for you to sit there and second guess and bad mouth our elected national leaders with your hindsight but who in the world certified you as an expect on foreign affairs?

You should be preaching the gospel you were trained to preach instead of just pandering to hindsighters, conspiracy nuts and malcontents and preaching a false gospel. Is this what you preach on Sunday?

Saudis Developing Nuclear Weapons - CWN: “Amid the growing controversy over Iran’s nuclear program, new information has emerged to suggest that Iran’s bitter rival, Saudi Arabia, has also been developing nuclear weapons. Saudi Arabia is believed to be building its clandestine nuclear program with the help of nuclear scientists from Pakistan. Earlier this week an Arabic news website published claims that Saudi Arabia has secretly constructed nuclear laboratories beneath several newly-built prisons. According to the magazine Israel Today, the website also ‘cited intelligence reports that indicated the Saudis are constructing a massive underground nuclear center and missile base south of the capital of Riyadh.’ It has long been speculated that Saudi Arabia is developing a nuclear weapons program. In fact, evidence suggests that Saudi Arabia’s quest for the bomb began as early as 1975.”

Oh great! Now we find out that Saudi Arabia also is developing nukes. We can’t let them get nukes either since they are the crib of terrorism. Next decade is not looking very good for the world.

Bush War Adviser Says Draft Worth a Look: “WASHINGTON (AP) - Frequent tours for U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan have stressed the all-volunteer force and made it worth considering a return to a military draft, President Bush’s new war adviser said Friday. ‘I think it makes sense to certainly consider it,’ Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute said in an interview with National Public Radio’s ‘All Things Considered.’ ‘And I can tell you, this has always been an option on the table. “

You cannot have a draft in an unpopular war any more. Have you people learned nothing from Vietnam? Rebellion in people would overturn the government and a draft would destroy the professionalism of the military. So consider it if that is what you really want to do and you will be much like Charles Randgel. On the other hand, if there were a nuclear attack on a city and a war against forces in Pakistan and radical Islam everywhere became necessary because of it then their might be enough support for a draft. Expecting a draft to be possible among our young under conditions in the country today is quite delusional.

Pakistan urges UK to pull out of Afghanistan - Telegraph: “Britain and America have been urged to prepare an exit strategy from Afghanistan by sources within the Pakistan government as the number of fatalities among Nato forces fighting the Taliban grows.”

Pakistan had better start dealing with the problem of allowing terrorists to have training camps on their own soil. I can assure them if they do not take care of the problem soon. NATO will. Telling NATO to depart from fighting the war on terrorism while the war is still ongoing is rather stupid foreign policy unless you want NATO to believe that the government of Pakistan is really part of the problem.