America's next big blunder

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
54
Oshawa
By ERIC MARGOLIS

Fears are growing the U.S. may be planning to attack Pakistan's "autonomous" tribal region bordering Afghanistan.
The Bush administration is ready to lash out at old ally Pakistan, which Washington now blames for its humiliating failures to crush al-Qaida or defeat Taliban resistance forces in Afghanistan. Limited "hot pursuit" ground incursions, intensive air attacks, and special forces raids by U.S. forces into Pakistan's tribal are being studied.
The U.S. claims the 27,200- sq.-km region, home to 3.3 million Pashtun tribesmen, is a safe haven for al-Qaida and Taliban, and a hotbed of anti-American activity. Indeed it is, thanks mostly to the U.S.-led occupation of Afghanistan.
I spent a remarkable time in this wild medieval region during the 1980s and '90s, travelling alone where even Pakistani government officials dared not go, visiting the tribes of Waziristan, Orakzai, Khyber, Chitral, and Kurram, and their chiefs, called "maliks."
These tribal belts are always called "lawless." Pashtun tribesmen could shoot you if they didn't like your looks. Rudyard Kipling warned British Imperial soldiers over a century ago, when fighting cruel, ferocious Pashtun warriors of the Afridi clan, "save your last bullet for yourself."
Law and honour
But there is law: The traditional Pashtun tribal code, Pashtunwali, that strictly governs behaviour and personal honour. Protecting guests was sacred. I was captivated by this majestic mountain region and wrote of it extensively in my book, War at the Top of the World.
The 40 million Pashtun -- called "Pathan' by the British -- are the world's largest tribal group. Imperial Britain divided them by an artificial border, the Durand Line, now the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. Pakistan's Pashtun number 28 million, plus an additional 2.5 million refugees from Afghanistan. The 15 million Pashtun of Afghanistan form that nation's largest ethnic group.
The tribal agency's Pashtun reluctantly joined Pakistan in 1947 under express constitutional guarantee of total autonomy and a ban on Pakistani troops entering there.
But under intense U.S. pressure, President Pervez Musharraf violated Pakistan's constitution by sending 80,000 federal troops to fight the region's tribes, killing 3,000 of them.
In best British imperial tradition, Washington pays Musharraf $100 million monthly to rent his sepoys (native soldiers) to fight Pashtun tribesmen.
As a result, Pakistan is fast edging towards civil war.
The anti-communist Taliban movement is part of the Pashtun people. Taliban fighters move across the artificial Pakistan-Afghanistan border, to borrow a Maoism, like fish through the sea. Osama bin Laden is a hero in the region.
The U.S. just increased its reward for bin Laden to $50 million and plans to shower $750 million on the tribal region to try to buy loyalty.
Can't be bought
Bush/Cheney & Co. do not understand that while they can rent President Musharraf's government in Islamabad, many Pashtun value personal honour far more than money, and cannot be bought.
Any U.S. attack on Pakistan would be a catastrophic mistake.
First, air and ground assaults will succeed only in widening the anti-U.S. war and merging it with Afghanistan's resistance to western occupation.
Second, Pakistan's army officers who refuse to be bought may resist a U.S. attack on their homeland, and overthrow the man who allowed it, Gen. Musharraf. A U.S. attack would sharply raise the threat of anti-U.S. extremists seizing control of strategic Pakistan and marginalize those seeking return to democratic government.
Third, a U.S. attack on the tribal areas could re-ignite the old movement to reunite Pashtun parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan into independent "Pashtunistan." That could begin unravelling fragile Pakistan, leaving its nuclear arsenal up for grabs.
The U.S. military has grown used to attacking small, weak nations like Grenada and Iraq. Pakistan, with 163 million people, and a poorly equipped, but very tough 550,000-man army, will offer no easy victories.
Those Bush administration and Harper government officials who foolishly advocate attacking Pakistan are playing with fire.

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Margolis_Eric/2007/07/22/4359095.html
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Hardly suprising that "playing with fire" is the passtime of America. While browbeating the world into believeing that Soviet Russia was evil incarnate, necessitated hunting down "commies" in the entertainment and media industries, legitimate rationale for supplying weapons to Nicaragua...well the list is just too lengthy to fit here....

America is an imperialist empire. Always has been. There isn't a great deal of difference between Britain and the United States. Britain of course is limited to an island whereas the United States is an enormous geographical block of North America...

Times change and so does the strategy of the imperialist. Years ago the British invaded and occupied whomever's nation they decided needed Britains "attention". America has troops stationed all over the world but hasn't adopted the classical routine of imperial expansionist policies from that era.

Currency trade and resources are the new beachheads and landing zones for America's troops.

If it swaggers like an American and quacks like an American.....be very wary that a handshake one day won't turn into a bombing sortie the next....
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,843
92
48
Margolis never met a Republican he didn't hate.
 
Last edited:

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
54
Oshawa
Margolis is a conservative.

Sorry Walt, but not all cons toe the line like you.

Thanks for the ad hominem btw.:roll:
 

Phil B

Electoral Member
Mar 17, 2007
333
10
18
Brighton,UK
Hardly suprising that "playing with fire" is the passtime of America. While browbeating the world into believeing that Soviet Russia was evil incarnate, necessitated hunting down "commies" in the entertainment and media industries, legitimate rationale for supplying weapons to Nicaragua...well the list is just too lengthy to fit here....

America is an imperialist empire. Always has been. There isn't a great deal of difference between Britain and the United States. Britain of course is limited to an island whereas the United States is an enormous geographical block of North America...

Times change and so does the strategy of the imperialist. Years ago the British invaded and occupied whomever's nation they decided needed Britains "attention". America has troops stationed all over the world but hasn't adopted the classical routine of imperial expansionist policies from that era.

Currency trade and resources are the new beachheads and landing zones for America's troops.

If it swaggers like an American and quacks like an American.....be very wary that a handshake one day won't turn into a bombing sortie the next....

Mikey

Forgive me for this as I do enjoy reading your points of view, but could I ask you to expand on your field of empires slated to include Germany, France, Belgium, Holland, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Turkey/Ottoman empire and the USSR( I could continue with the list but I'm bored of typing it ;) ). I see the British continually slated on here - quite correctly in places, but the actions of the countries that I have just listed was equally as abominable to anything the British had to offer historically.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
I have to say here that Pakistan is already in the war. The Taliban seem to come and go as they like back and forth across the Pakistan border. Taking away that safe haven sounds like a good idea. The main negative aspect is that Pakistan is a nuclear power. They have nuclear weapons and they can deliver them. Right now Pakistan is a U.S. backed military dictatorship. God help that whole region if one of the more rabid Islamic types overthrow Mushariff's regime.
 
May 28, 2007
3,866
67
48
Honour our Fallen
Finnaly some real meat and potatoe fight on terror.
I say we gotta put 500 thousand more troops in Afghanistan to do the job...we should take complete control of the borders with Pakistan and Iran as well...Make a 25 mile DMZ in our control.
Ban the madrasas by dentonation....they want to occupy them while we bomb em...good....this whole affair is getting way to stretched out and costly....go for the big surge..kill indeiscrimantly if you have to anything resembling a radical....let them shave and take off the head cloths to prove their with us......
It's good for the scalp anyway....
i'm tired of this namby pamby aproach....burn the opium fields as well..this is ridiculous that they should be allowed to grow stuff thats ruining east hastings children......
 

Dalreg

Electoral Member
Sep 29, 2006
191
1
18
Saskatchewan eh!
Hey they might have Weapons of mass destruction there. Or maybe Bin Laden is holed up there.

But why stop there, they might as well invade the whole country. You can never have enough puppet states under your control.
 

Just the Facts

House Member
Oct 15, 2004
4,162
42
48
SW Ontario
If it swaggers like an American and quacks like an American.....be very wary that a handshake one day won't turn into a bombing sortie the next....

What an oh so very ironic thing to say.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-07-15-pakistan_N.htm

Militants in northwest Pakistan disavowed a peace pact with the government and launched two days of suicide attacks and bombings that killed at least 70 people, dramatically escalating the violence in the al-Qaeda infiltrated region.

I guess the tribal leaders of Northwest Pakistan swagger and quack like Americans.
:read2:
 

Just the Facts

House Member
Oct 15, 2004
4,162
42
48
SW Ontario
Margolis is a conservative.

Sorry Walt, but not all cons toe the line like you.

Thanks for the ad hominem btw.:roll:

I'm no big fan of Ad Hominem either, but Eric "I know, I've been there!" Margolis really is full of himself. He used to be a regular panelist on a talk show on TVO, the name of which escapes me right now. He was nauseating. Whenever outclassed by another panelist, (which was often, almost, if not indeed, every show) he seemed to think he could give weight to his argument by pointing out that he'd been there.

Argumentum ad Tourism? :lol:

So I dubbed him Eric "I know, I've been there!" Margolis. I see he has deployed the same strategy in this article.

Seriously, don't take him seriously. He's a buffoon.
All the power to him for managing to make a career of it.
Still, a buffoon. :p
 

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
54
Oshawa
What is your definition of conservative? Margolis is a European socialist. France is his idea of Utopia.

You of course can prove this claim.....try and I will prove mine dear Walt, you poor misguided fool.:lol:
 

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
54
Oshawa
If it suits the person and the situation an ad hominem saves a lot of time. It's like a grain of salt.


An ad hominem is a tool used by the weak minded Walt, perhaps if you had two brain cells to rub together you could attack what Mr. Margolis had to say.

No need to fret dear boy, I expected as much from the likes of you.
 

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
54
Oshawa
I'm no big fan of Ad Hominem either, but Eric "I know, I've been there!" Margolis really is full of himself. He used to be a regular panelist on a talk show on TVO, the name of which escapes me right now. He was nauseating. Whenever outclassed by another panelist, (which was often, almost, if not indeed, every show) he seemed to think he could give weight to his argument by pointing out that he'd been there.

Argumentum ad Tourism? :lol:

So I dubbed him Eric "I know, I've been there!" Margolis. I see he has deployed the same strategy in this article.

Seriously, don't take him seriously. He's a buffoon.
All the power to him for managing to make a career of it.
Still, a buffoon. :p

Still nothing to refute the article.

Sad, but understandable.
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,843
92
48
You of course can prove this claim.....try and I will prove mine
Here is a quote from a recent Margolis column.

French enjoy the world’s finest lifestyle in a rich, magnificent, well-maintained nation with an enviable educational system that produces well-informed, highly literate graduates.

Past socialist governments have given them a 35-hour work week, generous pensions beginning at 58 or 60, no-cost medical care from France’s excellent, efficient health system, and five weeks annual vacation. Firing workers in France is almost impossible. Welfare payments are ample. Yet by some miracle, French labor productivity is actually higher than in the work-till-you-drop USA.