search this site: search the web:
Welcome to our New Server! Stronger, faster, and now with Lutein!

U.S. THREATENED TO BOMB PAKISTAN AFTER 9/11

user ballots

political :

U.S. THREATENED TO BOMB PAKISTAN AFTER 9/11


[+] serious ballot by cranky
ACTIVE Fri Sep 22, 06 - Wed Jun 17, 09

U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

By Gertrude Chavez-Dreyfuss
Thu Sep 21, 6:29 PM ET

President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan said that after the September 11 attacks the United States threatened to bomb his country if it did not cooperate with America's campaign against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Musharraf, in an interview with CBS news magazine show "60 Minutes" that will air on Sunday, said the threat came from Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and was given to Musharraf's intelligence director.

"The intelligence director told me that (Armitage) said, 'Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age,"' Musharraf said. "I think it was a very rude remark."

Musharraf is now in Washington and is due to meet President George W. Bush in the White House on Friday.

The Pakistani leader, whose remarks were distributed to the media by CBS, said he reacted to the threat in a responsible way. "One has to think and take actions in the interest of the nation, and that's what I did," Musharraf said.

* * * * * * * *

Is this a good way to create firm, long-term allies in the so-called "War on Terror?" Threaten to bomb them back to the stone age if they don't cooperate? (Reuters)

Yes, might makes right
No, that may explain why bin Laden is still at large in Pakistan
Register to submit choices


Ballot #102316 : SEE RESULTS

Comment:
Register to submit comments
You may still vote without registration

show your vote with comment?

v 2.0 © BESTANDWORST.COM
smile bank:










similiar ballots:
101602. To bomb or not to bomb, that is the question
131244. Uh, Oh. I am being threatened again...
131289. First Amendment Rights Threatened?
113287. A woman was once threatened with a fine by her homeowner's assoc. for what?
123070. Saudi government threatened attacks against British
91399. What would you do if Al-Qaeda captured Paris Hilton and threatened to execute her?
130280. Why is Alaska suing to remove Polar Bears from the threatened species list?
100833. Should the U.S. do to Pakistan what Israel has done to Lebanon?
73416. Should the US sell F-16 fighter planes to Pakistan?
103559. Has Israel, India or Pakistan ever signed the NPT?


COMMENTS:
This info is SOOOOO old.

The U.S.A. has wanted to go into Pakistan since the beginning... but, out of respect for its ally (i.e., Musharraf), it hasn't.

If Pakistan was led by someone like Hugo Chavez, the U.S.A. would have had forces on the ground in Pakistan years ago.

The U.S.A. is a good ally.
by xxxxxxxx on Fri Sep 22, 06 10:19am [+]

"The U.S.A. has wanted to go into Pakistan since the beginning... but, out of respect for its ally (i.e., Musharraf), it hasn't."

No. The U.S. hasn't gone into Pakistan because the Musharraf military dictatorship is tottering on the edge, and an invasion by the hated U.S. might be enough to topple his regime, which would probably be replaced by a conservative fundamentalist government... one with nukes. That would make all of Bush's chest-pounding and wee-wee waving over Iran irrelevant.
by cranky on Fri Sep 22, 06 10:39am [+]

Voted : No, that may explain why bin Laden is still at large in Pakistan
This administration is a rogue and illegal occupation of the White House. The American people should demand the immediate arrest and trial of the entire Bush administration.
by Beauregard on Fri Sep 22, 06 11:38am [+]

GWB originally wanted to bomb Hawaii--luckily Chaney informed him that Hawaii was part of the U.S.
by elvislennon on Fri Sep 22, 06 12:16pm [+]

cranky: Your comment just reinforces my previous comment.

Beauregard: I guess you missed the Presidential election in 2004. Just a reminder - President Bush received more votes for President than any other person has EVER received in any previous election. I know it's hard being a loser... but deal with it.
by xxxxxxxx on Fri Sep 22, 06 1:24pm [+]

Just confirms what i and others on here have been saying all along regarding Bush, excellent ballot Cranky!
by isay on Fri Sep 22, 06 1:28pm [+]

Beauregard: I guess you missed the Presidential election in 2004. Just a reminder - President Bush received more votes for President than any other person has EVER received in any previous election. I know it's hard being a loser... but deal with it.
by Tode1 on Fri Sep 22, 06 10:24am

Proves you're easily led.
by isay on Fri Sep 22, 06 1:30pm [+]

Tode1:

"cranky: Your comment just reinforces my previous comment."

No, it doesn't.
by cranky on Fri Sep 22, 06 2:12pm [+]

Which leads to the next question: Would they be justified to do so?
by ClosetIguana on Fri Sep 22, 06 6:14pm [+]

Considering the present atmosphere in the U.S., the popular attitude seems to be that the U.S. is justified in doing anything, for any reason, under any circumstance.

I can't help but think that may have negative ramifications down the road.
by cranky on Sat Sep 23, 06 9:57am [+]

cranky: Yes, it does.
by xxxxxxxx on Mon Sep 25, 06 12:33pm [+]

cranky: Think what you want about the future. The FACT is that the USA turned the other cheek for years, while muslim extremists attacked U.S. citizens over and over again.

If the attitude in the U.S.A. seems to be that the U.S.A. is justified in doing anything, for any reason, under any circumstance (which I do not concede)... It is only because the U.S.A. has seen what happens when it does practically nothing.

That is... The extremists just keep coming at us again and again and again... and after 9/11/2001, the Americans finally said, "NO MORE!"

9/11/2001: WE WILL NOT FORGET... AND WE WILL NOT FORGIVE!
by xxxxxxxx on Mon Sep 25, 06 12:40pm [+]

About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy |
© 2002-2009 BEST AND WORST dot com All Rights Reserved