Gosh, tell us how you really feel.
President Bush and Osama bin Laden are visiting the same country this week ...
If ever there were an unreliable partner, one who says one thing and does another, it is Pakistan ...
Pakistan on the other hand, gets preferential treatment and granted equivalence because it also holds America hostage in the war on terror. But Pakistan is a military dictatorship with a central government that can not even control its own territory. What is more, then objective signs indicate that it doesn't really desire to ...
Pakistan was itself a source of much Islamic extremism, a nuclear rogue state, and President Pervez Musharraf, who had seized power in a 1999 coup, had provided many of the same services to al Qaeda and the Taliban in a quest to manage Afghan internal struggles. The Pakistani intelligence service had even directly undermined U.S. counter-terrorism operations prior to 9/11 ...
The bottom line is the Musharraf, like Bush, uses the state of war to mask a lack of change.
The President says that Musharraf "leads a country that the terrorists seek to use as a base of operations, and they take advantage of every opportunity to create chaos and destabilize the country."
Mr. President, terrorists do use the country as a base. Say hi to bin Laden while our there.
I've got to say that it is a rather remarkable thing to see the president of the United States making an official state visit to the country that harbors Usama bin Laden.
Posted by armand at March 1, 2006 11:42 AM | TrackBack | Posted to International Affairsyeah, especially in light of the AQ Khan series published recently in Atlantic highlighting Pakistan's complicity in the marketing of nuclear secrets to everyone who could afford it, the whole thing is breathtakingly hypocritical.
Posted by: moon at March 1, 2006 02:27 PM | PERMALINKAlso on the list of people who would just rather not see what's staring them in the face (or at least people who don't want to bother discussing complexity and complicated choices) - David Ignatius. His column today in the Washington Post is entitled "Good Nukes, Bad Nukes" and notes that India's nukes aren't as scary as Iran's possible nukes (gee, you don't say - who knew?). But in his mastery of the obvious and an attempt to supposedly bring clarity to the nuclear club, he neglects to say a single word about the dangerous nuclear power that is literally stuck between India and Iran. Weird.
Posted by: Armand at March 1, 2006 04:42 PM | PERMALINK