It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Iraq Withdrawal - a strategic insurance policy?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 07:09 AM
Something struck me today, so I thought I'd share it here.

The UK is withdrawing from Iraq, effective from the middle of this year.

The US is withdrawing from Iraq, possibly as soon as the end of 2009.

Obama's main policy shift is to redeploy to Afghanistan, and it appears he's asking for help from the UK and other nations to move forces there.

Pakistan borders Afghanistan, and although things seem to be quiet there at the moment, there has been a fair amount of turmoil in that country, and should the current government suddenly be replaced in a coup by a more fundamental faction, the West - and India - may be in a position where they face an openly hostile nuclear armed power for the first time.

Afghanistan is the perfect stepping off point for an incursion into Pakistan to make a grab for the nuclear armed forces and secure them if need be - could it be that the strategists are trying to cover the bases here, and have a force, in region capable of stepping up to the plate should the need arise?

Your thoughts are, as ever much appreciated.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 08:26 AM
That sounds very plausible to me. I don't think Pakistan is very quiet, really, though. We may not be hearing a lot about it, but Obama mentioned it a lot during the campaign, as if it might be an important player in what was to come. I remember wondering at the time why he talked so much about Pakistan.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 08:34 AM
I could see Obama sending in troops into the region of Pakistan where the terrorist are supposedly held up. However, I don't see him sending in troops directly into the rest of Pakistan even if there was a coup. IMO, he would attack the terrorist regions to show that he is confronting the enemy but would avoid the rest of Pakistan because he would feel that Americans and the world would not be so approving of such an attack. I really think Obama values opinions and will strive to do what people find most popular.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 08:49 AM
i can't see anyone invading pakistan because......................... they have nukes!!!!!!

if you're the psychopathic despot ruler of a third world country which is being invaded by the US you know you'll be executed when they capture you anyway, so you might as well nuke whatever you can and go out with a bang.

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 05:21 AM
reply to post by neformore

Opposition Leader Phil Goff has said that apart of Bush legacy will be starting a second front before the job in Afghanistan. This is what I have said in the past only I have said it differently. Withdrawing US troops from Iraq to boaster the real war in Afghanistan is far from the perfect solution but it is still the best strategic option . IMO the leaders of Pakistan have given the go ahead for US military action across the border . They couldn't make such approval public for the fear of public backlash .

Ways of continuing to take the fight enemy during the Afghan Winter need to be found and as Gates has said more co-ordination is needed between allies . Something needs to be done about the haven the enemy has in the tribal region of Pakistan .

top topics

log in