It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Zardari: U.S. Shares Blame For Taliban Threat

page: 1
12

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2009 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Zardari: U.S. Shares Blame For Taliban Threat


politics.theatlantic.com

MR. GREGORY: And is it America's war or Pakistan's war?

MR. ZARDARI: It's a war of our existence. We've been fighting this war much before they attacked 9/11. They're kind of a cancer created by both of us, Pakistan and America and the world. We got together, we created this cancer to fight the superpower and then we went away--rather, you went away without finding a cure for it. And now we've both come together to find a cure for it, and we're looking for one.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on May, 11 2009 @ 10:44 AM
link   
I have a feeling this is only the tip of the iceberg. They go on to discuss the future and how the rug may be pulled out by the end of this next coming year. This was rather interesting here.

A nuclear Taliban? Are they trying to prep the world? More Fear mongering?



That might be what the growing debate over Afghanistan and Pakistan is becoming, as well. If Democrats and public opinion turn against U.S. efforts in that region, I'm not sure Zardari's point--whether or not it's true, and whether or not it should--will factor into the stances taken by those in the U.S. who advocate staying in Afghanistan and giving more aid to Pakistan. The threats of a nuclear Taliban and a terrorist-haven Afghanistan will probably have more to do with it.


politics.theatlantic.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
What are the chances of the Taliban actually over throwing the Pakistan government ?

Or is there more of a chance of some type of coup taking place in Pakistan ?

I tend to agree with you that this is only the beginning .



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Please delete double post

[edit on 11-5-2009 by Max_TO]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Max_TO
 


Not trying to toot my one horn here, but I've noticed very little interest here at ATS on this possible scenario. If you check my post history I have posted a few breaking news threads on this story with very little interest generated. I guess people wont care until the day comes when there is a blinding flash and poof!



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Max_TO
What are the chances of the Taliban actually over throwing the Pakistan government ?

Excellent. In the land where the enemy of my enemy is my friend .. they make strange partnerships so you never know who hates the Pakistan gov't enough to team up with the Taliban for a while in which the nukes could fall through the cracks. (India?)



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
I guess a good question is whether there is any difference between a Pakistani and a Taliban. From what I gather, Talibans are Pakistanis and them taking over just means that there will be a more extreme force in control.

I really don't see many options for the US except to help the Pakistanis with arms and money to fight the Taliban. I just can't see Obama sending forces into Pakistan.

And as far as interest in your threads, I hope you continue to post. I find them rather informative.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 11:02 AM
link   
That is why India has been kept of away from the media spot light, what ever happens in Pakistan they have their back up and its called India. Its a win and win situation which ever way it goes.

Lets not forget that India has been waiting for an opportunity like this for a very looooooong time.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I half expected something like this when I first herd the report a week or so ago of some big meeting taking place between Afghanistan , Pakistan and the U.S . My response was , give it a few weeks and we shall see what the result of that meeting would be .

Keep the posts coming my friend , I find them to be of great interest .

I also tend to agree with your assumptions of the underlining meaning of these issues .



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Max_TO
 


Here is another breaking story thread I just posted.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 11:47 AM
link   
This is important Slayer
thanx 4 posting.
I've been keeping an eye on this for couple of weeks now 2........this is ugly.

I was also wondering of the possibilities of the Taliban throwing over Pakistan????

Is Pakistan set up to fail here? Making the Taliban out to look like a tough dangerous army, now nuclear capable, justifying our (public) interest and tax dollars there for "the war on terror, Afghanistan?"


Afghanistan's geografical location is significant, also the pipelines.....and there's all the heroin that the US is protecting, slangin', or Taliban's protecting.....95% of the world's heroin funds alot of black ops......


I think the US is focused in Afghanistan, and want to make sure the puppet governments play ball. or else.....

The fact that the fear mongering continues with Taliban's nuclear threat, or whatever, only makes me think they (Taliban) might get more (US) "funding" for this war. Stretch it out longer too..........

*ha I just stepped in dog sh*t.*



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I too have been reading your threads but I don't know enough about the situation to comment. But I feel that it is going to get very ugly in Pakistan. Civil war perhaps. God help us if we get embroiled in another sectarian war like in Iraq.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   
This should raise an eyebrow:

"""WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan -- Gen. David McKiernan -- will be replaced by Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced Monday afternoon."""
www.cnn.com...

www.washingtonpost.com...

Who is Stanley McChrystal?

"""Lieutenant General Stanley A. McChrystal is an officer in the United States Army who is the Director of the Joint Staff. He previously commanded Joint Special Operations Command from 2003 to 2008, where he was credited with the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, but also criticized for his role in the investigation of the Pat Tillman friendly fire incident. As of May 11, 2009, he has been tapped by Defense Secretary Robert Gates to be the next U.S. Commander and Commander of NATO Forces in Afganistan, replacing General David McKiernan.[1]"""

This guy means business, I know that. He's "vintage" Special Forces.

en.wikipedia.org...

Well, just goes to show that US is building a strategy here, and not necessarily turning their heads with this fiasco.
Allegedly, Gen. David McKiernan was asked to resign.

"In addition to sending 21,000 more troops and trainers to Afghanistan, Obama has committed a surge in U.S. civilian personnel and aid to boost domestic support for Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who is currently considered weak and unpopular."


And I think the number above is more like 30,000.

This is getting interesting.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben Niceknowinya
 


I know I already started another thread here
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Oops. Sorry Slayer.

and thanx. I'll respond there.....


[edit on 11-5-2009 by Ben Niceknowinya]



new topics

top topics



 
12

log in

join