Ari Fleischer told India that they can't use pre-emptive strikes against Pakistan. Here is what he said, to be exact, when asked if it would be lawful for India to strike"

"What is different is the unique history of Iraq. Different policies work in different parts of the world, and different doctrines work at different times and in different regions because of the local circumstances."

Lol.. yeah.. whatever Ari, you damn slippery-tongued jewboy.

SOURCE

I was nodding my head until the little jew boy quip. Which is not only getting old, but stupid as well. make your point, instead of making crap.

My point is that if the US can start making pre-emptives, why can't other countries like India and Pakistan? I can see it now.. they'll just say "But you did it too" when the US opposes their attacks. It's total hypocrisy.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheMouse:
My point is that if the US can start making pre-emptives, why can't other countries like India and Pakistan?

---

Probably because a US pre-emptive strike won't be nuclear.

Nox

So can they just invade Pakistan and give them a "regime-change"?

Maybe because Pakistan is a US ally...

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheMouse:
So can they just invade Pakistan and give them a "regime-change"?

---

That is one hell of a point mouse!
All this warmongering makes the US look like the ritarded kid up the street. If you get us pissed we will keep beating everything possible up until someone finds us and gives us a tranquilizer.

This needs to stop.
Action has been taken, we need no more.

Shut up.

quote:

---

Maybe because Pakistan is a US ally...

---

I see. India can't attack Pakistan because Pakistan is a US ally. Now, a great deal of those Jihadi groups happen to find refuge in Pakistan. Why would the country that has most of these Muslim militant groups be protected by the US, yet Iraq, whom is not connected to Al Qaeda, be threatened with invasion?

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheMouse:
I see. India can't attack Pakistan because Pakistan is a US ally. Now, a great deal of those Jihadi groups happen to find refuge in Pakistan. Why would the country that has most of these Muslim militant groups be protected by the US, yet Iraq, whom is not connected to Al Qaeda, be threatened with invasion?

---

The answer could perhaps be found in the line of events that started with the overthrow of the Shah of Iran and ended - for the time being - with the 9/11-attacks and Bush�s preparations for war against Iraq.

Conspiracy is the natural continuation of natural politics by natural means. FoxLeonard

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
Shut up.

---

Now that is not a nice thing to say.
I think ye need some serious therepy spirit.
Ye may also benefit from actually making a point when ye talk.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheMouse:
I see. India can't attack Pakistan because Pakistan is a US ally. Now, a great deal of those Jihadi groups happen to find refuge in Pakistan. Why would the country that has most of these Muslim militant groups be protected by the US, yet Iraq, whom is not connected to Al Qaeda, be threatened with invasion?

---

India is also a US ally. And the answer to your question is that the government of Pakistan has been helpful in removing Al-Qaida more then Iraq has.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheMouse:
yet Iraq, whom is not connected to Al Qaeda, be threatened with invasion?

---

You forgot about the documents found in Yassar Arafat's office.

Nox

I haven't heard of those documents, but I would take anything found in his office by the IDF with a grain of salt.

all of this is simple,
EVERY ARAB COUNTRY HAS CONNECTIONS TO TERROR!!
Because they are all islam theocracies (or close to it) and we are democratic, they hate us.
Because we created israel (another democratic country) within Islam territory, they hate us.
Because a majority of us are Christian they hate us.
And because they hate us, they are going to fund any group that will hurt us.
There is no way to topple all of these countries, we should topple none, and we should do only what we can under international law to take out the groups, and nothing more.

Of course we don't want our allies fighting amongst themselves.

Pakistan is a key ally in that region. We need it, and it's government has shown a general willingness to combat terrorists, as much as it can without angering the populace.

The populace of Pakistan aren't going to be very happy about this Iraq thing. Any pro-US government in that country is on pretty shaky ground.

Pakistan is not supporting us in this Iraq thing.
No one is.
Except maybe merry old England, but I swear to god, if Bush threw a shoe at the Iraqi ambasador during a meeting of the UN, Blair would have another one in the air within 35 seconds.

quote:

---

Originally posted by HomerJay603:
No one is.

---

Used to be true, but no longer.

Nox

i think we should rise up as american enough of this anti- everything bull shit. if iran can rise up if fucking germany could rise up id the blosheviks could ride up then why don't the americans like ourselves that hate the government rise up and have a "regime" change. its valid. if the U.S. supports regime change i think we should show the government a "regime change"

Maybe because in both those cases there were intelligent interests behind the ignorant populace.

quote:

---

Originally posted by punkrawkerstonershit:
i think we should rise up as american enough of this anti- everything bull shit. if iran can rise up if fucking germany could rise up id the blosheviks could ride up then why don't the americans like ourselves that hate the government rise up and have a "regime" change. its valid. if the U.S. supports regime change i think we should show the government a "regime change"

---

The true difficulty with this idea is 3 things:
1) Most americans are idiots and don't see that the government is bad and that governments are better elsewhere. They truly believe that the American system is the way everyone should be. Look at the metric system, everyone here hates it, but we shouldn't because it is better. The simple fact is that the american populace is unwilling to change.
2) There are more of us than them. We are a small faction, we could do nothing.
3) They have the army, navy air force and marines. The largest, and one of the most highly trained armed forces in the world, loyal to the way things are. We would not have a chance against that

So, in summation, Although the idea that our government could be changed to reflect states like europe or japan, it is simply not feasable. Everyone not enlightened in america is afraid of change and that is most of america.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheMouse:
The populace of Pakistan aren't going to be very happy about this Iraq thing. Any pro-US government in that country is on pretty shaky ground.

---

Every government Pakistan has had was on shaky ground. When I went there, I had to get dollars exchanged for gold coins in the area were I was, because you can't very well ask an AK toting guerilla if he has change.

Vene said it. India can't attack Pakistan becauswe Pakistan is a US ally. Remember Bush's dramatic speech? "You are either with us... or you are with the terrorists."

The US has been telling countries what they can and can't do based on US interests for years, why would they stop now? Plus, backing up Pakistan in this pathetically subtle manner goes along with the "War on Terror" mentality. We want and probably need Pakistan to be our friends.

has no one forgotten that India are allies are of Britian, and Bush doesn't want to piss the British off at the moment, especialy when our alliance with america is causing countries like France to question where their alliances are.