All weekend we have been seeing and reading how Michaele Salahi and her husband crashed the the Obama Administration's first State Dinner for the Prime Minister of India. We all know about the couple and their desire for stardom and to be famous.
Unfortunately, what we do not know is what agreements, if any, the USA and India made during the Prime Minister's visit.
Was Obama able to convince the Prime Minister to go easy on Pakistan, so that Pakistan can concentrate on attacking Taliban and al Qaeda strongholds, rather than stationing troops on their border with India?
Will India provide money to help the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan? I know Indian troops would not be welcomed, but gold is welcomed everywhere.
And what about trade agreements? Were deals made that will be favorable to American consumers and more importantly, the American worker?
This is the information I am looking for, not how some blond bombshell smiled her way past the Secret Service.
Our country is in major trouble and we should be focusing on bringing down debt and creating jobs, rather than the next reality star.
Its Common Sense!!
Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts
Monday, November 30, 2009
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Hillary - No Holds Barred
Our Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, let the Pakistani press, and the people and government of Pakistan, know that she does not believe they are putting forth an all out effort to capture al Qaeda operatives in their country. Mrs Clinton made it clear that she finds it impossible to believe that the Pakistan government does not know where the al Qaeda terrorists are hiding.
Mrs Clinton also stated that she does not understand why the people of Pakistan are willing to give up land and let their country grow smaller as they cede parts of it to the Taliban and al Qaeda.
Tomorrow she will be meeting with top Pakistani military leaders to discuss their current war on the Taliban and al Qaeda. One thing I bet she will hear is that Pakistan wants the Afghanistan military, as well as the USA soldiers and their NATO allies to begin taking charge of their side of the Afghanistan/Pakistan border. After all, Pakistan would not have all their current Taliban and al Qaeda problems if the troops in Afghanistan had secured their border.
It will be interesting to see if Mrs Clinton's tough talk will have any positive outcome. The Negatives are already out, we'll see after her talks with the Pakistan military bring anything positive.
Yesterday she spoke of possibly cutting off aide to Pakistan. A pretty big stick, but I do not know what carrot she dangled along with it.
Richard Holbrook will probably find himself confronted with a barrel of new issues - especially hurt feelings - once Hillary leaves. Hopefully he'll be able to get the Pakistan government to work with all of the allies and bring about a meaningful peace in that mountainous region of the world.
Time will tell.
Its Common Sense!
Mrs Clinton also stated that she does not understand why the people of Pakistan are willing to give up land and let their country grow smaller as they cede parts of it to the Taliban and al Qaeda.
Tomorrow she will be meeting with top Pakistani military leaders to discuss their current war on the Taliban and al Qaeda. One thing I bet she will hear is that Pakistan wants the Afghanistan military, as well as the USA soldiers and their NATO allies to begin taking charge of their side of the Afghanistan/Pakistan border. After all, Pakistan would not have all their current Taliban and al Qaeda problems if the troops in Afghanistan had secured their border.
It will be interesting to see if Mrs Clinton's tough talk will have any positive outcome. The Negatives are already out, we'll see after her talks with the Pakistan military bring anything positive.
Yesterday she spoke of possibly cutting off aide to Pakistan. A pretty big stick, but I do not know what carrot she dangled along with it.
Richard Holbrook will probably find himself confronted with a barrel of new issues - especially hurt feelings - once Hillary leaves. Hopefully he'll be able to get the Pakistan government to work with all of the allies and bring about a meaningful peace in that mountainous region of the world.
Time will tell.
Its Common Sense!
Monday, October 12, 2009
Obama- Nobel Peace Prize - What's Next?
As we all now know, the Nobel Commission selected President Obama to be this year's recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. From all indications it was as much a shock to Obama as it was to the rest of the world. After all, other than some speeches, President Obama has done very little to take any measurable actions towards world peace.
It could be that the selection committee was impressed with his rhetoric and the idea that the USA was attempting to embark on a role as working with other nations for peace, rather than striking out independently as it had for the previous eight years.
Regardless of the reasons, the committee has now put Obama in a position where everyone will be watching his every move, ready to criticize regardless of what he decides.
We know that the next year will have many decisions effecting world peace. What will happen when the USA & her allies withdrawal from Iraq? Will there be peace or will things get worse? (I think a three way civil war, Sunni, Shiite and Kurd.)
In Afghanistan will the concentration be on Al Qaeda or due to the recent invasion of the Pakistan Pentagon by Taliban militants, will the USA also need to concentrate on destroying the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan to prove we are Pakistan's ally?
And finally of course there is Israel and Palestine. What will the USA do there?
And let's not forget Iran, the real joker in the deck.
Action in some of the most violent places in the world. How will the Obama Administration bring peace, or at the very least stability? Is it something that his Administration should even attempt?
During the next few years it will be interesting to see if the Nobel Peace Prize will prove to be a burden too heavy for Obama to wear.
We will need to watch and see if his actions are guided by living up to the Prize, or putting the USA's interest's first. Let's hope the latter has the priority.
Its Common Sense!
It could be that the selection committee was impressed with his rhetoric and the idea that the USA was attempting to embark on a role as working with other nations for peace, rather than striking out independently as it had for the previous eight years.
Regardless of the reasons, the committee has now put Obama in a position where everyone will be watching his every move, ready to criticize regardless of what he decides.
We know that the next year will have many decisions effecting world peace. What will happen when the USA & her allies withdrawal from Iraq? Will there be peace or will things get worse? (I think a three way civil war, Sunni, Shiite and Kurd.)
In Afghanistan will the concentration be on Al Qaeda or due to the recent invasion of the Pakistan Pentagon by Taliban militants, will the USA also need to concentrate on destroying the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan to prove we are Pakistan's ally?
And finally of course there is Israel and Palestine. What will the USA do there?
And let's not forget Iran, the real joker in the deck.
Action in some of the most violent places in the world. How will the Obama Administration bring peace, or at the very least stability? Is it something that his Administration should even attempt?
During the next few years it will be interesting to see if the Nobel Peace Prize will prove to be a burden too heavy for Obama to wear.
We will need to watch and see if his actions are guided by living up to the Prize, or putting the USA's interest's first. Let's hope the latter has the priority.
Its Common Sense!
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Change in Afghanistan
Two new generals are being sent to lead the USA's efforts in Afghanistan. President Obama has stated that this is a war that can not be lost. We have all heard that line in the past. Now we will have to see what happens.
History tells us that no foreign nation has ever been a long term conquerer in Afghanistan. I know the plan is to work with the Afghan government and NATO allies, but the question is, can this coalition defeat Al Qaeda and the Taliban?
In one way things are looking hopeful. The Pakistan government, out of fear and necessity has been forced to move against the Taliban invaders who took over the Swat Valley and were beginning to march towards Islamabad. Regardless of what you think of what is happening in that part of the world, none of us want the Taliban to have access to nuclear weapons.
Now we will have to watch and see if the new strategy will prove to be effective.
At the same time we need to help the Afghan economy, education and drive towards democracy. We need to bring the feuding warlords to a peace table and work out an effective and profitable deal for everyone. We have to make the country stable, then we can work on making it secure.
Its Common Sense!
History tells us that no foreign nation has ever been a long term conquerer in Afghanistan. I know the plan is to work with the Afghan government and NATO allies, but the question is, can this coalition defeat Al Qaeda and the Taliban?
In one way things are looking hopeful. The Pakistan government, out of fear and necessity has been forced to move against the Taliban invaders who took over the Swat Valley and were beginning to march towards Islamabad. Regardless of what you think of what is happening in that part of the world, none of us want the Taliban to have access to nuclear weapons.
Now we will have to watch and see if the new strategy will prove to be effective.
At the same time we need to help the Afghan economy, education and drive towards democracy. We need to bring the feuding warlords to a peace table and work out an effective and profitable deal for everyone. We have to make the country stable, then we can work on making it secure.
Its Common Sense!
Monday, February 16, 2009
Taliban - What is the Appeal?
I was reading where the Taliban has made great inroads in the Swat Valley of north-western Pakistan to the extent that the local officials are going to give into their demands for using a much stricter interpretation of Islamic law. The Taliban got their point across by destroying girls schools, beheading those not in agreement and basically terrorizing the valley. They evidently won.
What I fail to understand is why the people would agree to this? I admit that I am not an Islamic scholar but I do know a little history. I know that there was a time when Islamic scholars lead the world in science and medicine and that the great Islamic learning centers in Spain, North Africa and parts of the Middle East were the envy of the world.
Then something happened. It appears that Islamic thinking fell into some kind of dark age and they have never recovered. How could any modern thinker agree with the Taliban? Women with no rights, treated worse than animals? No culture, no music, no free thought. Its very reminiscent of Pol Pot in Cambodia during the '70s, when he believed everyone should be on the farm guarded by an AK47.
Where are the modern Islamic thinkers? Why are there no voices protesting the Taliban's negative interpretation of the Koran? Surely there are those in the Islamic world who want to stand up and say the Taliban does not represent how the prophet wants them to live and treat others.
I will appreciate any insight into Islamic law that someone can share. I know their are different sects within Islam, based on history and religious interpretation of the Koran, I just do not understand why anyone would support the Taliban's interpretation of the Koran and their desire to take the people back into the Dark Ages.
If we in America are going to be able to help the citizens of Afghanistan and Pakistan who want to live their lives and religions as they see fit, then we have to understand the mentality of the Taliban so that we will be able to defeat them not on the battlefield with rifles, but in the intellectual, philosophical, and spiritual inner being that truly define who we are.
Its Common Sense!
What I fail to understand is why the people would agree to this? I admit that I am not an Islamic scholar but I do know a little history. I know that there was a time when Islamic scholars lead the world in science and medicine and that the great Islamic learning centers in Spain, North Africa and parts of the Middle East were the envy of the world.
Then something happened. It appears that Islamic thinking fell into some kind of dark age and they have never recovered. How could any modern thinker agree with the Taliban? Women with no rights, treated worse than animals? No culture, no music, no free thought. Its very reminiscent of Pol Pot in Cambodia during the '70s, when he believed everyone should be on the farm guarded by an AK47.
Where are the modern Islamic thinkers? Why are there no voices protesting the Taliban's negative interpretation of the Koran? Surely there are those in the Islamic world who want to stand up and say the Taliban does not represent how the prophet wants them to live and treat others.
I will appreciate any insight into Islamic law that someone can share. I know their are different sects within Islam, based on history and religious interpretation of the Koran, I just do not understand why anyone would support the Taliban's interpretation of the Koran and their desire to take the people back into the Dark Ages.
If we in America are going to be able to help the citizens of Afghanistan and Pakistan who want to live their lives and religions as they see fit, then we have to understand the mentality of the Taliban so that we will be able to defeat them not on the battlefield with rifles, but in the intellectual, philosophical, and spiritual inner being that truly define who we are.
Its Common Sense!
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Indian Intelligence
The massacre in Mumbai will be investigated for sometime into the future. It appears that for many in India this is their 9/11.
What is frightening about this attack is that it appears to have been very well planned out and that the targets were not part of the infra-structure - train stations like in England or Spain, or symbolic structures of power, like the Twin Towers in New York. This time it appears that the terrorists wanted the world to know they could go where they want, even luxury hotels and do what they want.
The fact that they not only targeted westerners but also a large number of Indians shows that they were not overly sensitive about their target, rather settling for targets of convenience.
Pakistan has denied any involvement and is sending the top intelligence commander to confer with the Indians. Let's hope that's true.
Since both India and Pakistan have nuclear capability, the idea of things getting out of control there is very frightening. One can only hope that cooler heads will prevail.
Of course the main concern is to find out how the terrorists arrived, how they were supplied and to take the necessary measures to insure it will not happen again. The same measures need to be taken everywhere else, especially here where a person can go to a gun show by a semi-automatic assault rifle, convert it to automatic fire and then go on a rampage.
American gun laws will be a topic for another day.
Right now the USA needs to insure that our intelligence agencies develop close ties with the intelligence agencies of all countries threatened by acts of terrorism, so that information can be shared and used to help each other avoid future tragedies.
In this day of terrorism, we have to be our brother's keeper.
Its Common Sense.
What is frightening about this attack is that it appears to have been very well planned out and that the targets were not part of the infra-structure - train stations like in England or Spain, or symbolic structures of power, like the Twin Towers in New York. This time it appears that the terrorists wanted the world to know they could go where they want, even luxury hotels and do what they want.
The fact that they not only targeted westerners but also a large number of Indians shows that they were not overly sensitive about their target, rather settling for targets of convenience.
Pakistan has denied any involvement and is sending the top intelligence commander to confer with the Indians. Let's hope that's true.
Since both India and Pakistan have nuclear capability, the idea of things getting out of control there is very frightening. One can only hope that cooler heads will prevail.
Of course the main concern is to find out how the terrorists arrived, how they were supplied and to take the necessary measures to insure it will not happen again. The same measures need to be taken everywhere else, especially here where a person can go to a gun show by a semi-automatic assault rifle, convert it to automatic fire and then go on a rampage.
American gun laws will be a topic for another day.
Right now the USA needs to insure that our intelligence agencies develop close ties with the intelligence agencies of all countries threatened by acts of terrorism, so that information can be shared and used to help each other avoid future tragedies.
In this day of terrorism, we have to be our brother's keeper.
Its Common Sense.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Pakistan Invasion
Once again the US military made strikes into northern Pakistan where it is highly suspected that Al Queda and Taliban sympathizers and probably leaders are hiding out. The Pakistani government is not happy with these incursions into their sovereign territory and have repeatedly stated that the US's actions are hurting their attempts to control those regions of their country.
I find it interesting that both Obama and McCain feel that the US military has the right to follow potential threats into Pakistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistan government. My understanding is that Pakistan is an ally, an ally with nuclear weapons, and yet we disregard their sovereignty and do what we want.
Yet, as we well know, during the Iraq War, allegations have been made about the manpower and weapons being supplied to the insurgents by both Iran and Syria. Both of those countries are not consider to be USA allies, in fact our government favors sanctions against both of them. Yet, you do not hear of our troops or missiles violating their national borders in pursuit of the enemy.
It appears that we treat our allies worse than our enemies. Maybe it is because we do not think that Pakistan will retaliate, other than verbally. Are we afraid of how Iran and Syria would respond if we entered their territory? Are we more concerned of how the world would perceive our actions in relation to Syria and Iran, than we are about Pakistan?
Frankly, I fear that our arrogance is going to get us in trouble once again. Pakistan is in the midst of trying to rebuild its government, its military command, and the unity of its people. The last think the new government needs is incursions into areas of its country that are the most isolated and least educated. I believe that regardless of what their government says, these people believe that the US military is operating with the Pakistani government's permission. These are the people who support the Taliban and Al Queda. These are people, if they receive the funding and training, could start a civil war within Pakistan and start a whole new front on the war against terrorism.
The USA needs to work with and support our allies, not simply ignore them when we think they are in the way. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. We want a power friendly to us to control those weapons. Taking actions that divide Pakistan is not wise. We need to work with the Pakistani military, not tell them what to do.
Obama, much more than McCain, has stated he wants to talk with world leaders and improve our country's image. At the same time he has stated he has no qualms about going into Pakistan to get Bin Laden. Invading an ally, what image does that portray?
Mc Cain is so focused on Iraq I don't even know what he thinks about Afghanistan and Pakistan, except its okay to go anywhere to get Bin Laden.
Our country needs to treat our allies as equals, not as people less capable than we are. If we do not show respect for others, others are not going to show us any respect.
Its Common Sense.
I find it interesting that both Obama and McCain feel that the US military has the right to follow potential threats into Pakistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistan government. My understanding is that Pakistan is an ally, an ally with nuclear weapons, and yet we disregard their sovereignty and do what we want.
Yet, as we well know, during the Iraq War, allegations have been made about the manpower and weapons being supplied to the insurgents by both Iran and Syria. Both of those countries are not consider to be USA allies, in fact our government favors sanctions against both of them. Yet, you do not hear of our troops or missiles violating their national borders in pursuit of the enemy.
It appears that we treat our allies worse than our enemies. Maybe it is because we do not think that Pakistan will retaliate, other than verbally. Are we afraid of how Iran and Syria would respond if we entered their territory? Are we more concerned of how the world would perceive our actions in relation to Syria and Iran, than we are about Pakistan?
Frankly, I fear that our arrogance is going to get us in trouble once again. Pakistan is in the midst of trying to rebuild its government, its military command, and the unity of its people. The last think the new government needs is incursions into areas of its country that are the most isolated and least educated. I believe that regardless of what their government says, these people believe that the US military is operating with the Pakistani government's permission. These are the people who support the Taliban and Al Queda. These are people, if they receive the funding and training, could start a civil war within Pakistan and start a whole new front on the war against terrorism.
The USA needs to work with and support our allies, not simply ignore them when we think they are in the way. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. We want a power friendly to us to control those weapons. Taking actions that divide Pakistan is not wise. We need to work with the Pakistani military, not tell them what to do.
Obama, much more than McCain, has stated he wants to talk with world leaders and improve our country's image. At the same time he has stated he has no qualms about going into Pakistan to get Bin Laden. Invading an ally, what image does that portray?
Mc Cain is so focused on Iraq I don't even know what he thinks about Afghanistan and Pakistan, except its okay to go anywhere to get Bin Laden.
Our country needs to treat our allies as equals, not as people less capable than we are. If we do not show respect for others, others are not going to show us any respect.
Its Common Sense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
