If Pakistan was tending its own garden, it wouldn't have to beg against any kind of reaction.

This is going to get "interesting."

Norad: If Pakistan was tending its own garden, it wouldn't have to beg against any kind of reaction.

And if a frog had wings...

I'd prefer international diplomacy be tempered by reality, not blindly adherent to ideals.

Occam's Chainsaw: I'd prefer international diplomacy be tempered by reality, not blindly adherent to ideals.

Yep, this is why the U.S. is unilaterally striking the Waziristan region with missiles in a blind attempt to kill Mr. Big while pretending to keep up appearances onstage.

That's some swell diplomacy right there.

Norad: Yep, this is why the U.S. is unilaterally striking the Waziristan region with missiles in a blind attempt to kill Mr. Big while pretending to keep up appearances onstage.

That's some swell diplomacy right there.

Show me where I stated that the current methodology is the correct one.

Norad: If Pakistan was tending its own garden, it wouldn't have to beg against any kind of reaction.

Let's go pull their weeds!

You didn't. But I can say that the term 'diplomacy' is not in the current lame-duck administration's linguistics. Bush IS blindly adherent to ideals, whatever that may be anymore. It's a pot-shot theater via unmanned missile attack in north-west Pakistan until January 20th, oh, around noonish or so.

But speaking to Pakistan: They're brilliant at playing dumb. The Pakistani government knows EXACTLY what's going on in their back yard, and refuse to deal with it.

So when shiat like Mumbai goes down, Pakistan is left sitting there holding the bag. And India would like to know exactly why that is.

So would the U.S., for that matter.

Norad: You didn't. But I can say that the term 'diplomacy' is not in the current lame-duck administration's linguistics. Bush IS blindly adherent to ideals, whatever that may be anymore. It's a pot-shot theater via unmanned missile attack in north-west Pakistan until January 20th, oh, around noonish or so.

But speaking to Pakistan: They're brilliant at playing dumb. The Pakistani government knows EXACTLY what's going on in their back yard, and refuse to deal with it.

So when shiat like Mumbai goes down, Pakistan is left sitting there holding the bag. And India would like to know exactly why that is.

So would the U.S., for that matter.

Oh, I definitely agree. The Pakis are right, though; what option do we have but restraint? Open warfare between two nuclear armed nations who loathe each other deeply?

Occam's Chainsaw: The Pakis are right, though; what option do we have but restraint? Open warfare between two nuclear armed nations who loathe each other deeply?

Exactly. Remember the parliament attack in December 2001? That shiat damn near sparked all-out war.

What happened in Mumbai was equivalent to Al-Qaida landing boats in Los Angeles and laying waste to a large part of the city.

All parties need to sort through the facts first before flying off the handle.

Norad: All parties need to sort through the facts first before flying off the handle.

Nonono. This is Fark. We're supposed to spend the next two hours and hundred posts shouting back and forth, "You're wrong! The grass is green!", "You're wrong! The sky is blue!"

Occam's Chainsaw: Open warfare between two nuclear armed nations who loathe each other deeply?

Step 1: Grab marshmallows to make radioactive smores
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Hug everyone with nuclear arms

/I dunno, there's a joke in there somewhere... or maybe I'm just sleepy...

Occam's Chainsaw: Nonono. This is Fark. We're supposed to spend the next two hours and hundred posts shouting back and forth, "You're wrong! The grass is green!", "You're wrong! The sky is blue!

Dammit, I forgot my protocol.

*AHEM*....

YOU SUCK! Glass parking lot for the lot of em!

And your so-called 'facts'...Pfffft!

You can use facts to prove anything!

Norad: It's a pot-shot theater via unmanned missile attack in north-west Pakistan until January 20th, oh, around noonish or so.

Wrong. Now, you have made some good points, but, we will still have a hawk at Defence, and the man is rather good at letting the men with shiny brass stars, birds and oak leaves make decisions on the ground. So, they will continue until those men decide to tell that man that it is no longer needed.imho.

And +1 for the headline, subby.

Norad: Dammit, I forgot my protocol.

*AHEM*....

YOU SUCK! Glass parking lot for the lot of em!

And your so-called 'facts'...Pfffft!

You can use facts to prove anything!

That's better.

*ahem* You're a farking moron. The answer is clearly that the Pakistanis must weep and beg forgiveness, while the Indians turn the other cheek. Then we'll all sit down, drink tea, and take turns reading aloud from Sense and Sensibility.

alienated: Now, you have made some good points, but, we will still have a hawk at Defense, and the man is rather good at letting the men with shiny brass stars, birds and oak leaves make decisions on the ground.

Understood. But I'm betting that the U.S. military has relegated itself to taking a bunch of pot-shots into Pakistan, hoping that something juicy turns up.

So far, it hasn't happened. Militants here, militants there, fine. Kill the low-hanging fruit. And all these missile strikes do is fire up the very people that hate the U.S. in the first place, while doing nothing to decapitate the root cause.

Pakistan has a whole bunch of 'splainin to do.

Norad: And all these missile strikes do is fire up the very people that hate the U.S. in the first place, while doing nothing to decapitate the root cause.

Yes, that it does, for our detriment.

Pakistan has a whole bunch of 'splainin to do.

Training was the word you are looking for. Another is dedication.

Root cause ? *that* keeps me awake at night. Sadly, I have not found a solution that does not involve great (er) strife for the regions involved. I am open to ideas.

Occam's Chainsaw: Oh, I definitely agree. The Pakis are right, though; what option do we have but restraint? Open warfare between two nuclear armed nations who loathe each other deeply?

Simple answer. Cricket.

Send in the US international cricket team and let them get roundly beaten by both the Pakistani and Indian teams. Both countries will have a good laugh and feel better about themselves while claiming superiority, and the US loses nothing of value.

/Why yes, I am available for a diplomatic post. Why do you ask?

Norad: Occam's Chainsaw: I'd prefer international diplomacy be tempered by reality, not blindly adherent to ideals.

Yep, this is why the U.S. is unilaterally striking the Waziristan region with missiles in a blind attempt to kill Mr. Big while pretending to keep up appearances onstage.

That's some swell diplomacy right there.

They're bombing the wrong area. Mr. Big tends to tour more in Japan than anywhere else because of their popularity in that region.

Norad: Occam's Chainsaw: The Pakis are right, though; what option do we have but restraint? Open warfare between two nuclear armed nations who loathe each other deeply?

Exactly. Remember the parliament attack in December 2001? That shiat damn near sparked all-out war.

What happened in Mumbai was equivalent to Al-Qaida landing boats in Los Angeles and laying waste to a large part of the city.

All parties need to sort through the facts first before flying off the handle.

Remember the attack on New York in 2001? Mainly perpetrated by Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the usual gang of undereducated religiotards?

I remember saying the same "let's not fly off the handle" rhetoric flying around then, but fortunately we did the right thing and flattened a great deal of Iraq ("come and see the ruins! Children half price!").

In all fairness, I had become an instant member of the "turn sand into glass" gang about five seconds after it happened - but then, I'm not in charge of the armed forces.

Maybe India should pull their troops from the border to go work in a gigantic bureaucracy whose job is to strip-search and humiliate citizens and prevent them from boarding any aircraft without a cavity search or fight in a war with (insert non-involved country) because they could be harboring WMD's and Pakistanis.

I am going to have to call bullshiat on this cause
Everyone knows Cowboys killed all them Injuns

drjekel_mrhyde: I am going to have to call bullshiat on this cause
Everyone knows Cowboys killed all them Injuns

Killed them? They beat them 28-10 but I wouldn't say the killed them.

bingo the psych-o: drjekel_mrhyde: I am going to have to call bullshiat on this cause
Everyone knows Cowboys killed all them Injuns

Killed them? They beat them 28-10 but I wouldn't say the killed them.

If they had played a better zone defense the would a one.

So, I guess a lot of customer service and tech support jobs might be coming to the US soon...

Pakistan and India won't go to war. Not unless India feels like it can deal with the loss of a couple of hundred million people, plus the fallout.

Spanky_McFarksalot: So, I guess a lot of customer service and tech support jobs might be coming to the US soon...

Ppfftt. What does Cingular care if their support personel are in a terrorist-infested warzone? As long as they remember to mention the words "outstanding service" at least 20 times a call, they're good.

Pakistan has contacted Nancy Grace for her Rolodex in lining up OJ, Scott Peterson, the Fugitive (both the orginial series and remake),and other likely suspects.

As soon as they can get a sponsor she'll be on the case.

Unfortunately no one in Pakistan wants to sponsor a crazed woman who speaks non-standard English and is troubled with an addiction to sucking lemons off camera.

It's too bad Rosie O'Donnell wasn't in Mumbai at that hotel over the weekend.

(you'll have to pardon me y'all. my TF is currently running around out and about with my credit card paying for hookers and blow)

JUST the thing i need to wake up with. :-)

Occam's Chainsaw: Oh, I definitely agree. The Pakis are right, though; what option do we have but restraint? Open warfare between two nuclear armed nations who loathe each other deeply?

anyone ever read "A Canticle for Liebowitz"?

heh OC!

oh, and btw, as of this moment, NDTV via MSNBC says they are still pulling bodies out of the Taj.

Norad: And your so-called 'facts'...Pfffft!

You can use facts to prove anything!

Facts (^) one of my all time fav's!

paulseta: Remember the attack on New York in 2001? Mainly perpetrated by Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the usual gang of undereducated religiotards?

Actually, Mohammed Atta & his buddies were very well educated. They chose Jihad... it wasn't forced on them by economic circumstances. I would guess that the Mumbai terrorists probably had choices in life as well.

I think it's kind of a red herring to associate terrorism with the uneducated poor. There's no economic redistribution that solves this problem. The problem is not an economic one... not U.S. and European economics, in any case.

Of course, I don't recall Obama ever saying that we should step down the pressure on Pakistan. All that I remember is him being in favor of ratcheting up the pressure on the Pakistanis & increasing the scope of operations in Waziristan...

alienated: but, we will still have a hawk at Defence, and the man is rather good at letting the men with shiny brass stars, birds and oak leaves make decisions on the ground. So, they will continue until those men decide to tell that man that it is no longer needed.imho.

THIS.

well, MAYBE. he may just say to the Paki's, "Hey guise... either you do or we will." which would be an even hawk-yer position.

legion_of_doo: I think it's kind of a red herring to associate terrorism with the uneducated poor. There's no economic redistribution that solves this problem. The problem is not an economic one... not U.S. and European economics, in any case.

Yes and no. Most of what you say is true.

But in India, there's been continuous conflict between the majority Hindus and the minority Muslims since partition in 1947. And Muslims in India are often discriminated against, and as a group are the poorest class after the 'untouchables'.

Which political party in India gains most from conflict? The extreme anti-muslim BJP - who might just get into power in 2009. The current government might just declare war on Pakistan to avoid looking 'soft on terror'.

Isn't democracy wonderful sometimes?

"Now watch this drive..."

Anyone feel like we should just build an 80-foot wall around Pakistan and Afghanistan, along with a tight sea embargo? No aircraft, either: you come out through a gate and get strip-searched.

If you want to emigrate, fine. But you get a tattoo or RFID chip and can't purchase firearms, explosives, bulk fertilizer, or industrial chemicals.

We'll give them dial-up Internet access, and peek in every 5 years or so to see how things are going.

Who's with me?

Who wants to lay odds on this being where the next nuke goes off?

I personally would look the other way if Indian could pull off their own "Iraq War" or "Mexican War".

Bring back their original empire.
hmph...might give them some elbow room for their population.

Someone didn't like the headline one little bit.



"See you on the first tee in about 20 or 30 years, subber."

Norad
But speaking to Pakistan: They're brilliant at playing dumb. The Pakistani government knows EXACTLY what's going on in their back yard, and refuse to deal with it.

They're not brilliant. They let the conflict in Kashmir simmer because it gives the military dictatorship an excuse to continue, but they're not fooling anyone. At some point India will be pushed too far and they'll start shooting back, again.

FrancoFile
Anyone feel like we should just build an 80-foot wall around Pakistan and Afghanistan, along with a tight sea embargo? No aircraft, either: you come out through a gate and get strip-searched.

If you want to emigrate, fine. But you get a tattoo or RFID chip and can't purchase firearms, explosives, bulk fertilizer, or industrial chemicals.

We'll give them dial-up Internet access, and peek in every 5 years or so to see how things are going.

Who's with me?

It won't work. How are the opiums gonna get through. Opiums™, the religion of the masses. It's not like the drive-through at BurgerKing. There are backdoors.

All-out nuclear warfare is the only way to settle this crisis.

Occam's Chainsaw: Norad: Yep, this is why the U.S. is unilaterally striking the Waziristan region with missiles in a blind attempt to kill Mr. Big while pretending to keep up appearances onstage.

That's some swell diplomacy right there.

Show me where I stated that the current methodology is the correct one.

Here:

Occam's Chainsaw: the current methodology is the correct one.

War... war never changes.

mediaho: War... war never changes.

What is it good for?

PizzaJedi81: mediaho: War... war never changes.

What is it good for?

Absolutely nothing.

is not amused.

mediaho: War... war never changes.



I see what you did there...

But if they did it, here's how it happened.

legion_of_doo: Actually, Mohammed Atta & his buddies were very well educated. They chose Jihad... it wasn't forced on them by economic circumstances. I would guess that the Mumbai terrorists probably had choices in life as well.

I think it's kind of a red herring to associate terrorism with the uneducated poor. There's no economic redistribution that solves this problem. The problem is not an economic one... not U.S. and European economics, in any case.

9/11 is an exceptional case, I feel, and there's a possible selection bias that might arise by focusing narrowly on just those terrorists to get through to the West... for them to even there long enough without arousing suspicion, they'd need to have some 'Western' traits (like college education, perhaps). Ultimately, I think the association between socioeconomic conditions and terrorism would still stand if you were to look broadly at terrorist acts the world over and not just those that get through to the west ... the vast majority of suicide bombings in places like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq would probably be carried out by people who are not very well off.

In the end, I don't think there's a direct link between socioeconomic conditions and terrorism. The missing variable is the indoctrination of people into violent, extreme ideologies, and I think there's a strong case to be made that things like unemployment and general economic disaffection make it easier for people to get indoctrinated. Of course, this doesn't meant that it couldn't happen to educated, well-off people as well, but I think it would be less likely.