Benazir Bhutto Assassinated

**Boyar Son** · 12-28-2007, 01:42

Originally Posted by Sinan

Replying to Boyar

It's not possible for this to go without military reprisal. "
It is not possible to befriend an enemy which will not appreciate you unless you are in a position of strength.

You do not have to kill every Muslim because every Muslim has nothing to do with it.

The Pakistan Army has to really, with no UTTER BS, go INTO the BATTLE. There is no longer any excuse, the extremist elements within the military must be removed, the Army must engage the Al-Qaeda and the Taliban on all fronts. There must be decisive military victories if there is to be any hope of peace. There must be a dialogue, but what happened today is a GREAT victory for Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. There has to be a military response.

The extremists elements occupy much of the ranks of the army. There will be mass desertion and pakistan can only recieve so much help from its allies (US).

The taliban does not work as a regular state army. You can only fight them for so long before there withdrawal and you'll need to train your soldiers to be successful in mountain campaigns.

Their leadership is mobile and are aware that spies and assassins might try to infiltrate.

I agree action SHOULD be taken, absulutaly with you there and the show no mercy even if they have a family (yes everyone your determination must be ABSOLUTE and must pass theirs) but we--

___ cannot do what the US did and attack blindly, nor let them use their experience to gain an advantage.

**Shahed** · 12-28-2007, 01:50

I must learn to post just once, not post and edit and edit and edit...

No I don't think so. The so called elements in the army are not fools, nor are they true fundamentalists. Clever and cunning they are, they know what they are doing. The "elements" are not in the thousands, they are in the hundreds with a handful of top commanders. I very much doubt there will be mass desertion if the army TRULY mobilises to war footing and REALLY (no theatrics, no PR show) engages the enemy. It's very improbable they will desert in masses and droves. The average army troop does not want to kill natives on their own land, this is the major issue. Just send the US military and see what happens. Iraq will be a piece of cake compared to this. The point I'm making is that the army does not see them as invaders, this is the issue. It is an issue of propaganda, it's the responsibility of the army leadership to make sure the soldiers do the job they got hired to do: FIGHT!.

**Marshal Murat** · 12-28-2007, 02:01

With her death, hopefully, will destroy any popular support for the Taliban. The insurgency is only successful if it has local support.

**Tribesman** · 12-28-2007, 02:16

As to the event

SURPRISE

As to Cossacks posts....hmmmmmmmmslightly confuseled are thee...mightily confuseled indeed it appears

Now then Sinan , I find your posts on this wider topic both slightly enlightened and at the same time very disturbing...I think it is the "slightly" that makes them disturbing .

**Ice** · 12-28-2007, 02:22

Originally Posted by Tribesman

As to the event

SURPRISE

I'm assuming that's sarcasm.

If it is, I'd have to agree with you. This really doesn't come as surprise to me. It was more a question of when, than really "if".

**Tribesman** · 12-28-2007, 02:56

I'm assuming that's sarcasm.

Come on she was lucky and got away with it the day before , no way she could get away with it in Rawalpindi...read through Sinan posts and work out why .

The question is , will this lead to another civil war in a nuclear armed country that is already fighting several civil wars amd wi;; this on top of the other civil wars in a nuclear armed dictatorship that is already fighting several neighbouring countries escalate into a bigger regional mess .

When the world biggest superpower gets its "favourite" dictator and its "favourite" a;ternative into a tangle and the tangl turns into a tussle what way does it jump when the tussle turns nasty ?

**Pannonian** · 12-28-2007, 06:08

Originally Posted by Ice

I'm assuming that's sarcasm.

If it is, I'd have to agree with you. This really doesn't come as surprise to me. It was more a question of when, than really "if".

I expected her to at least reach office first before being killed, but her assassination was only a matter of time. Pakistan is not a safe place to be for hjgh profile and would-be populist figures.

**CountArach** · 12-28-2007, 08:57

Al-Qaeda claims responsibility:

http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English...1.0.1710322437

**Boyar Son** · 12-28-2007, 03:07

Originally Posted by Tribesman

As to the event

SURPRISE

As to Cossacks posts....hmmmmmmmmslightly confuseled are thee...mightily confuseled indeed it appears

Now then Sinan , I find your posts on this wider topic both slightly enlightened and at the same time very disturbing...I think it is the "slightly" that makes them disturbing .

Wuh?! how did you know it was ME!?

haha I seriously doubt that you _read_ my post and compared it with the 'enlightened' (no offence sinan)--> "charge and kill for glory"

seriously I thought you'd take my stance hehe what with the "lets think about how we're gonna do this"

But NO!!

good one tribesman

**Shahed** · 12-28-2007, 03:15

CHARGE !!! Dammit !!!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**Slug For A Butt** · 12-28-2007, 03:45

Hmm, not sure how this one is going to play out.
Undoubtedly Musharraf will be partying tonight behind closed doors, the people of Pakistan will be subjugated in the same way they have been over the last few months while the ahem... election was gearing up.
We are all assuming it's the fault of the only extremists on the sub-continent "Al-Qaeda", but remember that the powers that be had a vested interested in seeing her go too (maybe some sort of agreement would see her gone and the government's hands clean?).
In the meantime Musharraf will wring his hands in public, pay lip service to hunting terrorists and continue to be a puppet of the U.S. as long as the dollars keep rolling in.

**Lemur** · 12-28-2007, 03:46

Some useful background:

Bin Laden has plotted against Bhutto since she first became prime minister of Pakistan. In the fall of 1989, in the lead up to a crunch no-confidence vote in Pakistan's parliament, Bin Laden, based then in Peshawar, tried to sway the outcome by sending money to Islamabad to buy votes. According to testimony in Peter Bergen's 2006 oral history The Osama bin Laden I know, Bhutto, on discovering Bin Laden's involvement, personally phoned up King Fahd of Saudi Arabia and demanded the Saudis rein him in. The Saudis called Bin Laden back for consultations and promptly confiscated his passport, cutting him off for a while from the al-Qaida organisation he had founded in Pakistan the year before. The episode presumably did not endear Bhutto to Bin Laden.