Charlie Rose

REMant  06/02/2009 12:35 AM Report

The cross-border problem is indeed important, as it was in Vietnam. All the problems faced now were present in Vietnam except the India situation, which I don't really think is significant, but is merely being used as an excuse by the Pakistani military to, on the one hand, prove to the militants their Islamic credentials, and, on the other, to deflect the US-backed liberals. It is a balancing act I think they have been engaged in for a long time, and not really different from what the military establishment and political parties do here. The generals we shuffled in and out of Saigon were just the same, and that is why that war could never have been brought to any conclusion except by leaving them to their own devices, which, of course, is exactly what eventually happened. It should be noted in passing that perpetuating the conflict in this way is perfectly analogous to keeping an economy afloat by printing money. We played the same game in numerous countries during the Cold War and it is nauseating to see it making a comeback. If Saddam hadn't invaded Kuwait we likely would be supporting him now. We do have the opium trade and nuclear weapons to consider. The first is not I think much of a threat because the extremists will likely move against it eventually as they have before. The weapons, I suspect, will be eliminated if and when the US retreats, which I think is a virtual certainty. The threat of that and the promise of more support seem the only levers we have to use with Pakistani officialdom. If the Taliban takes over I think they will, like the Vietnamese communists, simply wither away, the more extreme types attempting to stir up war with India, but I don't see any dominos here, nor do I think Al Qaeda was ever much of a threat to anyone. There's really no way they can go on unless funded from other sources, which it would make more sense for us to focus on than the geography and religion. It is at least ironic that a country that professes to believe in capitalism, democracy and free trade thinks it has to club or bribe ppl into believing likewise.

tartufe  06/01/2009 03:29 PM Report

oops, statesman journalist

tartufe  06/01/2009 03:28 PM Report

Well said Shalom. Elsewhere is where we belong.

And well said Muldfeld. Moyers is about the only true states journalist left. The rest are a bunch of me-tooers.

ShalomFreedman  06/01/2009 03:01 PM Report

How can there be a discussion on Pakistan without considering in detail, the question of the supervision of Pakistan's nuclear weapons?

This discussion had a certain vagueness and dullness to it. There is a lot of reluctance to make firm judgments in it. Jane Perlez seems quite skeptical of the U.S. ability to succeed in Pakistan. No one seems very positive about the U.S. effort but no one goes so far as to say that perhaps the U.S. would be wiser to invest its resources elsewhere.

Muldfeld  06/01/2009 02:28 PM Report

Well said, tartufe. It's disgusting the level to which America continues to cloak its aggression as "civilized" while berating the tactics of "the other". It's interesting that so much of morality and a sense of regret is defined by our society. Because no one in the mainstream is challenging the savage tactics of the US in Pakistan, Obama feels and expresses no regret.

Thank God for Bill Moyers, who's one of the very few with a spine and sense of principles to call him out on this.

tartufe  06/01/2009 01:50 PM Report

All inside-the-box thinkers. Thumping the party line. The accepted M-I oligarchy orthodoxy. They all have a vested interest in painting chaos, as their jobs, life style and sense of adventure thrive on continuing the accepted administration and media orthodoxy. Jingoes for fun, adventure and profit.

A query was made what would happen if al Qaeda were to prevail? Indeed,.what? Probably damn little. It was mostly Saudi’s that used Afghanistan for planning etc. With N. Korea now a more existential threat than Af-Pak, an Al Qaeda controlled Af-Pak seems a feckless worry. Prioritization is absent, along with the adults.

The fear expressed by CR of Pak “accommodating” al Qaeda was over-baked. Hell we accommodate our own terrorists a la Torquemada (torture for fun and sexual thrills?) Cheney et al.

Strategically we should hope al Qaeda takes over all of Pakistan, then we could fight the kind of war we drool about - carpet bombing them even further into the stone age. We would rationalize nukes of course. And it would be our kind of war, removed 5-6 miles high, or even half a world away. The stuff wet-dreams are made of for the M-I oligarches. Sigh. Cigarette anyone?

Then the fools trumpeted the drones, which ALONE will assure that when we do (declare our singularly defined victory and) exit we will leave a net gain of hatred and al Qaeda fanaticized recruits. They already are equating their suicide bombers as an answer to our drones. Counterproductive, but obtuse - just the way we like it. It sustains the M-I high rollers in Rolex’s, yachts and post toasties.

We are a techno-chicken-shit nation. Have been for decades. Led by air-power - manned or otherwise and of course by the CIA - the drone targeters. And by the ever-present M-I oligarchy, pulling lobbying strings for preemptive wars on bogus precepts (Gulf of Tonkin, WMDs . . .). We murder and maim because we CAN, not because of NEED. Hiroshima, Nagasaki (to impress Russia, not Japan), Cambodia, Vietnam, carpet bombing, napalmed screaming little girl, shock and awe. SICKO SHIT! OVER AND OVER AGAIN! And we wonder why nuclear proliferation is looming large.

[Here’s an exercise. Technology transfer ultimately puts a drone over Peoria. How’s it play out in your mind? Are you pissed? Dismayed? Pissed and dismayed? Empathetic? Remorseful? Any regrets? They come out of a blue, soundless and senseless. In Pak multiple mud huts implodes, in Peoria a multiple bungalows. Do we give a shit? Does anybody give a shit? Or is it all just practice for the acceleration of nuclear winter - simply because we’re wired the way we’re wired?]

All four foils for the extant orthodoxy as much as admitted we had no exit strategy, nor a defined mission, no idea of what success would look like. Like we’ll know it when we see it. When al Qaeda will promise not to plan attacks? With every drone missile we assure the opposite.

Our absence will slow the rate of increase in their hatred. So DUH the strategic plan of choice should be an immediate pullout. Too outside-the-box thinking for our dutiful lock-step media, and sorry to say based on tonight’s performance CR. Pass the kool aid around CR’s table.

Besides the real threats are elsewhere. Yemen, Somalia, N. Korea, Darfur et al. Not to worry. We’ve got talent. We can create a new supply of replacement enemies overnight.

SufiLaghari  06/01/2009 12:18 PM Report

Th US must continue to insist to the govt of paksiatn that the ISI be dismantled.

Baloch and Sindh can counter the Jehadi elements in the state of Pakistan.

US must suport to Baloch and Sindhis and that is only natural ally for US.