Pakistan throws in full support

[Cirrsseeto Raurrssatta]

Well...Colin Powell has been in contact with the Pakistani president, and he is pledging total condemnation of terrorism, and vows to support the US and others fully in actions to bring the culprits to justice. There is pressure to close the Pakistani/Afghan border, as well to cease Pakistani exports to the Taliban, to pressure the release of Bin Ladin into US custody.

This is a MAJOR break...hopefully, its the beginning of the dam breaking. If Pakistan can apply this pressure, the Taliban might become increasingly more pliable in future demands.

I pray we can eventually coerce full cooperation, and maybe see active Afghan reprisals against the terror nerve network that resides in their country.

[Admiral Lebron]

There smart.

[Hart Kenobi]

And this is FANTASTIC. Afghanistan, a land-locked nation, has always depended on Pakistan for trade. Pakistan was the only neighboring nation that was regularly supportive of the Taliban's regime, and without it, Afghanistan is a sitting duck. Pakistan has also agreed to allow American fly-overs for any attack. Which, of course, makes it almost certain that just that will occur.

Naturally, this action was obviously going to occur, is was never suspected Pakistan would refuse, but I'm happy the wheels are in motion.

[Hart Kenobi]

I'm also quickly hoping for Congress to nullify the Act that prohibits the US from assassinating national leaders. "Leader" is too general a term. The Taliban, of course, cannot be killed. It must appear, for the EU's satisfaction, that he is overthrown or unseated by self-determination. At least that is what I hope. I hope he's not another Saddam Hussein where we'll let him resume power.

[Cirrsseeto Raurrssatta]

Think of it this way...

Ever since the 70's...a concept of "Neo War" has become apparent. This involves a nation or nations, forced to combat small groups, or even individuals.

Make no mistake. Terrorism is war. We must adapt to this, and repeal Gerald Ford's executive order regarding assassinations.

If we authorize our armed forces to assassinate a terrorist, it has the same tactical and strategic effect of wiping out a conventional armies DIVISION.

I can understand President Ford's views when he signed the order...but these are different times, and the enemies we face now are not the conglomerate and vast forces of Communism in the past.

Neo-war needs neo-strategy. We must have this option once again.

[ReaperFett]

if the rule is you cant kill a national leader, then surely you can take out a terrorist?

[Hart Kenobi]

I have a feeling we won't even need to kill the Taliban. If ground troops are implemented, we will, of course, get resistance. But we will ALSO get support. Afghanistan has been in an ugly civil war for decades. I'm hoping that once the civilians there see the United States flags and troops entering, the new generation of "Freedom Fighters" there will come up from their hiding places, their goal since the beginning to wipe out the current government.

Who knows if these rebel forces in Afghanistan are pro-American, but what we do know is that the US will probably be willing to "help" any rebel support with "encouraging" the people there to have them assume power afterwards. Nothing brings two forces together than when they have a common enemy. Of course, this is only speculation.

[Hart Kenobi]

Obviously, to us Bin Laden is a terrorist. To THEM, he's the People's hero, the man who lead the resistance against Soviet rule, the leader to the Muslim objective to remove this "white devil", Western influence which they think will send the world to hell.

It's a very tough decision. Will assassinating a leader solve the problem or make it worse?

[ReaperFett]

an Afghan spokesman said Bin Laden is under house arrest

[Dyne Darkforce]

I am confused now, I thought Bin Laden had some aleged ties with tha Pakistani government. It was on the MSNBC news site, guess that changed.

[Hart Kenobi]

Well, the US made it perfectly clear there would be retribution from any nations that were harboring our enemies or helping them in any way. Pakistan probaby fears that Afghanistan is about to take a beating, and wisely wants to make it clear that they are not helping. After all, I doubt any nation in that region is willing to take the chance of the US finding out that they were going to support Bin Laden in any way. No one wants to get attacked by our forces.

the last thing Pakistan wants is for Bin Laden to flee into their country, which would add them to the list of the nations "harboring" the terrorist, directly inking them into our "hit list"

[Lord Gue]

about the assasination of leaders deal. Isnt Afganastan run by the talaban? If it is then thats alot of guys to have to try to assasinate, then you figure these guys are the ones doing the regualr assasinations themselves......trying to assasinate the talaban would be much harder than just going in after them i think

[Sanis Prent]

They're talking about assassinating Bin Ladin, not the Taliban.

[ReaperFett]

he isnt a leader though, so that rule doesnt affect him, surely

[Wolfgang Schreiger]

Unfortunately, the rule is unilateral....it affects anyone.

[Pierce Tondry]

I don't think it's wise to go the "assassination of leaders" route politically or morally. It is quite expedient in achieving its' goal, but it tends to make things really chaotic as a result, and chaos in this case isn't what we need.

Maybe later, when things are more calm.

[Sanis Prent]

I wholly support it in regards to terrorists...I see no difference in doing that, and having an attack launched on an enemy army.

But right now...I pray that Pakistan can work with the Taliban. If there is to be a peaceful resolution to this terror....this is the only way I see it happening.

To be honest, I didn't even think something like this would happen. I am ecstatic in my hopes.