| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Alias
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 6:50 pm Post subject: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan |
 |
|
Cowboy diplmacy at its finest. 
Can't wait to hear the white house response.
| Quote: |
The U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan "back to the Stone Age" after the Sept. 11 attacks if the country refused to help America with its war on terrorism, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf says.
In an interview with CBS's 60 Minutes to air on Sunday, the Pakistani leader said the threat came from then-deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage. Musharraf said it was delivered to his intelligence director.
"The intelligence director told me that [Armitage] said, 'Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age,' " Musharraf said.
"I think it was a very rude remark."
But Musharraf said he reacted to the threat in a responsible way.
"One has to think and take actions in the interests of the nation, and that's what I did."
Pakistan was a strong supporter of Afghanistan's former Taliban regime, but switched sides after the Sept. 11 attacks. Musharraf also said the U.S. made some demands that were "ludicrous," including one to suppress vocal support in his country for terrorism in the U.S.
"If somebody's expressing views, we cannot curb the expression of views," Musharraf said.
He said he was also irked that the U.S. wanted Pakistan to turn over border posts and bases for the U.S. military to use against the Taliban in Afghanistan.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I cry for Musharref's hurt feelings.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boodleheimer
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Location: working undercover for the Man
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| can you give me a link to that article? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dulouz
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: Uranus
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If the Russians pulled off 911 they'd have gotten nuked. Why did we make the exception for Afghanistan again? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That is how you defeat terror. If the US were to threaten every country that supports Al Qaeda or allows them to be supported then those nations would wake up Al Qaeda members and their supporters in he middle of the night take them into the streets , slash their throats and let them bleed to death down the sewer.
Remember mid east nations are for the most part police states. They have excellent security services. They know what the elites do and who gets funded. The Clerics are on the government pay roll. They control the media. They can stop Al Qaeda if they choose to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Isn't Pakistan rumored to be behind the Taliban and Al Quaeda? Oh, and where's Bin Laden hiding? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Let's not forget that this is a breach of both the Geneva Convention and the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.......as I've repeatedly said, how the U.S. especially under Bush has no respect for these and is not brought to task for this........cowboy diplomacy indeed.
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
Let's not forget that this is a breach of both the Geneva Convention and the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.......as I've repeatedly said, how the U.S. especially under Bush has no respect for these and is not brought to task for this........cowboy diplomacy indeed.
DD |
You are a moron. How is threatening an attack on a country violating either of those?
The non nuclear profileration treaty deals with preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and their technology, and the Geneva Conventions deals with treatment of prisoners during war among other things. Therefore, threatening to attack someone isn't covered by either of these.
Especially not the non nuclear profileration treaty, as no one said anything about nuking Pakistan, just bombing it. Even if said bombs were nuclear though, the NNPT does not deal with or regulate the launching of nuclear strikes.
You are a idiot who doesn't even know what he is talking about. Why don't you go read a book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
I won't even bother responding by taking the time to look up and quote article 2 (a very important article) which prohibits nations from indirectly or directly threatening to use nuclear weapons....signed off by the U.S. of A. A major tenant of the nuclear non proliferation agreement, which I know a few things about.....
Regarding the Geneva Convention. It specifically deals with hostilities and the threat to make civilian populations suffer.......
You please get a book....I'm reading many at the moment. You might look up from your cereal box....
| Quote: |
| The Treaty was opened for signature on 01 July 1968, and signed on that date by the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and 59 other countries. The Treaty entered into force with the deposit of US ratification on 05 March 1970. |
| Quote: |
| The NPT is the most widely accepted arms control agreement. As of early 2000 a total of 187 states were Parties to the NPT. Cuba, Israel, India, and Pakistan were the only states that were not members of the NPT. |
This was motioned by the United States....(but yeah, you'd reject it, it was only Clinton who really wasn't a president....)
| Quote: |
| The International Court of Justice issues an advisory opinion on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons. The Court agreed unanimously that the threat or use of force by means of nuclear weapons that was contrary to article 2, paragraph 4 (refraining from the threat or use of force) of the Charter and did not meet the requirements of article 51 (inherent right of individual or collective self-defence) was unlawful, and that such threat or use of force should be compatible with international law applicable in armed conflict. It decided unanimously that �there exists an obligation to�bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament�. |
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sundubuman
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
Let's not forget that this is a breach of both the Geneva Convention and the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.......as I've repeatedly said, how the U.S. especially under Bush has no respect for these and is not brought to task for this........cowboy diplomacy indeed.
DD |
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.
defintely the idiotarian of the millenium for eslcafe.
Congrats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| I cry for Musharref's hurt feelings. |
yeah, shed me a tear Musharref. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pakistan? Stone Age? Naaaah! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
W.T.Carl
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dd is not a moron. But I reckon he ( and many other Canadians) have two dongers because nobody could get as silly as he is playing with just one. But all kidding aside, I remember many calling to turn Kabul into a glow in the dark parking lot. Cooler heads prevailed-Thank GOD! Next time, WHO KNOWS? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Has something to do with Musharref's memoirs, which he is publishing this week, apparently.
It seems that W. Bush acknowledges it and apologizes for it, but no one is taking responsibility on the U.S. side for actually saying it, especially not Armitage...
| Quote: |
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Friday said he was "taken aback" by a report that a U.S. official threatened the United States would attack Pakistan if it did not help immediately after 9/11.
Bush made the remarks at a White House news conference with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, thanking the U.S. ally for his role in the war on terror.
The Pakistan president has told CBS News that -- immediately following the September 11, 2001, attacks -- the Bush administration threatened to bomb his country "back to the Stone Age" if Pakistan did not help in the U.S. war on terrorism.
Bush said he first heard of the alleged threat "in the newspaper today." (Watch as Bush says he's unaware of any such conversation -- 1:56)
"I was taken aback by the harshness of the words," he said.
"All I can tell you is that shortly after 9/11, Secretary [of State] Colin Powell came in and said President Musharraf understands the stakes, and he wants to join and help root out an enemy that has come and killed 3,000 of our citizens."
Richard Armitage, then U.S. deputy secretary of state, is the official whom Musharraf identified in the CBS report. In an interview Friday with CNN, Armitage denied the allegation.
"Never did I threaten to use military force," he said. "I was not authorized to."
Armitage acknowledged he was part of a group who met with Pakistan's intelligence chief to convey strong U.S. determination. He said the message was that "we absolutely need their help if we were going to prosecute the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan."
"We wanted to make sure they understood both the opportunities and the downside, but there was no threat," he said.
Musharraf was asked Friday about the CBS report, but he said he couldn't talk about it because of a legal agreement with his publisher before the release of his new memoir next week... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote]dd is not a moron. But I reckon he ( and many other Canadians) have two dongers because nobody could get as silly as he is playing with just one. But all kidding aside, I remember many calling to turn Kabul into a glow in the dark parking lot. Cooler heads prevailed-Thank GOD! Next time, WHO KNOWS?[/quote
Just a little more on .
DD
PS> takes someone to be a little reality based, a little decent and wanting a workable world......not just a mad chaotic dash to the pig trough...which many envision is this world and the U.S. in bulk, bombast, doing so well there.......
Looking for civilized norms of behaviour.......How do Americans support a President who props up a dictator like Mussaraf? Oh yeah, I guess you got the well scripted, the sky is gonna fall answer, which always comes out when discussing the tyrants WE like. As if you know the future , as if democracy and civility is only good when it is "convenient". This seems to be the center of U.S. foreign policy , along with oil/business and revenge -- at the expense of American poor boys and girls.....while the well to do chink glasses in their glass towers, hour after hour.....
Yeah, a little more on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
