In short, Pakistan in 2009 is looking more and more like Iran thirty years earlier, when the seemingly impregnable Shah fell in the face of hostile demonstrations and a passive army. Full Story »
Posted by Derek Hawkins
To:
Separate email addresses with commas.
25 recipients max.
Note:
The author does not mention or make allowance for the Pakistani intelligence service which has been closely linked with Taliban forces. He also does not mention that the US has supported the Pakistani military (through arms sales, etc.) for quite some time.
Either this writer this unfamiliar with the dynamics on the ground in Pakistan, or he's lazy. Either way this piece makes assumptions about what's going on in Pakistan that simplify to the point of being not useful. The extreme case Zakheim is making requires solid evidence and and acknowledge of counter arguments, none of which he provides.
Any comparison to Iran would benefit from mention of the CIA-sponsored coup that led to anti-American sentiments. Our interference backfired there, so the implication would be that is will backfire, or has backfired, in Pakistan.
A war monger proposes intensifying the war. The article was written by a defense profiteer and former Bush DoD executive, What is said may be true, but that doesn;t mean it is right, The is substantial presidence for his stand, (Stalin in WWII, the Shah of Iran, Batista in Cuba, Noriaga in Panama ect) but all eventually bacvkfired on the US>
Instead of trying to play politics in Islamabad, the United States should employ its forces to support those of Pakistan’s military. Only in this manner can there be ... More »
Retrieving Comments
