Ron Paul fears US will invade Pakistan next

[bobbyw24]

GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul is worried the U.S. may invade Pakistan after Osama din Laden's death.

"I am absolutely afraid we will be in Pakistan trying to occupy that country," Paul, a congressman from Texas and a critic of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, said Wednesday on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."

Paul acknowledged has has no solid evidence that the U.S. has plans to "invade" Pakistan, but described his observation as being based on American foreign policy over the past two or three decades, and its "unintended consequences."

http://rp12.us/aIUOK

[tangent4ronpaul]

Ummm... they have NUKES!

and ties to terrorist groups...

[tangent4ronpaul]

Has anyone noticed that the cities these guys try to attack are all socialist hell holds?

Makes you wonder....

[Carehn]

Sounds like they are going to.... But in the end all will fall except the mighty mummar.

[cindy25]

http://news.antiwar.com/2011/05/17/border-clash-nato-helicopters-attack-pakistani-border-troops/

Border Clash: NATO Helicopters Attack Pakistani Border Troops

[ItsTime]

Ummm... they have NUKES!

and ties to terrorist groups...

Yeah so we better attack them to help them become stable. :\

[oyarde]

That would be so retarded , it is beyond my ability to comment on it ...

[Aratus]

things seem quiet,
between war drums...

[Bern]

Nah, Iran still has priority. It's just been on the down low since the wikileaks scandal over mid-east cheerleading and then the Shiite MENA uprising thing.

[Dr.3D]

Well, from past experience, the U.S. gives a lot of money to some country. Later after that country has used the money to buy more military equipment, the U.S. then attacks them and destroys all of the equipment.

It works great for the military industrial complex. They just keep making money selling arms to the countries the U.S. will later attack.

[Kelly.]

Well, from past experience, the U.S. gives a lot of money to some country. Later after that country has used the money to buy more military equipment, the U.S. then attacks them and destroys all of the equipment.

It works great for the military industrial complex. They just keep making money selling arms to the countries the U.S. will later attack.

dont forget about all of the reconstruction money that US corporations gets after their buddys bombed shit to death.
they are making money coming and going.

[raiha]

I thought you had to go to Syria first! Exhausting business bringing democracy to the world!

[doodle]

Has anyone noticed that the cities these guys try to attack are all socialist hell holds?

Makes you wonder....

That they are ultra conservatives?

Even if factually true, such inference could be incoorect.
Some media pundits after 9/11 had claimed that they attacked NY because it had one of the largest pro Israel jewish pupulations in the US and was financial center of US. No way to tell how much credibility is in such speculations either.

[tpreitzel]

Prophetic ... Just today, Gates was running his mouth that Osama had help from sources inside Pakistan. Here we go again a la 9/11. Drumming up excuses for war without the slightest shred of independently verifiable proof that Osama was even recently killed in Pakistan. Tragic.

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

I was wondering about the possibility before I ever heard Dr. Paul bring it up. There has been a lot of drum beating going on in the media about how Pakistan has been taking our money and harboring terrorists, "playing both sides". I even heard some pundit on Fox hint that they were our enemy.

[cindy25]

you can't control Iran without controlling Afghanistan; and you can't control Afghanistan without controlling Pakistan

[realtonygoodwin]

Syria, Yemen, and Iran all seem closer to me.

[AGRP]

What country won't we be going to war with?

[Lucille]

Are we at war now with Pakistan’s intelligence agency?
http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2011/05/20/are-we-at-war-now-with-pakistans-intelligence-agency/


In the stash of hard drives, thumb drives, and personal papers discovered in Osama bin Laden’s compound, one especially revealing find was his personal diary. According to an analyst privy to the frequent updates of translated material being posted to the intelligence community’s classified internet, the late Al Qaeda leader periodically recorded his amusement that U.S. drones were searching for him in the mountainous border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan while he was living comfortably less than a quarter of a mile from a Pakistani military academy. “Bin Laden was yukking it up about how clueless we were,” the source says…

At everyone expect Ron Paul (http://youtu.be/YyHtTL6sU2g), no doubt.


To survive for six years in the posh Islamabad suburb of Abbottabad, bin Laden almost certainly relied on what might be called a “deep state”—a network of current and retired intelligence and military officers who are actively undermining the official policy of Pakistan’s government. “I have no doubt that members of Pakistan’s military and intelligence services knew of bin Laden’s whereabouts,” says Representative Steve Rothman, a New Jersey Democrat who sits on the House subcommittees that fund the military and foreign-aid budgets and who has attended top-secret briefings on the May 1 raid. “The question remains, however, how far that knowledge went up the command chain in Pakistan.”…

The United States was able to prevent the deep state from thwarting its attack on bin Laden, but in doing so, it may have alienated the cooperative elements of the military. A week after the raid, a Pakistani newspaper printed the name of the CIA station chief—a leak that almost surely came from the ISI—and the army accused the United States of violating its national sovereignty. Meanwhile, the debate in Washington has mostly centered on whether or not to cut off the flow of aid money to Pakistan, which misses the point that the real problem runs much deeper.

Crazy like a fox.

[S.Shorland]

I think you are in a covert war with China.Libya was to kick them out of Africa.Gaddafi was the only African leader to refuse to join your 'africa command' or africom.The Chinese had 50 big contracts there and 30,000 men,29,000 of which had to flee.There is a very large Russian naval base in Syria.If you control Syria,you kick Russia out of the Meditterranean too.I think Syria will be next but it could be Pakistan,who knows.It depends where your warmongering elite will get the biggest returns.

[YumYum]

Who on this forum believes that bin Laden was recently killed? In 2002, the NYT ran an article that bin Laden was dead. Israel wants the U.S. to take possession of Pakistans nukes. Are we going to go to war with Pakistan? The Chinese think so.

China Gives Pakistan 50 Fighter Jets

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/asia/20pakistan.html?_r=1

[spcmckay]

I wonder why Ron Paul thinks that? Maybe it has to do with all the talk coming from the White House about how since they allegedly killed Bin Laden, now Pakistan is a new threat even though last month they were an ally. What we need in the White House right now is non-interventionist President who understand The Constitution and sovereignty.

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

Fox News is reporting this: "Terror witness: Mumbai terror group had links with Pakistan"

(:48)
http://video.foxnews.com/#/v/956331607001/mumbai-terror-trial-opens-in-chicago/?playlist_id=87937

[anaconda]

Ron's fears are justified. Our ace in the hole is that China appears to be stepping up and just saying "no" to U.S. aggression in Pakistan. Zbigniew is probably pissed.

http://tarpley.net/2011/05/21/us-pakistan-near-open-war-chinese-ultimatum-warns-washington-against-attack/

[anaconda]

I wonder why Ron Paul thinks that? Maybe it has to do with all the talk coming from the White House about how since they allegedly killed Bin Laden, now Pakistan is a new threat even though last month they were an ally. What we need in the White House right now is non-interventionist President who understand The Constitution and sovereignty.

http://tarpley.net/2011/05/21/us-pakistan-near-open-war-chinese-ultimatum-warns-washington-against-attack/

[anaconda]

Who on this forum believes that bin Laden was recently killed? In 2002, the NYT ran an article that bin Laden was dead. Israel wants the U.S. to take possession of Pakistans nukes. Are we going to go to war with Pakistan? The Chinese think so.

China Gives Pakistan 50 Fighter Jets


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/asia/20pakistan.html?_r=1

I'd bet all the tea in china that Bin Laden was not in that house that was "raided."

[James Madison]

Ron's fears are justified. Our ace in the hole is that China appears to be stepping up and just saying "no" to U.S. aggression in Pakistan. Zbigniew is probably pissed.

http://tarpley.net/2011/05/21/us-pakistan-near-open-war-chinese-ultimatum-warns-washington-against-attack/

I just had a really scary thought. Do you think the US is pushing toward a war with China because they realize the national debt is a black hole? And that defeating China in a war is the only way to get out?

[Lucille]

I just had a really scary thought. Do you think the US is pushing toward a war with China because they realize the national debt is a black hole? And that defeating China in a war is the only way to get out?

Too bad China would kick our ass.

[anaconda]

I just had a really scary thought. Do you think the US is pushing toward a war with China because they realize the national debt is a black hole? And that defeating China in a war is the only way to get out?

Interesting thought. I'm not sure on the breakdown of the holders of 12 trillion of national debt (or whatever the number is). I think it would be a lot easier to just default. The cost would be a lot less than a war. Tarpley seems to suggest that the American/Anglo empire is crumbling and that former puppet alliances are trying to defect to less arrogant eastern powers, especially since China's star is rising. Tarpley suggests that the west is panicking and willing to destabilize middle eastern countries to prevent this, either by CIA stoked "color revolutions" to install more puppet dictators or with plan B which is to bomb them into little pieces of regional tribes that are geopolitically impotent. Like the Iraq model.

[anaconda]

Too bad China would kick our ass.

I suspect the U.S. would babble lots of rhetoric and then completely back down. A fully engaged war with China might very well break the remaining crumbling U.S. hegemony irreversibly. An entire new political landscape. China could probably put 500,000 pairs of boots on the ground in Pakistan on short notice. This would clarify a lot of future U.S. policy I would think. Would be good for a Ron Paul candidacy, too. The voters would realize how irresponsible and dangerous these assholes running our government are. And see for real how quickly the whole thing could go up in flames. And how coming home and tightening up our defense of the American continents would be a preferable strategy.

[AFPVet]

I suspect the U.S. would babble lots of rhetoric and then completely back down. A fully engaged war with China might very well break the remaining crumbling U.S. hegemony irreversibly. An entire new political landscape. China could probably put 500,000 pairs of boots on the ground in Pakistan on short notice. This would clarify a lot of future U.S. policy I would think. Would be good for a Ron Paul candidacy, too. The voters would realize how irresponsible and dangerous these assholes running our government are. And see for real how quickly the whole thing could go up in flames. And how coming home and tightening up our defense of the American continents would be a preferable strategy.

The screwballs in Washington burnt up a good chunk of our military resources. We can't go into another war for a very long time. We would never win a conventional war with China.... That means nukes.

[James Madison]

Too bad China would kick our ass.

Probably. But remember who's in charge of "our" government.

[QueenB4Liberty]

Probably. But remember who's in charge of "our" government.

China.

So what does that mean for us? We won't invade Pakistan now because China says so?

[anaconda]

China.

So what does that mean for us? We won't invade Pakistan now because China says so?

Hopefully. China's not fucking around here, according to Tarpley.

[James Madison]

China.

So what does that mean for us? We won't invade Pakistan now because China says so?

Hopefully, yes.

[anaconda]

They screwballs in Washington burnt up a good chunk of our military resources. We can't go into another war for a very long time. We would never win a conventional war with China.... That means nukes.

I'm sure the U.S. could do a lot of damage, but not without bringing ruin unto itself. Which I suppose could be a globalist option, but I doubt it. The globalists responsible would swing from the gallows in Beijing.

[Dark_Horse_Rider]

i want to link dailymail link, pakistan, orion, mumbai - could someone post that link which states attack on pakistan naval base very similar to 2008 mumbai attack ?

airplnes on naval base destroyed... hmm, since pakistan - china naval base and fighter jet deal, and the background story of the other planes destroyed in the raid, kinda makes you wonder if this was a clear message from washington.

[anaconda]

i want to link dailymail link, pakistan, orion, mumbai - could someone post that link which states attack on pakistan naval base very similar to 2008 mumbai attack ?

airplnes on naval base destroyed... hmm, since pakistan - china naval base and fighter jet deal, and the background story of the other planes destroyed in the raid, kinda makes you wonder if this was a clear message from washington.

Seems cowardly rather than clear.

[Dark_Horse_Rider]

Seems cowardly rather than clear.

indeed.

[Lucille]

Probably. But remember who's in charge of "our" government.


China.

So what does that mean for us? We won't invade Pakistan now because China says so?

I thought the international bankstas and megacorps owned the US government (all of who would love another war (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig12/butler-s1.1.1.html)).

Aren't we pretty much in a currency and trade war with China now? And Obanksta did violate Pakistan's sovereignty to get UBL, and has threatened to do it again!

Even so, not to worry! HotAir's Ed assures us that we would never invade Pakistan because they're armed with nuclear weapons and they have a huge population, basically implying that the US only goes to war with weaker nations and that our military couldn't handle it anyway (both of which are true).
hxxp://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/18/ron-paul-the-us-will-end-up-occupying-pakistan/

In related news:

China to US: Hands off Pakistan
hxxp://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/24/china-to-us-hands-off-pakistan/


According to a report from India a few days ago, China has warned that an “attack” on Pakistan will be taken as an attack on China

Of course, the idiot neoclowns in the comments think we could actually win a war against China. I wonder what color the sky is in their world...


It is becoming increasingly clear that the federal government is completely and utterly out of control, spewing nonsense, issuing irrational threats and stumbling around the world stage like a belligerent drunk with an empty wallet... (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=274661)

...a loaded gun, and an itchy trigger finger.