Bhutto's assasination.

[filmmaker58]

Here we go. This is a tragedy. a tragedy for the Pakistani people, and a tragedy for the political process worldwide.

The neocons are blaming this on global jihadists before any investigation into what really happened. This type of kneejerk reaction is what brought us the patriot act, and the Iraq war. the neocons will be using this tragedy to strike fear into the hearts of americans once again. My only fear is that it's going to work.

[rachmiel]

Here we go. This is a tragedy. a tragedy for the Pakistani people, and a tragedy for the political process worldwide.

The neocons are blaming this on global jihadists before any investigation into what really happened. This type of kneejerk reaction is what brought us the patriot act, and the Iraq war. the neocons will be using this tragedy to strike fear into the hearts of americans once again. My only fear is that it's going to work.

Are you sure that will be the reaction? Don't you think it also smacks us with a little dose of reality, the fact that this insanity seems to be fundamentally ingrained in the politics of the region and that there is no end in sight, and that we ought not to be over there wasting our time?

[HalogenFlood]

Are you sure that will be the reaction? Don't you think it also smacks us with a little dose of reality, the fact that this insanity seems to be fundamentally ingrained in the politics of the region and that there is no end in sight, and that we ought not to be over there wasting our time?

I don't know. There is a lot of insanity over there but Bhutto had a lot of support which means there is a strong desire for democracy in Pakistan. Should we have a policy that supports the movement towards democracy in Pakistan? I say yes. But not by starting wars and intervening in their internal affairs and spending billions in aid. I don't know the answer.

[smtwngrl]

The Presidential Candidates are being asked to voice their thoughts about it. Since Ron Paul is supposed to be on The Situation Room this afternoon, I'm sure he will be asked about that, too.

I don't believe we need John McCain's version of foreign policy, but he at least sounds knowledgeable. Giuliani's response was scary. He was equating this event to "our need to stay on the offensive against terrorism". And the way he talked about what we needed to do, would have been more appropriate if Pakistan was a U.S. State.

[JGalt]

I don't know. There is a lot of insanity over there but Bhutto had a lot of support which means there is a strong desire for democracy in Pakistan. Should we have a policy that supports the movement towards democracy in Pakistan? I say yes. But not by starting wars and intervening in their internal affairs and spending billions in aid. I don't know the answer.

Of course, if you're cynical(or indian) you might say that Bhutto was a dictator as well.

I doubt this, of all things, would teach the neocons the error of their ways. We'd all be atom-dead before hacks like Bill Kristol admitted that interventionism isn't the answer.

[Philadelphia76]

Are you sure that will be the reaction? Don't you think it also smacks us with a little dose of reality, the fact that this insanity seems to be fundamentally ingrained in the politics of the region and that there is no end in sight, and that we ought not to be over there wasting our time?

We can only hope. That certainly was Ronald Reagan's conclusion after the Lebanon attack on the Marine barracks.

The best thing for the US to do right now is to have as low a profile as possible in Pakistan. The single most important question now is who the rank and file Pakistani in the street is going to blame for the assasination. It will obviously be Musharraf- but because of his ties to the US? Or because of his military and intelligence services' ties to Al Qaeda and the Taliban? If we're seen propping the guy up and providing him cover just to keep the radicals out of power- we may pay a VERY high price indeed.

[Liberty Star]

Military dictatorship creates an environment that increases radicalism, we need to reevaluate our support for military dictator there.

Who knows who is behind this but we should take a look at who benefits from this.



The New York Times then cited the results of the latest poll conducted by the International Republican Institute (IRI) that showed Musharraf's approval ratings in Pakistan as being lower even than those of Bush in the United States. 67 percent of Pakistanis want him to resign immediately whereas 70 percent believe his party does not deserve re-election. Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), with 30 percent support, emerges as the single largest party in Pakistan's multi-party system. Conservative former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) is in second position with 25 percent support. Most people would prefer a Bhutto-Sharif coalition to rule the country rather then the Musharraf-Bhutto alliance favored in Washington.




No one claimed responsibility for the attack. But some of Bhutto's supporters at the hospital began chanting, "Killer, Killer, Musharraf," referring to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, Bhutto's main political opponent. A few began stoning cars outside.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/husain-haqqani/will-bush-endorse-musharr_b_76967.html

[1000-points-of-fright]

Al Qaeda has apparently claimed responsibility and the Pakistani people are blaming Musharraf. Hopefully, this will push the country in a more democratic, anti-extremist direction. We should drop Musharraf like a dress on prom night. If we're seen as supporting him it would give extremists ammo to direct the people's anger toward us and the west in general.

[njandrewg]

wasn't she just as bad as Musharaff and actually had a number of her political rivals assassinated while in power? And didn't she have ties with Al Qaeda or Taliban or something like that.

I mean the woman was hardly a saint as far as I can tell

[filmmaker58]

If the Pakastani people implicate Musharef, then the reactions of the neocons this morning might just backfire on them. They are painting him as our ally against terrorism, but if the Pakastani people revolt against him over this, then it will certainly be in our best interest to cut ties with him. What we need is a smoking gun to prove who was responsible.

[LibertyGuy2008]

Are you sure that will be the reaction? Don't you think it also smacks us with a little dose of reality, the fact that this insanity seems to be fundamentally ingrained in the politics of the region and that there is no end in sight, and that we ought not to be over there wasting our time?


Weird insane reactions... I just saw peope taking turns attacking and wacking a burned out vehicle with a stick. Does anyone get the Pakistanis? I understand grief and frustration but what is this mentality they have? Are they crazy? Is it their culture? I don't believe we should be involved. We need to be non interventionalists and let the people play it out no matter how rough and tough it is. Heck we may need to do the same thing again here someday, and perhaps by then I will understand the rationale of beating a burned out vehicle with a stick.

[reaver]

Wow. I woke up this morning and forgot that she was going to be assassinated soon. I remember the first attempt on her life had those close to her blaming Musharaff for the bombing so it was only apparent they wouldn't miss this time if it was in fact his cronies.

As word spreads of her death through Pakistan and Afganistan there may be a massive civil uprising coming. Martial Law couldn't prevent this so most of the anger would be directed at their government; Whether they had anything to do with the assassination or not.

I hope it doesn't get ugly.

[reaver]

Weird insane reactions... I just saw peope taking turns attacking and wacking a burned out vehicle with a stick. Does anyone get the Pakistanis? I understand grief and frustration but what is this mentality they have? Are they crazy? Is it their culture? I don't believe we should be involved. We need to be non interventionalists and let the people play it out no matter how rough and tough it is. Heck we may need to do the same thing again here someday, and perhaps by then I will understand the rationale of beating a burned out vehicle with a stick.

I don't understand why people burn and flip cars after winning a big football game in Ohio either. :p

[rachmiel]

Weird insane reactions... I just saw peope taking turns attacking and wacking a burned out vehicle with a stick. Does anyone get the Pakistanis? I understand grief and frustration but what is this mentality they have? Are they crazy? Is it their culture? I don't believe we should be involved. We need to be non interventionalists and let the people play it out no matter how rough and tough it is. Heck we may need to do the same thing again here someday, and perhaps by then I will understand the rationale of beating a burned out vehicle with a stick.

Of course you are right. It would seem common sense that we shouldn't butt into the affairs of other countries. If your neighbors are having marital difficulties, are you likely to bust down their front door and intervene? Even if there were real violence occurring, most people still wouldn't butt in.

But I'm starting to realize that part of the reason people are so disinclined to accept this "radical" idea of non-intervention is that these foreign issues are being brought into our homes by the media. We are losing touch with reality and our priorities. Just by virtue of these stories being in front of our faces 24/7, we start to believe that these problems actually do have immediate relevance to our lives, that we should sacrifice our money and our children in order to stabilize this virtual environment that's being created through television and the global press, and that there is some kind of moral responsibility to be involved. This is not unrelated to the fact that when a political candidate gets a lot of face time, they will generally acquire some kind of a following, no matter how deplorable a person they are, or when a lie is repeated often enough people come to accept it as the truth.

[LibertyGuy2008]

Of course you are right. It would seem common sense that we shouldn't butt into the affairs of other countries. If your neighbors are having marital difficulties, are you likely to bust down their front door and intervene? Even if there were real violence occurring, most people still wouldn't butt in.

But I'm starting to realize that part of the reason people are so disinclined to accept this "radical" idea of non-intervention is that these foreign issues are being brought into our homes by the media. We are losing touch with reality and our priorities. Just by virtue of these stories being in front of our faces 24/7, we start to believe that these problems actually do have immediate relevance to our lives, that we should sacrifice our money and our children in order to stabilize this virtual environment that's being created through television and the global press, and that there is some kind of moral responsibility to be involved. This is not unrelated to the fact that when a political candidate gets a lot of face time, they will generally acquire some kind of a following, no matter how deplorable a person they are, or when a lie is repeated often enough people come to accept it as the truth.

You make excellent observations. Kill your TeeVee.

[LibertyGuy2008]

I don't understand why people burn and flip cars after winning a big football game in Ohio either. :p

More than likely they're drunk, and the mob mentality is a powerful force.

[rexsolomon]

Here we go. This is a tragedy. a tragedy for the Pakistani people, and a tragedy for the political process worldwide.
My only fear is that it's going to work.

No it WON'T work. Benigno Aquino Jr. was similarly martyred. The people of the Philippines soon revolted and overthrew the decades-old Marcos dictatorship.

Benazir's martyrdom will not be in vain. Musharraf's end has only be hastened.

The dictators in Burma know better. Just keep your opponent under house arrest, but NEVER consider killing them.

Why? Because as Musharraf will soon find out, the most unstoppable revolution is one guided by the spirit of a martyred hero.

[Julia]

Where should I go to get a commentary on Ron Paul's reaction whenever it is announced? Thing is, I just saw all sorts of reactions from all the other candidates quoted on Fox news (who knew Hilary was Benazir Bhutto's Best Buddy for the last 12 years? - Wonder what those two found to talk about?!).

The absence of comments from Ron Paul made me wonder whether he had said something and Fox was just stone walling it again or whether it hasn't happened yet.

Can someone talk us through it on the forums just to make sure? Thanks.

[Julia]

No it WON'T work. Benigno Aquino Jr. was similarly martyred. The people of the Philippines soon revolted and overthrew the decades-old Marcos dictatorship.

Benazir's martyrdom will not be in vain. Musharraf's end has only be hastened.

The dictators in Burma know better. Just keep your opponent under house arrest, but NEVER consider killing them.

Why? Because as Musharraf will soon find out, the most unstoppable revolution is one guided by the spirit of a martyred hero.

I remember the Philippines and Benigno Aquino very well - I was living there at the time. I was also there when Corazon Aquino (his wife) was elected and when she unceremoniously kicked the American armed forces out of the Philippines altogether.

Are the CIA and other American security forces willing to risk that happening in Afghanistan/Pakistan and other contiguous areas? I doubt it myself so I think the temptation to intervene in Pakistan in the wake of the confusion and unrest that is bound to occur now might just be too strong for Mr Bush to resist.

RP isn't going to get an easy ride on this subject - should make for some GREAT campaigning!