Presidential Debate

phattonez wrote:Just turn it around. Imagine Pakistan coming into this country to capture someone who bombed one of their embassies. They come in with helicopters, planes, ground troops, etc. Militarily, it will always be perceived as a threat unless there is a prior arrangement.

If we were hiding one of their terrorist or allowing them to hide via our poor control over an area of our country, they would in fact have a case for coming in. If they indeed had the ability to come into our country which they do not.

If we had a big terrorist cell sitting in say Utah that was attacking other parts of the world and we weren't doing anything about it because we either couldn't or didn't care then those countries under attack would have a right to come in and put a stop to it.

That being said though, America would make every effort possible to capture the person that had bombed the Pakistani embassy. Pakistan isn't helping us with the terrorist, and there is some evidence that they might actually be helping them.

You know, I don't like to suggest it, but one does have to wonder. I mean, let's say they just don't have the manpower to control that region. Why not invite us in?

rock_nog wrote:You know, I don't like to suggest it, but one does have to wonder. I mean, let's say they just don't have the manpower to control that region. Why not invite us in?

I didn't see this earlier, otherwise I would have replied then.

The Pakistani public would never accept that. They believe (probably rightfully) that increased US action against terrorists has actually inflamed extremist passions and encouraged more violent actions in their country. So inviting the US in would be political suicide. Also, the regions of Pakistan that are not governed are that way out of respect for the various tribal groups and leaders that have always resided there.

Thanks for clearing that up. That's just horrible, I must say.