President Barack Obama on Friday warned Al-Qaeda was a "cancer" that could devour nuclear-armed Pakistan, unveiling a sweeping new strategy for the "increasingly perilous" Afghan war.
Obama vowed to "disrupt, distmantle and defeat" Osama bin Laden's group, which he said was plotting deadly new assaults and made Pakistan the epicenter of the new US approach, more than seven years after the September 11 attacks.
He said he would plunge 4,000 more US troops into the unfinished war, triple US aid to Pakistan to 7.5 billion dollars over five years, attempt to peel away more moderate Taliban factions and lead a global civilian surge to Afghanistan.
The president candidly spelled out expectations of the United States, its allies and Pakistan, raising the stakes in a war that is killing more Americans than Iraq and reaping a rising civilian toll.
"Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that Al-Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the US homeland from its safe-haven in Pakistan," Obama said in a sober televised speech.
"We have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan and to prevent their return to either country in the future," he said as he released results of a 60-day policy review.
"That is a cause that could not be more just. And to the terrorists who oppose us, my message is the same: we will defeat you."
Flanked by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Obama backed a Senate bill to triple US aid to Pakistan's democratic government to 1.5 billion dollars a year over five years.
"Make no mistake, Al-Qaeda and its extremist allies are a cancer that risks killing Pakistan from within," he said, hours after a suicide bomb at a mosque in Pakistan killed more than 50 people and wounded 50 more.
But he warned Pakistan must play a more active role in eliminating the terrorists on its soil.
"After years of mixed results, we will not and cannot provide a blank check.
"Pakistan must demonstrate its commitment to rooting out Al Qaida and the violent extremists within its borders.
"We will insist that action be taken, one way or another, when we have intelligence about high-level terrorist targets."
Earlier, following reports that more US missile strikes on Pakistan militant targets could be part of the US tactics, Pakistan's foreign ministry asked Washington to reconsider.
"Pakistan?s concerns in this regard have been conveyed to the US government at the highest level," foreign ministry spokesman Abdul Basit said.
On Afghanistan, there was little of the rhetoric seen in the previous Bush administration that foresaw the country as a democratic bastion.
"We will shift the emphasis of our mission to training and increasing the size of Afghan security forces so that they can eventually take the lead in securing their country," Obama said.
"That's how we will prepare Afghans to take responsibility for their security and how we will, ultimately, be able to bring our own troops home."
The 4,000 extra US troops -- on top of the 17,000 already authorized by the president -- will partner Afghan security forces.
Obama also called on US global partners to join his push to send more civilian and development workers to Afghanistan, and warned that he would not turn a "blind eye" to corruption in the Afghan government.
He said the strategy establishes clear benchmarks to judge the effort by the United States and its allies in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Officials also said they expected to secure pledges for additional military help in Afghanistan when Obama presents the strategy at the NATO alliance annual summit on the France-Germany border.
Said Jawad, Afghanistan's ambassador to Washington, said Kabul was "very grateful" to the Obama administration for "this new strategy for victory."
"The Afghan government is committed to working with the US and our allies to implement this strategy," he said in a statement.
Pakistan's ambassador to Washington, Husain Haqqani, said it was an "extraordinarily positive" sign that Obama was re-examining US policy in the region.
He said Pakistan was "especially pleased" about Obama's personal commitment to "reinvigorating our common efforts to contain terrorism and extremism."
Any comments?
I just wish that we could get the heck out of that part of the world, period. I do not see that we are really going to gain anything by being there. ??? ???
The only reason we stay is so that our military has a foothold there, in the event that all hell breaks loose. There couldn't be any other reason...We sure haven't influenced the flow of oil, from what I can see...The general economy has had more influence on that than anything else.
Do you think if we make nice with Pakistan we can eventually root out Bin Laden?
No.
Okay, I am going to say something here, and if I offend anyone thats just too bad.
For those of you who say we should "get out" of that part of the world, or that we have no reason for being there, then I have a question for you. Do you remeber what happened on Spet. 11, 2001? How about the USS Cole, that name ring a bell???
For those who say we should "make nice" with pakistan, need I remind you that that is where the people who have caused the afore mentioned events? These people don't just want us out of the middle east, THEY WANT US DEAD!!! They cannot be reasoned with, we cannot "win their hearts and minds", we have to defeat them. And not just to the point of blocking their return to the US, but beat them down so bad that they won't even be able to think about attacking us or our allies. If that means we have to kill every last one of them, then so be it.
Sixdogsman, I have a friend who is currently in iraq. Having served six years with the Army as an Infantryman I have lost many, many, brother and sister soldiers in this WAR ON TERROR (and that is exactly what it is, war). I would invite you personally to face each of their families and explain to them that their sacriface was pointless and that we gained nothing for it.
For every one here who thinks this will be over if we catch bin laden, I say to you, WAKE UP. It is so much bigger then that.
Catwoman, the reason we stay is because the job is not done...there couldn't be any other reason. Our military has the capabilities of being anywhere in the world in a matter of hours. If we need a foothold, we make one.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on March 29, 2009, 09:22:05 AM
Any comments?
yeah,
So much for the "wailing and gnashing of teeth" about involving ourselves in a unwinnable war that we ddidn't belong in. Same Sh** Different Pile.
Quote from: sixdogsmom on March 29, 2009, 12:11:36 PM
I just wish that we could get the heck out of that part of the world, period. I do not see that we are really going to gain anything by being there. ??? ???
Gain? Well lets try this, we stay there, and keep them fighting on their soil, you enjoy freedom here without worrying about going to the grocery store or the movies or a coffee shop and haji decides to blow himself up with everyone else around there. The second we leave the middle east, they will regroup and bring the fight over here.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on March 29, 2009, 12:57:38 PM
Do you think if we make nice with Pakistan we can eventually root out Bin Laden?
Bin laden is a straw man now. He's just a figurehead. Even if you kill him, al queda isn't over with until we go after the head of the snake, and thats iran.
Kill irans leaders and network, and the rest of al queda and hamas and hezbollah die
Have to disagree with you srkruzich, there is no "head of the snake" that is al queda. Radical islam has sprung up all over the globe, and islam itself is one of the fastest growing religions in the world. This is a problem that we will have to deal with until God puts a stop to it, which He will. This was written about long ago, it just seems new to us because instead of reading about it we are seeing it happen.
Quote from: Varmit on April 04, 2009, 03:59:00 AM
Have to disagree with you srkruzich, there is no "head of the snake" that is al queda. Radical islam has sprung up all over the globe, and islam itself is one of the fastest growing religions in the world. This is a problem that we will have to deal with until God puts a stop to it, which He will. This was written about long ago, it just seems new to us because instead of reading about it we are seeing it happen.
Oh but what Iran decrees so goes the rest of islam. Alqueda is just one of Irans tools.
More like the other way around. Iran bases its governing on the laws of islam.
Quote from: Varmit on April 04, 2009, 06:49:10 AM
More like the other way around. Iran bases its governing on the laws of islam.
Ahh but which version of islam. There are mulitple versions.
From what I've seen I would say that it would be the crazy-blow-up-people-to-get-our-point-across types. not to mention the "chop their heads off if they're not muslim" type.
Everyone is making good points, especially you Varmint....I guess my whole point in this matter is 7.5 billion dollars going to Obama's buddy country of Pakistan kinda pisses me off!! That's really what jumped out at me in the whole story which is why I even posted it at all!!
I know what you're saying hillbilly. What kills me about this whole thing is that we are repeating history. We are doing exactly what started the taliban in the first place. During the russian/afghan war in the 80's we sent money, arms, and trainers into afghanistan to train them against the russians. How is that any different then what we are doing now? Not only that, but uncle sambo says that we cannot provide just a blank check without a pakistani comminment against al queda, yet we're sending them 7.5 billion, might as well be a blank check. Their willingness to fight so far is not what I would call encouraging.
What goes around comes around and generally bites you in the ass.
Kinda like Saddam and nuclear weapons and super germs and a host of OTHER bad ideas power hungry people have had.
In the 80's the Taliban were poor downtrodden tribesmen who were fightin the dreaded red for their freedom. They had the same philosophy they have now and did the same barbaric things but people pooh-poohed it because they were "useful" to us. Saddam was the same arrogant deceitful ass when US help put him on top but the government didn't like the people in charge at the time and he was "useful" to us.
The first time they set off a nuclear explosion they knew they had opened Pandoras box and what it could potentially do shocked even the guy who invented the notion but it was "useful" to us at the time. Scientists foolin around with viruses and germs created some of the most horrific diseases known to man and one slip could decimate the planet but they might be "useful" to us sometime or other so it goes on.
Now we run around the world tryin to keep that "power" out of the wrong hands and puttin it in the next set of "wrong" hands at the same time. We are our OWN worst enemy.
You're right to a point. The U.S. should stop trying to be a world police force. However, I see nothing wrong with going after those who are a threat to our country or our freedom.
Quote from: Varmit on April 05, 2009, 01:02:19 PM
You're right to a point. The U.S. should stop trying to be a world police force. However, I see nothing wrong with going after those who are a threat to our country or our freedom.
Neither do I. My point was who is considered a threat is dependant upon the agenda at the present. And THAT is a fact.
Anyone who would threaten liberty and freedom of this country are the threat, regardless of the agenda. Al qudea didn't turn against us until iraq invaded kuwait. Osama went to the prince of Saudi Arabia and asked that he and al qudea be allowed to repel saddam, the saudias thanked him but said no. He felt this was a slight against him and turned against us. Thus becoming an enemy not only against us but our allies as well.
I agree al queda is our enemy. I learned all I needed to know about arabs and their way of thinkin in the late 70's. I have no use for them OR their way of life. I have said on here many times muslims would just have to kill me because I will never live as they do.
If you have an honest bone tho you KNOW that who our government considers an enemy has depended MORE than ONCE on what they wanted at that particular moment in time.
Yea, but that can be said of any two people who are butting heads at the time. At the founding of America the enemy was Britian, now they're our allies. The issues of the argument dictate who stands with you or against.
Well I could say .....well duh...LOL but that would be rude so......... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :P
yeah it would :)
LOL. By the way...love the new pic, Pam!