I don’t understand the criticisms Obama has drawn because of his latest declaration. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6926663.stm
I mean, isn’t obvious by now that the “war on terror” should take place in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia (and not Iraq)? We were told that Saddam had WMDs and that terrorists could get a hold of them, none of which were true. There were neither WMDs nor terrorists in Iraq. On the other hand, Pakistan has active nuclear heads and terrorists by the boatload. Matter of fact, most intelligence agencies think Ben Laden is in Pakistan
Moreover, Musharraf is every bit as evil as Saddam when it comes to dealing with political opponents. He bombs entire villages, kidnaps, tortures and jails everyone who disagrees with him. Yet, I don’t hear much outrage from Washington about “democracy” (or the lack thereof) in Karachi.
I think Obama’s statement was spot-on. Pakistan is a nest for terrorists of all kind. But there’s no focus on that unequivocal threat. Rather, there’s much talk about how Iran is filled with terrorists and how they’re close to acquiring nukes when that couldn’t be farther from the truth.
Who agrees with Obama’s statements that Pakistan should be confronted? Personally, I believe pressure on Musharraf (and the Al-Sauds) would have made the world a lot safer than invading Iraq. Thoughts?