Pakistan threatens to retaliate against US

reply to post by Fathom


Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (H.R. 3162)
Under Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act, a person commits the crime of domestic terrorism if within the U.S. they engage in activity that involves acts dangerous to human life that violate the laws of the United States or any state and appear to be intended: (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.

Not much has changed.

Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007

"On October 23, 2007, the House of Representatives passed the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 by a vote of 404-6. The bill will be referred out of committee this week and will then go to the Senate floor. The National Lawyers Guild and the Society of American Law Teachers strongly oppose this legislation because it will likely lead to the criminalization of beliefs, dissent and protest, and invite more draconian surveillance of Internet communications. This bill would establish a Commission to study and report on "facts and causes" of "violent radicalism" and "extremist belief systems." It defines "violent radicalism" as "adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change." The term "extremist belief system" is not defined; it could refer to liberalism, nationalism, socialism, anarchism, communism, etc. "Ideologically based violence" is defined in the bill as the "use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs." Thus, "force" and "violence" are used interchangeably. If a group of people blocked the doorway of a corporation that manufactured weapons, or blocked a sidewalk during an anti-war demonstration, it might constitute the use of "force" to promote "political beliefs.""

I know i'm going to get slammed for this but who cares.

The state of Pakistan is corrupt, from the highest levels of Government down to the lowest ranking civil servant. Pakistan has been corrupt since it's creation during partition.

Pakistan has failed since it's inception to, educate it's population, provide medical care and build a strong economy.

Pakistan will always be a backward nation as long as it is an Islamic state and the corruption continues.

OBL is probably hiding in Pakistan just like many other terrorists, but then they can do this quite easily in a corrupt Islamic state.

In order to resolve the problem i think all Muslims should return to Pakistan, we should then build a wall around the country and not let anyone leave - ever. Problem solved. No need then for extra spending on security or military spending. Lock them in don't let them leave.

Pakistan barely retaliates against the criminals in Waziristan. Why should the United States worry about Pakistan's weak threats?

Perhaps if they'd take control of their own house we wouldn't have to.

Originally posted by duffster

Just what the USA and the world needs is to have another conflict going on
But IMO they have every right to be ticked off with the US-led forces
They should go through the correct channels

I love when people who have no idea what their talking about, project themselves as authorities on the matter. Let me tell you something buddy, if the Pakistanis didn't let the Taliban and AQ set up shop in the mountains, none of this would happen. The Pakistanis have let this problem fester to the point its affecting the world. Along with the fact they have a nuke arsenal. If we back off from Pakistan/Afghanistan, than others will pay with their lives. Your moral indignation is payed for by the lives of others.

Its horrible that civilians get killed, but this is THE war zone. Nobody tires to avoid civilian casualties like the US does.

[edit on 1-11-2008 by Marcus Calpurnius]

Originally posted by Marcus Calpurnius


I love when people who have no idea what their talking about, project themselves as authorities on the matter. Let me tell you something buddy, if the Pakistanis didn't let the Taliban and AQ set up shop in the mountains, none of this would happen. The Pakistanis have lets this problem fester to the point its affecting the world. Along with the fact they have a nuke arsenal. If we back off from Pakistan/Afghanistan, than others will pay with their lives. Your moral indignation is payed for by the lives of others.

Its horrible that civilians get killed but this is a war zone. Nobody tired to avoid civilian casualties like the US does.

You know sometimes when you read something and you think..wow...i wish i had written that? Well i just had one of those moments.

I agree with everything you say.

I'm sorry, but someone has to stand up to this guy and say to him, with much gusto in the ol' voice-o, "KAAAAAHHHHHHHN!"

I'm sorry, but it had to be done.

Thats the fallacy. Its not India would be doing this FOR the US. Its something India would love to do anyway and if they can use the US as an excuse for their own agenda then so be it. The US gets what they want and India gets what they want.

Originally posted by mr-lizard
reply to post by bodrul

 

That is precisely what i'm talking about.
Why would they risk everything for the US?


Makes no sense.