Obama’s policies leave US out in the cold for imminent Pakistan regime change

Flopping Aces ^ | 01-01-12 | Mataharley

[Starman417]

While we're waiting for Iowa to make up their minds as to a possible Obama opponent, it may behoove us to examine just what repercussions of Obama's Pakistan foreign policy lie in store for the US and our national security. Yes yes… I'm well aware that foreign policy is triaged way down in the electorate's mind in import. At least when it comes to specific day-to-day events. But there is no doubt that our national security does still remain an important campaign issue… even if not at the top of the voters' radar. So this is a worthy debate, even if not as "sexy" a topic these days.

The summary? Zardari is on his way out - early - and there's a three way frontal assault for new leadership of the nuke-armed nation. Pakistan has grown extremely anti-American with the average of a drone strike over Pakistani soil every four days - 291 total, and 236 of them under this POTUS alone, the invasion of sovereign territory - sans permission - to get UBL (as promised by candidate Obama), and the pièce de résistance, the NATO "oops" attack that killed 24 Pakistan soldiers. And as CJ, FA's boots-on-the-ground in Afghanistan reports, they've already begun exacting their revenge by slashing US supply lines to our troops in Afghanistan.

So exactly who is Pakistan's future potential leadership, and are they a potential enemy, or ally of the US? Sorry to report that the outlook isn't good, with two out of the three declaring, in advance, that the US is no friend to that nation and promising no cooperation as part of their elective appeal. Considering the above referenced events, Obama's ill-thought foreign policies have left the US extremely unpopular with Pakistanis who will not welcome any input… just as "new and improved" Egypt now states. In fact, it may be quite likely that any functional relationship with Pakistan will be coming to an end.

I'll start this crash course in a current events perspective with an little noticed press release over the holidays that former Pakistan army chief, General Ziauddin Butt, has charged the Musharraf regime with deliberately harboring Usama Bin Laden, away from the US's intelligence eyes, in the past holiday week.

Musharraf and Rick Perry, July 2011

Musharraf is, of course, one of the favorite dumping grounds of the western press. I also know that so many don't know, or care, where Pakistan fits in with the US national security overview. Fair enough. If anyone hasn't figured out why Pakistan is a better ally than enemy in this climate, I daresay there's not much I can do to influence you otherwise. But fact is… they are a nuclear nation. The citizens have demonstrated thru every election that they don't want Shariah law as the ultimate rule of the land, and they are none too pleased with internal terrorist attacks themselves.

Needless to say, Pakistan has all the makings of a Middle East, Islamic psuedo-ally in intel, and offers absolutely no appeal as an enemy. Post Sept 11th, they became that ally under Musharraf…until they were provoked and abused beyond the pale under this POTUS, that is.

Judging by the Commander in Chief's three years of policy choices, I'd say that Obama does not share my view of Pakistan as a more valuable ally than enemy. While I welcomed the death of UBL, I am on record (and taking much heat for…) my opinion that "…there would be a seriously hefty price for this nation to pay for Bin Laden’s head, if one weighs the cascading repercussions."

Today, those repercussions are painfully obvious - at least to those paying attention.

[humblegunner]

How about making a New Year’s resolution to stop pimping that damn flappy asses blog?

[SunkenCiv]

Musharraf helped build the anti-US and anti-India apparatus, and is not our ally. Pakistan is disintegrating, and US policy should be to encourage that disintegration by providing arms and ammo to all sides. Thanks Starman417.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

Pakistan has grown extremely anti-American with the average of a drone strike over Pakistani soil every four days - 291 total, and 236 of them under this POTUS alone, the invasion of sovereign territory - sans permission - to get UBL (as promised by candidate Obama), and the pièce de résistance, the NATO "oops" attack that killed 24 Pakistan soldiers.

Nonsense - Pakistan hated our guts long before Obama took office. Should we not have gone after terrorists finding sanctuary in Pakistan? Should we not have gone in and killed Osama? What's the point of this article - that we should have just kept shoveling billions in tax dollars to Pakistan and let them keep sheltering our enemies because it's better to pretend that Pakistan is an ally than face reality?