Osama being treated by Pak Army

The Times of India ^ | SATURDAY, JULY 24, 2004 12:56:40 PM | CHIDANAND RAJGHATTA

[DoughtyOne]

Hey thanks for the comments. That you were a researcher for him is interesting. Take care.

[Defiant]

I do not doubt that a "Pakistani source to the 9-11 commission" gave Arnaud the document that is quoted in this article. The issue is whether the document is real or disinformation. It appears from the quotes attributed to Arnaud that he considers it genuine, which gives it added credibility to me. However, this is something that on its face seems unlikely, and so, even though Arnaud is a proponent, I would want to see a lot more before I considered it to be true.

I consider it unlikely that the Pak army is treating Osama, because that would be dangerous for Musharef if he knows about it, and for the generals if he does not. They know we would take such a thing as a hostile act, and if caught with Osama, they would have to hand him over, and they don't want to do that and inflame their masses. So, they would not be likely to have Osama in a hospital getting dialysis. But, the report is credible, so it merits further investigation.

[Defiant]

I could tell a few stories. He had some great contacts. He read about 6 languages, and he had magazine articles from all over the world cut out and filed in filing cabinets all over the place. That allowed him to be able to piece together seemingly disparate events.

[SunkenCiv]

Not by coincidence, either. The British laid out the borders. General Sir John Hackett, writing circa 1980 in his "The Third World War" work of fiction (very much fiction), expressed the sour-grapes British view that the Indian union would fall to pieces in no time. The former East Pakistan split off to form Bangladesh, and there have been violent movements (like the Sikh rebellion) that made it look as if India would fly apart at any minute. I doubt that it will happen, even as the Moslem terrorism widens across the country.

[sukhoi-30mki]

Well Indian papers have been saying for years that the Pakis were proliferating to Iran&South Korea-most people took it with a pinch of salt till 4 months ago.

India knows the pyschology of these beasts-we've been stuck with them for nearly 60yrs-THe US Pak relationship is nothing but a one-night stand-which are renowned for the mutual pleasure it gives&also the high risk of STD transmission.

[Cronos]

It means, like most third world countries, Pakistan doesn't have any sense of national identity, only local loyalties based on faith, tribe, language...

you mean the Pakis don't have a sense of nationality when they say they have the Islamic bomb? You mean that if all the folks don't have a sense of national identity that makes the country third world? So, then Belgium with it's Walloon and Flemish split is a third world country? As is Canada due to the Quebecois? And maybe even hte US due to the Black Panthers and Aztlan and White separatist groups?

[Cronos]

Pakistan's president is trying to do the right thing (except toward Kashmir) but has internal opposition.

you said that, but he isn't trying to do the right thing -- he's trying to placate everyone so that he stays inpower -- and he hasn't delivered on his promises to us as that would throw him completely out of power in Paki land while he still appeases the Islamic terrorists in his own land

[SunkenCiv]

G'bye.

[Former Proud Canadian]

Another reason that Bush is treading lightly in the region. He, and his team, know that this problem will not be solved in a few months. Furthermore, they realize that the US armed forces might be called upon to liberate several more countries, including Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. To liberate all these countries simultaneously would require a huge standing army, which the US does not possess. Better to liberate these countries one at a time, turn them into allies, and husband resources for the next one.

[hershey]

Pakistan plays both ends against the middle, plus hopes to tilt the US against India. Huge Muslim population, same old, same old...large, restless, testosterone driven youth...lousy jobs, nothing to get up for but blaming America for everything from soup to nuts. Maybe what we need to invent is a device that destroys nuclear bombs in their bunkers. Maybe that 300,000 ton MOAB the pentagon mentioned last week? Or a magnetic pulsing device we could fire at missiles and not only destroy them, but evaporate or negate any nuclear elements.

[Cronos]

Better to liberate these countries one at a time, turn them into allies, and husband resources for the next one.

We can do that with Syria -- it IS 10% Christian and the ruler is a new Assad AND a Secular ruler, not a Muslim fanatic. For Iran, the popular feeling is AGAINST the ayatollahs -- so we may yet see a free Iran -- of it's OWN ACCORD.

Saudi A is the source of all funding for all muslim terror groups and Pakistan is the training camp for the terrorists. IRq was a bypass -- destroy (NOT liberate) Pakistan and we have eliminated the training grounds and the source of weapons (including nuclear weapons) of the terrorists. Elimintate the Saud family and we eliminate the funding of terror groups. to Win the WOT we must hit Pakistan and Saudi A or we win nothing.

[Cronos]

Pakistan plays both ends against the middle, plus hopes to tilt the US against India. Huge Muslim population, same old, same old...large, restless, testosterone driven youth...lousy jobs, nothing to get up for but blaming America for everything from soup to nuts. Maybe what we need to invent is a device that destroys nuclear bombs in their bunkers.

That's a good idea -- or just nuke the islamic nutjobs -- the russians and indians would join us (and to H*** with the French)

[Jackknife]

.....a Hunka Hunka Burnin' Love.......

[swarthyguy]

any military hospital anywhere in Pakistan".

Look how he parses it.."in any military hospital .....how about a regular hospital.

And technically, Pakistani Kashmir is not a "part" of Pakistan. Or as you say, a private clinic, connected to AQKhan or someone.

[swarthyguy]

Bump. Thanks. The original is far more damning than the TOI.

Another home run by Arno.

[Alas Babylon!]

Well, you would if the Indian papers were totalitarian mouthpieces, but they aren't.

Hah! Neither are the New York Times, LA Times, or Washington Post, but I don't believe their every dotted i and crossed t, either. Most democratic countries have newspapers that follow political party lines and are always ranting about something or other with very little journalistic integrity. I lived in Europe a number of years, and believe me, the things these folks would write about the opposition party or another country (like the USA) would spin your head around. And just for the record, Indian papers write all kinds of sordid things about the Paki's--some true, some bald-faced lies. It helps them sell, as the Indians themselves eat this crap up.

[Former Proud Canadian]

Well, you have touched on it. Each country is a different case. Iran has a very unpopular government and a (seemingly) pro-American populace. It seems like their nuclear facilities are about to be taken out by Israel soon which will complicate matters. However, the US should be conducting a large scale radio/TV propaganda campaign against the mullahs. Ditto Syria.

The Saudi regime seems very, very brittle. AQ seems to believe so. The US must be ready, in this case to secure the oil fields and facilities if things go badly for the regime. Maybe Jordan, Egypt and the Gulf states could contribute some police and garrison troops if and when the house of Saud collapses.

Pakistan is another case entirely. AQ leadership is enjoying its last redout in their "frontier" region. It has a huge population that cannot really be "controlled" by anyone. Certainly the US does not want to get involved in occupying Pakistan, but AQ must be dealt with and they are hiding in country. The answer here might be to back Musharak for a while, as long as he co-operates in apprehending AQ leaders and operatives. How much co-operation is forthcoming right now is open for debate.

[Cronos]

The answer here might be to back Musharak for a while, as long as he co-operates in apprehending AQ leaders and operatives. How much co-operation is forthcoming right now is open for debate.

I'm pretty convincend Mushie is playing us for suckers. We can't occupy a country of 140 million, but there is a neighbour who has a population of 1000 million who might be willing to do the occupation work for us if we knock out the Paki nukes and defenses.

[Former Proud Canadian]

I don't think India could really handle it. 140 million is A LOT of people. A very difficult job. We have excellent examples of how to occupy a country and turn it into a friend, Germany and Japan circa 1945-50 and the present case of Iraq. However, these were different cases and an occupation of Pakistan will have to take into account an Iranian regime that will try to derail everything.

As for Mushie, I don't trust him, but what are the choices? He is walking a tightrope himself. I heard a while ago that his wife was in Washington house shopping. Evidently he has his escape route in place in case things go bad. Pakistan is a failed state. Iran, Syria, and Saudi are borderline. Afghanistan and Iraq were rogue states pre US intervention. When you step back and take a look at the whole picture, I'm not sure if the only thing that will work in the long run is massive nuclear surgery.