Ron Paul reacts to Bhutto’s death by playing the same tired blame-America tune
In a very, very narrow sense, he has a point: I argued at the time of the emergency rule that we were pushing too hard and too soon on Musharraf, a man attempting to lead a country that is about as riven with difficulty as a country can get. I argued that the course of pushing democracy was too risky at this point, and that the Bush administration ought to take a long look at what democracy delivered on Israel’s borders before pushing for more of the same in Pakistan. Pakistan is peculiarly troubled: All of its heroes, including Bhutto, are deeply flawed; neither Musharraf, Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif trust each other; all of them would benefit in one way or another if one or both of the others weren’t around, yet they all claim to be the only thing that can save Pakistan; and any could also be weakened by the untimely demise of any of the others. Behind them there’s the rising Islamist threat that, sorry John Derbyshire, Patriot Paul does not understand to a depth greater than a nanometer. The problems in Pakistan are not, ultimately, the results of busted American foreign policy. Our short-term policy hasn’t helped, but the environment in which the problems thrive goes back a few decades, or a few centuries. As we ought to have learned in Afghanistan during the 1990s, rubble can make a very great deal of trouble indeed.
But in Ron Paul’s world, all problems are the result of the US taking action. Any action. Anywhere. Against anyone, doing anything. In the case of Pakistan, he says we should cut off aid to our “puppet” in Pakistan and make sure not to march in there with troops. There is, of course, at most a neglible possibility that we’ll send troops into Pakistan to do anything beyond taking on al Qaeda or securing the nukes. India might, but even that’s highly unlikely. And never mind that Pakistan’s history with democracy is sketchy, to say the least. Should we not have attempted to work with Musharraf against al Qaeda, Patriot Paul? Paul also tosses out the canard that we supported Osama bin Laden. Someone really needs to disabuse him of that notion one of these days. Someone should bone him up on the history of al Qaeda as well. It didn’t form because we support Musharraf, as Paul seems to think.Paul doesn’t even offer a pro forma statement of condolences either for Bhutto or Pakistan. As a doctor, he must have had splendid bedside manner.
H/T NookSpook
THIS BLOG HAS MOVED
TO CHECK OUT OUR NEWEST VERSION PLEASE CLICK ON THE SIREN VOICE
OR SIMPLY COPY AND PASTE ONTO YOUR BROWSER HTTP://THESIRENVOICE.BLOGSPOT.COM
Friday, December 28, 2007
Reactions to Bhutto’s death
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I don't think Musharraf is free of blame here. He is more Islamic than many know, and there are accusations that some of the aid America is giving Pakistan is finding it way, via Musharraf's administration, into the hands of terrorists.
Bhutto was not a saint. But she was a potentially great ally for the West and crusaders, much more than Musharraf. Her death leaves Musharraf effectively a dictator. The elections are too near for a new Pro-West candidate to succeed. If the new Prime Minister is an Islamist, and Musharraf is a wolf in sheep's clothing, the assassination of Bhutto will be a clear victory for Islamic terrorists. A democracy cannot exist if opposition can be eliminated. That is what the terrorists have done.
Musharraf failed to protect her. He is complicit in her assassination. Pakistan's loss is our loss.
I don't think Bhutto was a saint either, but she would not have been a better allied to the west. Musharraf has proven to support the west despite all his corrupt actions. And after all, it is the U.S. who kept there this long. Do you know how hard it is to control terrorism in the Punjab province?
Hey both of you are right on. While I hated to see Bhutto killed, an obviously courageous woman, but wasn't there a little ethnic cleansing type of thing that happened while she was PM to a tribe over there? Not to mention her own corruption issues like Musharraf.
I can't remember the name of the tribe. But, I think Musharraf is about the best we can do for now as far as I can see, hell they've tried to assassinate him nine times, and at least some of those were inside jobs.
Oh, and Ron Paul and his Paultards are idiots. They must really be liberals, I see too much of a yellow streak there for them not to be.
Post a Comment