What he writes it true–you can’t have it both ways. If you think invading Iraq was a disastrous decision, you should see similar flaws in any argument about invading Pakistan. (Arguing that we’d only invade but not occupy the country is a cheap dodge.)

But Dugger neglects to point out the stinking elephant in the room: it’s the Bush administration that wants to have it both ways.

The Bushies resolutely ignored any complaints about “soveriegnty” or “Muslim sensibilities” when it gave the American public a convenient target for its post-9-11 rage. Suddenly, it seems they’ve got religion on the complexities of real-world international relations.

The pertinent question is: why so much sensitivity for Pakistan, but none for Iran?

…. Don’t make an invasion of Pakistan a cornerstone of your foreign policy…. Duggerr

Who says invade? Merely go after the guys who attacked us who are living on the border of Afghanistan. Why let Pakistan give sanctuary to those who killed thousands of Americans? Are you a bin Laden supporter?

BTW, I love the “we’re in Iraq” argument on a blog where more than half the posts focus on getting out of said disaster. Well played.

Dugger you mindless asshole. Every complaint you have about the left can be applied more aptly against the right. Every one.

Now, do I get this sweeping progressive brainstorm right that, uhh ,’since we are in Iraq and you don’t like that, we should invade Pakistan.”

Check in with me later with your brilliant answer.

Wait.

Dugger…Dugger said that…

What the fucking FUCK? FUCK OFF.

But we need to stay in Iraq to defend the iraqi government even through the majority of the muslim population there sees us as an occupying force that’s trampling their sovereignty. Fantastic, dugs, fantastic.

Somehow this never came up when you morons were all rah-rahing the invasion of Iraq.

“Gosh, if we did anything resembling protecting our national interests in Pakistan, they might rise up and do something nasty like sell nuclear secrets on the black market or provide safe havens for al-Qaeda and the Taliban or…oh, really? Oh f*ck…Never mind.”

It goes without saying that somehow this logic goes down the swirly when you change “Pakistan” to “Iran.”

And do we really need to bring up the genius of funding radical Sunni groups in the region in an attempt to destabilize countries like Syria and Iran when you have the Saudi backed Sunnis carrying out 90%+ of the attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq (and, let’s not forget the gift that keeps on giving, 9/11)?

That’s really all you need to say to this asshole.

Dugger, the Republicans attacked Kerry and the Democrats during 2004 claiming they wouldn’t let some other nation veto plans for American security. They also said they would get Saddam.

Republicans are worthless in this field. Everything they say is for politics only.

Hell, that’s true in every field.

And I say bullsh*t. One of the thrusts of the article was that the mission was already getting too big. Flying a multi-service military presence in with multiple C-130s and no doubt choppers and support personnel and crews and troops is going to seem like an invasion to the Pakistanis. How long do you think that government would survive in a huge Muslim country if they just stood by and let us trample their sovereignty. But maybe you know more than military planners who have done that all their lives and have had special training. That works in the comics and in James Bond novels but not real life.

I’m doing you a favor. Don’t make an invasion of Pakistan a cornerstone of your foreign policy. If you don’t like Iraq, you’re gonna hate Pakistan. Sheesh!

Take it away, G.W….

–The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him.

–America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our people.

–Any government that supports, protects or harbours terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent and equally guilty of terrorist crimes.

–Any outlaw regime that has ties to terrorist groups or seeks to possess weapons of mass destruction is a grave danger to the civilised world and will be confronted.

–Every nation in every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.

–The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States…

–We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbour them.

–I will never give another country veto power over our national security.

I guess the “…unless it’s Saudi Arabia or Pakistan” is implied…or something…

Again, kudos to Dugger for taking a brave stand and pointing out Bush’s hypocrisy and utter failure in the “War on Terra.”

We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace.

How’s that trumped up war with Iran coming?

Are you really advocating invading pakistan?…. Dugger >

Don’t Republican revisionists
criticize Clinton for not invading? What happened to George Bush saying, “We’re going to get him. He can run, but he can’t hide. He’s wanted dead or alive.” ?

… unless they’re in Iraq. In which case, we should leave them alone. SaveFarris

You go get ‘em, boy.

…invade Pakistan to get one man…. Dugger 5:31:29 PM

Invade Afghanistan to get one man? Invade Iraq to get one man?
When the party line changes, the party apparatchiks turn on the dime.

This is why cons can never be trusted with these things. Just too god damn stupid.

Thirdly, if we did cross the border, why do you beleive that we should occupy the entire country?

Lastly, it isn’t all about 1 man, whom we should have apprehended 4 fucking years ago. It is about the organization that he runs. Apparently quite well.