[Vision2020] Pakistan Is Worse Than Iraq

Ted Moffett ted_moffett@hotmail.com
Fri, 31 Jan 2003 02:05:40 +0000


I agree with much of what you wrote.  I have no illusions about Iraq and 

Mike Curley's post today raises the possibility that we could be forcing 
Saddam to use weapons of mass destruction by attacking Iraq, whereas if we 
continue to inspect and pressure Iraq to disarm and try to remove Saddam by 
means other than massive military intervention (a good old fashioned cold 
war style CIA sponsored assassination might work, not that I advocate such 
tactics), we could achieve our goals without massive bloodshed.  I am not a 
total pacifist, I just think war is a last resort, is always an admission of 
failure, and that the innocents who die and suffer in war is a horror that 
nearly justifies advocating total pacifism.

I think Pakistan's nuclear weapons, the fact they harbor supporters of Osama 
Bin Laden and his gang, and terrorist attacks on democratic India, are more 
than enough reasons to justify Bush going after disarming and cracking down 
on Pakistan, according to Bush's own stated agenda on how he will prosecute 
the war on terrorism.  Obviously, the Bush administration has a "hidden 
agenda" to justify the disparate way they treat Iraq and Pakistan other than 
that stated as the goals of prosecuting the war on terrorism.

A nuclear war between Pakistan and India is a national security issue for 
the USA and the whole world.  India is a Democracy, the largest in the world 
in total population.  Pakistan is a dictatorship at present.  Perhaps the 
USA should be siding with India in the nuclear standoff between Pakistan and 
India to promote democratic ideals, another reason for the USA to demand 
that Pakistan disarm?  Israel has nuclear weapons it is well known, yet we 
hear the argument made that Israel is a democracy that has a right to defend 
itself, that it is not threatening other nations like Iraq is, so the USA 
does not demand that Israel disarm.

Again I point out, Pakistan is connected to terrorist attacks against the 
democratic state of India, is a dictatorship with nuclear missiles, also has 
connections to Osama Bin Laden's gang that can be linked to 9/11 or future 
terrorist attacks against the USA, yet we do not hear any demand for 
Pakistan to disarm by the Bush administration.

I do not know the complete history of UN resolutions concerning Pakistan, 
but I will assume for the moment you are correct that there has been no UN 
resolution for Pakistan to disarm its nuclear weapons.  But the Bush 
administration has stated it does not require the permission of the UN to 
declare a nation a terrorist state and take military action.  Pakistan 
certainly qualifies as a terrorist state.  Until the USA moved into 
Afghanistan, Pakistan supported the Taliban.


>From: Debbie Gray <dgray@uidaho.edu>
>To: Ted Moffett <ted_moffett@hotmail.com>
>CC: vision2020@moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Pakistan Is Worse Than Iraq
>Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 15:59:17 -0800 (PST)
>OK I am no political expert but isn't part of the problem w/Iraq that they
>are not supposed to have WMD due to various UN/US/whoever agreements?
>Whereas Pakistan is not under a similar agreement? Obviously it is not the
>goal to attack all nations having WMD. I am not sure what the goal is, but
>it's not like Saddam and Iraq are just innocent harmless people being
>victimized by the Big Bad Bush Macho Mean Machine. Why is Saddam being so
>secretive? Why won't he allow scientists to be interviewed? Why does he
>have 200 tons of some hideous chemical? Why does he also seem hell
>bent on war?
>Pushing peace from this side is all well and good, but how can pacifists
>possibly _prevail_ when they are in a relationship with irrational,
>power-hungy tyrants willing to allow 'volunteers' to surround his various
>castles as human shields? I am all for allowing plenty of time for the
>inspectors to do their job. On the other hand, I worry that this just
>gives more time to Sadam's scientists working away at some underground
>bunker to perfect even more devastating WMDs.
>I envy those of you who can see things in such black and white ideals.
>There are too many gray issues for me, I guess that's fitting w/my
>Debbie Gray
>Moscow, ID 83843
>On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Ted Moffett wrote:
> > Nuclear weapons on missiles that can be launched in a nation rife with
> > terrorism in its borders?
> > Do we see demands from Bush for Pakistan to disarm?
> >
> > Why are we not demanding that Musharraf and Pakistan disarm their 
>weapons of
> > mass destruction, eliminate the supporters of Osama Bin Laden within 
> > borders, and stop all terrorism against India, or we will bomb them?
>   Debbie Gray      dgray@uidaho.edu      http://www.uidaho.edu/~dgray/
>   We must be willing to get rid of the life we've planned, so as to
>   have the life that is waiting for us." --Joseph Campbell
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com

The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*