• Friday, August 23, 2019

US threatened to bomb Pakistan 'back to stone age' after 9/11: Musharraf

Discussion in 'Strategic & Foreign Affairs' started by Neo, Sep 21, 2006.

  1. EagleEyes

    EagleEyes PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    16,778
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Ratings:
    +25 / 15,611 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    It was a smart decision.

    If that has happened to Bangladesh. There would have been no Bangladesh. Imagine a country with no nuclear weapons and fights with U.S!

    He made a correct decision and leaded the country to the prosperity and hope. It was in interest of Pakistan to join the hands of U.S on war on terror, and rightly did so.

    The same thing happened to Japan in one of the old days. Japan agreed with U.S for the access to its ports (for military and trade) even though it didn't wanted to, it recieved the same threats, Japan knew that it couldn't resist against the heavy machine guns and powerful ships. Later on it was the same Japan that kicked U.S *** out of its sea ports and U.S couldn't do anything about it, because Japan prepeared itself.

    If Pakistan had not agreed for fighting on the global war on terror, what would it have gotten except for bombs and *** kicked?

    Now it is the time of Pakistan that it is prepearing itself. It is acquiring fighter jets, frigates, conventional submarines, nuclear submarines, training aircrafts, tanks, APCs and a lot more. It is not the old Pakistan anymore, the economy is at its height! The time will come, when Pakistan will be one of the big global powers, but its still not that time. The time will come!

    Its easy to say that we will fight, but its hard to fight. Me and you are only cyber militaric war specialists, nothing more than bullocks.

    The war is a total reality!
     
  2. Awesome

    Awesome RETIRED

    Messages:
    22,023
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Ratings:
    +5 / 20,608 / -0
    who are you quoting up there Webby?
     
  3. EagleEyes

    EagleEyes PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    16,778
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Ratings:
    +25 / 15,611 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    A Bangladeshi. :) (ARKhan)

    Can't give you anymore information unless i have to shoot you. ;)
     
  4. TexasJohn

    TexasJohn SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,257
    Joined:
    May 13, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 523 / -0
    Country:
    United States
    Location:
    United States
    Not anyone in particular I don't think Asim, but I kinda see his point - it's all about timing, timing..
     
  5. Awesome

    Awesome RETIRED

    Messages:
    22,023
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Ratings:
    +5 / 20,608 / -0
    Yeah I know we can't always bet on that fortune will favor the bold. Somebody oughta ask Bush how wrong would it have been to bomb Pakistan!

    Wait that doesn't matter...
     
  6. waz

    waz MODERATOR

    Messages:
    12,946
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Ratings:
    +57 / 29,810 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Like I said my dear brothers we have moved on now and Pakistan should tread its path carefully and plan ahead in order to maximise our strategic defence. Like many of you echoed it was the right choice. The thing is the white house will not be too pleased with the latest revelations as I am sure they wanted this to be kept quiet.
     
  7. wangrui961

    wangrui961 FULL MEMBER

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    7
    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    If Bush is humen?
     
  8. Spring Onion

    Spring Onion PDF VETERAN

    Messages:
    41,382
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Ratings:
    +17 / 35,121 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Yes waz white house wont be happy over the disclosur but it is the way it is.
    Offcourse turnign our back to afghan rulers of that time was not an easy task, there was something bad from US for Pakistan and at that time it was the right decision. now its the time we had to work carefully, we need to make more frineds and negotiations and if 2mrwo we had to talk to taliban why not to make grounds for that today.
     
  9. Cheetah786

    Cheetah786 PDF VETERAN

    Messages:
    9,002
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Ratings:
    +1 / 7,279 / -4
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    So this was the secret evidence shared with Mushy to convince him.That it was osama who was involved in 9-11 attacks :coffee: sounds fishy dosent it .

    oh my bad i shouldnt say fishy bangaldesh might attack us and send us to stone ages :rofl: :yahoo:
     
  10. blain2

    blain2 ADVISORS

    Messages:
    6,864
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Ratings:
    +34 / 8,237 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    This is how bad turning our back on Afghan rulers in 2001 was:
    http://nawaiwaqt.com.pk/urdu/daily/sep-2006/22/columns2.php

    This is the kind of bs that I am bothered with...we have to strike the right balance and learn to say no more often.

     
  11. waz

    waz MODERATOR

    Messages:
    12,946
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Ratings:
    +57 / 29,810 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/200...-musharraf.html


    Bush says he didn't know about threat to bomb Pakistan

    Last Updated Fri, 22 Sep 2006 11:39:31 EDT
    CBC News


    A former top Washington intelligence official has denied telling Pakistan that the U.S. would bomb it back into the Stone Age unless it co-operated with the American "war on terror" in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.

    Pakistan's President Gen. Pervez Musharraf told the TV show 60 Minutes that then deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage made the threat to Pakistan's intelligence director. The show is set for broadcast on Sunday.

    But Armitage told CNN that was wrong. "I didn't say it," he said, but he did make it clear that "Pakistan was either with us or it was not."


    After meeting Musharraf on Friday, U.S. President George W. Bush said he was not aware of Armitage's conversation at the time, and first became aware of it when he read a newspaper story on Friday. "I don't know about it," he said.

    After the Sept. 11 attacks, then Secretary of State Colin Powell told him that Musharraf understood the stakes and was willing to fight on the U.S. side, Bush told reporters.


    At the same press conference, Musharraf said he couldn't talk about the Armitage conversation because he has a book deal that requires him to remain silent for several more days. "Buy the book," Bush joked.
    WTF???????????


    White House spokesmen said Friday that they didn't know what Armitage said to the Pakistani intelligence chief, but the U.S. had demanded Pakistan pick a side — either back America or the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

    "We have made very clear that we went straight to President Musharraf in the days after 9/11 and said it's time to make a choice: Are you going to side with the civilized world or are you going to side with the Taliban and al-Qaeda," White House advisor Dan Bartlett said on The Early Show on Friday.

    "U.S. policy was not to issue bombing threats," White House press secretary Tony Snow said. "U.S. policy was to say to President Musharraf, 'We need you to make a choice.' "

    Following his meeting with Musharraf, Bush will meet Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Tuesday. All three leaders are scheduled to meet Wednesday.

    With files from the Associated Press
     
  12. waz

    waz MODERATOR

    Messages:
    12,946
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Ratings:
    +57 / 29,810 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom

    Do you think Mushy put some masala on the comments "you are with us or against us"? If he did that Mushy is one hustler especially with his book coming out. lol :lol: :rofl:
     
  13. blain2

    blain2 ADVISORS

    Messages:
    6,864
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Ratings:
    +34 / 8,237 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Or maybe Lt Gen Mahmud (DGISI) delivered the message to him as such...the fact of the matter is that a statement like "you are either with us or against us" exactly means that if you are not with us, your *** will get bombed back to the stone age....these fools in Washington are simply denying the semantics of the threat (which really is the meat of the matter), the underlying deal was exactly as Musharraf has stated, had Pakistan not sided with the US, there would have been a campaign of "shock and awe" of Pakistan as well.
     
  14. waz

    waz MODERATOR

    Messages:
    12,946
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Ratings:
    +57 / 29,810 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom

    True bro....
     
  15. Neo

    Neo RETIRED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,927 / -0
    Much ado about nothing, storm in a glass of water!

    When Bush said 'Either you're with us or you're against us', things were clear for us.
    No third oftion was given and Imho we don't need to spell out what 'against us' means or what the concequebces would have been.

    Its all a big PR game, brilliant move by Mush to go public with it. :flag: