<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Brinksmanship Along the Durand Line (Updated)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brinksmanship_along_the_durand_line/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brinksmanship_along_the_durand_line/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 02:17:47 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: NYkrinDC</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brinksmanship_along_the_durand_line/comment-page-1/#comment-511189</link>
		<dc:creator>NYkrinDC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:00:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=25072#comment-511189</guid>
		<description>Dan Said: &lt;i&gt;Mine was a general comment, as Obama&#039;s position on pursuing Al Qu&#039;eda into Pakistan took a lot of criticism here. But yes, I think pursuing Al Qu&#039;eda into Pakistan if the Pakistani government will not is the correct strategy.&lt;/i&gt;

Actually, the reason Obama&#039;s position was attacked, at least by those knowledgeable and versed in foreign affairs, was that this was already US policy with regard to the country. Sen. Biden, among others pointed out, that what he took issue with, was with Sen. Obama telegraphing our actions to the enemy, and using it as a political talking point, when such talk could destabilize a government allied with us in Pakistan.

Yes, I know some others took issue with it by saying that Sen. Obama called for attacking our allies (i.e. Pakistan) while calling for peace with our enemies (i.e. Iran). But these were merely the know nothing talking heads.

As for Dave&#039;s larger point, I think you are largely correct. Our raids into Pakistan reflect a failure of our counter-insurgency strategy in Afghanistan thus far. Part of that failure revolves around our seeming inability to recognize Pakistan&#039;s security concerns in the country, and their fears regarding increasing Iranian and Indian influence in Kabul. This in addition to our failure to better address the increasing drug trade problem with better tools, other than spraying and poppy field eradication, which if anything have pushed subsistence farmers into the hands of the Taliban.

As you note, Dave, given the instability within Pakistan, the administration is risking a lot by engaging in cross border raids, but this may reflect their feeling that if the democratic government in Islamabad collapses, that General Kiyani will manage to take the reins. A huge risk, maybe, but it could be a calculated one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dan Said: <i>Mine was a general comment, as Obama's position on pursuing Al Qu'eda into Pakistan took a lot of criticism here. But yes, I think pursuing Al Qu'eda into Pakistan if the Pakistani government will not is the correct strategy.</i></p>
<p>Actually, the reason Obama's position was attacked, at least by those knowledgeable and versed in foreign affairs, was that this was already US policy with regard to the country. Sen. Biden, among others pointed out, that what he took issue with, was with Sen. Obama telegraphing our actions to the enemy, and using it as a political talking point, when such talk could destabilize a government allied with us in Pakistan.</p>
<p>Yes, I know some others took issue with it by saying that Sen. Obama called for attacking our allies (i.e. Pakistan) while calling for peace with our enemies (i.e. Iran). But these were merely the know nothing talking heads.</p>
<p>As for Dave's larger point, I think you are largely correct. Our raids into Pakistan reflect a failure of our counter-insurgency strategy in Afghanistan thus far. Part of that failure revolves around our seeming inability to recognize Pakistan's security concerns in the country, and their fears regarding increasing Iranian and Indian influence in Kabul. This in addition to our failure to better address the increasing drug trade problem with better tools, other than spraying and poppy field eradication, which if anything have pushed subsistence farmers into the hands of the Taliban.</p>
<p>As you note, Dave, given the instability within Pakistan, the administration is risking a lot by engaging in cross border raids, but this may reflect their feeling that if the democratic government in Islamabad collapses, that General Kiyani will manage to take the reins. A huge risk, maybe, but it could be a calculated one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dantheman</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brinksmanship_along_the_durand_line/comment-page-1/#comment-511184</link>
		<dc:creator>Dantheman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:42:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=25072#comment-511184</guid>
		<description>Dave, 

Mine was a general comment, as Obama&#039;s position on pursuing Al Qu&#039;eda into Pakistan took a lot of criticism here.  But yes, I think pursuing Al Qu&#039;eda into Pakistan if the Pakistani government will not is the correct strategy.

I will add something I said a few years ago on another forum.  When the AQ Khan network was discovered, I said that if I were the Administration, I would say to Musharraf that the price for having us forebear on prosecuting Khan was full cooperation in going after Al Qu&#039;eda.  Instead, Khan is still venerated in Pakistan and Al Qu&#039;eda is still holed up in the Northwest Frontier.  As so many other things the Bush Administration touched, we got the worst of both worlds.  Call him the anti-Miley Cyrus.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave, </p>
<p>Mine was a general comment, as Obama's position on pursuing Al Qu'eda into Pakistan took a lot of criticism here.  But yes, I think pursuing Al Qu'eda into Pakistan if the Pakistani government will not is the correct strategy.</p>
<p>I will add something I said a few years ago on another forum.  When the AQ Khan network was discovered, I said that if I were the Administration, I would say to Musharraf that the price for having us forebear on prosecuting Khan was full cooperation in going after Al Qu'eda.  Instead, Khan is still venerated in Pakistan and Al Qu'eda is still holed up in the Northwest Frontier.  As so many other things the Bush Administration touched, we got the worst of both worlds.  Call him the anti-Miley Cyrus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Glittering Eye &#187; Blog Archive &#187; The Unforgiveable Sin</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brinksmanship_along_the_durand_line/comment-page-1/#comment-511178</link>
		<dc:creator>The Glittering Eye &#187; Blog Archive &#187; The Unforgiveable Sin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:28:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=25072#comment-511178</guid>
		<description>[...] arrow in some people&#8217;s debating quiver the charge of hypocrisy? For example, a comment in my recent post on a cross-border attack into Pakistan evoked this comment: And once again, we end up following Obama&#8217;s heavily criticized positions [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] arrow in some people&#8217;s debating quiver the charge of hypocrisy? For example, a comment in my recent post on a cross-border attack into Pakistan evoked this comment: And once again, we end up following Obama&#8217;s heavily criticized positions [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Schuler</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brinksmanship_along_the_durand_line/comment-page-1/#comment-511175</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Schuler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:19:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=25072#comment-511175</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m just pointing out the risks; I pointed them out when Obama advocated cross-border incursions and I&#039;m pointing them out now.

Should I gather from your comment that you believe the Bush Administration is acting prudently?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I'm just pointing out the risks; I pointed them out when Obama advocated cross-border incursions and I'm pointing them out now.</p>
<p>Should I gather from your comment that you believe the Bush Administration is acting prudently?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dantheman</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brinksmanship_along_the_durand_line/comment-page-1/#comment-511174</link>
		<dc:creator>Dantheman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:11:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=25072#comment-511174</guid>
		<description>And once again, we end up following Obama&#039;s heavily criticized positions on foreign policy, not McCain&#039;s.  Sure looks like the Bush Administration thinks Obama&#039;s judgment is better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And once again, we end up following Obama's heavily criticized positions on foreign policy, not McCain's.  Sure looks like the Bush Administration thinks Obama's judgment is better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
