Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by miloblithe, Sep 21, 2006.
Hmm... maybe that's why Pakistan has been so "helpful" in catching bin Laden, and the GWOT in general?
Nothing like threats of violence to properly motivate you, right?
But admitting this can't help anything. It'll enrage anit-US sentiment in Pakistan and weaken Musharraf's hold on power.
I think if Musharraf is able to show that the meager cooperation he's given the US has been coerced, that probably boosts his standing among his own people.
how do we know bush is lying? because he doesn't read newspapers.
It's sickening, but it also seems easier to trust Musharraf's wording over that of Armitage. Why would Musharraf embellish alleged threats with a quoted phrase? One of them is not telling the truth.
Clearly it's the browner one.
Haven't you learned anything yet?
Sounds to me like it's more or less a mater of semantics. Armitage is admitting to threatening them, just not to saying exactly what they are quoting.
i wouldnt trust anybody in this whitehouse, after all, they've been lying alot.
That's pretty sad that at this point we trust them more than our own government, but given what's been happening lately, I can't blame people for doing so. Just waiting for someone to come in and tell us we're all traitors because we love this "terrorist" so much instead of trusting Glorious Leader and his cronies, despite them making such comments many times publicly. Isn't Amitage the one who leaked the Valerie Plame thing? Wouldn't that make him a traitor? Hm.
I'm curious whether "bomb you back to the stone age" is a common phrase in Pakistani dialog.
It certainly gets used with reasonable frequency in American circles.
Euphemism for “make an offer you can’t refuse”.