Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 12/14/2003 11:32:13 AM EDT
story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20031214/wl_afp/pakistan_blast_031214165451


ISLAMABAD (AFP) - A powerful explosion damaged a bridge which Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf had crossed just minutes earlier, police and officials said.

They added that no one was hurt in the blast in the garrison city of Rawalpindi, near the capital Islamabad, late on Sunday.

“We are determining what caused the explosion, but there were no casualties,” city police chief Marwat Shah told AFP.

The explosion caused minor damage to the bridge, which leads to the city’s military area. The bridge is now safe, Shah added.





Well, since Pakistan has "da bomb" I think we need to watch this. The Islamists are clearly pissed about Musharaff's help of the US and his efforts from time to time to crack down on the jihadis. Id say that if the islamikazis take the Pakistani government, we're a max of six months from some sort of nuke incident, either in Israel or India/Kashmir.

Link Posted: 12/14/2003 12:16:15 PM EDT
There was a big split in AQ whether to try to take over Pakistan and gain control of their nukes before staging attacks on the US. UBL thought otherwise and 9-11 went down with Musharraf still in charge of Pakistan. Life would have been a lot harder during OEF without Pakistan's cooperation with overflight, logistic staging, etc.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 12:34:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By H46Driver: There was a big split in AQ whether to try to take over Pakistan and gain control of their nukes before staging attacks on the US. UBL thought otherwise and 9-11 went down with Musharraf still in charge of Pakistan. Life would have been a lot harder during OEF without Pakistan's cooperation with overflight, logistic staging, etc.
View Quote
Would it? We would then of had a excuse to take what we wanted from Pakistan by force, with the help no doubt of India. It might of delayed action on Iraq though because the troops used there would have first been used in Pakistan, but it would have been easier technically than trying to run Afghanistan through a shoestring supply line.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 4:26:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/14/2003 4:27:25 PM EDT by H46Driver]
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: Would it? We would then of had a excuse to take what we wanted from Pakistan by force, with the help no doubt of India. It might of delayed action on Iraq though because the troops used there would have first been used in Pakistan, but it would have been easier technically than trying to run Afghanistan through a shoestring supply line.
View Quote
Pakistan isn't Iraq or Afghanistan. It is a country of 150,000,000 that has an estimated 20 nukes. That's 6 times as many people as Iraq. India isn't going to be real interested in getting in a real shooting war with them on our behalf. AQ in charge of a nuclear armed Pakistan definitely changes the equation.
Top Top