Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims

Bush’s Legacy

Truman’s was a difficult, extraordinary, time in office; Bush’s was worse. Bush leaves office in similar circumstances, too. Will Bush bounce back like Truman?


 

President George Bush leaves office on Tuesday, 20 January 2009, amidst a dismal 34% job-rating. His two terms in office has been a tumultuous period: the September 11, 2001 (9-11) attacks, his waging of global war on terrorism, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He leaves behind all his wars inconclusive, indeed, messy; he could not catch Osama bin Laden, the 9-11 mastermind. His waging of these wars also prompted, see critics, the worldwide jump in Islamic extremism and violence. The U.S. economy is left in doldrums, affecting the global economy in similar way. The charges of illegal detention of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and harsh interrogation tactics and torture of prisoners in violation of international law, plus abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, further taint his presidency.

Most observers will undoubtedly view Bush’s presidency as a dark chapter, a disaster, in U.S. history. Still he leaves office defending his tenure as he told the nation in farewell speech: “I have always acted with the best interests of our country in mind”. He propped up defense of his presidency by touting: “America has gone more than seven years without another terrorist attack on our soil”.

In a country like the U.S.—highly conscious of its defense and security and investing so much resources in it, particularly since the WW II—attacks like the 9-11 by non-state actors like al-Qaeda would not occur easily under any President. So the claim that no further attacks like the 9-11 occurred during Bush’s presidency does not add up.

Bush said he would leave office with a “great sense of accomplishment”; Vice-President Dick Cheney agreed. He has repeatedly touted that history will judge his legacy, which he repeated in his closing press conference, saying: “I don't think you can possibly get the full breadth of an administration till time has passed”.

I subscribe to Huntington’s Civilization Clash thesis. Huntington talks about likely emergence of a multilateral clash between some eight civilizations. As a researcher of Islamic theology and history, I see the clash between Islam and the rest would stand out and overwhelm all others.

Huntington recounted ongoing conflicts of Islam with their neighbors all over the world; he most accurately retorted to the deniers of Islam-West conflict that “The relations between Islam and Christianity, both orthodox and Western, have often have been stormy. Each has been the other's Other.”

“The twentieth century conflict between Liberal Democracy and Marxist-Leninism is only a fleeting and superficial historical phenomenon compared to the continuing and deeply conflictual relations between Islam and Christianity”, he added.

Islam’s conflict with greater humanity is much wider in scope. Historically, Islam’s relationship has been much more conflictual with the pre-Islamic peoples of all creed, color and race—Pagans, Jews and Christians, Zoroastrians, Buddhists, Hindus, and Animists—of Arabia, West Asia, Persia, Africa, Central and Southeast Asia, and India. Many of these civilizations have completely succumbed to Islam: they have vanished; estimated 300 hundred million people perished to the sword of Islam, wielded since its birth in Arabia in the 7th century.

The civilizational clash is thus not new as far as Islam is concerned. Islam was born in Arabia as Islamic God Allah’s master-plan, His politico-military tool, for creating a global Islamic state by making Muslims His “agent and inheritor of the earth” [Quran 6:165] and promising to make Islam victorious over all peoples and places [Quran 8:39]. Since then, Muslims have divided humanity into two houses, nations, civilizations: Dar al-Islam (House of Islam) and Dar al-Harb (House of War). Islam’s mission has been to turn the non-Muslim Dar al-Harb into Dar al-Islam through Jihadi wars to realize Allah’s ultimate goal of creating a global Islamic state. Islam’s history reflects exactly that.

Muslims have achieved stunning success in this mission, but it remains unfinished. The ongoing conflicts of Islam—in Kashmir, Southern Thailand, Mindanao, Balkan, Chechnya, and parts of Africa—are a part of Islam’s continued civilizational clash with the rest of humanity. The Arab Islamic world’s war against Israel, Muslim immigrants’ conflict with the socio-political order of Western societies, the 9-11 attacks and the worldwide violence by numberless Islamist groups are a part of this age-old civilizational clash, too.

Remarkably, this clash has sustained 14 centuries since Islam’s founding at immense cost of innocent humanity. Bush’s legacy, for me, should be judged by whether his administration—in the backdrop of spectacular 9-11 attacks—understood that the attacks was part of this age-old civilizational clash of Islam with the rest of humanity; and whether he took necessary measures to fight it.

His administration probably understood the conflict reasonably well, but failed to undertake decisive measures. This war of Islam against the rest of humanity can only be fought by exposing what the clash is all about. His touting the slogan that ‘Islam is peace’ undermines the fight. His “war on terror” was a necessary component to neutralize the clash, but insufficient to kill it forever. Only by exposing Islam’s design—based on its religious foundations—against the rest of humanity can this age-old menace to humanity be neutralized forever.

Understandably, the world today is held hostage by oil-producing Muslim states; this constraint prevents the taking of necessary actions, namely pointing to where truly lies the root of this global conflict. Working under this constraint, the Bush administration could, undoubtedly, do much less than what is needed to win this battle decisively. Under the circumstances, another President, Al Gore for example, in all likelihood, would have done much less.

This is a war that must be won against immense odd, fighting huge ignorance of the global population. We have noticed the hypocrisy of Europeans: they overwhelmingly supported Barack Obama for his naïve but goody-goody gesture toward Islam, whilst a great majority of them feel uncomfortable with Muslims living amongst them: their attitude toward Islam is hardening, becoming unfavorable.

In a world, not ready to take an oil-shock, creating this awareness, this unfavorable attitude toward Islam, will be crucial—probably the first step—toward defeating Islam’s age-old war against humanity. Bush’s war on terror, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq—although failed to achieve short-term objectives—have undoubtedly played a central role in this vital “awareness creation” about Islam.

An unconditional conflict against wider humanity, waged by few hundred impoverished Arabs under Prophet Muhammad’s leadership, has sustained 14 centuries. And Islam has achieved much: today, Islam 1.4 billion volunteers push Islam’s civilizational clash forward in one capacity or another. It shouldn’t be difficult to understand the kind of vitality and resilience, Islam exudes into this battle.

It is not difficult either to understand the difficultly, the odds, global non-Muslim humanity faces in this battle with such staggering army of volunteers, so much of world’s vital resources on Islam’s side today, whilst its opponents are handicapped by restraints like international law and human rights etc., for which Islamists have nothing but contempt.

For a keen observer of Islamic history, who understands its theological foundations and cares for the immense sufferings it has caused to humanity, attempt at winning this battle decisively is much more noble than Bush administration’s lapses in upholding international laws and human rights of dreaded terrorists, who are hell-bent on, and take gleeful joy in, causing mass-murder of innocent men, women and children, inspired by a demented theological doctrine. Of the reformed, low-risk terrorists released from Guantanamo, 61 of them have returned to Jihadi trail for mass-killing of innocent people. Some measure of harsher tactics may even be essential to tackle these dreaded breed of mass-murderers, who deem dying in the hands of their perceived enemies most desirable, a martyrdom, which lands them in paradise.

It is a battle either side can win from here, but in historical context and present reality, the balance tilts in Islam's favor unless, extraordinary measures are being taken. Given the circumstances, the Bush administration made a reasonable attempt at neutralizing this dreaded enemy. This battle, lasting 14 centuries, cannot be won overnight; it will take decades if not centuries; more real, determined, measures must come. It can be won only by following the trail of Bush administration’s measures and strengthening the resolve further. Bush’s message to his successor—that “with the courage of our people and confidence in our ideals, this great nation will never tire, never falter, and never fail"—is probably the least that will be needed.

Whether Bush’s commendable, but insufficient, attempts at winning this war leads to sustained effective measures will determine the fate of this lasting civilizational clash of global expanse. We have to wait for decades to see the outcome. Bush is correct: only history can judge his legacy.

Harry Truman left office in 1953 with a miserable 32% approval-rating to the relief of most Americans amidst his unpopular war and gloomy economy, so is Bush’s departure. Yet in a decade, Truman became rated amongst nation’s top ten presidents. A movie was made entitled, “Give ’em Hell, Harry!”; Chicago group sang “America needs you, Harry Truman”.

Truman’s was a difficult, extraordinary, time in office; Bush’s was worse. Bush leaves office in similar circumstances, too. Will Bush bounce back like Truman? It all remains to be seen.


If you like this essay: Stumble it   Stumble Upon Toolbar digg it reddit

MA Khan is the editor of islam-watch.org Website and the author of upcoming book, Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery.


Name:   
Comment:

Comments Notes: Keep comments short. Our system cannot separate paragraphs. Comments must be relevant to the topic of the article. Irrelevant comments, materials, adds of other websites, pasting external articles etc. are not allowed. We may ban such nuisance posters.


Name: jahngir odiwala
Date: Friday January 23, 2009
Time: 09:46:34 -0500

Comment

did u guys see this???...speech of bin laden calling for taking back Jerusalem?... http://indiansawaal.blogspot.com/2009/01/speech-of-bin-laden-english-translation.html its scary...what is solution to this ...its spreading like cancer in the world...


Name: Bush Legacy
Date: Friday January 23, 2009
Time: 11:48:24 -0500

Comment

0% Alternative Energy in USA and 100% dependent on Oil Imports from Venezuela and Muslim Countries. There is only one question remaining: Is he an idiot, an as**ole or both together?


Name: Mumin Salih
Date: Friday January 23, 2009
Time: 11:57:14 -0500

Comment

Thank you MA Khan for such an outstanding article and impressive analysis. I personally think that Bush was unlucky because he was so fiercely opposed by the liberal left in his own country. America was and still divided in the war against terror. The democrats were more interested in proving that Bush was wrong than in their national interests. Bush, like his father, took half measures, which is a big mistake. America should have toppled Saddam in the Kuwait war. That could have freed them from a lot of the headache that followed. In a similar way, George W. Bush should have turned his back to the Arab World, even threatening them, because the Arabs listen when they feel the real risk. Some drastic measures against Islamist influence in America should have been taken immediately after 9/11. The public would have accepted those measures. However, Bush’s main handicap was his divided home front. A divided nation can never win.


Name: Charles Martel
Date: Friday January 23, 2009
Time: 12:52:55 -0500

Comment

He is neck & neck with LBJ as the US's worst president in my opinion. He is the paid shill of Saudi Wahabis. After 9/11 he could have stopped Moslem immigration and naturalization of those here (I am American) and destroyed the Moslem religious and "charitable" infrastructure through its links with terror organizations. Whatever history says (and history is increasingly biased PC crap anyway) he is a traitor.


Name: caleb singh
Date: Friday January 23, 2009
Time: 12:56:38 -0500

Comment

i must congratulate you and other esteemed writers in this web site for starting this courageous web site exposing the evil that is islam and thereby trying to bring a better future to all mankind i truly enjoy the articles and op eds please keep up the good work i have some suggestions most of the articles seems to focus on the evil acts permitted in islam by it prophet and its despicable cruelty done to those who refuse to bow to it i thinks that more articles should be written about the fraudulent character of the quran examples archelogical events contradicting the stories of the quran the changes in the quran based on the yemen fragments the topkapi and samarkand codex more stories based on ibn warraqs -essays on the origins of the quran,jeffery work,lammens & caentaeni work and ignaz goldhizher also cook and crone for i believe many muslims can remain commited to the quran even if it is evil but if it is exposed as a fraud perpetuated on mankind to further advance arab supermacism many muslims will leave hope to see more articles on these points regards


Name:
Date: Friday January 23, 2009
Time: 14:04:58 -0500

Comment

Watch Peace TV: http://islambox.tv/watch/PeaceTV.ashx


Name: Abul Kasem
Date: Friday January 23, 2009
Time: 15:24:45 -0500

Comment

MA Khan has written an excellent article that traces the fault-line of the current conflict in the world. It is Islam that is at war with humanity. It is a perpetual war, as Professor Huntington has correctly identified. President George Bush could identify the enemy, but was half-hearted to defeat it. He hit Islam at it wrong place, Iraq and Afghanistan; whereas the real enemy is his so-called closest ally, Saudi Arabia. This Bedouin Kingdom is the epicentre of all Islamist terrorism. George Bush did not have enough fortitude to go for America's arch enemy. It was all because America is hopelessly dependent on Islamic oil.


Name: Ibrahim
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 00:04:17 -0500

Comment

I think G. Bush Jr. has just too many personal demons to exocise after retiring from Presidency. His will was strong and his Aim was right. His problem was the same as his father's, he could not identify the real enemy which is Islam. Just too many precious lives were lost fighting this war on Terrorism. All these years America has been fighting ghosts. No1 noes if Bin Laden is still alive or dead. There is gardly any intel on the the various Islamic groups. Basically he was trying to cure the diseased and not the disease itself. I feel that through eductaion and media America could have achieved a lot with much lesser expense. Just imagine what Mulla Radio has achieved through his illegal Fm channel in Waziristan. Today large tracts of Waziristan have been today over by the local Taliban. Swat is on its way to become Talibanized. Pakistan is no doing anything inorder t stop this menance, cos the top Millitary and intel brass in Pakistan is hand in glove with these terrorist whom the had trained and even now provide support. Joining hands with Pakistan was the biggest mistake of the Bush adminstration. Actually Bush should have struck Pakistan rather than Afghansitan cos that is where the Jihadis get their money and inspiration from. Killing terrorits is not a solution to the problem for these people procreate at a rate which is unparralel in anywhere in the world. The more terrorist you kill more you have them sprout. If only the Americans had struck the Maddarssas in Pakistan from where there people get their ideological training a lot would have been achieved.


Name: bush cud have eliminated islam but he did not
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 01:34:06 -0500

Comment

bush cud have said islam is evil ideology or just said jihad is evil.also he cud have just bombed kaba and saudi and pakis. he did not.he failed bcoz of fake political correctness.


Name: some thing is better than nothing
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 01:58:53 -0500

Comment

some thing is bettr than nothing.George bush junior has done his job at his best in fighting war on terrorim and securing his people.He loved his people and cared them much than any other US president in recent times.He is morally sound(Unlike Clinton )and always looks happy and dynamic and easy going man.(he actively ducked the shoe by being conscious and didn't bothered about it)Afganistan before war was in hands of butchering mad Taliban stoning people to death and extreme poverty.Now it is democratic and on way to progress and relatively better in devolopment and safety.It has now become difficult for islamic terrorist there for their global jihad.In Iraq the dictatoor Saddam had also similar unhumnaic rule and torture the people there.People were extremly poor and even not had the basic heatlh facilities for common fever and dying.IT is evident thaat much of iraqs oil money was bypassed to Alquida global jihad.THe war on Iraq by US though on false grounds of mass weapons has given good turn to ts progress on democracy.Radiation Theraphy in cancer is coslty and pain full and even damages some body cells.But it is necessary to avoid bigger damage of killing the man by cancer.US and israel are not like india like countries to remain mute to terrorism attacks.Bush has done best possible job.Any president in his position must have to do the same.Regarding housing crisis it started in clinton time and is largely due to extreme consumerism of americans with ouit thinking for savings.


Name: can anybody please give email id of bush?
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 02:01:15 -0500

Comment

can anybody please give email id of bush? or postal address.I want to write letter of appreciation to him.


Name: About Bush
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 03:46:11 -0500

Comment

At first he was an alcoholic. Then he turned to braindead fundamentalists and won two elections because he told the people that he prays more often than others. He was lying about Iraq to begin war. He told the people to fight against terrorism but attacked Iraq which had no connection to it. He allowed torture in Iraq and Guantanamo. He did nothing for the US economy which is now bankrupt while terrorism is stronger then ever. Everybody hated the US. I hope that Bush will get what he deserves and go to jail. Did you see his smiles on his face in the last days of his presidency? It is the smile of somebody who does not have to say anymore. Worst president of American history!


Name: vbv
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 05:31:19 -0500

Comment

Bush was the worst USA president? So what? Tell me if other presidents were sane and not autocratic , arrogant and overbearing. They lost the war in Vietnam where they used all kinds of WMD against coomon folks,except nuclear bomb. They even used chemical weapons ! These hypocrite yet lost the war miserably. Before attacking Iraq they made sure through fraudulent UN"inspectors" that Iraq was striiped of all weaponry with the right to hit back the invaders. Yet they are stuck in that place for seven years with bad record of murdering innocent people(collteral damage ,they say),war crimes,torture of POWs,etc. What have they achieved? Has terrorism abated.? As a matter of fact it has caused more hatred for Americans and their hypocritical and fraudulent policies to exploit and fleece the oil in Iraq. Let's see if Obama fares any better or is he also a lackey of American companies and their 'billionaires'.


Name: vbv
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 05:35:54 -0500

Comment

The rootcause of terrorism is in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and they are the 'best' friends of USA. Has Bush been sincere in his 'war against terrorism'? No . So also were other American presidents who tend to wear blinkers and look the other way when it comes to their pals Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. So much for principles and good character!


Name: vbv
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 05:36:09 -0500

Comment

The rootcause of terrorism is in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and they are the 'best' friends of USA. Has Bush been sincere in his 'war against terrorism'? No . So also were other American presidents who tend to wear blinkers and look the other way when it comes to their pals Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. So much for principles and good character!


Name: Some idiots...
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 08:59:09 -0500

Comment

Some idiots think they know better than heads of state...


Name: duh_swami
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 13:15:49 -0500

Comment

If Bush policies failed, Rasulullah Obama's (PBUH) policies will succeed because he is already busy erasing, and reversing Bush policies. He declared the war on terror over, then authorized drone attacks in Pakistan...If the war is over, why are they attacking Pakistan, and who are the enemies? If the war on terror is over, Taliban and Alqaeda are no longer our enemies...How long before, Al-Qaeda rents the Lincoln Bedroom? Things are going to get a lot screwier before they get better...


Name: duh_swami
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 13:24:54 -0500

Comment

Some idiot.....I'm glad you used the word 'some', because not all idiots know more than the heads of state, but some do...It's sort of like, 'some animals are smarter than some people'. Many heads of state are retarded...Their dogs are smarter...


Name: duh_swami
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 13:30:06 -0500

Comment

Mr Khan...I like your new format...I don't know if you are aware of color on the human psyche, but many institutions paint the walls pale blue, or green because those colors are soothing...Imagine a mental hospital where all the paint was deep, or blood red...


Name: duh_swami
Date: Saturday January 24, 2009
Time: 14:38:41 -0500

Comment

I better put down this pipe, I could have sworn I posted on a pale blue background...


Name: History will justify George W. Bush
Date: Tuesday January 27, 2009
Time: 08:45:16 -0500

Comment

Former president George W. Bush was right in starting the Global War on Terror, the appropriate response against Islamic Terrorism.


Name: Wagamama
Date: Tuesday January 27, 2009
Time: 19:05:27 -0500

Comment

“The relations between Islam and Christianity, both orthodox and Western, have often have been stormy. Each has been the other's Other.” >> This is because these two demoniac monotheistic cults believe in uprooting other faiths by hook or crook. "Remarkably, this clash has sustained 14 centuries since Islam’s founding at immense cost of innocent humanity.">> Khan conveniently forgets that even before the birth of Islam, there was another slum religion called Xnity. It killed millions of people across Europe, US, Asia, South America, and elsewhere in the name of holy father Jesus Christ! CLASH OF CIVILIZATION DIDN'T START WITH THE BIRTH OF ISLAM BUT HAD ALREADY STARTED 3 CENTURIES BEFORE ISLAM WAS BORN. Both Islam and Xnity are at all-out war against rest of the civilization.


Name: Wagamama
Date: Tuesday January 27, 2009
Time: 19:10:17 -0500

Comment

The war on terror should have ended in Afghanistan. But, the OIL reserves in Iraq attracted the evil mind of Bush. It is a well known fact that Bush attacked Iraq ONLY BECAUSE OF OIL. I suggest everyone to watch the movie FARENHEIT 9/11. There is so much human rights voilation in Zimbabwe, but Bush kept silent on ROBERT Mugabe. This is because there are no resources in Zimbabwe to prey on, and secondly but least important--Mugabe is a Christian.


Name: A.M. Jamsheed Basha, Chennai, India
Date: Friday January 30, 2009
Time: 01:52:11 -0500

Comment

9/11 was an attack carried out by a few who took upon themselves the burden of protecting the rights of Muslims or espousing their cause. Whether they were justified or not, is a different question. To avenge this, the response of US was diabolical. No soberiety involved. Emotive decisions taken precedence over reasons. Bush reacting violently launched a large scale attack on the people of Afghanistan and succeeded in unseating the Talibans. The Talibans were guilty of sheltering Osama bin landen, whom was suspected to be brain behind the 9/11 attack on US. Where was then the justification to launch another attack on Iraq in search of non-existent WMD. It took nearaly six years for Bush to admit his mistake in invading Iraq, after so much destruction and loss of life. Is he not guilty of war crimes? Why he is not tried for the acts of crime against humanity? We all admit Saddam Hussein was bad and not a good ruler. But then, who gave the right to Bush to attack and unseat him. The people of Iraq, would have waged a struggle against him and one day they would have succeeded in throwing him out. Saddam was a despot and he would have met the same fate as any other despot in the history had met the fate. But by hanging him in farcical trial, US hanged him and made a hero out of him. Today US and the people of Iraq are paying the price. Not a day passes in Iraq without an ambush or a suicide bombing. Every day people are killed including the soldiers. There is no peace in that country. Neither the people are happy nor the invader. US troops are suffering highest casualties through militant attacks on them. The Iraqi soldiers which melted soon on invasion as resurfacing to attack the allied troops at will. Today, US is received plane loads of coffins of their soldiers and other allied troops are no exception. Is it necessary. Why West accuse Jihadis for causing terror? Who is responsible for the state of affairs? It was first Russia which tried its luck in Afghan in search of warm waters but ended in a humiliating defeat and ignominous retreat from that country. No before suffering heavily both in men and materials, costing its exchequer heavily. That ultimately saw the end of mighty USSR. History is before the Americans. If they continue to occupy the sacred lands of Muslims in Iraq and Afghan, they too would meet the same fate as the Russians met and for that matter earlier invaders met. Those who are fighting against them, were Vietnamese or Koreans, but a determined nation called Muslims. Through their Jihad, they would soon gain victory over the evil forces occupying their sacred land there. Agreed the Jihad was situational when the religion was in infancy state and it has to protect against itself from annihilation. As the world developed and Muslims were secure in their home land, the Jihad had lost its meaning. Jihad has other meanings besides exertion or struggle. Jihad is as relevant today as it was yesterday, meaning to struggle against oppression, illeteracy, injustice, hunger and poverty. It is a continuous struggle for have nots against haves and it is going on in several Muslim countries. It only took the violent form after US trained and financed the fighters in Afghan against the occupation of Russia. US did this not out of love for the people of Afghan. It did it to teach its arch rival Russia a lesson. US was not bold enough to take the highly nuclear armed Russia head on but to defeat them using the Muslim Mujahideen. History is replete with instances where the cowardly American people washed their hands off from the world affairs. They could do little, when Russia invade Czesolovakia, Poland and other Communist block including East Germany, where it stationed several thousands of troops. The Americans were cowards, unable to fight them, just maintained an eerie silence. Similarly, when the whole Europe was engaged by the mighty Germans, Italians and Japanese in the World War II, US remained neutral watching the goings on from a distance. When Japanese attacked the pearl harbour destroying all its mighty fleet, the Americans instead of fighting them, forced them to surrender using nuclear bombs, that wiped out the humanity in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If Muslims are struggling today in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan, it was due to the faulty policies of US and Israel. It tried its luck with Iran. But went short of invading that country for fear of nuclear reprisal by that country. Iran has the world's sixth largest army armed to the teeth and with nuclear arsenals stockpiled, US could do least with them except indulging in public rhetorics. Its an advice to Obama. Never follow Bush while dealing with the Muslim world. Today they are more strong and would not take any attack on the Muslim interest just sitting duck. A determined reply would await any aggressor. It is for Obama to talk to the people who matter most in the on going struggle and conflict whether it is in Gaza or Afghan or Iraq. Violence begets violence and there is no point in sending drones deep inside Pak causing heavy casualties among the civilians and extensive damage to the properties. By attacking Pak in the name of weeding out the terrorists, US is widening its area of conflict. It would be US undoing in the region which is already volatile and the resurgent Talibans are active. Obama, better deal the situation with discretion and tact. The people of the world need peace and security. This could be achieved through dialogues and not by confronting them.


Name: [email protected]
Date: Saturday January 31, 2009
Time: 10:56:25 -0500

Comment

Thank you Mr. Khan..an astute analysis. Please circulate this You Tube video...tells all http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97hyDRjdXCE


 
Hit Counter