Andrew Nenow is a wine and viticulture sophomore and Mustang Daily conservative columnist.
Americans do not necessarily worry about Pakistan quite like Iran, Iraq or Yemen. The quiet nation of Pakistan is not a hotbed for troubling protest or even known for radical Islamic ideals.
However, the death of Osama bin Laden has momentarily narrowed the focus on the Pakistani government. There might be other issues domestically for Americans to be concerned about, but there are some facts to consider.
In the aftermath of bin Laden’s death, the American government has discovered some facts that indicate that the Pakistani government was in cahoots with bin Laden. The first consideration is the location of bin Laden’s compound where he was killed.
Located outside the city of Abbottabad, the compound was probably the last place the United States military expected bin Laden to be. For 10 years the world thought bin Laden was in a hole in a mountain; many thought he was roughing it without electricity or running water.
Instead, he was living in the suburbs in a mansion only called a compound due to the double-layered, barbed wire wall surrounding it. If the Pakistani government was unaware bin Laden was in the country, how dim-witted is it?
If that was not enough, Abbottabad is home to the country’s military academy.
So let me get this right … bin Laden was just about 1,000 yards from Pakistani forces for five years? It would be crazy to think Pakistan had no idea he was in the country.
Now let’s consider the compound mansion and rip through some facts about it.
The mansion was worth more than $1 million. It was constructed in 2005 and is eight times larger than nearby homes. The mansion is on a hilltop surrounded by two 12 by 18 feet high concrete walls equipped with barbed wire. Expensive cars were often seen pulling in and out of the compound, and those inhabiting the compound were so paranoid about security that they burned their garbage instead of leaving it out for collection.
So what is the definition of suspicious behavior to the Pakistani government? What about barbed wire walls, expensive cars and paranoid inhabitants does not scream suspicious to these people?
As far as we know, military officials stationed at the military academy in Abbottabad were looking up at this complex thinking, “That giant, walled mansion looks perfectly normal in this desert.”
So what has the Pakistani government had to say about bin Laden’s discovered whereabouts?
Of course, it has refused to acknowledge knowing anything about him being in the country and have put forward a half-hearted agreement to help the United States fight terrorism.
On a completely unexpected note, the former spy chief of Pakistan turned the tables and chided our military for an unauthorized and unlawful entry into Pakistan. Some have even said Pakistan should retaliate for such a forced entry. This begs the question: Who do they think they are dealing with?
It is laughable to take them serious. I mean, you’re going to threaten the U.S. for killing one of the biggest mass murderers in history? You might as well just tell Americans you harbored bin Laden and are supporting al-Qaida. This American thinks our government should take a good look at Pakistan and decide what role it is playing with al-Qaida.
Someone please teach this guy how to wear a tie, I cringe every time I see his column in the paper and his tie is about 10 inches short from his pants lol
“Americans do not necessarily worry about Pakistan quite like Iran, Iraq or Yemen. The quiet nation of Pakistan is not a hotbed for troubling protest or even known for radical Islamic ideals.”
That would only include those Americans as poorly informed as you apparently are. This “quiet nation” has been at war with its neighbor India over the Kashmir region for pretty much all of its 64-year history. Their Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) trained and equipped 83,000 muhajideen fighters for service in Afghanistan against the Soviets (with our help, naturally). While this was going on, Pakistan,under the second of three military coups,was under strict sharia law (1978-1988). The Taliban was born in Pakistan, not Afghanistan,among Afghan refugees studying at many of the thousands of religious madrassas operated by the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, which advocates for strict adherence to sharia law. This organization doubles as a political party and got 11% of the vote and nearly 20% of the seats in Parliament in the 2002 elections.
Pakistan was also instrumental in getting the Taliban installed in the first place, providing 20,000 troops from the regular forces and 8,000 Pakistani nationals who volunteered to serve with Taliban forces, about one-third of their strength. Once the Taliban were in power, Pakistan immediately recognized them as the legitimate government, one of only three nations to do so, and subsequently gave them substantial military and economic aid.
Call me crazy, but to me that makes them a shade more worrisome than Yemen.
“It is laughable to take them serious(ly).” It is incredibly naive to take them any other way,for two important reasons. One,they are a nuclear power,and have been since the 1970’s… with a nasty history of letting their nuclear technology go to unsavory places like North Korea and Iran (Try Googling A.Q. Khan).
Two, they have complete control of our main supply route to Afghanistan, the only way we can supply our troops there without the crippling expense of airlifting everything into theater. If we write off Pakistan, we are nearly forced to write off Afghanistan as well.
I get it that you are a sophomore, so sophomoric should be expected. I can even tolerate the way you murder the language, since people in your J-school aren’t much better. But it would help the strength of your argument, and the weight of your opinion,if you bothered to do some simple research before committing such howlers as this article, putting Nancy Pelosi in the Senate, or discussing dams in the Sacramento Delta.
Who cares about how he wears a tie, what about how he writes? For one, Abbottabad is not in the desert (Pakistan is not even in the Middle East, which people so closely associate with the desert). Secondly, he misused the term “begs the question” which should refer to the logical fallacy of “begging the question” when he more correctly should have said “This raises the question…” Additionally, unless I am mistaken, in the last paragraph “serious” (an adjective) should be “seriously” (an adverb) because it is being used to qualify a verb, not a noun.
Finally, also referring to the last paragraph, we know what you mean Andrew, because you are writing to tell us. It seems awfully informal to me to use the term “I mean, …” in a newspaper column, or anywhere outside of actual conversational speech, for that matter.
While I’m at it, “Let me get this right…” also seems awkward. Specifically, a colon would probably have been more appropriate than the use of ellipsis, which usually imply a trailing off of a thought or omission of something. Maybe that’s just a style difference though.
Sorry to be a grammar Nazi, but it’s better than attacking the man for how he wears a tie. Also, if you want people to take your message seriously (see how I used the adverb there?), having proper grammar and a mature style (is there a copy editor in the house?) help keep the focus on the issues (and hopefully less on your accessories).
Regarding actual content: I think Americans should reconsider the effectiveness of our alliance (and the large sums of cash and weapons that accompany it) with Pakistan in the war on terror. To “decide” what role Pakistan is playing with al-Qaida seems to me to be the wrong approach. One can hardly make a good decision without having a more reasonable understanding of the facts. To investigate what relations Pakistan and members of its military, police, government, and intelligence services actually have with al-Qaida and its members/allies would surely be a more appropriate course of action, and isn’t that what journalism is all about?
I believe everything that the actors on TV tell me to believe. All hail Rome!
People love to talk about anything but the article on here. who gives a rats ass about the grammar? The point of the article is that a country was hiding the biggest mass-murderer in the world. So stop hiding behind your cowardly ego and realize that an opinion piece is about someone’s opinion. Sorry if its not yours.
Bush is hiding in Pakistan?