Bhutto assassinated in gun and bomb attack

[shifty_git]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/wtMost...BrandChannel=0

By Augustine Anthony

RAWALPINDI, Pakistan (Reuters) - Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was assassinated on Thursday as she left an election rally in the city of Rawalpindi, putting January 8 polls in doubt and sparking anger in her native Sindh province.

State media and her party confirmed Bhutto's death from a gun and bomb attack.

"She has been martyred," said party official Rehman Malik.

Bhutto, 54, died in hospital in Rawalpindi. Ary-One Television said she had been shot in the head.

News of her death brought a swift and angry reaction from supporters in Sindh and its capital, Karachi, where fires were set, shots fired and stones thrown.

"Police in Sindh have been put on red alert," said a senior police official. "We have increased deployment and are patrolling in all the towns and cities, as there is trouble almost everywhere."

President Pervez Musharraf condemned "in strongest possible terms the terrorist attack that resulted in the tragic death of Bhutto and many other innocent Pakistanis", the state news agency said.

"The president convened a high-level emergency meeting ... soon after the tragic development.
The U.S. ally has been struggling to contain Islamist violence while Musharraf, whose popularity has slumped, only lifted a state of emergency on December 15 after six weeks.

[kfrost06]

Horrible news! Pakistan is in turmoil right now and they are a nuclear power, things could get scary.

[Prada]

The result of this can be deadly. Already the country is quite tense, this will have to be watched closely.

[shifty_git]

Horrible news! Pakistan is in turmoil right now and they are a nuclear power, things could get scary.

The result of this can be deadly. Already the country is quite tense, this will have to be watched closely.

very true...

things in Pakistan were very unstable as it was... this has made the world a much more unstable place now...

i can see it coming... one group accusing another group of international funding, terrorists blowing more things up round the world for either revenge or to stir things up even more....

disturbing...

[Logan13]

Horrible news! Pakistan is in turmoil right now and they are a nuclear power, things could get scary.

But, but, no country should be prevented from having nuclear weapons..........

This is a good example of why not every country should have them just because they want them.

[xero]

But, but, no country should be prevented from having nuclear weapons..........

This is a good example of why not every country should have them just because they want them.

While the US has been sucking up to the Pakistan military dictatorship since 2001 you were quite happy to overlook the fact they have nukes (not to mention the dictatorship part).

Now the whole place is about to disintegrate and now we worry about democracy and nukes.

Just like the days when the US were doing deals with the devil by supporting the Taliban and Saddam Hussien, this is going to come back and bite your asses.

I've said it elsewhere on a thread in this forum, and at the risk of being repetiive i'll say it again: US foreign policy and international leadership has proven to be rather poor for many decades now. Too often seem to be making what are ultimately short sited decisions in the international arena.

[thegodfather]

While the US has been sucking up to the Pakistan military dictatorship since 2001 you were quite happy to overlook the fact they have nukes (not to mention the dictatorship part).

Now the whole place is about to disintegrate and now we worry about democracy and nukes.

Just like the days when the US were doing deals with the devil by supporting the Taliban and Saddam Hussien, this is going to come back and bite your asses.

I've said it elsewhere on a thread in this forum, and at the risk of being repetiive i'll say it again: US foreign policy and international leadership has proven to be rather poor for many decades now. Too often seem to be making what are ultimately short sited decisions in the international arena.

I would like to give the people in the international community exactly what they want, no more US interference in ANY of their business, INCLUDING foreign AID(money, food, etc). None of it, cut it all off from every country and focus on the people at home. If the people in the international community want us out of their business I am ready to oblige them, so long as they realize that it is all ecompassing and includes foriegn aid such as food&money.

[Logan13]

While the US has been sucking up to the Pakistan military dictatorship since 2001 you were quite happy to overlook the fact they have nukes (not to mention the dictatorship part).

Now the whole place is about to disintegrate and now we worry about democracy and nukes.

Just like the days when the US were doing deals with the devil by supporting the Taliban and Saddam Hussien, this is going to come back and bite your asses.

I've said it elsewhere on a thread in this forum, and at the risk of being repetiive i'll say it again: US foreign policy and international leadership has proven to be rather poor for many decades now. Too often seem to be making what are ultimately short sited decisions in the international arena.

Please post the thread in which I stated that it was a good idea for Pakistan or any other 3rd world country to own nukes........

[Logan13]

I would like to give the people in the international community exactly what they want, no more US interference in ANY of their business, INCLUDING foreign AID(money, food, etc). None of it, cut it all off from every country and focus on the people at home. If the people in the international community want us out of their business I am ready to oblige them, so long as they realize that it is all ecompassing and includes foriegn aid such as food&money.

+1
Well stated.

[thegodfather]

Please post the thread in which I stated that it was a good idea for Pakistan or any other 3rd world country to own nukes........

Ignoring my own proclivities about national sovreignty for a second. It is probably not a good idea for nations that cannot even feed or provide adequate infrastructure for the majority of their population, to own devices which can kill millions of people at one time.

[Logan13]

Ignoring my own preclivities about national sovreignty for a second. It is probably not a good idea for nations that cannot even feed or provide adequate infrastructure for the majority of their population, to own devices which can kill millions of people at one time.

proclivities. I have always liked that word, but no one uses it anymore.

[Amorphic]

a storm is brewing....

[Prada]

Ignoring my own proclivities about national sovreignty for a second. It is probably not a good idea for nations that cannot even feed or provide adequate infrastructure for the majority of their population, to own devices which can kill millions of people at one time.

Yes even though I agree with you and would even state that no state whatsoever should have nuclear arms. I say this indiscriminately, some nations are obliged to obtain them from whatever means necessary when their own sovereignty is threatened. Pakistan in 1998 did so after India tested their own missile few years earlier. India did so to thwart off any threat from China and Russia. Those two states did so for quite evident reasons. Even though Sharif(I believe) was strongly urged by the US, on the basis of sanctions, to not embark on the same trajectoy as India, the nations very existence was in jeopardy and really had no choice. Millions were and are still being siphoned off for armament. Then again whether there is an abundance of poverty and feeble infrastructure one could argue that goverment spending in general is questionable regardless of what reason it is for.

Not good for a nation that could not feed or provide adequate infrastructure but ask any Pakistani their thoughts of the nuclear testing and surely a vast majority would support it and in hindsight have no regrets over it.. Where AQ Khan irrespective to his clandestine activities and blackmarket network is regarded as a national hero and surely Musharraf would be assassinated had be bowed down to US pressure to have Khan questioned and handed over.

Its global strategic positioning and one can say that Iran is possibly trying to achieve the same objective because nuclear arms, in pretty much all cases, can restore the balance of power.

[Flagg]

Yes even though I agree with you and would even state that no state whatsoever should have nuclear arms. I say this indiscriminately, some nations are obliged to obtain them from whatever means necessary when their own sovereignty is threatened. Pakistan in 1998 did so after India tested their own missile few years earlier. India did so to thwart off any threat from China and Russia. Those two states did so for quite evident reasons. Even though Sharif(I believe) was strongly urged by the US, on the basis of sanctions, to not embark on the same trajectoy as India, the nations very existence was in jeopardy and really had no choice. Millions were and are still being siphoned off for armament. Then again whether there is an abundance of poverty and feeble infrastructure one could argue that goverment spending in general is questionable regardless of what reason it is for.

Not good for a nation that could not feed or provide adequate infrastructure but ask any Pakistani their thoughts of the nuclear testing and surely a vast majority would support it and in hindsight have no regrets over it.. Where AQ Khan irrespective to his clandestine activities and blackmarket network is regarded as a national hero and surely Musharraf would be assassinated had be bowed down to US pressure to have Khan questioned and handed over.

Its global strategic positioning and one can say that Iran is possibly trying to achieve the same objective because nuclear arms, in pretty much all cases, can restore the balance of power.

I'm all for progression, and I truly believe that Nuclear Power is the worlds near future, but I still feel uneasy about countries like Pakistan and N.Korea having nuclear arms. To deny them access to power is to leave them further and further behind in the dark ages, half the problem that unstable countries are unstable, but to allow them access is to give a potential nutcase the ability to "eliminate the infidels". So what do you do?

[Prada]

I'm all for progression, and I truly believe that Nuclear Power is the worlds near future, but I still feel uneasy about countries like Pakistan and N.Korea having nuclear arms. To deny them access to power is to leave them further and further behind in the dark ages, half the problem that unstable countries are unstable, but to allow them access is to give a potential nutcase the ability to "eliminate the infidels". So what do you do?

Well nuclear energy, research, development and what is derived from it has to be for the right reasons. Unfortunately many of these underdeveloped, non-democratic nations want it to have a strategic advantage, militarily speaking. History has shown that these nations are willing to pay a very hefty price to obtain them. In hindsight were these countries really deterred, regardless of the sanctions? No, hence the price to pay for being discovered is minute in comparison to what benefits that could be drawn.

[Odpierdol_sie!]

I would like to give the people in the international community exactly what they want, no more US interference in ANY of their business, INCLUDING foreign AID(money, food, etc). None of it, cut it all off from every country and focus on the people at home. If the people in the international community want us out of their business I am ready to oblige them, so long as they realize that it is all ecompassing and includes foriegn aid such as food&money.

Then they will all be over here then seeking fvcking asylum coz they got it so bad in their home land, put them in an even better position to attack the west... NUKE EM ALL! that will solve the problem!

[Odpierdol_sie!]

Im not going off on a tangent but... in the UK 1-2% of the population is Muslim.

Northern Ireland has some 35% catholic and 32% protestant mix the remaining 33% being neutral.
They have had troubles for years that seem to have no end to as diplomacy is a small part of argument.

Religion is a major contributor to conflict, put 2 religions together and you have conflict.

There are between 2-3 million Muslims in the UK, take that up to about 20million and you have a large scale Northern Ireland... difference in this is it will be race orientated.

Race attacks go on here all the time, and you see it now with Islamic communities taking the side of the Muslim brother regardless if they are right or wrong.

All i can hope for is more Polish, Ukraine, Russian etc emigrate here, in 20 years when it gets to boiling point they will side with British just to the fact they are white and catholic.

It is going to happen, Britain is too far to stop (bout time i say though, they have invaded enough countries over the years) but anyway, in the film "children of men" you see civil unrest and martial law being run on the streets every Brit i hear speak of that film says its just a matter of time...

The USA pulling out and denying places like Pakistan aid etc would only speed up the problem (which in fore sight might not be a bad idea).. I still say nuke em all.

The only way to stop this is to deport them all, like in "children of Men"... aint gonna happen now is it, Human rights act and all... But where would that lead?... there is no right and wrong thing to do in this instance, you are damned if you do and you are damned if you don't. DROP THE BOMB!!!!

[***xxx***]

While the US has been sucking up to the Pakistan military dictatorship since 2001 you were quite happy to overlook the fact they have nukes (not to mention the dictatorship part).

Now the whole place is about to disintegrate and now we worry about democracy and nukes.

Just like the days when the US were doing deals with the devil by supporting the Taliban and Saddam Hussien, this is going to come back and bite your asses.

I've said it elsewhere on a thread in this forum, and at the risk of being repetiive i'll say it again: US foreign policy and international leadership has proven to be rather poor for many decades now. Too often seem to be making what are ultimately short sited decisions in the international arena.

you are absolutely right.

[RA]

The US has done what was in its interest at the time. Its easy to sit back and criticize when your not the one making the decisions.

While the US has been sucking up to the Pakistan military dictatorship since 2001 you were quite happy to overlook the fact they have nukes (not to mention the dictatorship part).

Now the whole place is about to disintegrate and now we worry about democracy and nukes.

Just like the days when the US were doing deals with the devil by supporting the Taliban and Saddam Hussien, this is going to come back and bite your asses.

I've said it elsewhere on a thread in this forum, and at the risk of being repetiive i'll say it again: US foreign policy and international leadership has proven to be rather poor for many decades now. Too often seem to be making what are ultimately short sited decisions in the international arena.