View Poll Results: Was it a professional hit?
Of course
11
31.43%
Dont be stupid
3
8.57%
Not sure but something stinks
10
28.57%
She was always going to be killed somehow.
11
31.43%
Voters: 35. You may not vote on this poll
Was Benazir Bhutto a professional hit?
29 December 2007, 12:37 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was Benazir Bhutto a professional hit?
Stories getting a bit twisted now, close friends say they saw the shots hit her, professionals say NO shots hit her.
Al Quaeda (sp) are now being blamed by the Pakistan Government. Is this the "incentive" the Yanks need to move in?
This all comes apparently AFTER emergency talks with the USA for their "assistance" in the matters in Pakistan.
Al Quaeda (sp) are now being blamed by the Pakistan Government. Is this the "incentive" the Yanks need to move in?
This all comes apparently AFTER emergency talks with the USA for their "assistance" in the matters in Pakistan.
29 December 2007, 01:27 PM
#2
I'm not sure I totally understand the question you've asked.
The Government is pointing fingers at the mythical Al Quaeda (who they're actually pointing fingers at are the Taleban Clerics that sit in Quetta preaching hate and intolerance to anyone who will listen) in order to move any suspicion away from themselves. As we've discussed in the other thread on her death, Musharraf has the motive to have had her killed - but I doubt if he had a direct hand in it; it was just handy for him.
At the end of the day - it was a fundamentalist grouping lead/influenced by the Clerics in Quetta that had her killed. As for the US - her death is actually totally *not* in the interests of the US government; she was quite vocal that she would allow US forces to pursue Taleban/AQ into Pakistan - which is one of the reasons they wanted her dead so much. She was well aware that Pakistani forces in those regions were totally unable/unwilling to deal with the issues in the effected regions, and saw US involvement as a way of removing the influence and regaining control over those wayward areas.
So did the US do it? No. Not a chance.
Did Musharraf do it? Nah, he just turned a blind eye to security matters and plays the "oooh.. what a terrible shame *snigger*" card.
Did the hardline Islamic Clerics do it? Hell yes. She was a direct threat to the status quo they currently enjoy under Musharraf.
Thats my short take on it anyhow
The Government is pointing fingers at the mythical Al Quaeda (who they're actually pointing fingers at are the Taleban Clerics that sit in Quetta preaching hate and intolerance to anyone who will listen) in order to move any suspicion away from themselves. As we've discussed in the other thread on her death, Musharraf has the motive to have had her killed - but I doubt if he had a direct hand in it; it was just handy for him.
At the end of the day - it was a fundamentalist grouping lead/influenced by the Clerics in Quetta that had her killed. As for the US - her death is actually totally *not* in the interests of the US government; she was quite vocal that she would allow US forces to pursue Taleban/AQ into Pakistan - which is one of the reasons they wanted her dead so much. She was well aware that Pakistani forces in those regions were totally unable/unwilling to deal with the issues in the effected regions, and saw US involvement as a way of removing the influence and regaining control over those wayward areas.
So did the US do it? No. Not a chance.
Did Musharraf do it? Nah, he just turned a blind eye to security matters and plays the "oooh.. what a terrible shame *snigger*" card.
Did the hardline Islamic Clerics do it? Hell yes. She was a direct threat to the status quo they currently enjoy under Musharraf.
Thats my short take on it anyhow
29 December 2007, 01:35 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 9,368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
like Seven Eleven staff, Pakistani presidents WILL be shot at sooner or later.
Anyone who wakes up in the morning thinking "you know, I fancy being president of Pakistan" is either brave, stupid or both.
astraboy.
Anyone who wakes up in the morning thinking "you know, I fancy being president of Pakistan" is either brave, stupid or both.
astraboy.
29 December 2007, 01:42 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont think the question is that complex, assuming people know a bit more about the situation, which clearly you have taken the time to do 
While her being in power may have been in their interests, whether or not she MADE it to power, for any level of time is another matter.
With AQ getting the blame now, as demonstrated by her supporters, ANY action against her killers would be welcomed..... An offer from an international force to come in and sort things out will now surely receive far less of a hostile reception.
Bit like the mythical WMD's in Iraq, was a damn good excuse to invade.
Thats my short take on it
Oh one other thing, who did it is a big question indeed, but who was behind it or supported it is another question.
Prasius, hows this then....... Will the USA assist and send troops into Pakistan ?
Personally I see some international force landing there soon.
While her being in power may have been in their interests, whether or not she MADE it to power, for any level of time is another matter.
With AQ getting the blame now, as demonstrated by her supporters, ANY action against her killers would be welcomed..... An offer from an international force to come in and sort things out will now surely receive far less of a hostile reception.
Bit like the mythical WMD's in Iraq, was a damn good excuse to invade.
Thats my short take on it
Oh one other thing, who did it is a big question indeed, but who was behind it or supported it is another question.
Prasius, hows this then....... Will the USA assist and send troops into Pakistan ?
Personally I see some international force landing there soon.
29 December 2007, 02:03 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edinburgh (ish)
Posts: 8,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AtJ
Last edited by andythejock01wrx; 29 December 2007 at 02:05 PM.
29 December 2007, 03:27 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see that happening myself. Apart from the obvious recation within Pakistan to such intervention, the US is likley to be a bit less keen to use land forces in the next few years given the Iraq debacle (although that doesn't mean they won't bomb Iranian nuclear sites !). They would get involved in Pakistan militarily if they thought Pakistan's nuclear weapons might get into the hands of the extremists, but as matters stand those particular WMDs appear to be firmly in the hands of the Pakistan Army.
AtJ
AtJ
fair play mate, just a good topic of discussion USA and bombing go like jelly and ice-cream lol
Trending Topics
29 December 2007, 05:43 PM
#9
With the situation as it is at the moment. No. The only thing that would achieve at the moment is make the whole situation even worse. (Of course, that might not worry the Americans too much!). But I can never see Musharraf, nor the Pakistani Parliament as it stands at the moment, agreeing on such an action by the US.
The wild card is of course Musharraf. He will do whatever he thinks he needs to in order to retain power; and to be honest, how things are at the moment, its probably best that he does, whatever that might entail. He is a known quantity and is at least on generally reasonable terms with the west - which, seeing as Pakistan is the only Islamic Nuclear power, is a good thing.
Through all of this we mustn't forget that the really worrying thing is that India will be watching this with great concern and the two countries have a ****load of nukes pointing at each other. As it stands they don't think twice about sharing artillery barrages with each other on a daily basis - and it only takes the type of people who think suicide bombing is a good idea to gain control of some nukes and....
Last edited by Prasius; 29 December 2007 at 05:47 PM.
29 December 2007, 05:53 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My opinion:
With the situation as it is at the moment. No. The only thing that would achieve at the moment is make the whole situation even worse. (Of course, that might not worry the Americans too much!). But I can never see Musharraf, nor the Pakistani Parliament as it stands at the moment, agreeing on such an action by the US.
The wild card is of course Musharraf. He will do whatever he thinks he needs to in order to retain power; and to be honest, how things are at the moment, its probably best that he does, whatever that might entail. He is a known quantity and is at least on generally reasonable terms with the west - which, seeing as Pakistan is the only Islamic Nuclear power, is a good thing.
Through all of this we mustn't forget that the really worrying thing is that India will be watching this with great concern and the two countries have a ****load of nukes pointing at each other. As it stands they don't think twice about sharing artillery barrages with each other on a daily basis - and it only takes the type of people who think suicide bombing is a good idea to gain control of some nukes and....
With the situation as it is at the moment. No. The only thing that would achieve at the moment is make the whole situation even worse. (Of course, that might not worry the Americans too much!). But I can never see Musharraf, nor the Pakistani Parliament as it stands at the moment, agreeing on such an action by the US.
The wild card is of course Musharraf. He will do whatever he thinks he needs to in order to retain power; and to be honest, how things are at the moment, its probably best that he does, whatever that might entail. He is a known quantity and is at least on generally reasonable terms with the west - which, seeing as Pakistan is the only Islamic Nuclear power, is a good thing.
Through all of this we mustn't forget that the really worrying thing is that India will be watching this with great concern and the two countries have a ****load of nukes pointing at each other. As it stands they don't think twice about sharing artillery barrages with each other on a daily basis - and it only takes the type of people who think suicide bombing is a good idea to gain control of some nukes and....
I would hope we stay out this time, even if the Yanks pile in.
29 December 2007, 06:07 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edinburgh (ish)
Posts: 8,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The wild card is of course Musharraf. He will do whatever he thinks he needs to in order to retain power; and to be honest, how things are at the moment, its probably best that he does, whatever that might entail. He is a known quantity and is at least on generally reasonable terms with the west - which, seeing as Pakistan is the only Islamic Nuclear power, is a good thing.
29 December 2007, 09:52 PM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
I don't think Musharraf ordered it but I think it stinks of someone high up in his regime ordering it. The fact Musharraf's regime stood a very good chance of being ousted in the next few weeks says it all for me.
Also the guy holding the pistol couldn't have been any more stereotypical of a Special Agent unless he'd been holding a Walter PPK. So either Al Qaeda/Taliban militants now dress like James Bond with dark glasses and smart clothes (and no beard - i've yet to see any Al Qaeda supporters on telly without zz top beards) or it was a professional hit with the suicide bomber providing an easy get away/diversion for the Government hired gunman. Funny how the Government had also let the security be about as lax as it could be.
Their forensics made me laugh. First of all the fire brigade hosed the whole crime scene down, then it was left for the public to walk over then the day after the bombing the 'forensics' team turn up and start looking for evidence
Sounds like the Government really want to find who did it 
Also the guy holding the pistol couldn't have been any more stereotypical of a Special Agent unless he'd been holding a Walter PPK. So either Al Qaeda/Taliban militants now dress like James Bond with dark glasses and smart clothes (and no beard - i've yet to see any Al Qaeda supporters on telly without zz top beards) or it was a professional hit with the suicide bomber providing an easy get away/diversion for the Government hired gunman. Funny how the Government had also let the security be about as lax as it could be.
Their forensics made me laugh. First of all the fire brigade hosed the whole crime scene down, then it was left for the public to walk over then the day after the bombing the 'forensics' team turn up and start looking for evidence
Sounds like the Government really want to find who did it
29 December 2007, 10:25 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are folks on here talking about a US intervention, this isn't even a faint possibility?
I suspect this is just another opportunity to put the knife into the US.
I suspect this is just another opportunity to put the knife into the US.
29 December 2007, 10:31 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are the USA in talks with Pakistan about what can be done to bring this to an end.
A lot of issues around the world have little to do with the forces that intervene.
Not saying they will, nor that they are gun slinging nutters that like any excuse for a war
Just curious as to WHY the ARE getting involved even at a talks level, if they are not interested in helping.
Just think, base US troops in welcoming Pakistan, then pop over to all the rogue neighbours... Handy eh
I should work for The Sport.
As for the shots fired by the "gunman" periscopic vision, can shoot accuratly over his head, blind..... shame he blew himself up, would have made a great sniper!
29 December 2007, 10:45 PM
#18
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
30 December 2007, 08:51 AM
#21
I didn't say it above, but their is the very strong possibility that the assassination was carried out by the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence (the news refers to them as the ISI) - which is Pakistans largest intelligence agency. However, when I say that, I still don't think Musharraf had anything explicitly to do with it - the ISI are are a bit like Irans IRGC in that they have their own little agendas and the agenda of one office is likely to be the polar opposite of the one next door . The reason I didn't mention the ISI directly above is that there is plenty of rumour that elements of it is as fundamental and extreme as the Taleban, and would rather take their orders from Quetta than Islamabad.
Martin - as for people asking about increased US involvement in Pakistan, I think its a fair question and one people are genuinely worried about if they don't have much knowledge of the region and its politics. Pakistan has been a lynchpin of US foreign policy in the region for some years; and I'm sure there will be some pretty tense meetings going on in Washington at the moment.
. The reason I didn't mention the ISI directly above is that there is plenty of rumour that elements of it is as fundamental and extreme as the Taleban, and would rather take their orders from Quetta than Islamabad.Martin - as for people asking about increased US involvement in Pakistan, I think its a fair question and one people are genuinely worried about if they don't have much knowledge of the region and its politics. Pakistan has been a lynchpin of US foreign policy in the region for some years; and I'm sure there will be some pretty tense meetings going on in Washington at the moment.
Last edited by Prasius; 30 December 2007 at 08:53 AM.
30 December 2007, 10:24 AM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Please excuse my Spelling - its not the best !!
Posts: 2,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post