A True Reason Behind Declaration Of Usama’s Death .::::. US Forces Needed A clean Sweep Out From Afghanistan and Other Muslim Countries Because of their Economy getting lowr n lower and Of Course Afghanistan was a Hard Nut To Crack. They Only Had The Budget Of 10 Years As Now Its been almost 10 years (End Of American War Time). Whenever they do war they always do it for 10 years
I`m gonna grounded for exams starting from 14th of march.see you guys i will miss u too so keep missing me back nd wishing me best of luck TC =)
- Sabah Qureshi
Conventional wisdom might suggest that the U.S. military should step in to halt a notorious dictator from carrying out ruthless crackdowns on his own people — especially against those standing up for democracy.
This is particularly true in Moammar Gadhafi’s case, as he has been a thorn in our side since taking power in a 1969 coup.
This week Secretary of Defense Robert Gates ordered two Navy amphibious ships, USS Kearsarge and USS Ponce, along with a contingent of Marines through the Suez Canal to the Mediterranean — though he stressed they would be in place for humanitarian relief and potential evacuations.
While noncombatant operations are one thing, combat missions, including European-led talk of establishing a “no-fly zone,” are quite another.
So while U.S. leaders continue to discuss options for military contingencies with NATO allies, they ought to think twice before committing the use of force.
Here are five reasons why:
U.S. intervention in Libya would inflame the anti-American sentiment already prevalent in the Middle East, North Africa and other regions. Al-Qaida, pro-caliphate and pan-Arab nationalist crowds would use any U.S. military action taken against Muslims for their propaganda purposes. Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, our chief critic in Latin America, is already exploiting the oil argument, with claims that the U.S. is distorting the situation to “justify an invasion.”
U.S. allies need to take more responsibility for their security and economic prosperity. Some 85 percent of Libya’s oil goes to European Union countries. Allies who have been vocal in the Libyan crisis — the U.K., France and Germany — can combine forces to enforce a “no-fly zone” and launch ground operations, if they desire.
Libya is in such a state of chaos that U.S. troops could very well be attacked by anyone. Gadhafi’s military, militias and mercenaries would rally around their leader to protect the regime. The pro-democracy rebellion, meanwhile, has depicted Gadhafi with a Star of David, stocked full of U.S. dollars. Its ranks contain dangerous anti-American and anti-Semitic strains — those who wouldn’t likely receive the U.S. as liberators. Sound familiar?
U.S. forces are already stretched thin by two wars — 97,000 troops in Afghanistan and 47,000 in Iraq. Shouldering the bulk of costs in dollars and lives in both wars fought for Western interests — let alone bearing primary responsibility for politically radioactive yet necessary missions like detention operations and interrogations — our forces already have enough on their plate.
It could be worse. It’s worth noting that bad as Gadhafi is — his order to sabotage Pan Am Flight 103 stands out as one of the most heinous cases of state terrorism in history — it’s always possible that we could end up with someone worse.
Apparently the U.S. still recognizes the Qaddafi regime as the government of Libya, even while saying that Qaddafi is “delusional” and must step down. When the Libyan ambassador here resigned, it seems that the State Department immediately recognized his deputy as the charge d’affaires and the Qaddafi flag continues to be displayed in the Libyan Embassy in Washington, rather than the “Independence Flag” which flies over all the liberated areas of Libya.
This makes no sense. If it reflects a thought that we need to keep lines of communication open to Muammar Qaddafi and his clique in order to encourage a peaceful resolution of this tragedy, there are many ways to do that without continuing to recognize it as a government and treating the Embassy here as their sovereign possession.
Perhaps some legal types at the State Department are just mechanically following procedures. But the consequences are serious. We should be making every effort to communicate with the new provisional authorities in Benghazi and elsewhere and moving as quickly as possible toward recognizing a provisional government of free Libya. Continuing to recognize the Qaddafi regime is an obstacle to doing that.
The administration should be pressed to go beyond vague declarations that they are in touch with elements in the country and take steps to formalize the channels of communication, to include sending an envoy to Benghazi and to other liberated cities where conditions are stable.
“The effects of Facebook and other means of networking have been obvious in places like Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. We have all heard the stories of anonymous Facebook users who set up pages calling for a revolution. During the early days of Egypt’s revolution, ousted President Hosni Mubarak’s authorities cut internet connections in the country in a bid to halt the endless stream of messaging and posting that was bringing people to the streets in opposition to his 30-year regime.”
No wonder “The Social Network” was such a hit film, nominated for eight Oscars and taking home three. If the Academy’s panel of judges was made up of Egyptians, Tunisians, Libyans, Yemenis or Palestinians, the movie would have definitely won Best Picture.
The film, chronicling the humble but inventive beginnings of Facebook tells the story of how one very intelligent Harvard student took the idea of social networking to a whole new level, changing the face of the internet forever. However, even Mark Zuckerburg, the young genius who invented Facebook could not have envisioned the revolutionary changes to which his social network gave life.
The effects of Facebook and other means of networking have been obvious in places like Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. We have all heard the stories of anonymous Facebook users who set up pages calling for a revolution. During the early days of Egypt’s revolution, ousted President Hosni Mubarak’s authorities cut internet connections in the country in a bid to halt the endless stream of messaging and posting that was bringing people to the streets in opposition to his 30-year regime.
The effect has not been lost on Palestine either. Groups have been popping up on Palestinian networks right and left ranging from calling on people to rally in solidarity with Arab peoples determined on toppling their regimes, to calls for the toppling of our own leaderships. In Gaza, almost simultaneously, groups appeared on Facebook both in favor of and opposed to the de facto Hamas government there, one calling for its demise and the other calling for its support.
In the West Bank, fortunately, Facebook has been mostly utilized to rally people around a common demand – Palestinian reconciliation. Thousands of people have taken to the streets over the past few weeks calling on leaders to set aside their differences and unite. The general mood of the Arab street has rubbed off on the Palestinians, the sense that people’s power can move mountains.
Even the leadership has taken note. Last week, Prime Minister Salam Fayyad posted questions to the public on his Facebook page asking fans to suggest candidates for new government posts. Two days ago, Fayyad posted an initiative for ending the split in which he outlines ways of reconciling with Gaza and moving towards a more cohesive and unified Palestinian front.
The move is obviously a way of catering to the people’s demands, something the Arab world’s dictators learned the hard way. The Palestinian leadership is now acutely aware of the fact that a certain nail in any government’s coffin is being disconnected from its people. Vast social networks such as Facebook leave little excuse for any honest and willing government to allow this to happen. Western educated leaders such as Fayyad well understand the importance of the new age of technology and how powerful a tool it can be. Blogging, social networking, instant messaging and “tweeting” can rally millions around or against a cause and obviously, bring down whole regimes. The Palestinian people have also realized how powerful a tool these networks are. Groups have been created for Jerusalem’s youths to combat social problems such as drug abuse and school dropout rates, artists who encourage Palestinians to broaden their cultural horizons and refugees who reunite across borders and barbed wires in the vast world of cyberspace to learn more about their lost homeland.
The changes in the Arab world have shown us just what Facebook can do. It is no longer just to view your friends’ pictures, post mood statuses or play games. Facebook has become the rebel yell of oppressed peoples and the face of changes so amazing we are all still dumbfounded with awe.
Davis is the CIA contractor in jail in Lahore facing murder charges for the execution-slayings of two young men believed to be Pakistani intelligence operatives.
February 27, 2011 | Pakistani and Indian newspapers are reporting that Raymond Davis, the CIA contractor in jail in Lahore facing murder charges for the execution-slayings of two young men believed to be Pakistani intelligence operatives, was actually involved in organizing terrorist activities in Pakistan.
Photo Credit: AFP As the Express Tribune, an English-language daily that is linked to the International Herald Tribune, reported on Feb. 22:
“The Lahore killings were a blessing in disguise for our security agencies who suspected that Davis was masterminding terrorist activities in Lahore and other parts of Punjab,” a senior official in the Punjab Police claimed.
“His close ties with the TTP [the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan] were revealed during the investigations,” he added. “Davis was instrumental in recruiting young people from Punjab for the Taliban to fuel the bloody insurgency.” Call records of the cellphones recovered from Davis have established his links with 33 Pakistanis, including 27 militants from the TTP and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi sectarian outfit, sources said.
The article goes on to explain a motive for why the US, which on the one hand has been openly pressing Pakistan to move militarily against Taliban forces in the border regions abutting Afghanistan, would have a contract agent actively encouraging terrorist acts within Pakistan, saying:
Davis was also said to be working on a plan to give credence to the American notion that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are not safe. For this purpose, he was setting up a group of the Taliban which would do his bidding.
According to a report in the Economic Times of India, a review by police investigators of calls placed by Davis on some of the cell phones found on his person and in his rented Honda Civic after the shooting showed calls to 33 Pakistanis, including 27 militants from the banned Pakistani Taliban, and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, an group identified as terrorist organization by both the US and Pakistan, which has been blamed for the assassination of Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, and for the brutal slaying of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. (You’d think this would be a big story for the Wall Street Journal, especially on the editorial page, but so far, there has been no mention of it in Murdoch’s rag.)
Meanwhile, while the US continues to claim that Davis was “defending himself” against two armed robbers, the Associated Press is reporting that its sources in Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), are telling them that Davis “knew both men he killed.”
The AP report, which was run in Thursday’s Washington Post, claims the ISI says it “had no idea who Davis was or what he was doing when he was arrested,” that he had contacts in Pakistan’s tribal regions, and that his visa applications contained “bogus references and phone numbers.”
The article quotes a “senior Pakistani intelligence official” as saying the ISI “fears there are hundreds of CIA contractors presently operating in Pakistan without the knowledge of the Pakistan government or the intelligence agency.”
In an indication that Pakistan is hardening its stance against caving to US pressure to spring Davis from jail, the Express Tribune quotes sources in the Pakistani Foreign Office as saying that the US has been pressing them to forge backdated documents that would allow the US to claim that Davis worked for the US Embassy. President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other top US officials have been trying to claim Davis was an Embassy employee, and not, as they originally stated, and as he himself told arresting police officers, just a contractor working out of the Lahore Consulate. The difference is critical, since most Embassy employees get blanket immunity for their activities, while consular employees, under the Vienna Conventions, only are given immunity for things done during and in the course of their official duties.
