• Welcome to the new SAOCA website. Already a member? Simply click Log In/Sign Up up and to the right and use your same username and password from the old site. If you've forgotten your password, please send an email to membership@sunbeamalpine.org for assistance.

    If you're new here, click Log In/Sign Up and enter your information. We'll approve your account as quickly as possible, typically in about 24 hours. If it takes longer, you were probably caught in our spam/scam filter.

    Enjoy.

A repeat of Archduke Ferdinand assassination?

jumpinjan

Bronze Level Sponsor
So, how many of you are thinking that the murder of Benazir Bhutto yesterday might be the "Sarajevo" of our time? I know, most people knowadays are too stupid to know who Ferdinand was... think about it though...
Radio talk show host Michael Savage made the same analogy last night on his show. It's certainly going to ramp up the Islamic infighting in that region.
Jan
 

Nickodell

Donation Time
You're referring to the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, Archduke of Austria-Este, the spark that triggered WWI.

There are some similarities and many differences. In 1914 the major countries or Europe - France, Britain, Germany, Austria-Hungary and Russia - were producing arms as fast as they could go, were spoiling for a fight and believed their own propaganda that they could defeat anyone, and were tied up in treaties so that when one was attacked others would weigh in; the proverbial "domino effect."

Austria, in particular, wanted to settle old scores with Serbia, so that even when that country agreed to almost every one of the demands in Austria's untimatum after the assassination by the Serb Gavrilo Princip, Austria rejected this surrender and invaded. Then the interwoven network of treaties started the whole continent, and ultimately much of the world, in conflict.

Nothing like this is going to happen in Pakistan, of course; however, the danger is that Bhutto's supporters (hers was the country's largest political party) will overthrow the administration of Pervez Musharraf. Either that or a military coup, especially as he relinquished the post of Commander-in-chief last month. The great danger, of course, is that radical Islamists will gain control of Pakistan's nuclear weapons. Al qaeda has long controlled much of the northwest part of the country, and with Musharraf overthrown could easily control much more.

Scary times.
 

jumpinjan

Bronze Level Sponsor
Yeah, how about this scenario
Hardline radical government takes over in Pakistan making claims it will claim the Kashimer province no matter the cost…

India reacts by mobilizing on its Northern border…
At the same time Pakistan mobilizes…
Meanwhile, an unnoticed truck rolls into New Dehli…
In an instant, India’s population is reduced by 10 milllion…
Followed by India lauching a nuke reducing Karachi to ashes….

Nope, I don’t see the familiarity (with the start of WWI) at all…
 

Nickodell

Donation Time
Yeah, how about this scenario
Hardline radical government takes over in Pakistan making claims it will claim the Kashimer province no matter the cost…

India reacts by mobilizing on its Northern border…
At the same time Pakistan mobilizes…
Meanwhile, an unnoticed truck rolls into New Dehli…
In an instant, India’s population is reduced by 10 milllion…
Followed by India lauching a nuke reducing Karachi to ashes….

Nope, I don’t see the familiarity (with the start of WWI) at all…

Good, we're making progress. Let me explain again. Unlike 1914, there are no mutual-aid treaties obligating the superpowers, and other nuclear powers like China, Britain, France, N. Korea - and probably Israel - to enter the fray. There are no large Hindu nations outside India, so there would not even be a religious reason for any country to attack Pakistan in retaliation, and risk getting nuked themselves. This war in far-off Asia would not involve any member nations of Nato, the only similar pact to some of the 1914 ones.

Russia would not give a toss about the loss of 1% of India's population, and would not declare war on Pakistan. (Someone in the Kremlin would probably remark that India adds that number every few months, and in any case disease and malnutrition take off a like number, slowly, every year or two).

The US would be rightly horrified at such an attack, but that is as far as it would go, other than to cut off the hundreds of millions of $ it sends Pakistan each year, which should have been stopped years ago when that country allowed al Qaeda a haven.

India would certainly retaliate, and since it would be clear that al Qaeda was responsible, the whole tribal area where they live and train their operatives would be removed from the map - other than the loss of innocent lives of the local tribesmen, a net gain to the world.

If past history is any guide, the other probability is that the totally useless United Nations would propose a resolution blaming the US and Israel, and the Bush-haters would blame him. Oh, wait. That has already started. Butto's assassination was Bush's, and America's, fault. Example: New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, running on the Dem. ticket for president, speaking yesterday about the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, sharply criticized the Bush administration's Pakistan policy and urged him to "force" Musharraf from power. (How? Invade Pakistan? Send a hit squad?)
 

Eleven

Platinum Level Sponsor
Of course any of that could happen

but murdering a candidate in India and Pakistan is a long honored tradition. If Bhutto's party gets control, they are more democratic and hopefully stable than any of the others. The truck bomb scenerio is what keeps us all awake and is the fruit cake element in their relationships. As I get older, there is a good reason why I stick my head in an old car and worry why the Master Cylinder that I proudly rebuilt won't pump., etc. Anything other...yikes.,
 

skywords

Donation Time
Where is this guy when you need him?

day_5.jpg
 
Top