Quote:
Originally Posted by cullennewsom
I think it used to be "If the purpose of the war was to get Osama and since they got him already, shouldn't the war be over?" To which I should have merely answered "Yes, it should be over, except we've been lied to, so it isn't."
Of course I do not believe that nuclear war is a trivial matter.
But with respect to (what I infer to be) t walgamuth's hypothesis that India / Pakistan relations are our gov't's reason / justification for continued military presence in Afghanistan; and that both countries are ready to annihilate each other any minute now.
I have to say that I think both of those are unlikely; and that I've seen no information to support either notion.
|
I don't think they are ready to annihilate each other either, the death toll from such an exchange is self evident to them as it is to us, however I can see an argument for the nation of Afghanistan suddenly becoming a far richer prize since the greater exploration of their mining potential in recent years.
Now its less of a mountainous country full of armed, dangerous people, and more of a mountainous country full of armed, dangerous people sitting on untold treasure to be exploited.
That difference in perception might be the difference in any kind of move towards conquest by any of the bordering nations, and subsequent widening of any conflict, which involves those two nuclear powers.
I could see India not being happy at the prospect of Pakistan adding a huge chunk of Afghanistan to its borders, ect