Dragon Ball Z Uncensored

[Big Fagot]

Benazir Bhutto is a faggot.

[Big Fagot]

http://news.google.com/news?q=bhutto

[johnbuisthegreat]

Peter this is not a subject matter you are well informed on is it?

[johnbuisthegreat]

IS IT?

[johnbuisthegreat]

America is fucked prepare for a draft. Anyways after January 2010 I cant even be drafted unless there is all out war and shit

[Stupid Fucking Faggot]

More like Butt Ho.

[8 bit orgy]

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,70131-1298475,00.html


"Bhutto...minutes before her death"

[Magic Juan]

It's kind of cool how Bhutto basically killed herself.

[8 bit orgy]

What the hell is going on? Is the woman dead? Is the guy dead? I need a timeline!

[Magic Juan]

u r not uh, getting any...software...speed?

[GimpMask]

Who?

[Engel242]

http://mikeely.wordpress.com/2007/12/27/bhutto-dead-us-failures-deepen/

[Stupid Fucking Faggot]

I'm not sure why everybody is talking as if this assassination is going to translate into terrible difficulty for American security and the economy, but they're probably right.

[Big Fagot]

Pakistan is pretty significant as foreign countries go.

[Engel242]

Not so much as American security as it will make things harder for American imperialist foreign policy.

Bhutto was a refreshing replacement for Musharaff, and now the US doesn't have that. As the article I posted above states:

In any case, this leaves the U.S. global situation much worsened for many reasons.

1) The U.S. now has no backup replacement for Musharraf. It was a global self-exposure for the U.S. to claim to be “fighting for democracy” around the world – while in Pakistan shamelessly backing the military dictator Musharraf, pouring multi-millions into his operations, downplaying his shameless suppression of the judiciary, the rule of law and western-style elections. Even worse (from the U.S. point of view) was that Musharraf was losing his grip – as the country was almost unanimously opposed to his alliance with the U.S. Bhutto, who heads one of the few secular forces with deep roots among the poor of Pakistan, was waiting in the wings (perhaps for a Democratic presidential victory in November and a “new face” on the so-called “war on terror.”) Bhutto’s death does not end the instability in Pakistan – it is now going to intensify, while the U.S. has lost its major possible replacement candidate.

2) The death of Bhutto strengthens the hand of theocratic Islamist forces in Pakistan. Her party, the Pakistan Peoples Party was so narrowly focused on her (and her family’s legacy) that it is hard to imagine this party continuing contenting for power at the same level without her. The rest of the liberal opposition to the existing government is extremely fragmented, and often popularly discredited.

3) The elimination of Bhutto is designed to make it even harder for the U.S. to “go after” Al-Qaida and Taliban Islamist theocrats in Pakistan. And it may well have that effect. It will be harder for many forces to speak out in support of U.S. actions, if only because they would face Bhutto’s fate. Meanwhile, the assassination happens as the U.S. position in Afghanistan has worsened, and the U.S. was openly considering increasing the size of its occupation forces to prevent a major strategic loss there.

4) A genuine nightmare looms for U.S. imperialism — their attacks on Al-Qaida, their invasion of Afghanistan and their whole global offensive might come to this: triggering the emergence of a nuclear-armed theocracy in one of the world’s largest Muslim countries. It is hard to imagine a more major failure of policy and war. The U.S. has transferred sophisticated nuclear control technologies to forces within the Pakistani military that they consider “reliable” – meaning that the U.S. had demanded (in exchange for its escalating aid) secret-but-real control over Pakistani nuclear arsenal. But these desperate measures show the U.S. fear of an Islamist theocracy in Pakistan, not its confidence that such a theocracy can be avoided.

5) Any deepening instability of Pakistan and any strengthening of Islamist forces in Pakistan has powerful impact over that country’s borders. Renewed crisis could erupt at any time, in disputed Kashmir and along the India-Pakistan border. This means: A real danger of a regional military confrontation, even war (and even cross-border nuclear exchanges with horrific casualties).

5) The mounting instability in Pakistan “pins down” huge parts of the Indian army.This has real implications for revolutionary movements in South Asia. The pressure mounts for the Indian government and army to focus on its western border region and the possibility of major war – rather than the mounting counterinsurgency campaigns against Communist rebel forces within India. And the increasing unpredictability of its nuclear enemy to its west, means the Indian government may be considerably more reluctant to consider reactionary military adventures against Nepal (such as militarizing its northern border and occupying the Terai agricultural border region within southern Nepal in case of Communist victory).

[Action Hank]

Pakistan? But I hardly know you!

[Username]

I wonder who didn't expect her to die if she went back to her own country.

[Stupid Fucking Faggot]

Jesus Christ, Engel.

I wanted somebody to tell me how the US was secretly involved in this Illuminati-backed assassination and that Ron Paul is our only hope, instead you had to go and give me a concise and detailed report featuring a politically-informed description of the situation paying carefully-contextualized respect to international and historical factors, complete with logical, well-grounded speculation.

Man, get lost.

[Engel242]

I do what I can, Chris.

Also, Ron Paul groupies annoy me.

[Big Fagot]

This guy once stole a bunch of money from me and donated it to Ron Paul's campaign, and I was like, what is this, a joke?