U.S. Bombs Pakistan

"Aircraft from Afghanistan have once more attacked Pakistan killing 18 Pakistanis in remote villages. Even non-US sources, such as Al-Jazeera has adopted the tone of embedded journalists, telling the world that the US attack on Pakistan killed 18 people in “a village stronghold of pro-Taliban Islamists.”

"This incident is yet another evidence that Musharraf has made Pakistan a big loser after September 11 with the misconception that it had no option except bending backwards to the US demands. His mantra: Pakistan had no option. It either had to join the US aggression or invite Bush’s wrath. Had Musharraf hesitated, the Americans would have clobbered Pakistan’s military and ‘strategic’ assets and allowed India to attack. By siding with Bush, Pakistan has been saved from American anger and its own “extremists.” It has also been able to break out of its isolation and rejoin the international mainstream."

"However, do we see any signs of such successes? Did the United States spare Pakistan? Are not our troops and people dying? The “president house” might be safe, but are the rest of homes in Pakistan safe from the American aggression? No one cares to answer a simple question. What would Pakistan have lost if it had chosen to negotiate the fine print of our cooperation with the US? Even America’s European allies—with the exception, of course, of Britain—took some time to make up their minds before rushing in with offers of help."

"Would Pakistan have been declared international terrorists if the spineless Musharraf had negotiated with some toughness instead of being dazzled by the sudden attention he started getting? Now that the euphoria has gone, what do Musharraf and his minions have to show for his caving in? Musharraf got his exclusive dinners with Bush and Blair and accolades from Zionist groups and Islamophobes. Beyond that, what did he get? The nation is facing what he wanted to avoid: aggression of the United States of American."

As you can see, from the perspective of a citizen of one of our "allies" in the war on terror, not even our "friends" get treated with any respect, if we can get away with it. From the very begining of our alliance with Pakistan, it's been clear that it's been no different than many of the allies we had during the Cold War. Then as now, we're using a weak, corrupt, dictatorship to advance our cause, to the detriment of their people. These kinds of partnerships led directly to revolutions that drove their people into the waiting arms of the Soviets' sphere of influence. After which, we'd have to go and re-liberate them through renewed subversion. Others were strong enough, and simply used our fanatical support of their "declared" anti-communist regimes, to kill any and all opposition to it's rule, communist or not. These alliances never benefitted the people other countries, only their rulers, since we supported the oppression of their people, so the rulers could remain in power and be our "friend". It explains why there's hostility towards the U.S. in Central and South America today. Iranian history is another example of what happens when we sponsor and manipulate unpopular leaders. And don't forget Cuban history either.

Can you guess the results of todays support of governments that go against the wishes of its' people? No need to guess, history reveals all, through it's repetition.