Who Watches While the US Invades Pakistan and Syria?

It is fair to ask if anyone in Washington has noticed of late that Chapter VII of the UN Charter clearly establishes the rules for one country attacking another, rules to which this country is a signatory.

The rules don't apply to the U.S.A. (duh).

It all changed on Sept. 11, when someone else actually attacked US!  Now all our military actions are justified.  It's us vs. them, good vs. evil.  And God is on our side!!  trust us!!!  The US GOV'T never lies!!

(clipped!)

I wonder if this sort of thing will stop after Obama is elected?

We have requested support from both Syria as well as Pakistan. Neither country has made any attempts to quell, reduce, or attempt to secure foreign fighters, known terrorist, or insurgent wanna-be, from moving freely across their borders. In Syria, we have governmental officials providing passports, travel arrangements, money, safe houses, and known assistances for any jihadists to move across the Syrian border into Iraq. Syria the country that created the Ba'ath Party, has ties with Sunni insurgents and former Saddam supporters is not likely to stop the flow of weapons, money, men, and explosives into Iraq. Syrian military units and police border units have opened fire on US military service members who were posted near or around the border. Even back in 2004 we were getting reports from Marine units stationed past Airfield H5 near the Syrian/Iraq border that they were getting shot at by Syrian law enforcement persons who crossed the border well into known Iraqi land and started to take shots on US Marines moving on the highways.

Let's not just assume that there is a person just sending troops into Syria and Pakistan for the hell of it. You think that Pakistan is going to slow down or attempt to secure the Northern areas near the Afghanistan borders? You think Pakistan is going to go into known hostile areas of taliban controlled enclaves and remove Taliban leaders or equipment? Pakistan has made an open agreement with known terrorist cells as well as the Taliban that will not allow Pakistan military action against those held areas so long as the Taliban do not engage in terrorist activities in Pakistan. Insurgents receive training and support from sympathetic Pakistan ISI intelligence agents and senior military commanders. Those religious schools that operate without any over-sight and screening are promoting the idea of the Taliban as well as supporting Al Qadia operations. The US military commanders have asked for support in blocking known routes of the insurgents into Pakistan. Pakistan does nothing. But the flow of support moves freely and insurgents move back and forth into secure areas being claimed as "untouchable" by the Pakistan administration and under the protection of the Pakistan government. So actions conducted by US military planners are not seeking armed conflict with Syria or Pakistan. But you can't just sit there as well and wait for the next attack against US troops and allow these insurgents to move without reprecussions.

I do not agree with the entire "Bush doctrine", but I do believe that many senior military commanders are attempting to avoid the same mistakes we observed in Vietnam. We were not allowed to venture into Cambodia, Laos, or North Vietnam for a period of time. Weapons, arms, ammunition, and men moved freely from safe havens across the border and carry attacks against US troops, then slip back over the border where they knew they could not be attacked. I think this falls into the same mind-set.

Obama winning the Presidential election will not stop terrorism or terrorist attacks.

I wonder if the title of this article is misleading. There is no invasion by America into Pakistan and Syria. There have been very limited strikes and very small-scale, localized insertions of special ops types, for very limited duration, but nothing even remotely approaching an 'invasion'!