Should the U.S. take military action in Pakistan?

Yes
No
Resources for this issue
Reviews of this issue

This issue has been approved by whereIstand editors.

Do not use this page to take a stand on this issue.

This page shows the dialogue between users and editors regarding the merits of this issue. If you have comments about the issue's wording, relevance, etc., write them here. Only registered whereIstand members can edit an issue. Users must register in order to participate in all aspects of the whereIstand community.

9/30/2008 6:54:25 PM

Set as news: False

9/25/2008 1:04:43 PM

Set as news: True

9/15/2008 6:16:17 PM

Set as news: False

9/4/2008 12:44:27 PM

Set as news: True

6/18/2008 6:53:42 PM

Set as news: False

6/11/2008 3:04:06 PM

Set as news: True

6/11/2008 3:02:56 PM

Set as news: True

7/23/2007 2:35:50 PM

Run, Forrest, run!

7/23/2007 9:24:53 AM

issue prior to revisions:

Should the U.S. take military action inside of Pakistan?
Yes
No
No position or position not known.

7/19/2007 7:22:04 PM

I like the way it's worded: not "against Pakistan" (heaven help us) but ""inside of Pakistan." It also seems to cover the possibility that we do it after inducing Pakistan to cooperate (not as big a problem), and the possibility that we don't. What it does contemplate is "U.S. military action," as opposed to merely support for Pakistan military action.

Looks good to me!

7/19/2007 2:35:27 PM

This is a pretty crazy issue that more people need to talk about.  Or maybe they don't.  I wish it would go away.  The Bush Administration has passed up two big opportunities to attack Al-Qaeda cells in Pakistan because they are afraid it would cause such a stir that might eventually overthrow Musharraf.

WP editorial

Facing al-Qaeda
With the terrorists growing stronger, their sanctuary in Pakistan must be eliminated.

7/19/2007 2:31:01 PM

issue prior to revisions:

Should the U.S. take military action inside of Pakistan?
No position or position not known.