Personal tools
 
Views

Argument: Success in Afghanistan is key to stability in nuclear Pakistan

From Debatepedia

Revision as of 10:31, 21 July 2010; Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ←Older revision | Current revision | Newer revision→ (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

Joshua Foust. "The Case for Afghanistan: Strategic Considerations". Registan. August 27th, 2009: "lest anyone think it is appropriate to write off the India-Pakistan conflict as somebody else’s problem, it is never somebody else’s problem when nuclear weapons are involved. As Jari Lindholm reminded, India and Pakistan have come a hair’s breadth from nuclear conflict twice over Kashmir. And like it or not, it is a compelling and vital American interest to prevent nuclear conflict in South Asia—which makes “fixing” Afghanistan in some way also a vital American interest."


"Obama's war. Why the Afghanistan war deserves more resources, commitment and political will." The Economist. October 15, 2009: "The West has a security interest in preventing the region from slipping into a maelstrom of conflict. Pakistan, with 170m people and nuclear weapons, is vulnerable to the Taliban’s potent mixture of ethnic-Pushtun nationalism and extremist Islam (see article). Anarchy in Afghanistan, or a Taliban restoration, would leave it prey to permanent cross-border instability."

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.