Unintended Consequences in Nuclear Pakistan

If U.S. military leaders are right that they cannot prevail in Afghanistan without escalating into Pakistan, this is the strongest possible argument for withdrawing from Afghanistan. For nothing, not even Taliban rule in Kabul, could justify allowing the tiny Afghan tail to wag a giant, nuclear-armed Pakistani dog whose stability is clearly America’s very top priority in the region. Further instability in Pakistan would only benefit al-Qaida, which has ... Full Story »

Posted by Patricia Blochowiak
Tags Help
Subjects: World, U.S., Politics
Member Tags: viet nam, Nixon Administration, Eisenhower Administration
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Patricia Blochowiak - Oct 10, 2009 - 8:51 PM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Patricia Blochowiak - Oct 10, 2009 - 8:55 PM PDT

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Steven K Samra
4.7
by Steven K Samra - Oct. 11, 2009

Branfman carefully explains the danger in expanding the troop presence in the Middle East and does so with factual, logic-based arguments originating from knowledgeable and pertinent sources.

See Full Review » (6 answers)
Patricia Blochowiak
4.3
by Patricia Blochowiak - Oct. 10, 2009
See Full Review » (18 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

4.3

Good
from 3 reviews (42% confidence)
Quality
4.3
Facts
4.3
Fairness
3.3
Information
5.0
Insight
5.0
Sourcing
4.3
Style
5.0
Accuracy
3.0
Balance
2.0
Context
5.0
Depth
5.0
Enterprise
5.0
Expertise
5.0
Originality
4.0
Relevance
5.0
Transparency
3.0
Responsibility
5.0
Popularity
4.5
Recommendation
5.0
Credibility
4.3
# Reviews
1.5
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!