The larger point is that it cannot be unintentional to put his hidey-hole McMansion/compound next to the Pakistan military academy. There was some intention--we just don't know what it was. Perhaps the food is especially good here? The sunsets? The hiking trails? I have no clue, but there will be heaps of speculation about this.
For a sharper take than anything I can provide, see Chris Fair's piece* at, yes, you guessed it, foreignpolicy.com. Also, see Vali Nasr's* op-ed: "If history is any guide, Pakistan cannot be relied upon to make the right decision. In the coming weeks, Islamabad is likely to hunker down in reaction to bin Laden’s death and then go after the CIA’s eyes and ears around Pakistan."
* This raises a completely different question--do I like certain stuff because I have met the people, or do I meet the people because I like their stuff? Well, the cases of these two people, I met them more or less accidentally, so no intentionality there. Moreover, I really do not know squat about Pakistan (despite appearing on local radio yesterday to talk about it) so it cannot say that I like their takes because they confirm my beliefs--my beliefs are embryonic.
Any comments on stealth helicopter technology and the possibility of Chinese interest (and Pakistani army compliance) in its remains?
ReplyDeleteI have no info on this, but would not be surprised. Once you use some new technology on the battlefield, it is open for exploitation.
ReplyDeleteHere, the stakes obviously justified the risk.