Republican Presidential Candidates on Pakistan and Nuclear Terrorism (ContributorNetwork)

As America moves deeper into the 21st century, Pakistan is becoming a serious concern to its neighboring nation states and the U.S. It is undemocratic -- the Pakistani government recently banned Facebook, YouTube and Wikipedia, among other violations of civil rights and liberties. It is experiencing problematic economic growth, currently containing a population half of the United States' within an area only one-twelfth the size of the U.S. And it possesses more than 100 nuclear weapons and provides safe haven to multiple terrorist groups.

According to a journal published at West Point Military Academy, terrorists have attempted to gain access to nuclear sites in Pakistan on numerous occasions.

In short, conditions in Pakistan are a recipe for national and international disaster.

And for this reason, the candidates seeking the Republican presidential nomination were asked how they believe the Pakistani situation should be handled.

Here is what they said:

* Jon Huntsman: "Pakistan is a concern. That's the country that ought to keep everybody up at night. ? You've got the youngest demographic of the 160 million people in Pakistan. You've got a Midrasha movement. You've got over 100 nuclear weapons. You've got trouble on the border. You've got a nation-state that is a candidate for failure. And I say it's a haven for bad behavior. It's a haven for training the people who seek to do us harm. And an expanded drone program is something that would serve our national interest."

* Michele Bachmann: "Pakistan has been the epicenter of dealing with terrorism ??? there are al-Qaida training grounds there. There's also the Haqqani network that can be trained there as well. And they also are one of the most violent, unstable nations that there is. We have to recognize that 15 of the sites, nuclear sites are available or are potentially penetrable by jihadists. Six attempts have already been made on nuclear sites. This is more than an existential threat. We have to take this very seriously."

* Mitt Romney: "Pakistan is the sixth largest country in the world. We can't just say goodbye to all of what's going on in that part of the world. Instead, we want to draw them toward modernity. And for that to happen, we don't want to literally pull up stakes and run out of town after the extraordinary investment that we've made. And that means we should have a gradual transition of handing off to the Afghan security forces the responsibility for their own country. We need to bring Pakistan into the 21st century -- or the 20th century, for that matter -- so that they can engage throughout the world with trade and with modernity. Right now, American approval level in Pakistan is 12 percent. We're not doing a very good job with this huge investment we make of $4.5 billion a year. We can do a lot better directing that to encourage people to take advantage of the extraordinary opportunities the West and freedom represent for their people."

* Newt Gingrich: "We were told, a perfectly natural Washington assumption, that our killing bin Laden in Pakistan drove U.S.-Pakistan relations to a new low. To which my answer is, well, it should have because we should be furious. You tell the Pakistanis, help us or get out of the way, but don't complain if we kill people you're not willing to go after on your territory where you have been protecting them."

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/gop/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20111128/us_ac/10544791_republican_presidential_candidates_on_pakistan_and_nuclear_terrorism

kat von d tiki barber minnesota vikings packers vs vikings packers vs vikings randall cobb packers score