Diana West, writing in the Washington Times, examines the split in the conservative blogosphere over Pakistan:
...two pundit groups have quickly formed, splitting conservatives in particular in a significant way. They come down to (1) supporting, or at least acknowledging, Gen. Musharraf as the lesser of many evils, including the Taliban; and (2) supporting democratic elections in Pakistan as the only possible moral choice.
Adherents of democracy now as the only moral choice face some daunting facts:
Yes, Mrs. Bhutto is very popular, with findings from Terror Free Tomorrow showing her drawing more support (63 percent) than both Osama bin Laden (he gets a disturbingly large 46 percent) and Gen. Musharraf (38 percent). But Shariah, or Islamic law, is popular, too. As Jeffrey Imm points out at The Counterterrorism Blog, the same poll and another from World Public Opinion indicate that between 60 and 76 percent of Pakistanis seek more Shariah throughout Pakistan. This is anything but "moderate." In fact, this popular desire for Shariah dovetails nicely with Taliban plans to turn Pakistan into an all-Shariah state.
Given other popular sentiments - for example, when asked by World Public Opinion to rank government priorities, Pakistanis listed defeating "al Qaeda, the Taliban and other Jihadi groups" dead last - the will of the Pakistani people looks unlikely to amount to an asset, for example, to American troops fighting in the region. And aren't troops in harm's way to protect our national security our real moral imperative?
79% of Pakistanis want "Strict application of Sharia law in every Islamic country"
74% of Pakistanis agree with the goal of "unifying all Islamic countries into a single Caliphate." (see what that actually means, here)
In Medicine we have a simple dictum, "Above all do no harm."