comment: >
  
  The sad thing is they eventually succeeded in assassinating him.
context: Holy shit >
  
  Pakistan the government is not Pakistan the people necessarily. I doubt these people deserved it but maybe you know better >
  
  Pakistani people largely support Taliban in Afghan and were celerating their return >
  
  These particular people? My point is it's wild to say the dead deserved it without knowing intimate details >
  
  It's a bit of a jump to go from "actions have consequences" to "these specific people deserved to die." 
  Terrorism is a stupid game and Pakistan plays it perhaps more than any other state in the world. So it goes. >
  
  "Actions have consequences" is only meaningful to say if you are suggesting they did something to deserve it. Otherwise it's just saying "stuff happens". >
  
  Pakistan has done more than anyone else to use fundamentalist terror groups as a tool to destabilize their political rivals in the region. This action, the regional cultivation of fundamentalist terror groups, has consequences, the proliferation and sustainment of regional terror. 
  "Deserve" introduces a morality judgement that doesn't otherwise exist in this observation. Nobody deserves to be murdered in cold blood, but it is nonetheless true that Pakistan bears some degree of responsibility for the violent sectarianism that currently plagues its own neighbourhood. It's not "deserve" it's "responsibility." >
  
  The article mentioned that the Taliban took credit for it. So basically we have a religion killing people in the same religion for  being the wrong flavor of the religion.
  Fundamentalism is a disease. >
  
  Not only that, but Talibans just attacked a nation that previously financed and sheltered them. >
  
  Depending on which Taliban the Afghan or Pakistan Taliban both groups are two different entities. >
  
  The Pakistan Taliban only exist because Pakistan Sheltered, Trained, and Armed the Afghan Taliban for two decades. This is a problem of their own making. >
  
  Well the US did it first lol >
  
  But Pakistan ran with it and now the monster they created is haunting them as well. 
  The U.S was giving funds but it was Pakistan that was allocating those funds into groups that would later become the taliban. >
  
  Well, the Afghan Taliban, while being Muslim fundamentalist, are also the defacto Pashto nationalist group. Millions of Pashto speakers also live in Pakistan so many are also attracted to the Taliban >
  
  Pakistan had a habit of backing more extreme Mujahideen groups during the soviet war. They tended to favor guys like Gulbaddin hakmatyer  known as the butcher of Kabul. Moderates like massoud were often not given as much support by the Pakistani military.
  
  Millions of Pashto speakers also live in Pakistan so many are also attracted to the Taliban
  
  Seems like the Pakistan military failed to realize how this was going to come back and bite them. >
  
  
  Moderates like massoud were often not given as much support by the Pakistani military.
  
  Pakistanis were working with the Saudis who actively tried to kill massoud multiple times iirc.