US to use Afghanistan as base of drone attacks in Pakistan - Times of India

[Ignited Mind]

Tell me how they came to the conclusion of Dawood Ibrahim whereabouts. It just seems like a lot of lies & speculation to me. They should at least some kind of pictures of his house.

And btw, that's not even the complete address, it doesn't have what Phase Number (1-8) his house is in. All Defence Housing Authority (DHA) houses have a phase number. So it's not even a complete address

Go to sleep, Bilal. It must be pretty late now in the US.

 

[53fd]

Go to sleep, Bilal. It must be pretty late now in the US.

---------- Post added at 01:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:34 PM ----------



Read number 151. Follow the link.

What link? There is no link that opens the address on google maps. I dare you to locate this address on google maps or any other application, this is an incomplete address. I've lived in Defence Housing Authority (DHA) Phase 6 Khayaban-e-Sehr o/ Khayaban-e-Ghazi House # 15 myself, now that is a complete house address for a location in the Defence Housing Authority. As I have already mentioned, the address is incomplete because it doesn't have the phase number with it.

This is the address I mentioned located on google maps:

Phase 6 Khayaban-e-Sehr o/ Khayaban-e-Ghazi Karachi, Pakistan - Google Maps

 

[Obambam]

a. Nukes. As I meantioned earlier, Pakistani nukes give them the leeway to continue to use terror as a state policy. But the nukes will not save them forever. At least not when they are so heavily dependent upon the west for their economy as they are now.

Ok so right now India is afraid so they are riding on the American backs instead? Is that a good thing? Is that what you are implying?

b. What's with this Chinese habit of calling every other Indian poster a troll? lol looks like you never met HongWu.

I don't care about what other posters do. It is not of my concern. As for trolls, I mean the ones who likes to flame and stir up trouble. It was directed at individuals, not the Indian population as a whole. To poke fun at Pakistani for being plundered and not knowing what it means initially isn't an act of trolling? You can tell me what it means otherwise?

Q - Is China as effected by terrorism as is the west or India?
A - Hell NO!

Answer: Read up more about terrorism in China.

On the side note - terrorism is global and anyone can commit acts of terrorism. It doesn't narrow down to one country nor can a country be blamed because of individual crimes.

The point was to illustrate that China too, when it comes to Chinese interests, go to extreme limits. It's just that so far Chinese interests have not been threatened to an extent so as to warrant a military action. Mind you, the day that happens, China won't wait for anybody's clearance.

Also serves your ways of preaching propaganda? I guess the Propaganda Crusaders are highly worshipped here, it even runs through the blood of some Indian trolls.

"Until that happens". Are you playing fortune teller now? We have seen more wars initiated by the west than China in any case. Are you trying to tell the readers that going into war to protect ones interest is copyrighted now? I think it applies to anyone even with india. Until you can prove that India doesn't protect its interests to the extremes, you better keep that trap shut

China has already warned the Pakistanis against instigating the Uighurs. If the problem gets out of hand, I won't be surprised to see China getting tougher with Pakistan and that will spell doom for this sermon of 'internal affair' of yours.

CHINA

CHINA’S DEEPENING ENGAGEMENT WITH PAKISTAN ON COUNTERTERRORISM

Beginning in 2004, in four separate attacks twelve Chinese lost their lives on Pakistani soil. In addition, on occasions China warned Pakistan that Xinjiang separatists in collaboration with local militants planned to kidnap Chinese diplomats in Islamabad.

You mean that? deepening of engagement on counter terrorism? Does that mean China will fly drones and attack Pakistan now?
There are ways to encounter crimes and bombing a country isn't one. For everyone and innocent you kill, more will come back to take revenge. It is the nature of humans.

Agreed. China is a major power now and now it remains to be seen to what extent will it take matters once push comes to shove but as I stated earlier, the trailer shown by China so far as getting aggressive is concerned, give away too much.

If you have been following politics enough, you should know it is like a game of chess. China isn't alone against the barbaric western movements. Russia is very much in it with China. Being close with the Russians, it would be interesting to see which way India sways when the "push comes to shove" part happens.

And what makes you think India has not stated that this is not a Pakistani internal issue? You live on Earth, right?

In that case, it must be an issue India cannot solve so they must rely on others to solve it for them? i.e. riding on the American backs?

 

[Awesome]

The only way the US will get away with perpetually bombing Pakistan indefinitely is if they decide to bomb Pakistani civilian areas like cities and villages, because the government may not stop the US, but the people will eventually even march into the US Afghanistan drone bases.

 

[Developereo]

1. The advantage of the Northern Corridor is that it is relatively safe than the 2000 km long Pakistani Corridor.

2. It allows the US presence in the Russian underbelly and by undertaking improvement of the infrastructure in these countries, it will create goodwill.

3. Instead of ferrying petrol, oil and lubricants from the Middle East, the US would use Caspian Oil and hence give a ready market to these countries and to their advantage.

4. US requirement of foodstuff would open up markets in these countries to their advantage.

5. Therefore, the diplomatic win win over many CAR countries in comparison to one Pakistan will accrue greater advantage.

6. Being in the neighbourhood of Xinjiang, will open up avenues to surveil China as also create problems through the Uyghurs! Win win!

Now check what will be the disadvantage to Pakistan.

1. No moral advantage of 'controlling' and 'limiting' the Drone strikes from bases in Pakistan.

2. Loss of revenue for the fee for transiting supplies through Pakistan.

3. Unlimited Drone strikes as and when it please Pakistan would cause chaos in Pakistan, more so, since they cannot attack the US in Afghanistan. Because if they do, then the US extend operations to destroy the Taliban bases in Pakistan and encourages the Pashtuns for an independent Pakhtunkwa!!

I could go on, but it is all kiteflying since things are still panning out and are fluid.

Pakistani may feel that their Govt is inept, but then they are good at survival instincts.

I am surprised NATO hasn't hired you as a geopolitical advisor.

On second though, I am not.

Despite Indian fanboi hysterics, the fact is that the northern supply routes are 100% controlled by Russia, and NATO would much rather deal with Zardari than Putin.

 

[Ignited Mind]

The only way the US will get away with perpetually bombing Pakistan indefinitely is if they decide to bomb Pakistani civilian areas like cities and villages, because the government may not stop the US, but the people will eventually even march into the US Afghanistan drone bases.

I contend the US can do what it wants, when it wants and to whatever extent it wants in Pakistan.

RD case was a mere 'technology demonstrator' of sorts, dare I say?

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

It's not safer. It passes through Russia & Uzbekistan, which are not safe countries. Uzbekistan still has its Al-Qaeda affiliated Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan in there, as well as other Uzbek terror groups.

If it makes you happy and helps you, then so be it.

In so far as Russia is concerned, they are more worried about Islamic fundamentalists and terrorists. They did a joint ops in Afghanistan a few months ago.

The CAR countries have the Soviet hangover and are still very harsh on Islamic fundamentalists.

Not really.

You may google and check the geopolitical situation in CAR.

Doesn't help with the drone war

If the US does not have to care about Pakistani sensitivity any more, then why should they bother about what happens in Pakistan? If so, what is there to pursue their operational goals through Drones?

Same as above

Same as above. No dependence on Pakistan.

Same as above

Same as above.

The route you will be taking will of course not be touching Xinjiang of course, or be anywhere close to it. Not that it has anything to do with the drone war anyways.

Whoa! I am not taking any route.

The US and ISAF are.

Once any country like the US establishes it presence it take everything into consideration.

The US contractors were there for spying?

False. Pakistan's activities will not be monitored, & it can operate where ever it wants to more freely. It will be a great moral boost to the people of Pakistan

That is right.

They would not be bothered about what happens in Pakistan as they are bothered now.

Therefore, Drone attacks will continue as per their agenda.

With the bases away from Pakistan, it will raise Pakistani morale.

However, with Drone attacks indiscriminately launched and with no Pakistani leverage, how will the Pakistan morale be?

The US does not pay the costs of maintaining the trucks & the road systems they go on, which incur a huge cost for Pakistan right now, which won't be applicable in the future.

Are the Pakistani trucks, the drivers, the godowns leased from Companies of Pakistan coming free?

What is the US paying the money for which is claimed as compensation for Pakistan spending? There are no transit fee? Are you suggesting that the Pakistan Govt has nothing like 'transit fee'?


There will be less drone strikes as compared to now as the time needed to get the supplies into Afghanistan will be longer taking the C.Asian route as compared to the direct sea route from Pakistan. The US forces will also come under more fire from the terrorists as their supplies would be coming in late.

You can keep sprouting your garbage, but nothing you said up pertained to the drone war in Pakistan. So as I said, the US becomes severely disadvantaged in the drone war game when it breaks contact with Pakistan .

So, your fear of the inevitable becomes garbage?

If one is not constrained, then what is it.

If the US is not constrained by Pakistan and the Taliban operating from the Pakistan Frontier, do you think the US will sit still and say All IZZZ Well? With the Pakistan Govt and Govt crying foul regularly and yet the US going gung ho with Drones and thus constrained, do you think that without the same constraint, the US will not go gung ho with greater gusto?

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

I am surprised NATO hasn't hired you as a geopolitical advisor.

If one reads regularly the happenings of the world instead of merely being jingoist and fear crazed, one knows what is happening around the world.

On second though, I am not.

Your posts is a sure certificate of the same. There was no requirement to mention. It was so obvious.

Despite Indian fanboi hysterics, the fact is that the northern supply routes are 100% controlled by Russia, and NATO would much rather deal with Zardari than Putin.

Have a relook!

 

[53fd]

If the US does not have to care about Pakistani sensitivity any more, then why should they bother about what happens in Pakistan? If so, what is there to pursue their operational goals through Drones?

It means Pakistan can dominate in Afghanistan & the region again if the US leaves Pakistan, as the US won't be able to monitor their activities anymore, just like what they did before 9/11 & after 9/11 till 2006, when Musharraf agreed to CIA drone strikes. The stuff happening on the ground will be much more important than what is happening aerially.

However, with Drone attacks indiscriminately launched and with no Pakistani leverage, how will the Pakistan morale be?

And you don't seem to understand that there will be fewer drone strikes in Paksitan as compared to now as the time needed to get the supplies into Afghanistan will be longer taking the Central Asian route as compared to the direct sea route from Pakistan. The US forces will also come under more fire from the terrorists as their supplies would be coming in late, which will compromise their whole fight against the Taliban. Is it so hard to understand simple English?

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

To cut the Northern Route issue short, here is something to mull on

Northern route eases supplies to US forces in Afghanistan

The United States has established several new transit corridors to deliver non-lethal goods to its forces in Afghanistan. Pakistan had previously been the main transit point for all types of supplies, but the increasingly fragile security situation along its border with Afghanistan convinced the US authorities of the need to establish alternative routes. A major component of this strategy is the Northern Distribution Network (NDN), a series of rail, water and road links to deliver cargo to Afghanistan through the former Soviet republics of Central Asia. The network now handles about 30% of all ground supplies. The NDN comprises a southern route – starting at the Georgian port of Poti, going over land to the port of Baku, Azerbaijan, then by ferry to Aqtau, Kazakhstan, and on through Uzbekistan to Afghanistan – and a more heavily used northern route, traversing Latvia, Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. A spur of the northern route bypasses Uzbekistan and runs from Kazakhstan via Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, but is hampered by bad roads in Tajikistan. Moving supplies via the northern rail route costs approximately 10% of the cost of movement by air. The US military is keen to have a diverse range of supply routes so as to avoid dependency on any particular one. For example, if it were to secure a transit agreement with Turkmenistan, the port of Turkmenbashi could be an additional destination for goods leaving Baku by ferry. US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates visited Baku in June 2010 to strengthen ties with Azerbaijan and discussed ways to diversify routes. Washington is also exploring the idea of expanding the NDN eastwards by adding a Chinese branch, originating in China’s Pacific ports and travelling via road and rail to Afghanistan. Diversifying supplies The 2,000km-long Pakistan Ground Lines of Communication (PAKGLOC) have so far been the principal supply route for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. Goods are transported from the port city of Karachi to Afghanistan by two main supply arteries through Pakistan. One cuts through the Khyber Pass, west of Peshawar; the other crosses the border further south at Chaman, near the city of Quetta. However, cargo making the ten-day journey was notoriously vulnerable to attack by Taliban militants, particularly on the Khyber Pass, which traverses the restive tribal areas along the border with Afghanistan. On 18 November 2008, the Taliban conducted a raid on 23 commercial trucks delivering NATO supplies in the Khyber tribal area and on 7 December 2008, insurgents launched the single biggest assault on US supplies in seven years, destroying 160 trucks at two Pakistani terminals near Peshawar. In December 2008, 12% of Afghanistan-bound freight crossing Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province en route to the Khyber Pass disappeared, most of it in flames, according to Vice Admiral Mark Harnitchek, deputy commander of the US Transportation Command (TRANSCOM). In 2008, security concerns spurred efforts to find alternative routes. US Central Command (CENTCOM) sanctioned the US Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) to send a series of trial shipments from Europe to Afghanistan using prime vendors – suppliers with long-term contracts for goods such as food, spare parts and building supplies – to test the viability of northern routes. On 16 September 2008, one company agreed to move ten shipping containers filled with sheets of plywood from Germany to Afghanistan. Regular deliveries using the NDN began in May 2009 at a rate of seven containers per day. By August 2009, the number had increased to 1,000 containers per month, and by January 2010 the rate was approximately 1,640. Apart from fuel, goods most commonly dispatched included cement, lumber, blast barriers, septic tanks and rubberised matting. According to General Duncan McNabb, head of TRANSCOM, 80% of supplies bound for Afghanistan previously flowed through the port of Karachi and on through Pakistan, but this has fallen to about 50% since the opening of the NDN. Of the total cargo heading to US forces in Afghanistan, 30% goes via the NDN and 20% by air. Of all non-lethal cargo delivered by surface transport, about 50% transits the NDN and 50% via Pakistan. However, such is the volume of supplies that Peshawar has seen the shipments it handles more than double in 2010. The monthly average through PAKGLOC is still 4,200 containers, compared with 1,457 through the NDN. Meanwhile, the situation along the Pakistani routes remains unstable. This year on 9 June, Taliban gunmen destroyed 50 trucks carrying supplies for ISAF near the capital Islamabad.

The NDN has also become a key component of ISAF’s fuel-supply infrastructure. During 2009, its daily fuel consumption increased from 2 million to 4.1m litres per day, meaning that more fuel had to be imported via Afghanistan’s northern borders. According to the DLA, approximately 40% of the fuel contracted by the US Defense Energy Support Center is produced in Pakistani refineries and transported via truck into Afghanistan, while the fuel that it acquires from Central Asia (in particular Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan) accounts for approximately 60% of the overall contracted volumes and is shipped via the NDN. NATO has also begun using the NDN. The first trial shipment of NATO cargo, consisting of 27 containers of construction materials and food supplies, departed from Riga, Latvia, in May 2010. Russia had offered transit to NATO at the Alliance’s 2008 Bucharest summit, but it was not until 2009 that NATO began negotiating transit rights with Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, and these talks took almost a year to complete. Plans are under way for further shipments, subject to the demands of ISAF troop-contributing countries. Demand is likely to increase in light of a June 2010 attack on NATO trucks in Pakistan. Diplomatic contacts The larger US military footprint in Afghanistan has required greater diplomatic engagement with Central Asian states. In 2009 Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan each reached agreements with Washington on over-land transit of supplies to Afghanistan. Georgia had given permission for over-land supplies in 2005, Azerbaijan in March 2009 and Russia in July 2009 as part of the ‘resetting’ of the US–Russia relationship. US President Barack Obama’s administration has also worked with countries involved in the NDN to secure overflight rights for military equipment and personnel: agreements were reached with Russia and Kazakhstan in July 2009 and April 2010 respectively. In December 2009, General Stanley McChrystal, then ISAF commander, said: ‘ISAF’s Northern Distribution Network and logistical hubs are dependent upon support from Russian and Central Asian states, giving them the potential to act as either spoilers or positive influences’. McChrystal’s statement pointed not only to the reliance of the US on Central Asian countries in managing the NDN, but also to the risk of over-reliance on them. Recent political upheavals in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan’s decision in 2005 to close down the US air base at Karshi-Kanabad underline the risks involved. Russia has long been concerned about the US military presence in Central Asia, but the NDN could change the dynamic of US–Russian diplomacy in the region. The political troubles in April 2010 in Kyrgyzstan showed cooperation between Russia and the US, and the NDN presents a further opportunity for cooperative interaction. At an April 2010 summit in Prague, US and Russian officials declared their willingness to pursue cooperation to avert a new round of skirmishes over the US air base at Manas in Kyrgyzstan, as occurred in 2009 when Russia put pressure on Kyrgyz authorities to terminate the US lease. Moscow and Washington had also agreed on the use of Russian airspace by US forces using Manas. Supply challenges There are a number of major challenges affecting the development of the NDN, especially in light of the fact that demand for its use is projected to increase from 25,000 to 40,000 tonnes per month over the next two years. It relies on poor infrastructure, both along its routes and within Afghanistan, which only has two short railway lines across its northern borders with Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. David Sedney, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Afghanistan, Pakistan and Central Asia has drawn attention to Afghanistan’s poor road links, saying that despite recent construction efforts, ‘the lack of effective entry points [is a] huge limiting factor ... in our ability to deliver supplies throughout Afghanistan’. DLA Director Vice Admiral Alan Thompson noted in March 2010: ‘one issue we’re working on is a time delay at the border with Uzbekistan that was more than 30 days ... We’re closer to 20 days now, but we still need to reduce it further.’ To address this bottleneck, the Asian Development Bank is financing a $165m project to build a railway line from the Afghan border town of Hairatan to the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif, 75km away, expected to be completed by November 2010. The existing line, which runs only 10km from the Uzbek border town of Termez to Hairatan, where the freight terminal serves as a gateway to Afghanistan, has reached its handling capacity of 4,000 tonnes of cargo per month. Until upgrades are completed, this border crossing is likely to remain a choke point. Meanwhile, railway experts have questioned whether the existing rail route through Uzbekistan is capable of handling the amount of traffic envisioned by the US military and its allies. Beyond infrastructural problems, the NDN inevitably poses political challenges. Some US military strategists fear that as the volume of cargo delivered along the NDN increases, so too will the risk of exporting Afghanistan’s problems into Central Asia. They suggest that bringing Central Asia into the theatre of war could lead to an increased threat of attack by the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and the Islamic Jihad Union, groups that have a loyal following in the restive Fergana valley, which stretches through Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. In September 2009, two tankers from Tajikistan delivering fuel to ISAF were hijacked by Taliban insurgents in Kunduz Province in Afghanistan, which borders Tajikistan. After the hijacked trucks stalled while crossing the Kunduz River, German forces called in a US air strike, resulting in dozens of civilian and insurgent casualties. In recent months, there have been several battles between Taliban insurgents in Kunduz Province and US, NATO and Afghan government forces. In January 2010, there was fighting in a small town in Kunduz Province just a few miles from the Tajik border, amid evidence of growing insurgency in the province. Nevertheless, the NDN is seen as providing benefits both for ISAF and the region. It encourages Central Asian states to cooperate with each other and is helping to accelerate the development of an integrated regional infrastructure. The network has given much-needed impetus to NATO–Russia and US–Russia cooperation with regard to Afghanistan. It has increased the strategic role of Central Asian states and given them an opportunity to help promote stability in Afghanistan.

http://www.iiss.org/EasysiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=45813&type=full&servicetype=Attachment

It has it plus and minus.

China is also assisting.

 

[Developereo]

If one reads regularly the happenings of the world instead of merely being jingoist and fear crazed, one knows what is happening around the world.

Ironic that you should accuse anyone of being a jingoist. Your uninformed rants have already annoyed the Chinese members, and now you are making a fool of yourself by demonstrating gross ignorance of the geopolitics of the CAR region.

Just because the Indians are having wet dreams about this scenario does not change the fundamental facts of the region.

Have a relook!

NATO has been in Afghanistan for almost ten years. Do you really think they haven't explored the alternatives? What kind of army lays out its supply route through 'enemy' territory where the Afghan Taliban are supposedly running rampant (Balochistan and NWFP)?

Carry on with your silly 'analyses' pretending to be a geopolitical expert. It provides good entertainment for the rest of us.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

It means Pakistan can dominate in Afghanistan & the region again if the US leaves Pakistan, as the US won't be able to monitor their activities anymore, just like what they did before 9/11 & after 9/11 till 2006, when Musharraf agreed to CIA drone strikes. The stuff happening on the ground will be much more important than what is happening aerially.

I have not understood how Pakistan will dominate Afghanistan if the US leaves Pakistan.

Are you suggesting that Pakistan will have a free ride in Afghanistan with the US around and being mauled by Pakistani dominance of the Taliban?

Would they just sit pretty and be mauled.

Such provocation is just as per the Doctor's order as far as the US is concerned.

Apart from the Drones, they will have many options to select.

And you don't seem to understand that there will be fewer drone strikes in Paksitan as compared to now as the time needed to get the supplies into Afghanistan will be longer taking the Central Asian route as compared to the direct sea route from Pakistan. The US forces will also come under more fire from the terrorists as their supplies would be coming in late, which will compromise their whole fight against the Taliban. Is it so hard to understand simple English?

Require more time?

The Northern Route is already operational.

Check the IISS Report I have appended in full so that one cannot accuse me of selective editing since when I present facts, I am still accused by the Chinese troll and propaganda master and you!

I don't find it hard to understand either simple or complicated English and that is why I am better informed than you. I do hope simple English is not too complicated for you!

Now, be a good chap, do read the IISS report!!

It heralds the things to come and what is already in place!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Chew on it and will see you later!

Have a nice day!

 

[KS]

In that case India has a lot of Maoist too, does it mean Americans can bomb them too?
It is not America's right and only lunatics can imagine Afghanistan, Iraq and pakistan is a threat to the U.S.
Falsely making up threats and war mongering is a specialty of the west no?

Are u for real Mr.Bam ?

When did the Maoist scums kill or American soldiers or when did terrorists who took 'training' in our jungles were caught for some terrorist plot in the West.

Compare apples with apples - not cricket balls.

 

[Developereo]

The Northern Route is already operational.

Nobody's disputing that the norther route is feasible and even operational. By some estimates, over 50% of supplies are coming that way.

The point is that the payment for the northern option won't be measured in dollars; Russia will extract heavy concessions from the US in exchange for this route. Those concessions are priceless compared to the paltry billions that the US pays to Pakistan. (5 billion is chump change to the US.)