What's new

Ambassador shery rahman finally speaks up

Safriz

BANNED
Joined
Aug 30, 2010
Messages
20,845
Reaction score
-1
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
WORLD At Security Conference, Tense Talk Between U.S. and Pakistan By ERIC SCHMITT
Published: July 28, 2012 ASPEN, Colo. - Tensions flared between the United States and Pakistan on
Friday, as two top officials traded accusations of doing too little to
combat Taliban sanctuaries in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The tart exchange between the officials, Douglas E. Lute, President
Obama's top adviser on Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Sherry Rehman,
Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, took place during a
conference in this bucolic mountain setting. Under questioning from Steve Kroft of "60 Minutes," Ms. Rehman,
speaking on videoconference from Washington, said that Pakistani
Taliban fighters, who have taken refuge in two remote provinces in
eastern Afghanistan, were increasingly carrying out rocket attacks and
cross-border raids against Pakistan. "These are critical masses of people that come in; this is not just
potshots," Ms. Rehman said. She said that on 52 different occasions in the
last eight months Pakistan had provided to American and NATO
commanders in Afghanistan the locations from which the militants were
attacking, to no avail. Immediately, Mr. Lute, a retired three-star Army general and deputy
national security adviser who rarely speaks in public, fired back. "There's
no comparison of the Pakistani Taliban's relatively recent, small-in-scale
presence inside Afghanistan to the decades-long experience and
relationship between elements of the Pakistani government and the
Afghan Taliban," he said. "To compare these is simply unfair." Pakistani officials have long faced criticism from Americans and Afghans
for what they say is their failure to stop militant assaults originating
from safe havens in Pakistan, often with the complicity of Pakistan's
main spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate. But in the past several months, Pakistani officials have started accusing
American and allied officials of the same problem coming from
Afghanistan.
 
What decade long attacks? Americans started weeping about Hakkanis in 2007-2008 when new government took-over and they intensified their illegal drones offensives. If they talk about comparison then Pakitan has lost 40 thousand lives. How many have americans sacrificed or lost as a result of Hakkanis and whole Afghan Taliab combined? These Amerian MORONS need to see picture and acknolwedge our contribution before expecting any further favour. Pakistan has done beyond its capacity already and we have no reason to offer them an inch of further favor.

For America it might be a matter of winning the war of saving its face but for Pakistan its the matter of existential threat. If you fail to see this side of equation, you fail to understand dynamics and reasons which make Pakistan act - BUT like always - I have no expectations from sick minds who see everything with their eyes closed on facts.
 
The Pakistani parliament's demand that the U.S. stop Predator drones attacks on its territory is just "hot air" for public consumption, isn't it? The Pakistani government has turned Pakistan into an American protectorate for $$$$ in U.S. aid, and now it demands "apologies" from the U.S. for the way it is using their land? It is funny, isn't it? Obviously, the Pakistani politicians want to have it both ways: a) Pocket the $$$$ from the U.S., and b) portray themselves to ordinary Pakistanis as nationalists!

Well, they are not! The fact is that they have leased their property (a.k.a. sovereignty) to the U.S., and the U.S. has the right to use it according to the terms of the lease! And I don't mean the publicly stated terms of the lease that are phony, but the behind the scenes "wink, wink" terms that count!

What the Pakistani parliamentarians try to do, therefore, is sell their corruption that has resulted in the U.S. Predator drones strikes in Pakistan, as nationalism with pompous statements in the parliament!

Here is the indisputable and raw fact: "Pakistan has turned itself into a U.S. 'contractor state' for its war in Afghanistan," and the U.S. won't write checks to Pakistan for nothing!
 
What decade long attacks? Americans started weeping about Hakkanis in 2007-2008 when new government took-over and they intensified their illegal drones offensives. If they talk about comparison then Pakitan has lost 40 thousand lives. How many have americans sacrificed or lost as a result of Hakkanis and whole Afghan Taliab combined? These Amerian MORONS need to see picture and acknolwedge our contribution before expecting any further favour. Pakistan has done beyond its capacity already and we have no reason to offer them an inch of further favor.

For America it might be a matter of winning the war of saving its face but for Pakistan its the matter of existential threat. If you fail to see this side of equation, you fail to understand dynamics and reasons which make Pakistan act - BUT like always - I have no expectations from sick minds who see everything with their eyes closed on facts.

Decade long attacks since the Taliban were driven out of Afghanistan in 2001 they fled to the Tribal areas of Pakistan where they re-grouped and planned attacks in Afghanistan.

The Haqqanis are one facet of the Militancy in Afghanistan. They made their presence known not by fighting NATO forces in battles but sending suicide bombers in major terrorist attacks occurring in Afghanistan such as the Indian Embassy Bombing.

Pakistan lost 40,000 people because its military is not designed to combat an insurgency and its security protocols are totally unable to prevent suicide bombings and the mass Pakistani Army offensives in the tribal areas caused wide spread death and destruction which resulted in a mass displacement of people which led to 40,000 people being killed.

Comparing to American casualties is ridiculous. American soldiers wear kevlar vests, and have some of the best medical evacuation procedures on the planet and with the best medical facilities and are armed with the best weapons and thus their casualties are low compared to the Pakistani Army.

As for Drone strikes, I totally support Drone strikes. These drone strikes alone have saved thousands of Pakistani lives by killing any potential terrorist who was planning more terrorist attacks in Pakistan.
 
The Haqqanis are one facet of the Militancy in Afghanistan. They made their presence known not by fighting NATO forces in battles but sending suicide bombers in major terrorist attacks occurring in Afghanistan such as the Indian Embassy Bombing.


As for Drone strikes, I totally support Drone strikes. These drone strikes alone have saved thousands of Pakistani lives by killing any potential terrorist who was planning more terrorist attacks in Pakistan.

Do not be so inconsiderate!
I know what you mean,and to a level it is true that these drone strikes are effective,they do kill the right targets (Baitullah Masood) but the cost it brings along with it is unacceptable for us.Civilian deaths cannot by justified.
A better solution for us is to cut the "Good Taliban-Bad Taliban" Bulls***, IMO the idea that the Afghan Taliban being seen freedom fighters,whilst the TTP being seen as a completely different entity supported by India/Israel/US/whatever is really upsetting.What we need to do is take the fight to the enemy and actually root out the TTP for ourselves to stop the Drones from buzzing anymore. Can't it be any more obvious than that?
 
These drone strikes alone have saved thousands of Pakistani lives by killing any potential terrorist who was planning more terrorist attacks in Pakistan.

They're saving our lives by attacking any near-adult in strike-zones? They're just ensuring more young minds are ensnared by the TTP propaganda. If anything, we're more at risk than before.
 
I cant believe someone tried to justify "DRONE" strikes by saying this:

These drone strikes alone have saved thousands of Pakistani lives by killing any potential terrorist who was planning more terrorist attacks in Pakistan.


POTENTIAL TERRORIST

What about the others dying? What's that called collateral damage? Or just a form of producing more rebels? If a child/ teenager sees their parents/ family dying in front of me and the only few people who approach him/ her are terrorist and turns that person into a terrorist....the cycle just goes on...more attacks/ terrorists more drones...

Seriously! Under no circumstance should such crimes be allowed any form of justification!
 
I cant believe someone tried to justify "DRONE" strikes by saying this:




POTENTIAL TERRORIST

What about the others dying? What's that called collateral damage? Or just a form of producing more rebels? If a child/ teenager sees their parents/ family dying in front of me and the only few people who approach him/ her are terrorist and turns that person into a terrorist....the cycle just goes on...more attacks/ terrorists more drones...

Seriously! Under no circumstance should such crimes be allowed any form of justification!

Innocent people being caught in the crossfire has happened in every war for the last 200 years.

Drones are probably the most accurate weapon in terms of avoiding civilian casualties. There is no other weapon platform which can achieve 100% success rate in terms of avoiding civilian casualties.

During World War II, when the Allies invaded Normandy on June 6, 1944, Allied naval warships bombarded the German positions but 4,000 french civilians were killed in the bombardment.

Does that mean that the Allies should not have invaded Normandy?

Please get over this high horse about civilian casualites. They will happen regardless. War is brutal and ugly.

Drones strikes are a Necessary Evil.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom