What's new

American attack aftermath: Pakistan declares attack a 'plot'

Its a way to recording our protest..... Seriously are you this much dumb.... We all know they have atleast 6 Months supplies.... And if we dont open routes they'll get it from Russia..... That doesn't mean we should not record our protest.



exactly,
its one form of a protest even if the supplies that go from Pakistan are 1% or none at all. instead of launching attacks the governments . decrease Diplomatic and trade ties, Pakistan already done it by closing borders and deciding not to attend the Bonn meeting.

the hurt is that the attack was from an ally not the enemy. the Taliban have done much more harm but there is no complaint because we are at war with them,.

Some Indian trolls say where there is no air cover or radars? the answer is that Pakistan doesn’t view Afghanistan, Nato and Iran as its enemy and has no past or present record of any war.

does India have same amount of extensive radars and other early warning systems and air defence systems Installed with the Nepals border or the sea shores that are facing Sri Lanka? ok it might have them because it can spare the cash and resources but they wont be as extensive as are along its borders with China and Pakistan.

to date, taliban have never launched an air attack so no need was considered for air defence but if nothing comes out of the investigation and NATO tries to hush it all up then Pakistan might deploy air defence systems and use the same line as NATO does (to protect its troops and its people)
it would be a bad outcome because in the end it will be Afghanistan and Pakistan which will suffer due to prolonged instability and only Taliban will benefit.
 
.
i don't know airports so i am not in a position to comment but do u think that this will have a significant impact???

it will give US more a reason to attack pakistan, because now they can claim that pakistani government is not supporting them but supporting terrorists.....

We are not slaves to the yanks, so it means we are supporting the Taliban? great.

The example of airports I gave was that, there are agents in plain sight at airports, big , huge, bald guys in suits, so just wonder how many more could there be on the streets?
 
.
It doesn't take that long if there is even a small heli intruding from the eastern side, or may be it is?

No, eastern side is a different case. Fighters are scrambled whenever any aircraft comes near LoC. Even inside country the SOPs are very complex, an uninformed flight of a PA/PAF/PN a/c over marked airspace is considered violation.
 
.
Pakistan: NATO Ignored Pleas During Attack


(ISLAMABAD) — The NATO airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers lasted almost two hours and continued even after Pakistani commanders had pleaded with coalition forces to stop, the army claimed Monday in charges that could further inflame anger in Pakistan.

Pakistan: NATO Ignored Pleas During Attack - TIME
 
.
Pakistan: NATO Ignored Pleas During Attack


(ISLAMABAD) — The NATO airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers lasted almost two hours and continued even after Pakistani commanders had pleaded with coalition forces to stop, the army claimed Monday in charges that could further inflame anger in Pakistan.

Pakistan: NATO Ignored Pleas During Attack - TIME

So Here is the answer for JonAsad...the did what they ahd planned. It was a properly planned and well executed attack.
 
.
pakistaniprotesters007.jpg


A protest in Lahore against the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a Nato air strike. Photograph: News Pictures/Rex Features


China has lent diplomatic support to Pakistan, saying it is "deeply shocked" over the deaths of the Pakistani soldiers bombarded by Nato helicopters.

Beijing's support came as Afghan officials again claimed the air strikes were called in after they were first targeted from the Pakistani side of the border.

Warning of "serious consequences", the Pakistan military said the "unprovoked" attack on a border checkpoint in the Mohmand part of the tribal area on Saturday continued even after it contacted Nato to plead for the firing to stop. The military has not accepted Nato's explanation for what the coalition has called a "tragic incident". Afghan and Nato officials have insisted that they came under fire first.

The incident, which left 24 Pakistani soldiers dead, has thrown the coalition strategy in Afghanistan into crisis, with Pakistani co-operation considered vital in stabilising the country and bringing the Taliban insurgents into talks. Pakistan keeps more than 100,000 soldiers stationed along the Afghan border, supposedly in support of the coalition mission.

On Saturday, Pakistan closed the border for supplies to Nato troops in Afghanistan. There is no indication when the border crossing will be reopened. Half the supplies to coalition soldiers pass by land through Pakistan, including most of the fuel supplies, using local transport companies. On Monday, the All Pakistan Oil Tanker Owners Association said it would only resume transport if Islamabad and the Pakistani military accepted an apology for the incident.

The prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, said Pakistan would "revisit engagement with Nato and the International Security Assistance Force" following the casualties in Mohmand, the deadliest such incident since coalition forces entered Afghanistan in 2001.

Pakistan has suggested it may now boycott the 5 December international conference on Afghanistan's future at Bonn, in Germany.

The Pakistani foreign minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, spoke to her Chinese opposite number, Yang Jiechi, in a "40-minute conversation in which she informed her Chinese counterpart of the extreme outrage in Pakistan on the unprovoked attacks", the foreign ministry said. It added that Yang Jiechi "expressed deep shock and strong concern", adding that "Pakistan's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity must be respected".

Islamabad considers Beijing to be its closest ally and an alternative partner to Washington and the west. China and Pakistan both oppose US plans to have bases in Afghanistan beyond the 2014 date for ending the coalition's combat operations there.

"China is deeply shocked by these events, and expresses strong concern for the victims and profound condolences to Pakistan," a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman, Hong Lei, said. "China believes that Pakistan's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity should be respected and the incident should be thoroughly investigated and be handled properly."

On Monday, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference also condemned the attack on the checkpost, while over the weekend Turkey promised to raise the issue at Nato headquarters in Brussels.

There were further protests on the streets of Pakistan on Monday, including a boycott of the courts by lawyers. The striking lawyers in Karachi and Lahore chanted "Go America, go".

Nato is investigating the incident on the poorly marked border between the Afghan province of Kunar and Mohmand. Coalition and Afghan troops believe they received fire from insurgents operating from close to the Pakistani post, which is located 300 metres into Pakistani territory. Pakistan says there were no militants operating on its side.

A senior Afghan official told the Guardian that a combined Afghan-Nato squad had received incoming fire from "the so-called Pakistani post", prompting them to call for air support. "The most important point here is that they were receiving fire from the direction of that post."

The official, who did not want to be named, added: "The Pakistanis are blowing this thing totally out of proportion by responding the way they have, so severely and strongly. But we hope that they will at least come to Bonn and it will not affect the steps that we have started to take in terms or rebuilding our relationship with Pakistan."

Afghan and coalition officials have accused Pakistan repeatedly in the past of failing to act to stop Taliban militants using its territory.

Afghans living in Kunar said they were delighted by the strike against the bases, saying they believed Taliban fighters were being harboured by the Pakistani army.

"These terrorists wear civilian clothes and then when they have done their attacks in Afghanistan they go to the Pakistan checkpoints," said Qari Ehsanullah Ehsan, a tribal leader from the province. "Some of them wear fake beards and then put on Pakistani military clothes when they finish their operations. The people of Kunar are happy. We have been telling the Americans for a long time that the Pakistanis are bringing the Taliban to our villages."

China supports Pakistan in row over Nato border attack | World news | The Guardian
 
. .
Pakistan: NATO Ignored Pleas During Attack


(ISLAMABAD) — The NATO airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers lasted almost two hours and continued even after Pakistani commanders had pleaded with coalition forces to stop, the army claimed Monday in charges that could further inflame anger in Pakistan.

Pakistan: NATO Ignored Pleas During Attack - TIME

So, the only reason not to do this that it will inflame anger, it has nothing to do with national security.
 
. . .
So Here is the answer for JonAsad...the did what they ahd planned. It was a properly planned and well executed attack.

More reason to blame the airforce isn't it?-
Now dont tell me the commanders cannot call in an airstrike in such hopeless situations aswell-

It all comes to this-
Do we have the equipment and adequate SOP's to retaliate-
Or
Do we have the balls to retaliate-

Both way Army is to be blamed for letting this happen-
 
.
So Here is the answer for JonAsad...the did what they ahd planned. It was a properly planned and well executed attack.

Which Means, American Special forces came 2.5Km inside Pakistan and when they were spotted by our troops they opened fire on them.

From the day one I'm hearing the bullshits of Nato that they fired upon us, Can Nato with respect tell us What the Hell, which Machine Gun can fire accurately at the distance of 2.5 KM except powerful sniper guns and which gun can accurately fires continuously 2.5 Km away target that made them attack us?

This lead to only logical conclusion, Afghani and Nato troops crossed our border for some secret mission, they were fired upon and reacted back killing 28 soldiers of ours.
 
.
It is NOT "safe" to call it an act of war.

and when it is "safe" to call it an act of war-

Dont tell me- i know- for you it is "never"-

You should be happy- The army is full of similar minds-
 
. .
then how do u plan to respond to this "act of war"??? by closing supply routes????

sorry for being mocking but it baffles how can u guys be talking one thing and doing another????

Do you watch the news, read the forum..
If this forum is any gauge.. How do you us "guys" wants being translated into actions by our leadership "guys"?

---------- Post added at 08:45 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 AM ----------

It is NOT "safe" to call it an act of war.

Why?
You can put rubber on it and call it an act of "backstabbing your ally and killing them" if that is kosher enough.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom