Bush planned Pak attack

[desiman]

Should have sent his Special Forces, we would have given them a Special welcome and Special treatment too.

thats exactly what Iraq said before you know what happened

 

[Kompromat]

how much time would it take for them to reach islamabad?

More time than it would take us to bomb New Delhi

 

[LeGenD]

Should have sent his Special Forces, we would have given them a Special welcome and Special treatment too.

They have made such rare advances in the past:

U.S. troops raid Pakistani village - Los Angeles Times

American ground troops carried out a rare raid on Pakistani soil Wednesday, a cross-border attack from Afghanistan that left up to 20 people dead and provoked sharp condemnation from Pakistan's government.

They did not get any special treatment from our army. Instead, the invaders gave the following special treatment to Pakistani people:

The governor of the North-West Frontier Province, which has partial authority in the tribal areas, said that as many as 20 people died, including women and children. Gov. Owais Ahmed Ghani termed the strike "outrageous."

The special operation forces operations that Bush was planning inside Pakistan would have been done with nod from Musharraf, which never came. Therefore, drone attacks were proposed as an alternative and they have killed over 2000 people in Pakistan alone.

When are we going to embrace ground realities?

 

[Kompromat]

no vest ,no helmet, right out in the open with one gun, call that brave wont we ?

I would call it stupid as driving without seat belt and riding a 1000CC Bike without a helmet and safety gear

 

[WAQAS119]

Stunts to sell book!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[TaimiKhan]

thats exactly what Iraq said before you know what happened

With 4,400+ dead, 39,000+ officially wounded while rough estimates putting wounded at 2-3 times of the official figure, that speaks a lot. Plus, in Iraq a certain portion of the public is fighting, had it been whole of Iraq, things would have been much different. Similarly, had it been Pakistan, it would not be some portion of the nation fighting the US, rather whole of it would have been.

And the rag tag Talibans taking out 1,350+US ones and 2,200+ dead over all also speaks a lot.

And they all doing in with just basic weapons, not employing anything extra ordinary.

So, next time, do see the figures also and then speak out.

 

[monitor]

Any attack on pakistani soil other then drone attack where any us solder are involve will mark as a aggrassion and us will lost a friend/ally like pakistan .the end result would be more chinese influence over pakistan and increase the influence of radical group .In any case it is us who will be the loser .in any aggrassion by usa may even provoke modarate side of pakistani istablishment to suport taliban in afganistan which will cause more bloodsheed for nato troops.

 

[TaimiKhan]

no vest ,no helmet, right out in the open with one gun, call that brave wont we ?

Well it can be called a stupid also, depends who views from where and trying to prove what point.

Most probably they were caught off guard by the rag tag, on foot Talibans.

 

[TaimiKhan]

They have made such rare advances in the past:

U.S. troops raid Pakistani village - Los Angeles Times

They did not get any special treatment from our army. Instead, the invaders gave the following special treatment to Pakistani people:

The special operation forces operations that Bush was planning inside Pakistan would have been done with nod from Musharraf, which never came. Therefore, drone attacks were proposed as an alternative and they have killed over 2000 people in Pakistan alone.

When are we going to embrace ground realities?

These kind of actions are hit and run tactics, which does not yield any results, had they really wanted to have some results, they will have to have a perm base inside Pakistan, in the Tribal areas to carry out operations, thus giving more opportunities to hit them.

And as for drone strikes, they are being jointly done and for the number of figure killed, can you give the break up of how many civilians killed and how many combatants ??

And I am talking in perspective of a US invasion, which Bush as well as Obama had advocated with respect to Pakistan, to send in their forces, which would have attracted lot of heat as well as lot of other Pakistanis joining in the fight to take on the US personnel, even many from the armed forces would have joined in too.

 

[monitor]

how much time would it take for them to reach islamabad?

depends how much bodybag they will carry with them.

 

[monitor]

thats exactly what Iraq said before you know what happened

Pakistan is not iraq .with a size of 796000km^2 and population of 17crore there are no way to compare iraq war with atatck on pakistan they may have to lose more troops then vietnam .

 

[LeGenD]

With 4,400+ dead, 39,000+ officially wounded while rough estimates putting wounded at 2-3 times of the official figure, that speaks a lot. Plus, in Iraq a certain portion of the public is fighting, had it been whole of Iraq, things would have been much different. Similarly, had it been Pakistan, it would not be some portion of the nation fighting the US, rather whole of it would have been.

Brother, these wars fought (under the banner of WOT) have been lot less costly for the Americans than what they have faced in the past.

A member here once correctly remarked that defenders likely have some sort of homefield advantage over aggressors.

As far as resistance goes, it had been very very tough in Iraq. At one time, almost entire Iraq became hostile to Americans and battle spread to most parts of the country accept maybe the northern kurdish sector. Entire cities were turned in to fortresses of resistance. The situation was so dire that people were expecting American defeat in this second but crucial phase of war in Iraq.

However, Americans were prepared with a capable commander, heavy armor, numbers, and air-power.

It is a big feat to defeat a large country in modern times and than occupy it for many years. Saddam is gone and that was the main goal of America. History will focus more on this aspect of conflict.

In short, Americans had to fight two wars in Iraq within its span of occupation of that nation.

This war alone sends a big message to all Islamic nations that they need to wake-up and stop depending upon Americans.

And the rag tag Talibans taking out 1,350+US ones and 2,200+ dead over all also speaks a lot.

And they all doing in with just basic weapons, not employing anything extra ordinary.

So, next time, do see the figures also and then speak out.

Taliban are masters of guerrilla warfare. Ironically, they have been trained in the war arts by none other than America and Pakistan.

In addition, Afghan territory massively favors guerrilla style fighting. Therefore, Americans are fighting this war in a different manner. They are not willing to deploy heavy armor and large quantity of troops in Afghanistan to get the job done like they did in Iraq. Also, Americans are showing flexibility by giving Taliban its due share in the final solution being planned for Afghanistan: Hence the negotiations. Karzai also wants this because he knows what happened to najeebullah. He is a coward.

Also, wars are not won just by weapons. Tactics are also as much important. You are smart enough to understand this.

 

[LEGENDARY WARRIOR]

The statement that Pakistan would have considered the presence of Special Operations of U.S a compromise with its sovereignty is true, I bet if India was in our place it would have reacted in the same way. . .
The main point everyone is missing is that Musharraf was a DICTATOR, he wasnt an elected President. It was Bush's mistake to consult and give aid to a DICTATOR. .

 

[LeGenD]

These kind of actions are hit and run tactics, which does not yield any results, had they really wanted to have some results, they will have to have a perm base inside Pakistan, in the Tribal areas to carry out operations, thus giving more opportunities to hit them.

I agree!

Furthermore, if Americans were allowed to carry out operations inside Pakistan, people would have questioned that what Pakistan army is doing and what is the purpose of having one if it can't do its job?

I think that Musharraf made a wise decision.

And as for drone strikes, they are being jointly done and for the number of figure killed, can you give the break up of how many civilians killed and how many combatants ??

You can see statistics here. This source is fully updated compared to most others.

And I am talking in perspective of a US invasion, which Bush as well as Obama had advocated with respect to Pakistan, to send in their forces, which would have attracted lot of heat as well as lot of other Pakistanis joining in the fight to take on the US personnel, even many from the armed forces would have joined in too.

Brother, that kind of invasion would have never occurred and neither was planned. Bush wanted tacit approval from Pakistani leadership and COAS to carry out military operations in Pakistan.

However, even if we are to assume that an invasion of limited scale (of lets say N.W.F.P) from the Afghan side would have taken place, would you expect resistance from our side to do wonders? This is not Vietnam brother.

Americans have ample resources and overwhelming technological superiority to get the job done, even forcefully. If troops get bogged down in fighting, the USAF arrives and levels the entire field in response. This is why Taliban do not engage American army in the open. They know from experience that they don't stand a chance in the open and thus they primarily use covert means to send their message.

Civilian resistance regardless of its size and scope is not enough to stop a powerful army. If this was true than who needs an expensive army?

We need to understand the ground realities of this conflict and try to overcome our weaknesses in the longer run. Only our hardwork can save us from lots of troubles. We do possess the potential to become a powerful nation. Unfortunately, things are looking grim for us in present circumstances.

 

[TechLahore]

I am confused. If Musharraf "misled" Bush, why did Bush receive him so warmly in Texas just last month?