Chinese student killed in bombings had followed her passion to Boston

[Dubious]

But which would you rather have?

1. Innocents targetted by their own goverments.
2. Innocents killed by collateral damage when saving them from the tyrants that want to kill them?

And still no one condemns Muslim governments for killing thier own people. No protest or terrorism; there's complete silence on the Muslims Worlds part.

It's only when the foreigners do it it's a problem.

@Redbull NEITHER! Why would I have AT LEAST SOMEONE killing them? That is A DUMB QUESTION!

Then attack the govt...remove them like Saddam is now gone...why stay back? Mubarak was gone , Ghadafi was gone, still unwanted people stayed back and increased the no. of "collateral damage" what is the meaning of that?!

 

[Dillinger]

so you mean to say we should kill every person who is labelled as taliban??i HAVE A BETTER IDEA....to leave USA alone with Afghan issue...seal our borders and deal with internal issues...where as USA can fight with afghan alone.she is backed up by NATO.remember when we can deal with tamils in sri lankan case successfully,then this ttp is nothing and only ttp is responsible for all this mess

Sealing the borders will work too but then it has to be effective..as long as the Taliban can cross over from Pak to Af the US will have a pretext to use drones in Pak...the keyword here is pretext..how well they justify it depends upon their clout and global perception with regard to Pak.

 

[Dubious]

Slav defense you really think you will appeal to some high moral principal and Gambit will 'see the light' .

@Sedqal at least we can say we tried

Ok sorry my stay in Malaysia has not been for long, still learning

O i see leave it then

Sealing the borders will work too but then it has to be effective..as long as the Taliban can cross over from Pak to Af the US will have a pretext to use drones in Pak...the keyword here is pretext..how well they justify it depends upon their clout and global perception with regard to Pak.

@Dillinger they CANT justify innocent killing....that too not 3-4 but in 10-20s!

I dont even know which stat to believe

 

[Redbull]

@Redbull NEITHER! Why would I have AT LEAST SOMEONE killing them? That is A DUMB QUESTION!

You can't have neither. You either are quiet over the issue and allow the dictators of those countries to kill thier people, or you act.

Then attack the govt...remove them like Saddam is now gone...why stay back? Mubarak was gone , Ghadafi was gone, still unwanted people stayed back and increased the no. of "collateral damage" what is the meaning of that?!

That was the plan: attack the government and leave. Then Al-Qaeda and other millitant guerilla groups propped up which are a danger to the whole World.

 

[gambit]

@gambit Perhaps the terms and red lines should be made clearer....do not let your sovereign territory be used by terrorists..hand them over and/or eradicate them and there will be no punitive strike..fail to do so and you've failed to comply with your duty as a sovereign state and thus can hardly argue when the intended targets of these terrorists strike at them within your lands in a preemptive manner.

That bit of common sense have been recognized by war capable countries since mankind have been capable of creating civilizations and waging wars.

The Avalon Project - Laws of War : Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land (Hague V); October 18, 1907

Article 1.
The territory of neutral Powers is inviolable.

Art. 2.
Belligerents are forbidden to move troops or convoys of either munitions of war or supplies across the territory of a neutral Power.

Art. 3.
Belligerents are likewise forbidden to:

(a) Erect on the territory of a neutral Power a wireless telegraphy station or other apparatus for the purpose of communicating with belligerent forces on land or sea;

(b) Use any installation of this kind established by them before the war on the territory of a neutral Power for purely military purposes, and which has not been opened for the service of public messages.

Art. 4.
Corps of combatants cannot be formed nor recruiting agencies opened on the territory of a neutral Power to assist the belligerents.

Art. 5.
A neutral Power must not allow any of the acts referred to in Articles 2 to 4 to occur on its territory.

It is not called upon to punish acts in violation of its neutrality unless the said acts have been committed on its own territory.

Article 1 will be respected only if Articles 2 thru 5 are respected any any state claiming neutrality in a conflict. If Pakistan claimed neutrality in the conflict between the US and Afghanistan, then Pakistan have the duty to secure Pakistani territories from being used BY EITHER SIDE as staging ground for their conflict.

Pakistan failed.

That having been said..damn man why Iraq? Should have left Uncle Saddam alone to die of old age..you guys ended up diverting precious resources and men from the Af- Pak theater.

That may be a miscalculation on our part, but the reality is that people like Saddam Hussein are seldom satisfied within their own borders. If not now then it would be a different US President and a different world that will have to deal with Iraq.

 

[Dubious]

That was the plan: attack the government and leave. Then Al-Qaeda and other millitant guerilla groups propped up which are a danger to the whole World.

@Redbull and THAT is what I answered too...when collateral damage increases...the family of the dead are EASILY recruited by talibans....Because THEY SEE this as justice! It is human nature in anger to want revenge in any form and if someone puts it in front of you.....


I see it as a positive loop...THAT is what we were talking about BEFORE YOU CAME IN!

 

[Slav Defence]

Sealing the borders will work too but then it has to be effective..as long as the Taliban can cross over from Pak to Af the US will have a pretext to use drones in Pak...the keyword here is pretext..how well they justify it depends upon their clout and global perception with regard to Pak.

uh,dear the truth is quite different...TTP is crossing border from afghan and are entering in PAK...MUSHARRAF HAD a tough argument with USA about this..they were not allowing them to seal the border...due to this reason we suffer so many TTP terrorists...

 

[Redbull]

@Redbull and THAT is what I answered too...when collateral damage increases...the family of the dead are EASILY recruited by talibans....Because THEY SEE this as justice! It is human nature in anger to want revenge in any form and if someone puts it in front of you.....


I see it as a positive loop...THAT is what we were talking about BEFORE YOU CAME IN!

Majority of them are not people who want revenge but oppurtunistic loosers who want to show how great Muslims they are by blowing themselves up and other innocent people. How you can call that "justice", I don't know.

 

[Dillinger]

@Sedqal at least we can say we tried


O i see leave it then


@Dillinger they CANT justify innocent killing....that too not 3-4 but in 10-20s!

I dont even know which stat to believe

Talon how many people do you see shedding tears over the dead in Pakistan? Lets be clear as far as I am concerned Pakistan is nemesis and owing to the proxy war waged by it against my nation it would be disingenuous of me to say that I remotely care for its troubles or people. But not caring is a level away from actively hating..the children shouldn't have to take a missile on their heads every time a terrorist has to die. That much any sane man/woman HAS TO AGREE TO..but here is the qualifier..there was a time when these strikes were coordinated with ISI provided intelligence..then the US realized that while they did get some of the targets usually when they shared information with Pakistan many of their intended targets would escape..almost as if they knew before hand that a strike was coming. The reason you have higher casualties is that break down in HUMINT and ELINT sharing..the US no longer trusts the ISI and so is striking unilaterally..had this breach of trust not developed these strikes would have followed exact vetting like the previous ones and collateral damage would have been insignificant.

The US will justify it as they have always justified it..Pakistan can either find the resolve to route out all the Taliban so that the US has no pretext left or directly challenge the US itself. Which option do you think is the more feasible of the two..other than that if it tries to argue in terms of right and wrong then its own support for proxy elements will be used to beat its argument into the ground. You want to stop them or try and convince them that they are wrong and then hope that they will stop?

uh,dear the truth is quite different...TTP is crossing border from afghan and are entering in PAK...MUSHARRAF HAD a tough argument with USA about this..they were not allowing them to seal the border...due to this reason we suffer so many TTP terrorists...

TTP enters Pak from Af, Haqqani sahib and Omar ji's men enter Af from Pak...you can throw accusations around all day long or you can uproot the Haqqani network and Mullah Omar and happily throw them in the US's face..after that they will not have a leg to stand on when it comes to drone strikes and the TTP will be far easier to deal with. OR...you can continue as you are now..and have to fight the TTP while facing the consequences of having guests like Haqqani.

 

[Dillinger]

That bit of common sense have been recognized by war capable countries since mankind have been capable of creating civilizations and waging wars.

The Avalon Project - Laws of War : Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land (Hague V); October 18, 1907

Article 1 will be respected only if Articles 2 thru 5 are respected any any state claiming neutrality in a conflict. If Pakistan claimed neutrality in the conflict between the US and Afghanistan, then Pakistan have the duty to secure Pakistani territories from being used BY EITHER SIDE as staging ground for their conflict.

Pakistan failed.


That may be a miscalculation on our part, but the reality is that people like Saddam Hussein are seldom satisfied within their own borders. If not now then it would be a different US President and a different world that will have to deal with Iraq.

Bro I meant for the posters here..not in terms of nations..there seems to be a lot of obfuscation with regard to semantics..terms such as legal combatant, collateral damage..the process of levying sanctions.

 

[gambit]

The US will justify it as they have always justified it..Pakistan can either find the resolve to route out all the Taliban so that the US has no pretext left or directly challenge the US itself. Which option do you think is the more feasible of the two..other than that if it tries to argue in terms of right and wrong then its own support for proxy elements will be used to beat its argument into the ground. You want to stop them or try and convince them that they are wrong and then hope that they will stop?



TTP enters Pak from Af, Haqqani sahib and Omar ji's men enter Af from Pak...you can throw accusations around all day long or you can uproot the Haqqani network and Mullah Omar and happily throw them in the US's face..after that they will not have a leg to stand on when it comes to drone strikes and the TTP will be far easier to deal with. OR...you can continue as you are now..and have to fight the TTP while facing the consequences of having guests like Haqqani.

A lot of people here morally condemned US for using the phrase 'collateral damages' to describe non-Taliban people killed in our UAV strike program. But what those same people do not realize is that the Pakistani leaders who refused to secure the Pakistan-Afghanistan border see those deaths in the same clinical way -- collateral damages -- to the greater goal of waging a proxy war against the US.

Bro I meant for the posters here..not in terms of nations..there seems to be a lot of obfuscation with regard to semantics..terms such as legal combatant, collateral damage..the process of levying sanctions.

We have to present arguments in terms of inter-state relations, after all, the Pakistanis are speaking for Pakistan.

 

[Slav Defence]

Talon how many people do you see shedding tears over the dead in Pakistan? Lets be clear as far as I am concerned Pakistan is nemesis and owing to the proxy war waged by it against my nation it would be disingenuous of me to say that I remotely care for its troubles or people. But not caring is a level away from actively hating..the children shouldn't have to take a missile on their heads every time a terrorist has to die. That much any sane man/woman HAS TO AGREE TO..but here is the qualifier..there was a time when these strikes were coordinated with ISI provided intelligence..then the US realized that while they did get some of the targets usually when they shared information with Pakistan many of their intended targets would escape..almost as if they knew before hand that a strike was coming. The reason you have higher casualties is that break down in HUMINT and ELINT sharing..the US no longer trusts the ISI and so is striking unilaterally..had this breach of trust not developed these strikes would have followed exact vetting like the previous ones and collateral damage would have been insignificant.

The US will justify it as they have always justified it..Pakistan can either find the resolve to route out all the Taliban so that the US has no pretext left or directly challenge the US itself. Which option do you think is the more feasible of the two..other than that if it tries to argue in terms of right and wrong then its own support for proxy elements will be used to beat its argument into the ground. You want to stop them or try and convince them that they are wrong and then hope that they will stop?



TTP enters Pak from Af, Haqqani sahib and Omar ji's men enter Af from Pak...you can throw accusations around all day long or you can uproot the Haqqani network and Mullah Omar and happily throw them in the US's face..after that they will not have a leg to stand on when it comes to drone strikes and the TTP will be far easier to deal with. OR...you can continue as you are now..and have to fight the TTP while facing the consequences of having guests like Haqqani.

you are free to believe whatever you want...you can twist as much u want u are welcome..but atleast you are not allowed to enforce your thoughts on others....mullah omer etc are actually opposing americans...they have nothing to do with pak.....our actual target is ttp..and our army knows what to do and when to take which action...you when said they are entering from pakistan you have proved that how much phd u rforget it dear...leave us alone with our problems we will handle with ourselves

 

[Dillinger]

you are free to believe whatever you want...you can twist as much u want u are welcome..but atleast you are not allowed to enforce your thoughts on others....mullah omer etc are actually opposing americans...they have nothing to do with pak.....our actual target is ttp..and our army knows what to do and when to take which action...you when said they are entering from pakistan you have proved that how much phd u rforget it dear...leave us alone with our problems we will handle with ourselves

So its OK that Mullah Omar is using Pakistani territory to target ISAF forces in Af..best of luck reasoning with the US to halt drone strikes. @gambit this is what I meant...here's a hint when you let your territory be used by others to target a sovereign nation then that said sovereign nation can do one of two things..hope that you will eventually route these elements or do that on its own..beyond that try and convince any ISAF country that your logic above is sound and see whether they sympathize with you. Whether you're right or wrong doesn't matter what you can do or not does..the fact that your state does not shoot these drones out reflects on the latter.

 

[Dubious]

So its OK that Mullah Omar is using Pakistani territory to target ISAF forces in Af..best of luck reasoning with the US to halt drone strikes. @gambit this is what I meant...here's a hint when you let your territory be used by others to target a sovereign nation then that said sovereign nation can do one of two things..hope that you will eventually route these elements or do that on its own..beyond that try and convince any ISAF country that your logic above is sound and see whether they sympathize with you. Whether you're right or wrong doesn't matter what you can do or not does..the fact that your state does not shoot these drones out reflects on the latter.

@Dillinger just out of curiosity ARE YOU WORKING WITH the terrorists? No/ YES? Otherwise what are your sources?

Do YOU know ANYTHING about military operations? NO/YES?

IF you said yes to the 2nd one then you will also know, NOT ALL THE info is handed off to public for reviewing...

So, you can ONLY say what you think...THOSE LIVING IT can TELL YOU what they KNOW!


Either learn to listen and understand OR take your reasoning where it belongs...Not every operation / situation is similar nor can be painted with the same brush!

Now, this thread is about chinese student who was killed in Boston,

My sympathies for her!

And my ONLY question which EVERYONE AVOIDED with their own crap is Where are the tears for others who die from American attacks or using American weapons?

 

[Dillinger]

@Dillinger just out of curiosity ARE YOU WORKING WITH the terrorists? No/ YES? Otherwise what are your sources?

Do YOU know ANYTHING about military operations? NO/YES?

IF you said yes to the 2nd one then you will also know, NOT ALL THE info is handed off to public for reviewing...

So, you can ONLY say what you think...THOSE LIVING IT can TELL YOU what they KNOW!


Either learn to listen and understand OR take your reasoning where it belongs...Not every operation / situation is similar nor can be painted with the same brush!

Now, this thread is about chinese student who was killed in Boston,

My sympathies for her!

And my ONLY question which EVERYONE AVOIDED with their own crap is Where are the tears for others who die from American attacks or using American weapons?

And what do you know of the ground situation- between the Pakistani narrative and American narrative which one should the world at large pick.

I do know something of COIN ops..here is the thing you too are posting your personal conjecture and analysis. So are Gambit and the others.

The difference is that my nation has never been attacked by proxies which are provided shelter on US soil, it has been repeatedly attacked by proxies who find shelter on Pakistani soil. I believe I qualified my bias beforehand. Basically what you are saying is that A) The Haqqani network is not present on Pakistani soil OR B) Even if it is then it is not Pakistan's obligation to rout them. Way to go..here is a thought I don't have a horse in this race..the US does and so do you..again it is capability that matters..right and wrong are quaint principles which the governments of the world care two hoots for.

We cannot take the terrorists out in Pakistan, nor can we stop them from infiltrating into Kashmir with 100% success but we can eradicate them once they are in our territory albeit at the cost of our jawans so we do...similarly you cannot push the US out of Af by force..even after their 2014 draw-down they are going to leave their spec-ops units back in Af and have already signed upon a mutual defense treaty. What your forces CAN do is shoot the drones down..how can you blame the US if your own forces have never shot a single one down? IF they had tried and failed then you could still shift your attention to the US, if they were say shooting down 7-8 drones hell even 2 drones out of the 10 that come in every few months you could still then say that OK we are doing all we can..now its time to continue that effort and mate it with a new paradigm- the international one where we show that we are against drone strikes and we are shooting them down so the US had better stop. But not a single measly drone shot- WHATEVER THE SECRET REASON FOR THAT MIGHT BE- IF YOU'RE OWN GOVERNMENT AND FORCES DON'T CARE ENOUGH TO STOP IT THEN WHY WILL THE US?

Anyway you're right this has gotten very OT some other thread ans some other time.