What's new

CIA Escalates in Pakistan

IBRIS

BANNED
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
2,696
Reaction score
-1
Pentagon Diverts Drones From Afghanistan to Bolster U.S. Campaign Next Door

WO-AC773_DRONEj_G_20101001181301.jpg

Onlookers in Pakistan's Sindh province after suspected militants set fire to tankers Friday carrying fuel for NATO troops in Afghanistan.

WASHINGTON—The U.S. military is secretly diverting aerial drones and weaponry from the Afghan battlefront to significantly expand the CIA's campaign against militants in their Pakistani havens.

The shift in strategic focus reflects the U.S. view that, with Pakistan's military unable or unwilling to do the job, more U.S. force against terrorist sanctuaries in Pakistan is now needed to turn around the struggling Afghan war effort across the border.

In recent months, the military has loaned Predator and Reaper drones to the Central Intelligence Agency to give the agency more firepower to target and bombard militants on the Afghan border.

The additional drones helped the CIA escalate the number of strikes in Pakistan in September. The agency averaged five strikes a week in September, up from an average of two to three per week. The Pentagon and CIA have ramped up their purchases of drones, but they aren't being built fast enough to meet the rapid rise in demand.

P1-AX479_PRED_G_20101001192505.jpg


U.S. officials say a successful terrorist strike against the West emanating from Pakistan could force the U.S. to take unilateral military action—an outcome all parties are eager to avoid.

Although the U.S. military flies surveillance drones in Pakistan and shares intelligence with the Pakistani government, Pakistan has prohibited U.S. military operations on its soil, arguing they would impinge on the country's sovereignty. The CIA operations, while well-known, are technically covert, allowing Islamabad to deny to its unsupportive public its involvement with the strikes. The CIA doesn't acknowledge the program, and the shift of Pentagon resources has been kept under wraps.

Pakistan has quietly cooperated with the CIA drone program which started under President George W. Bush. But the program is intensely unpopular in the country because of concerns about sovereignty and regular reports of civilian casualties. U.S. officials say the CIA's targeting of militants is precise, and that there have been a limited number of civilian casualties.

U.S. officials said there is now less concern about upsetting the Pakistanis than there was a few months ago, and that the U.S. is being more aggressive in its response to immediate threats from across the border.

"You have to deal with the sanctuaries," Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry (D., Mass.) said after meeting with Pakistan's foreign minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, in Washington this week. "I've pushed very, very hard with the Pakistanis regarding that."

Tensions between the U.S. and Pakistan have been exacerbated in recent days by a series of cross-border attacks by North Atlantic Treaty Organization helicopter gunships. Islamabad responded by shutting a key border crossing used to supply Western troops in Afghanistan and threatening to halt NATO container traffic altogether. On Friday, militants in Pakistan attacked tankers carrying fuel toward another border crossing, in another sign of the vulnerability of NATO supply lines crossing Pakistani territory.

Because U.S. military officials say success in Afghanistan hinges, in large part, on shutting down the militant havens in Pakistan, the surge in drone strikes could also have far-reaching implications for the Obama administration, which is under political pressure to show results in the nine-year Afghan war and has set a goal of beginning to withdraw troops in July.

The secret deal to beef up the CIA's campaign inside Pakistan shows the extent to which military officials see the havens there, used by militants to plan and launch attacks on U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan, as the primary obstacle to the Afghan war effort.

"When it comes to drones, there's no mission more important right now than hitting targets in the tribal areas, and that's where additional equipment's gone," a U.S. official said. "It's not the only answer, but it's critical to both homeland security and force protection in Afghanistan."

The idea of funneling military resources through the CIA was broached during last year's Afghanistan-Pakistan policy review, officials say. The shift in military resources was spearheaded by CIA Director Leon Panetta and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a former CIA director himself. It also has the backing of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, and the new commander of allied forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David Petraeus.

Mr. Gates helped smooth over initial dissent among some at the Pentagon who argued that the drones were needed in Afghanistan to attack the Taliban.

Since taking command in Afghanistan in July, Gen. Petraeus has placed greater focus on the tribal areas of Pakistan, according to military and other government officials.

The U.S. military has been focused on trying to persuade the Pakistan army to step up its actions against militants in the tribal areas. That effort led to operations in some areas, but not North Waziristan, which is used by the Haqqani militant network to mount cross-border attacks and is believed by U.S. officials to be the hiding place of senior al Qaeda leaders.

Pakistan says its army has been spread thin, limiting its ability to carry out additional large-scale operations. Its resources have also been diverted to responding to the worst flooding in the country's history.

The U.S. now sees the need for a stronger American push in Pakistan because of the growing belief that Pakistan isn't going to commit any more resources to fighting militants within its borders, said a former senior intelligence official. The Pakistani military is tapped out, the former official said. "They've gone as far as they can go."

U.S. officials are also increasingly frustrated by what they see as Islamabad's double-dealing. Some elements of the country's powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency continue to support the Haqqanis as a hedge against India's regional influence, and the government has rebuffed U.S. calls for a crackdown on the group.

Pakistani government officials have repeatedly denied that they provide any support to the Haqqanis and said their military is too overstretched to take them on directly in their North Waziristan base.

Gen. Petraeus has taken a hard line on the Haqqani network, calling them irreconcilable. He has also met with top Pakistani military leaders and presented intelligence tying the Haqqanis operating out of North Waziristan havens to attacks on U.S. and Afghan troops, according to a military official.

The Pentagon has allowed loaned equipment and personnel to the CIA several times since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to former intelligence officials.

In addition to drone aircraft, officials said the military was sharing targeting information with the CIA from surveillance over-flights.
 
from where these american dogs would withdraw from afghanistan, pakistan after all this stupid cheap tactics will not allow, iran will not allow, seems like big hell of of time for these pigs, death is only good for them
 
They're pushing for more drones after the closure of the supply line, as if they're implying that we're under the control of NATO.

Another drone strike today. Tribesmen closed down everything in protest.
 
U.S. drone strikes kill 18 militants in Pakistan

U.S. drone strikes kill 18 militants in Pakistan | Reuters

(Reuters) - Two U.S. drone attacks killed 18 militants in Pakistan on Saturday, intelligence officials said, after recent NATO incursions raised tensions with an ally critical to Washington's war effort in Afghanistan.

The United States has escalated pilotless drone aircraft missile strikes against al Qaeda-linked militants in Pakistan's northwest, with 21 attacks in September alone, the highest number in a single month on record.

Angered by repeated incursions by NATO helicopters over the past week, Pakistan blocked a supply route for coalition troops in Afghanistan after one such strike killed three Pakistani soldiers on Thursday in the northwestern Kurram region.

Taliban militants threatened to attack more tankers carrying fuel to Afghanistan over that route after three dozen of the vehicles were set on fire in south Pakistan on Friday.

The United States needs Pakistan as it scrambles to contain a raging Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan before U.S. troops start withdrawing in July 2011.

Border incursions and disruptions in NATO supplies underline growing tensions in the relationship.

On Saturday, two drone attacks within hours of each other killed 18 militants in Datta Khel town in North Waziristan tribal region along the Afghan border, intelligence officials said.

"In the first attack two missiles were fired at a house while in the second attack four missiles targeted a house and a vehicle. The death toll in the two attacks reached 18," said one intelligence official. At least six foreigners were killed in the first strike.

There was no independent confirmation of the attacks and militants often dispute official death tolls.

A large number of Arab, Chechan and Central Asian insurgents have taken shelter with Pakistani militants in the lawless tribal regions on the Afghan border after fleeing the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan in late 2001.

U.S. officials say drones are valuable weapons which have killed high-profile Taliban and al Qaeda figures in an area in northwest Pakistan described as a global hub for militants.

Pakistan worries the strikes undermine efforts to deal with militancy because civilian casualties inflame public anger and bolster support for the fighters.

Elimination of high-profile targets could not be possible without Pakistani intelligence, however, analysts say.

Homegrown Taliban fighters continue to carry out attacks including suicide bombings despite a series of military offensives officials say have weakened them.

A Taliban spokesman, Azam Tariq, told Reuters by telephone from an undisclosed location militants had attacked the NATO supply trucks in southern Sindh province on Friday to avenge NATO incursions.

The al Qaeda-linked group would carry out more attacks on tankers on all roads used to transport NATO supplies, not just the one closed by Pakistani authorities.
 
lol, Americans are pushing Pakistan army too hard for operation in North Waziristan. I can bet, they will start crying in few day like babies pleading Please PLease do it.... :D
Infact IMO, those recent NATO's attack on Pakistan Army is related to those pressure tactics. But they are gone to far in these tactics by attacking Pakistan Army.. Now its time for Pakistan to kick their a$$.....! which I am sure they have started doing successfully.
 
waiting for ar,y to answer those drones, seriously this deadly siliene of the government will not work, if PPP failed to resolve this issue surely we will see PPP and its govt last moment of survival
 
It feels pathetic that our Army does more than our Government when it comes to deciding things.

Bring mush back!
 
It feels pathetic that our Army does more than our Government when it comes to deciding things.

Bring mush back!
Have you noticed how every dictator comes in on a white horse and leaves crucified? No, the Army is doing pretty good right now. Let's leave it as it is.
 
Have you noticed how every dictator comes in on a white horse and leaves crucified? No, the Army is doing pretty good right now. Let's leave it as it is.

I agree... I would hate another event where army gets their hands dirtied in politics.

I support musharraf as he is coming back as an ordinary politician (not a corrupt one!), and not a part of the army.
 
lol, Americans are pushing Pakistan army too hard for operation in North Waziristan. I can bet, they will start crying in few day like babies pleading Please PLease do it.... :D
Infact IMO, those recent NATO's attack on Pakistan Army is related to those pressure tactics. But they are gone to far in these tactics by attacking Pakistan Army.. Now its time for Pakistan to kick their a$$.....! which I am sure they have started doing successfully.

If Pakistan won't do it, why are they complaining when we do? You either enforce your own territory when there's ample evidence $h!t is going down, or it isn't yours anymore.

You can dream Pakistan is kicking nato @$$ as drones strike areas that are formally part of Pakistan but in practice not under their control, doesn't change the reality.

What is Pakistan's army spreading thin against by a North Waziristan operation? India? India's not going to attack as long as Pakistan is under the US umbrella. So what gives?
 
If Pakistan won't do it, why are they complaining when we do? You either enforce your own territory when there's ample evidence $h!t is going down, or it isn't yours anymore.

You can dream Pakistan is kicking nato @$$ as drones strike areas that are formally part of Pakistan but in practice not under their control, doesn't change the reality.

What is Pakistan's army spreading thin against by a North Waziristan operation? India? India's not going to attack as long as Pakistan is under the US umbrella. So what gives?

If you think that Pakistan is under the US umbrella, you are gravely mistaken. Pakistan has received peanuts for it's contributions compared to other participation nations in this war. As for the army thinly spread, here's some rough stats:
Pak Army total: ~650,000

Pak army in Tribal Areas: +150,000
Pak army helping with floods: +60,000
Pak army in mainland Pakistan consolidating previously held militant areas(eg. Swat): +50,000
Pak army at the Indian border: ~250,000

Rotation: ~140,000
 
^^ I don't know much about military matters, but doesn't that leave about half the army free?
 
^^ I don't know much about military matters, but doesn't that leave about half the army free?

soldiers get leave too, can't expect them to be on duty for ever......
 
IF you want to help the Pakistani army.. then pay your taxes and pay your bills I know times are hard and corruption is there but at least some of the money will get to where it belongs so that we as a nation can operate.
 
Back
Top Bottom