Give Pakistan drones to target terrorists: Musharraf

[BATMAN]

For sake of a laugh:

Pakistan is going to fit those drones with loudspeakers...and the drones will fly shouting ...I am a Pakistani Drone.......Not an American...Please don't mind if I throw some missile or two on you........and Citizens of Pakistan will brace themselves for attack by Pakistani drone...

So does it mean if Pakistani Army kill civilians its OK...but if Americans kill Terrorists along with Some Civilians..its an attack on Pakistan Sovereignty....

What a nonsense rant!

Pakistan is asking for drones to save civilian lives which are being lost in US drone attacks.
Where as Pakistan army will use those drones against TTP terrorists, and other terrorists crossing into Pakistan from Afghanistan. Which have never been targeted since years of Afghan invasion by US.

I'm not sure if indian lobby will permit US to give Pakistan wepon to kill its own operatives. Neither would Pak govt. would like to annoy its masters.

Simpler solution to get rid of terrorist is to expel indian army out of Afghanistan.. than we don't need drones!

 

[K^se]

Give Pakistan drones to target terrorists: Musharraf
Thursday, 10 Sep, 2009 8:34 am


LONDON : Former president Pervez Musharraf believes Pakistan should be given drone aircraft so it can take out top terror suspects without the help of the West, he told FOX News in an exclusive interview.

“It was not for United States alone it was for Pakistan," he said during a wide-ranging interview with FOX News' Amy Kellogg in London.

"We are a progressive, moderate people, so it was very clear that we cannot accept" the Talibanization of his country, he said, calling it an easy decision to turn his military's sights on the militants.

"They were roaming around our cities and causing terrorist attacks in our cities and all over, and we had to eliminate that."

Musharraf said that al Qaeda has been significantly diminished in Pakistan, but the Taliban is thriving. Yet he believes that the unmanned aircraft the US uses to target key militants in Pakistan should be handed over to his country.

They have been very controversial always," he said. "I personally believe that drones should be given to Pakistan because the sensitivity is American troops or any foreign troops coming into Pakistan."

The question on so many minds — where is Osama Bin Laden? Remains unanswered. Musharraf has doubts whether Bin Laden has survived the eight harsh years since 9/11.

“There is even a doubt whether he is alive," he told FOX News. "Because right in the beginning he was a dialysis patient, he was a kidney patient; therefore I wonder if he is alive. “

Musharraf came to power in a 1999 coup but left power last year amid threats of impeachment by the opposition party in connection with his imposition of a state of emergency in 2007.

He is travelling on the lecture circuit now, focusing on winning the war against extremism.

He believes a combination of military might and political solutions will ultimately destroy the Taliban, a disparate band of militants with no front line. He says they are digging their own grave by making Pakistanis turn away from them.

He cited Swat Valley, where the Taliban had a stronghold but were recently defeated by the Pakistani army. The Taliban's "very cruel behaviour in Swat" — including the harsh imposition of religious law and the slaughter of innocents — appalled the entire nation of 172 million people and bound it together behind the army, he told FOX News.

"Now all the people of Pakistan and also the media is combined, is united, asking the army to defeat them."
Pakistan is united and remains an American ally, but a growing divide is emerging because Pakistanis generally don't like the US, Musharraf said.

“For 42 years, until '89, we were the strategic partners of the West," he told, noting the "lead role" of Pakistan in the Afghanistan War that lasted from 1979 until 1989.

"We defeated the Soviet Union together," he said, attributing the end of the Cold War in large part to the victory over the U.S.S.R. in Afghanistan.

"Then what happened after 1989 is the question," he said. "We were left high and dry" as tribal warfare raged in Afghanistan and 30,000 mujahideen holed up there, forming the central cells of al Qaeda.

The US also turned away from Pakistan in the intervening years, he said.

"There was a strategic shift in the United States where they shifted towards India, which was always with the East, and never with the West.”

Despite the internal tension, Musharraf says he developed a strong friendship with former President George W. Bush, whom he called "a very good man" and "a good friend."

"I think president Bush was a very sincere person, he was a very straight-talking, upright man," he said. "I like that in a man. A man who can look into your eyes and talk straight. ...

Musharraf says the Muslim world is now waiting with bated breath to see what President Obama can deliver.

"President Obama has said that he will develop better, closer relations with Muslims, and I think he has been welcomed in the Muslim world," he said.

"The Muslim world was very upbeat about his election. Having said that, he must deliver ... and I think it is a tough job that he faces to deliver on all that he has been talking.

"Muslims expect the United States to play a very fair role, an impartial role to deliver justice to the Islamic world," he said.




Copyright Aaj TV, 2009

LOL that's not a new network, Conservative/Corporate Media doesn't count..I just saw this interview yesterday I pretty much laughed at FOX's reporters for doing this interview... You people might not now know, the U.S doesn't really care for their UAV technology as most other nations do, I personally don't want our high-end grade technology to go to other nations.. But Pakistan might get it do to the fact they're taking swift action in South Waziristan, but since they can't do a ground offensive yet do to the other fact they are not well equipped and they're casualties would be immense..U.S Congress are already talking about sending them more equipment/ or possibly a lend-lease arm sales so they can hurry and do the ground offensive..

 

[Spring Onion]

LOL that's not a new network, Conservative/Corporate Media doesn't count..I just saw this interview yesterday I pretty much laughed at FOX's reporters for doing this interview... You people might not now know, the U.S doesn't really care for their UAV technology as most other nations do, I personally don't want our high-end grade technology to go to other nations.. But Pakistan might get it do to the fact they're taking swift action in South Waziristan, but since they can't do a ground offensive yet do to the other fact they are not well equipped and they're casualties would be immense..U.S Congress are already talking about sending them more equipment/ or possibly a lend-lease arm sales so they can hurry and do the ground offensive..

Well unless we are equiped with needed stuff we cant get desired results. So indeed weapons and other stuff is badly needed for this fight against al-qaeda and other terrorists.

On the other hand transfer of drones will ease up blam on US besides we can do much better job with these drones.

 

[jaunty]

Well personally I don't see any reason why Pakistan should not get the drones. Every country has right to purchase weapons for its defense. India is also investing huge amount of money on defense equipments. But having said that, I also don't see any problem with India trying diplomatically to ensure that Pakistan does not get these drones. IMO that's also a part of the game. Its good for you if you can stop your enemy from getting sophisticated weapons.

On the other hand I also don't buy the argument that these drones will be exclusively used for terrorists. In a war time situation every armed force would try to use it's best weapons against enemy. Same goes for India also.

So if Pakistan gets the drones, India should try to develop counter measures to tackle these rather than whining about it.

But I seriously doubt if the US would give Pakistan such high tech weapons like predator drones.

Cheers

 

[Spring Onion]

Well personally I don't see any reason why Pakistan should not get the drones. Every country has right to purchase weapons for its defense. India is also investing huge amount of money on defense equipments. But having said that, I also don't see any problem with India trying diplomatically to ensure that Pakistan does not get these drones. IMO that's also a part of the game. Its good for you if you can stop your enemy from getting sophisticated weapons.

On the other hand I also don't buy the argument that these drones will be exclusively used for terrorists. In a war time situation every armed force would try to use it's best weapons against enemy. Same goes for India also.

So if Pakistan gets the drones, India should try to develop counter measures to tackle these rather than whining about it.

But I seriously doubt if the US would give Pakistan such high tech weapons like predator drones.

Cheers

jaunty if Pakistan gets the drones then be sure India will also get these simple as that.

 

[TruthSeeker]

U know the name of Slain TTP head, of course u do sir, he was released from Guantanamo & he came back & started his shop in Pakistan,first thing he did coming back was killing Chinese engineers, hats off for CIA they release such terrorists then blame others for not doing more

Abdullah Mehsud was not the leader of the TTP. Baitullah Mehsud was never held by the US. It is true that the US government (not the CIA) has released detainees who have returned to the battlefield. I wish they would just kill all the "detainees", problem solved. BUT many in the world SCREAM about the "rights" of these people and the US government gives in and lets some of them go. For which it gets zero credit from its critics. (Like you?) Pakistan has also let many of the jihadis go. Sometimes more than once! That still does not mean that the TTP is a US asset. Get real. Use some common sense.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Abdullah Mehsud was not the leader of the TTP. Baitullah Mehsud was never held by the US. It is true that the US government (not the CIA) has released detainees who have returned to the battlefield. I wish they would just kill all the "detainees", problem solved. BUT many in the world SCREAM about the "rights" of these people and the US government gives in and lets some of them go. For which it gets zero credit from its critics. (Like you?) Pakistan has also let many of the jihadis go. Sometimes more than once! That still does not mean that the TTP is a US asset. Get real. Use some common sense.

Sir, kindly can you tell me that why just single number of drone attacks have been done in the TTP held areas out of 85+ drone strikes in the past few years ?? And all these single digit strikes happened in the last 2 or 3 months, where were the drones for the past 3 years since TTP had been launching devastating attacks in Pakistan & beheading PA soldiers & killing hundreds of others ??

Plz b real, don't comment by quoting American media, they just tell strike happened here this much people died, but we living here know the map and the exact areas where these strikes happen, which clearly tell who is protecting whom.

Abdullah Mehsud was the leader of the militants who form major part of the TTP, whose command was taken over by BM & instrumented in forming TTP.

But seeing your replies makes me think it is futile to argue as you think drone strikes happen on TTP, but in reality they don't. For understanding that you need to know the area, area controlled by TTP & by Taliban, the strikes happened in the past, where they did happened and who got killed.

Anyhow hope on day you realize the real situation & don't forget Pakistan is the only country which has given the maximum number of AQ people to US. Which we Pakistani's don't regret.

 

[TruthSeeker]

But seeing your replies makes me think it is futile to argue as you think drone strikes happen on TTP, but in reality they don't.

This statement is patently false. How did Baitullah Mehsud assume room temperature? I do not know the statistics of how many drone strikes can be assigned to a TTP target. I guess you are saying only a few. Perhaps you are correct, I don't know how narrowly you are defining the TTP. It is not zero. I already explained that I think the US targeting was predominantly intended to addressing Al Qaeda and for NATO force-protection by going after groups attacking in Afghanistan. Since Pakistan has been and still is railing against drone strikes, why should the US give it "extra" ammunition to complain about by striking targets that are internal Pakistani affairs?

Even so, the lack of drone strike priority on the TTP in NO WAY means that the TTP is a US asset. That is the libel that I object to in your post. The US does not strike the Kashmiri jihadi groups either. Does that make them US assets? Of course not.

 

[TaimiKhan]

This statement is patently false. How did Baitullah Mehsud assume room temperature? I do not know the statistics of how many drone strikes can be assigned to a TTP target. I guess you are saying only a few. Perhaps you are correct, I don't know how narrowly you are defining the TTP. It is not zero. I already explained that I think the US targeting was predominantly intended to addressing Al Qaeda and for NATO force-protection by going after groups attacking in Afghanistan. Since Pakistan has been and still is railing against drone strikes, why should the US give it "extra" ammunition to complain about by striking targets that are internal Pakistani affairs?

Even so, the lack of drone strike priority on the TTP in NO WAY means that the TTP is a US asset. That is the libel that I object to in your post. The US does not strike the Kashmiri jihadi groups either. Does that make them US assets? Of course not.

How BM got what he deserved is a different story, i have been told what in reality happened but can't disclose full details. If US can't help PA in targeting the people who are killing its soldiers then i think US or NATO should not expect miracles from us too, nor keep saying do more & do more. ISI & PA on many times had given very accurate information to US for launching of air strikes on some major TTP commanders while the drones where near by but alas americans did not. That was the reason PA & ISI got frustrated with US, as they don't give us the technology nor they attack themselves, so what will you make of it ?? Plus, one of my cousins in an intelligence agency was narrating me an incident that how they had provided coordinates for a strike to US as one major TTP commander was in that house, & he said that to our amazement just after 10 minutes some foreigner guys came out of the house & sped away in the awaiting cars & that TTP commander also left in a hurry, & who those foreigners were won't be told as i know the reaction, similarly so many other incidents have happened that clearly show who is protecting TTP & how money & weapons are getting in their hands. They have latest satellite phone, frequency hoping radios, even american origin NVGs have been recovered from them, american weapons, latest sniper rifles, communication equipment advanced enough that they can hear the army chatter and sometimes come to know about the army plans.

Its ironic, when taliban attack american troops or NATO troops inside Afghanistan shouldn't we say its america's internal affair as they invaded a country why ask us to do more ?? If TTP is our internal affair, getting equipment & funding from Afghanistan & US doing nothing about it, so why US asking us to attack the taliban here in Pakistan when the taliban attack americans in Afghanistan, so shouldn't it be US-Afghanistan Internal affair ??

So dear Sir, we here sitting in pakistan have a very good knowledge & understanding that what is happening & who is doing what. If US can't control the growing Indian influence in Afghanistan, who are supporting such groups in Pakistan to create trouble, i think we also then have the right to do what is best for Pakistan, even if we have to support the real Taliban ?? Don't you think you or your country would have done the same if you guys had been in our shoes & the sovereignty of your country had been at stake ??

 

[TaimiKhan]

Even so, the lack of drone strike priority on the TTP in NO WAY means that the TTP is a US asset. That is the libel that I object to in your post. The US does not strike the Kashmiri jihadi groups either. Does that make them US assets? Of course not.

Lack of drone strike on TTP is not just the only factor making TTP a US asset.

Kashmiri Jihadi groups are not threatening US nor Pakistan. The real Taliban are not a threat to Pakistan, then it means we should not attack them then ? Right ?? But US wants us to attack them as they are attacking US forces in Afghanistan, then why can't Pakistan ask US to attack TTP who attack PA with funds & weapons & equipment gotten from Afghanistan or even US equipment in their hands??

 

[TruthSeeker]

i think we also then have the right to do what is best for Pakistan, even if we have to support the real Taliban ?? Don't you think you or your country would have done the same if you guys had been in our shoes & the sovereignty of your country had been at stake ??

Yes of course, do what is best for Pakistan. I think Pakistan has always done what is best for Pakistan. If that means you believe you should support Taliban who cross your borders and kill Afghans and NATO troops, then do it. If you drive the US into a deeper relationship with India, will you have gained? You will reap what you sow, just as does the US .....

 

[TaimiKhan]

Yes of course, do what is best for Pakistan. I think Pakistan has always done what is best for Pakistan. If that means you believe you should support Taliban who cross your borders and kill Afghans and NATO troops, then do it. If you drive the US into a deeper relationship with India, will you have gained? You will reap what you sow, just as does the US .....

See, you did not understood my question, kindly read it again, i said what if you had been Pakistan & TTP had been attacking you with weapons & funds gotten through or from Afghanistan, while US not attacking TTP guys with the objection that hey Pakistan they are not attacking US forces then why we kill them on the other hand US asking Pakistan to kill taliban in Pakistan as they cross or get weapons from Pakistan & attack US forces in Afghanistan, shouldn't Pakistan tell to US that hey these Taliban are not attacking Pakistan Army, so why you asking us to kill them ?? tit for tat, US not targeting TTP as they don't attack US forces, so Pakistan shouldn't attack Taliban who are not attacking PA.

I hope you understood my point of view. You ask your neighbor clean his mess but when your neighbors asks you the same request you tell fcuk off ?? Is that the right way ??

Plus no matter how much we do to please US, they will go closer to India, its a strategic move, not a move based on Pakistan not doing enough. We are already reaping for the greatest sin of ours, friendship with US, who asks us to do more, but whenever we had asked for help or were in need, US did not come to our help.

Anyhow thx for your time, hope so you get our point of view as we regret US human loss civilian or military as we know what it feels to lose your countrymen & armed forces personnel. Right now also can't sleep as constant artillery fire booms shakes everything up

 

[MilesTogo]

Why have USA used drones in Pakistan and not so much in Iraq and Afghanistan?

 

[IndianSuperpower]

Lolz well the US will look after that you need not to worry. Americans are not that fool. After all, all that propaganda about harpoons we have allowed US to check it out.



Didnt you kill own civilians in Mezoram ? Assam and so on

Strange logic. If india kills its civilian you will also kill yours...........

 

[TruthSeeker]

I hope you understood my point of view.

I do understand your point of view. And I am sorry that your sleep is being interrupted by artillery firing and by all of the violent turmoil as well.

My point through all of our exchanges on this thread is simply that the TTP is NOT a US asset. You have provided nothing factual to back up your initial charge, which I think is a pernicious libel. Why the US has not used it's drones against the TTP more than a few times, I don't know. The politics of drone strikes between the US and Pakistan are very, very murky and the public statements contradictory. Who knows what the real truth is between the CIA and the ISI over drone targeting and usage in Pakistani territory?

I don't believe that the US wants the TTP to succeed in destabilizing Pakistan, in killing Pakistani soldiers or in interrupting NATO supply convoys. The Indians might want all those things, that I'll grant you. But not the US.