Illegal US drone strike kills six people in Pakistan: officials

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Drone attacks are also carried out on the basis of Joint Pakistan US Intelligence Co-Operation.

No, the official Pakistani position on the issue is clear - unilateral US drone strikes are illegal - any other interpretation is nothing but a conspiracy theory and speculation.

Pakistan cant argue with Afgan/Nato to clear TTP safe heavens in Afgan border since they are not ready to clean up their own home and not letting others to do so.

NATOAfghanistan/US cannot argue with Pakistan to clear up any alleged safe havens in Pakistan since they are not ready to clean up their own home.

 

[foxbat]

No, the official Pakistani position on the issue is clear - unilateral US drone strikes are illegal - any other interpretation is nothing but a conspiracy theory and speculation.

Illegal under what jurisdiction and what is Pakistan doing to stop these and bring culprits to justice?

 

[Fuego]

If it is illigal then what Pakistan going to do about it?

 

[swathi]

No, the official Pakistani position on the issue is clear - unilateral US drone strikes are illegal - any other interpretation is nothing but a conspiracy theory and speculation..

If that is so, It is a violation of Pakistan sovereignity, Then why can't Pakistan shoot the drones.

[

NATOAfghanistan/US cannot argue with Pakistan to clear up any alleged safe havens in Pakistan since they are not ready to clean up their own home.

I agree with this point as safe heavens exist in afghanistan also (Nuristan and Kunar province)

 

[Matrixx]

Sometimes back Pakistan warned US not to attack unless PA will shoot down drones....what happen to that...I hear almost every week 2-3 news of drone attack....

Does not suit to a atomic power country to be humiliated every day like this....

 

[Amolthebest]

What worries me most is the insensitivity of Pakistani members. These members even have stopped to reply in drone attack threads. It seems they just dont care about their citizens and soldiers. Wake up guys.Shake your army to do something.

 

[swathi]

Sometimes back Pakistan warned US not to attack unless PA will shoot down drones....what happen to that...I hear almost every week 2-3 news of drone attack....

Does not suit to a atomic power country to be humiliated every day like this....

It was not some time back but on december 10 2011, " the most powerful man in pakistan groaned " any drone that enters into pakistan airspace will be treated as hostile and shot down, To prove his point they also provided anti aircraft guns and anza missiles to soldiers. Everyone knows what happened after that.

What worries me most is the insensitivity of Pakistani members. These members even have stopped to reply in drone attack threads. It seems they just dont care about their citizens and soldiers. Wake up guys.Shake your army to do something.

Previously US was striking monthly once or twice or thrice, Now they are striking weekly once or twice or thrice.

 

[OrionHunter]

So before accusing Pakistan of 'State support' the US/Afghans need to eliminate the terrorist sanctuaries on Afghan soil responsible for the massacres of hundreds of Pakistanis.

Easier said than done! If it was that easy, the PA would have wiped out all the TTP sanctuaries in Waziristan by now. If you know anything about mountain warfare, then you'll understand what I'm implying.

Secondly, why would the Yanks eliminate TTP sanctuaries on the Afghan border? They are using them as proxies just as Pakistan is using the Afghan Taliban to kill American troops. (Well, that's what the Americans say, anyway!)

Reminds me of Tom and Jerry!

 

[lightoftruth]

No, the official Pakistani position on the issue is clear - unilateral US drone strikes are illegal - any other interpretation is nothing but a conspiracy theory and speculation.
.

sir drone strikes were never declared being unilateral so the whole purpose of this position falls as people are never taken in account ,as people never know which is unilateral or which is not. however this maybe intentional.

 

[foxbat]

NATO can absolutely be held responsible since it is the occupation force that itself has taken on the responsibility for 'establishing democracy and building local institutions, especially security institutions'. If NATO does not want to be held responsible, then it needs to end its massive military presence in Afghanistan - there is no way to dance around this fact.

As long as NATO has a military presence in Afghanistan, it will be responsible for acting against terrorists operating out of Afghanistan.

Thats a lame self serving argument. Lets not forget that it was Pakistan who was the only country supporting Taliban (and peviously led to establishment of their regime) in Afghanistan post 9/11. Now NATO is clearing out the mess creating by Pakistan from Afghanistan despite all the hurdles and hinderences created by Pakistan in that effort (discounting Pakistan's fake claims about being a front line state in fight against terror). Now if your own pets are biting you, you cant blame the city council or health department for not controlling them. Had they been strays, it would have been a different story, but if they are your own cherished strategic pets (assets) who have now turned on you, tought luck really.. Pakistan can keep making noises about NATO being responsible etc etc, but thats exactly what they are..Noises.. And that is why even Pakistan is not taking any formal stand against this issue.. After all jab apna sikka hi khota ho, to you can hardly blame outsiders..

NATO/ISAF/ANA is responsible for the terrorists operating from its soil, and the CIA supported some of the very same militant groups that suited its purpose during and after the Soviet presence in Afghanistan, so that point of yours is irrelevant to the discussion that NATO needs to act against the terrorists operating out of Afghan territory that it is responsible for.

Its another bogey man commonly used by Pakistan to fool its own citizens. Taliban as an organization came into existence much after USA left the region. No doubt some people were from erstwhile Mujahiddins. But then calling these terrorists as those Mujahids that NATO supported against USSR is some what akin to calling all Pakistanis as erstwhile Indians. And we know how every Pakistani here throws a fit when some thing to that effect is said.. So as you yourself said, whats good for the goose, is good for the gander

You must be living with your head buried in the sand then, given Panetta's recent comments about 'the US is losing patience' - the clamor from the US on wanting Pakistan to launch a military operation in North Waziristan is pretty loud and consistent. Pakistan does not find the option of unilateral drone strikes palatable, given that they are patently illegal and unauthorized. Pakistan is willing to accept drone strikes that are conducted jointly or PAF air strikes.

Not very oftern that you see the great AM lose his temper and use hard words.. anyway, I belive the comments from Panetta are more to build pressure on Pakistan, because given the ridicule he heaped on Pakistan from India (of all the places) and Afghanistan, is not something one does if he wants to convince someone to do something for him. And about drone strikes, well, you folks keep shouting that they are illegal, but havent seen you do anything to challenge that since last so many years.. The only conclusion that can be drawn, is that either Pakistan govt is complicit (here's that word again) in these strikes killing its own citizens, or is aware that any formal action they take will get laughed out of any international body due to the known Pakistani support to UN designated terrorist organizations that weaken its claim on its sovreignity violation.

Pakistan has offered to use its own resources - one of the proposals made by Pakistan involves replacing illegal US drone strikes with precision PAF strikes.

I was replying to your countryman who said that Pakistan should be given drones to kill its enemies. The same post where I asked him to stop begging and for which you gave me an infraction..

Previously US was striking monthly once or twice or thrice, Now they are striking weekly once or twice or thrice.

I remember a tet-a-tet between Karan and AM last year where Karan predicted that the expected attacks on Pakistan will never be in the form of an invasion, but a steadily increasing intensity and brazenness of Drone strikes that will have interspersed Spec Ops missions. Things are pretty much going in that direction for last 5-6 months now with both drone strikes and terrorists attacks going up steadily.. I expect an inflexsion point in next few months for sure

 

[Hello_10]

Actually, once you are done boot licking the Yanks, the 'thinking in Pakistan' is pretty straightforward - unilateral US drone strikes are illegal and unacceptable. Pakistan has proposed joint US-Pakistan operated drone strikes as well as precision PAF air strikes based on joint US-PAK intelligence cooperation.

There is nothing wrong with 'Pakistani thinking' on this issue - the problem is entirely one of US hubris and bullying in order to continue its illegal drone strikes.

AM i tell you something, one day we had a survey on PDF to find out who support drone attacks and who dont, and we found 32% Indians support and 20% dont and it also means, Indians are the least informed about drone attacks on afghan/pakistan, only 52% could give their opinion. also, it was guessed that most of those who supported drone attacks were based in US or other western countries so they are also the one who are part of NATO's war. but majority Indians dont know as India is not part of this war. even during recent attacks on embassies, Indian embassy wasn't attacked and it simply means that Taliban is also not fighting with India....

and from here, you cry as you think for those pakistani nationals who are getting killed in chase of 1-2 militants while others western nationals (including indian origins) are the one who celebrate killing of those 1-2 militants by NATO's drone attacks as they may be Al Qaeda terrorist also who may be a threat to these western nationals in future, regardless how many pakistani civilians are also getting killed in mean time. western civilians/voters want their governments to remove all those who may be a threat to them in future while pakistani government is worried for their voters who may not vote them in future if they are not defended by the current pakistani government. as, will these NATO's democratic governments win next election if they drop bombs on western civilians in chase of 1-2 militants? in the same way, pakistani democratic government will also not win the next election if they can't stop killing of pakistan's civilians in chase of 1-2 militants......

and who to blame? here, pakistan says its the US who made these Al Qaeda/Taliban and now pakistan is paying a price, while US says it were both US and Pakistan who made these militants but we have to remove them. and here is the confrontation. and the straight answer is, "if you can defend your civilians then do, and if NATO can kill their militants they want to, who may be a threat to western countries in future, then they will." you have strength then defend your civilians from these attacks and if NATO has strength then they will do their works in that region. rest of talks are bullshiits

 

[swathi]

As i said Earlier, Obama firmly believes both Pakistan and US has different trajectories in Afghanistan, To be more frank George W Bush respected the sovereignity of Pakistan to some extent. Intelligence was shared to Pakistan before striking High value targets. Obama does not care about sensitive issues of Pakistan. He sees only US Interests in the region.

 

[Hulk]

As i said Earlier, Obama firmly believes both Pakistan and US has different trajectories in Afghanistan, To be more frank George W Bush respected the sovereignity of Pakistan to some extent. Intelligence was shared to Pakistan before striking High value targets. Obama does not care about sensitive issues of Pakistan. He sees only US Interests in the region.

Which is right attitude and reason he was successful against OBL.

 

[Hello_10]

As i said Earlier, Obama firmly believes both Pakistan and US has different trajectories in Afghanistan, To be more frank George W Bush respected the sovereignity of Pakistan to some extent. Intelligence was shared to Pakistan before striking High value targets. Obama does not care about sensitive issues of Pakistan. He sees only US Interests in the region.

I tell you few bottom line points as below, apart from my post #41,:

1. Obama was made president because US/West wanted to have hands of 'blacks' in their dirty works also. there were few cases that few black soldiers refused to work in Iraq which US/West didn't like. also, it was then clear that US was to do few very dirty works in coming years and Obama was best suited doing that. while we can see that even if Mrs Clinton lost election to Obama, we always have a sense that the most powerful person of US is Mrs Clinton, not Obama

2. excessive bombing on Afghan, including many bombings on the marriage ceremonies in hunt of just 2-3 Taliban Fighters, angered Pashtun based in Pakistan's north west states also. they first gave their moral support and then they started fighting with NATO in revenge of their family members who got killed. and whether we accept or not, not every one of Taliban is terrorists, No , and neither 99% of them are as educated that they may go to a western country and can be a threat to that society. and this much heavy bombings on Afghan finally involved Pashtun majority north west states of Pakistan also since 2007, if I remember, it was the year when drone attacks for WOT extended to Pakistan also, not before that .....

3. US knows that Taliban are funded by many muslim countries so they want to control Afghan anyhow and muslims of the world 'widely' see Taliban as a "Force of Islam against aggression of Christianity". i havent met even a single muslim while living in western countries who dont blame US for Afghan war and in fact, they want to see Taliban winning over US

4. Pakistan might be playing double game and so US. while Pakistan is right on first place to blame US for the mess of Afghan started from 80s. as SU was opponent of US and even if Pakistan was also involved in training and arming Taliban/Al Qaeda, along with CIA, pakistan worked in behalf of US against SU to do so. and right now, drones might be killing 1-2 militants but its mainly pakistani civilians who are suffered the most, not the US's civilians. and hence, US made this mess in Afghan and only Pakistan is paying the cost of it, while US is already arming/funding terror in Syria also......

 

[Hello_10]

Which is right attitude and reason he was successful against OBL.

As i said Earlier, Obama firmly believes both Pakistan and US has different trajectories in Afghanistan, To be more frank George W Bush respected the sovereignity of Pakistan to some extent. Intelligence was shared to Pakistan before striking High value targets. Obama does not care about sensitive issues of Pakistan. He sees only US Interests in the region.

look you both are right as you people are based in US and want to see your country winning the war, no matter whose fault is. you would only like to see your nation US win and the same other side also. rest, in one way it is found that US/NATO have lost the war and going to leave Afghan soon, while the other news says that they are even training Baloch militants which simply means that they are intended to stay here. rest, the time will say who won and who lost