ISI cannot be touched, says US

[Abingdonboy]

And this is a surprise? If the ruling had been the opposite can you imagine the fallout??! Day 1 US supply routes to Afghanistan through Pakistan stop, after that the ISI launches harder and more aggressive attacks on US troops in Afghanistan. The US needs Pakistan, it's not going to do anything meaningful to get on the wrong side of the Pakistani milirary/ISI.



Non-story.

 

[Abingdonboy]

But does this mean the USG doesn't know what is going on? Adm Mike Mullan's comments said it all


"the Haqqani Network works as a veritable arm of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence [spy] agency,”


These comments would have been cleared by the highest echolons of the USG and weren't purely his last comments before he sailed off into the sunset.

 

[ares]

I am from the army that being five times smaller gave you a bloody nose, when you Indians don't have a leg to stand on you escape back to 1971. Obviously you prefer to ignore 1965 or 2002....but then you are just a minute detail acting as a fan boy.



Orange cloth covering the RAW bit**. !!

Are we missing something here. You feel proud of the fact that unlike 71, you were not completely defeated in a war that you provoked against a much larger neighbor...that is not a victory but a missing chromosome .

Except the fact 1965 ended in ceasefire, where both armies withdrew to prewar boundaries..Pakistan not only lost more men and material but also more land in rather strategic locations. Had the fighting continued, experts believe Pakistan's position would have gone from bad to worse. And to make matters worse for Pakistan the coup de grâce for 1965 deceit came not in 1965 but 6 yrs later, for your 1965 adventurism turned two neighbors, who were though not friends but neither were they enemies into sworn enemies.

And what about 2002? Did Pakistan army achieve any victories in the battlefield..that makes you proud of it?

 

[Windjammer]

Are we missing something here. You feel proud of the fact that unlike 71, you were not completely defeated in a war that you provoked against a much larger neighbor...that is not a victory but a missing chromosome .

Except the fact 1965 ended in ceasefire, where both armies withdrew to prewar boundaries..Pakistan not only lost more men and material but also more land in rather strategic locations. Had the fighting continued, experts believe Pakistan's position would have gone from bad to worse. And to make matters worse for Pakistan the coup de grâce for 1965 deceit came not in 1965 but 6 yrs later, for your 1965 adventurism turned two neighbors, who were though not friends but neither were they enemies into sworn enemies.

And what about 2002? Did Pakistan army achieve any victories in the battlefield..that makes you proud of it?

Albeit you are digressing from the topic, if one is to go by your logic, then it could be argued, what could have happened if PAF had more than a single squadron in Eastern sector, what would have been the outcome for IA without the support of Muktis.
Where as Indians never stop talking about Kargil, IA commanders openly question the so called victory while Indian sources point to some peaks still under PA control.....as for the rest, read at will, remember it was India which mobilised and shifted almost a million men to border....only to remain paralysed for almost a year. !!

Casualties

The standoff inflicted heavy casualties. It took India months to mobilize and lost 789 men to 1874 men[23] in the standoff. Around 100 soldiers were killed in the initial phase of laying mines, another 250 were injured. The remaining casualties were a result of artillery duels with Pakistan and vehicle accidents. The Pakistani losses were estimated to be about 34 casualties and 10 injuries.[citation needed]
Cost of standoff

The Indian cost for the buildup was 21,600 crore (US$3.93 billion) being much greater than that of Pakistani $1.4 billion.[24]

 

[Secur]

The US court doesn't even have a " locus standi " on the matter - let alone having any prove of ISI involvement ...

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

AoA,

Absolutely, the American officials are 100% correct.

And in fact, it's in their interests to avoid irritating the ISI in order to please india -- especially after Raymond Davis and other such affairs (which incidentally, the assailant was released on grounds of immunity as well)

Should india have concerns, they can reach us directly rather trying to use America as some sort of liaison here. Surely it is the indians that were pushing for the spooky, 'evil ISI' to be implicated. To this day however (and unfortunately for the indians) no evidence exists of high-level or any-level ISI involvement in the 26/11 drama. None. Zilch. Nada. So they should stop trying to milk on the deaths of 170 people in order to use it as a chance to villify our intelligence agencies (the same ones that are responsible for OUR internal security and a first line of defence against our enemies)

Now, on intelligence officials --- Gen. Taj has been out of the service for several years now and is retired. He's a patriot and a son of the Pakistani soil; he's going nowhere. And he's answerable to nobody.

Gen. Pasha (no longer DG ISI) himself had actually offered --in an UNPRECEDENTED move -- to fly to india the next day to assist in the preliminary investigations (indian were already blaming Pakistan, as usual). Given that the indian government was using media diplomacy tactics and issuing anti-Pakistan statements, the offer was called off. Had there been a respectful approach, cooperation at that high level would have been given --negating the need for indian to hide and seek American support.

At any rate, ISI had nothing to gain and nothing to do with mumbai drama. Me personally, i believe it was an inside job. I have my own views on the whole thing. Even that American guy Headley was an American agent and an informer for the DEA as well. Italian as well as UAE soil was also used to plan the attacks apparently, so why haven't the indians or the Americans summoned their officials?

No ISI officials are answerable to nobody else --except PAKISTAN. Any efforts to blindly get them as defendants in a murder case will be futile.....indian can complain to US department of justice or state department or whoever the hell else till their heart's content.

They are simply wasting their time on what are essentially NoN-starters.

So i hope our most cherished, 'distinguished' indian guests on this forum took good notes of what I have said on a clean sheet of notebook paper. You all have yourselves a wonderful day.

 

[ares]

Albeit you are digressing from the topic, if one is to go by your logic, then it could be argued, what could have happened if PAF had more than a single squadron in Eastern sector,

Nothing spectacular!!..how many squadron did you have in the west ..how did it effect the war their..Indian army despite having very limited aims in the west not only successfully defended the area but aslo achieved splendid victories against heavy odds and broke through Pakistani defenses in two sectors.

This is because of simple fact that PAF is strong enough to prevent IAF from achieving air superiority over PAF skies but at same time is not strong enough to effect the war on land.And IAF despite taking losses makes it point to effect the war on land.

what would have been the outcome for IA without the support of Muktis.

Result would hardly been different, had Muktis been not supporting the war effort, though conceded without the help of Mukti...Indian army's wouldn't have captured Dhaka as quickly as the did.. because they being localities were acting as out guides and as our spies.

But the fact remains, that simple look at deployment map of Eastern theater will tell you, that it was not defensible.
Not only was Pakistani army outflanked it was surrounded by Indian army and Indian Navy on all sides.
You had no room to manoeuvre ,all you could do, was sit tight and hold on to certain strongholds, prolonging your defeat but not evading it.

Where as Indians never stop talking about Kargil, IA commanders openly question the so called victory while Indian sources point to some peaks still under PA control

As an act of desperation, you have also involved Kargil in this milieu:

Kargil was by far the most humiliating defeat Pakistan(and not just its army) has gotten since 71.
In Kargil, Pakistan attained very strong position, very early in the war but in the end ended up losing 139 peaks of some 140 odd peaks it captured.

The reason why some Indian generals do not hail as an Indian victory, is because

1) India suffered a massive intelligence failure and failed to prevent Pakistan from capturing Indian peaks in the first place.
2) India allowed Pakistan ti cease the initiative, all it did was fight to fight to regain, what was already it's. too
3) India did not cross the LOC , it did not take the fight to Pakistan , but fighting took place on Indian lands.

This in some general's views is not a victory.

.....as for the rest, read at will, remember it was India which mobilised and shifted almost a million men to border....only to remain paralysed for almost a year. !!

2002 was a stand off not a war..the reason Indian army's deployment took longer time and costed much more..because Indian army is a much more massive than Pakistani army and has to cover larger distance for deployment on Pakistan border....this was another time Indian army lost the initiative ..was unable to launch swift operations across the border because of political uncertainty and it arrived late at scene. But as you know this problem is already being rectified. Again nothing for Pakistan to be proud off..this was an internal problem.

 

[karan.1970]

Orange cloth covering the RAW bit**. !!

Any port in the storm eh? Realizing your faux pas in a thread about ISI, now you want to talk about RAW

Typical clueless fanboy

I am from the army that being five times smaller gave you a bloody nose, when you Indians don't have a leg to stand on you escape back to 1971. Obviously you prefer to ignore 1965 or 2002....but then you are just a minute detail acting as a fan boy.

Err.. 1965 . We captured much larger area of Pakistan than vice versa
1999- Guess you forgot your 4000 dead soldiers, a bunch of them still buried on our side of the LOC .. (Yeah, you have point 5353 :rofl)
2002 - ??? You spent half your defence budget doing nothing..

and yeah! 1971 is a spectacular event to go back to.. Rarely does it happen that a country which is barely 25 years old and has suffered a severe military debacle less than 7 years back, steps up and slices an enemy into 2

Orange cloth covering the RAW bit**. !!

You want to see a pup of that bit**, open the atlas and look up a country called Bangladesh.. Looks like it wasn't a bit** but a pit bull that did away with half your country in 1971

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

AoA,

Absolutely, the American officials are 100% correct.

And in fact, it's in their interests to avoid irritating the ISI in order to please india -- especially after Raymond Davis and other such affairs (which incidentally, the assailant was released on grounds of immunity as well)

Should india have concerns, they can reach us directly rather trying to use America as some sort of liaison here. Surely it is the indians that were pushing for the spooky, 'evil ISI' to be implicated. To this day however (and unfortunately for the indians) no evidence exists of high-level or any-level ISI involvement in the 26/11 drama. None. Zilch. Nada. So they should stop trying to milk on the deaths of 170 people in order to use it as a chance to villify our intelligence agencies (the same ones that are responsible for OUR internal security and a first line of defence against our enemies)

Now, on intelligence officials --- Gen. Taj has been out of the service for several years now and is retired. He's a patriot and a son of the Pakistani soil; he's going nowhere. And he's answerable to nobody.

Gen. Pasha (no longer DG ISI) himself had actually offered --in an UNPRECEDENTED move -- to fly to india the next day to assist in the preliminary investigations (indian were already blaming Pakistan, as usual). Given that the indian government was using media diplomacy tactics and issuing anti-Pakistan statements, the offer was called off. Had there been a respectful approach, cooperation at that high level would have been given --negating the need for indian to hide and seek American support.

At any rate, ISI had nothing to gain and nothing to do with mumbai drama. Me personally, i believe it was an inside job. I have my own views on the whole thing. Even that American guy Headley was an American agent and an informer for the DEA as well. Italian as well as UAE soil was also used to plan the attacks apparently, so why haven't the indians or the Americans summoned their officials?

No ISI officials are answerable to nobody else --except PAKISTAN. Any efforts to blindly get them as defendants in a murder case will be futile.....indian can complain to US department of justice or state department or whoever the hell else till their heart's content.

They are simply wasting their time on what are essentially NoN-starters.

So i hope our most cherished, 'distinguished' indian guests on this forum took good notes of what I have said on a clean sheet of notebook paper. You all have yourselves a wonderful day.

166 people died in that incident.

Even if you 'believe' it was an inside job, the least you can do is not disrespect the dead by calling it a drama. Real people don't die real deaths in dramas.

Thank you

 

[notorious_eagle]

166 people died in that incident.

Even if you 'believe' it was an inside job, the least you can do is not disrespect the dead by calling it a drama. Real people don't die real deaths in dramas.

Thank you

I have my full sympathies with the families who lost their loved ones and pray that Allah give them the strength to bear this terrible loss. But lets be realistic here, there is no shred of proof to suggest that the ISI was behind the 26/11 attacks. In fact, your own PM admitted to the fact that there was no evidence to implicate the ISI for these attacks. The ISI does not stand to gain anything by killing innocent people. After all, the members of the ISI have families of their own. If an attack was launched in DRDO where top engineers and scientists were killed, i could understand the point of view of Indian members here but in this case i flatly reject these accusations. Engaging in mere propaganda by making the enemy look like a savage does not bring out the truth.

I am simply appalled by the attitude of Indian members on this thread. Engaging in Ad Hominem attacks is not helping their argument. The DG ISI rightly so enjoys immunity as he at the time represented an organization part of a sovereign nation, thus he automatically enjoys immunity.

 

[karan.1970]

I am simply appalled by the attitude of Indian members on this thread. Engaging in Ad Hominem attacks is not helping their argument. The DG ISI rightly so enjoys immunity as he at the time represented an organization part of a sovereign nation, thus he automatically enjoys immunity.

Not really.. The immunity comes into play if he committed terrorist acts for which he is being sued on behalf of Pakistani govt. Not otherwise.. The court still needs to rule on who does the burden of proof falls on to prove if he acted on Pakistani state's behalf or not. But that will come much later.. First it needs to be proved if he was even involved or not.

 

[RazPaK]

Not really.. The immunity comes into play if he committed terrorist acts for which he is being sued on behalf of Pakistani govt. Not otherwise.. The court still needs to rule on who does the burden of proof falls on to prove if he acted on Pakistani state's behalf or not. But that will come much later.. First it needs to be proved if he was even involved or not.

But according to the strongest, not largest, democracy, he wasn't proven to be complicit. So I would advise you to take it home this time and a hatch a better one in the future.

 

[foxbat]

But according to the strongest, not largest, democracy, he wasn't proven to be complicit. So I would advise you to take it home this time and a hatch a better one in the future.

y

Do you want to back up your comment in the bold. American State department has offered an affidevit that if DGs ISI are even guilty, they enjoy immunity. They have not commented on the validity of the case of the innocence of Pakistani ISI.

You need to stop your fingers getting ahead of your brain really...

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

I have my full sympathies with the families who lost their loved ones and pray that Allah give them the strength to bear this terrible loss. But lets be realistic here, there is no shred of proof to suggest that the ISI was behind the 26/11 attacks. In fact, your own PM admitted to the fact that there was no evidence to implicate the ISI for these attacks. The ISI does not stand to gain anything by killing innocent people. After all, the members of the ISI have families of their own. If an attack was launched in DRDO where top engineers and scientists were killed, i could understand the point of view of Indian members here but in this case i flatly reject these accusations. Engaging in mere propaganda by making the enemy look like a savage does not bring out the truth.

I am simply appalled by the attitude of Indian members on this thread. Engaging in Ad Hominem attacks is not helping their argument. The DG ISI rightly so enjoys immunity as he at the time represented an organization part of a sovereign nation, thus he automatically enjoys immunity.

Thanks for the concern for the families of the victims first of all.

Now ,i don't know what Indian members here are saying , but as i said before , it is a sound legal argument which America has given not to make ISI stand trial, although i do believe rogue individuals from ISI could have been involved since David Headley has suggested some involvement.

But whatever be the point of argument , my only point is that irrespective of what you believe , please respect the dead and don't refer to the whole thing as a drama because real people died in this incident.

 

[Bang Galore]

I have my full sympathies with the families who lost their loved ones and pray that Allah give them the strength to bear this terrible loss. But lets be realistic here, there is no shred of proof to suggest that the ISI was behind the 26/11 attacks. In fact, your own PM admitted to the fact that there was no evidence to implicate the ISI for these attacks. The ISI does not stand to gain anything by killing innocent people. After all, the members of the ISI have families of their own. If an attack was launched in DRDO where top engineers and scientists were killed, i could understand the point of view of Indian members here but in this case i flatly reject these accusations. Engaging in mere propaganda by making the enemy look like a savage does not bring out the truth.

Regardless of your passionate defence of the ISI. it is the position of the Indian government post the Abu Jundal interrogation(as articulated by then HM Chidambaram), that elements of the Pakistani state were involved & complicit in the 26/11 attacks. You may disagree but that is the position of the GoI
The Hindu : News / National : Futile to deny state role, Chidambaram tells Pakistan

I am simply appalled by the attitude of Indian members on this thread. Engaging in Ad Hominem attacks is not helping their argument. The DG ISI rightly so enjoys immunity as he at the time represented an organization part of a sovereign nation, thus he automatically enjoys immunity.

I find this argument extraordinary. Immunity does not mean non-complicity. Automatic immunity also does not follow. The argument made in the U.S. court was that since there was evidence (their claim in court) to suggest ISI involvement (either directly or through their proxy LeT) and since the Pakistani state claims that they did not order the attacks directly, the ISI was acting as a rogue agency & therefore not eligible to claim immunity accorded to state organisations. Regardless of the merit in their claim, your argument that he holds absolute immunity was being put to question & therefore it is fair for any of us to expand that argument.