Many Haqqani Commanders Killed in NW OPS - Pak Army

[SQ8]

So what the Pentagon Report says about Pakistan is incorrect because the information came from afghan heroin dealers? Or is it because ISI remains one of the many foreign spy agencies with their fingers in the dusty pie called Afghanistan?

It is incorrect because it places focus on false reports by its Afghan allies who have other beef to grind with Pakistan instead of actual intelligence from sources within Pakistan and in coordination with the Pakistani forces.The Pentagon report is incorrect because it classifies its own dealings with the Afghan Taliban(Haqqanis included) for peace as legit and those from Pakistan is illegitimate.

 

[halupridol]

Considering the Pentagon/CIA's role in directly/indirectly bolstering ISIS, their intelligence flop on WMD's in Iraq, and the statement of their own Military Commander in Afghanistan (quoted in my post earlier), yes, we should treat is devoid of credibility unless the "facts and evidence" it used can be reviewed and analyzed.

will same not apply on the particular statement of General khattak

 

[VCheng]

It is incorrect because it places focus on false reports by its Afghan allies who have other beef to grind with Pakistan instead of actual intelligence from sources within Pakistan and in coordination with the Pakistani forces.The Pentagon report is incorrect because it classifies its own dealings with the Afghan Taliban(Haqqanis included) for peace as legit and those from Pakistan is illegitimate.

I can accept that as being your point of view. Of course, there are other points of view to consider too, wouldn't you agree?

 

[SQ8]

I can accept that as being your point of view. Of course, there are other points of view to consider too, wouldn't you agree?

Always are. Hence the Pentagon's POV is not a POV I choose to accept.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

will same not apply on the particular statement of General khattak

The Pakistani General's statement is supported by the statement of his US counterpart in Afghanistan, as I pointed out in my earlier post.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

It is incorrect because it places focus on false reports by its Afghan allies who have other beef to grind with Pakistan instead of actual intelligence from sources within Pakistan and in coordination with the Pakistani forces.The Pentagon report is incorrect because it classifies its own dealings with the Afghan Taliban(Haqqanis included) for peace as legit and those from Pakistan is illegitimate.

The same "methodology" (sourcing exclusively from NDS, Afghan military and Karzai officials with axes to grind with Pakistan) was used in the BBC documentary "Secret Pakistan", with almost no effort to obtain the opposing point of view from Pakistani officials - hardly the definition of objectivity.

 

[halupridol]

The Pakistani General's statement is supported by the statement of his US counterpart in Afghanistan, as I pointed out in my earlier post.

Sirji,,seems u have already reviewed n analyzed the "facts n evidence",,,in this case a video hosted by pentagon

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Sirji,,seems u have already reviewed n analyzed the "facts n evidence",,,in this case a video hosted by pentagon

The statements from the Pakistani military field commander and the US military field commander (the latter in Afghanistan) are complimentary - what is so hard to understand about that?

 

[halupridol]

The statements from the Pakistani military field commander and the US military field commander (the latter in Afghanistan) are complimentary - what is so hard to understand about that?

i undrstd wht u r saying,,,,,
but i find it hard to believe,like u find pentagons report

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

i undrstd wht u r saying,,,,,
but i find it hard to believe,like u find pentagons report

In the case of the Pentagon Report, the claims being made are one sided, with the side being attacked outright denying them.

In the case of the Pakistani and US General, the latter is in fact contradicting the Pentagon Report (and we don't really know what kinds of input was used to compile it, without which the credibility cannot be analyzed), and (independently) supporting the Pakistani claim. This is not the kind of "equal equal" situation between the two sets of claims that you are making it out to be.

That said, I agree that it is still early to comment on how comprehensive the damage (from the Pakistani military ops) inflicted on the various terrorist groups operating in FATA will be, but the kind of outright skepticism being demonstrated by some is out of line as well.

 

[SMC]

Oh, and what the Pentagon Report says is totally devoid of credible facts and evidence.

You're airing fantastic conspiracy theories here. What evidence does the pentagon report have against Pakistan? All I see are a bunch of statements and no evidence.

 

[SMC]

i undrstd wht u r saying,,,,,
but i find it hard to believe,like u find pentagons report

Pentagon report has no evidence, it is just airing claims and statements without any evidence to back them up.

 

[VCheng]

Always are. Hence the Pentagon's POV is not a POV I choose to accept.

The target audience of the Pentagon Report is those to whom it was submitted. As long as they accept it and make decisions based off of it, it has served its purpose.

 

[VCheng]

You're airing fantastic conspiracy theories here. What evidence does the pentagon report have against Pakistan? All I see are a bunch of statements and no evidence.

What conspiracy theory have I aired? I am just saying that the Pentagon Report being discussed was formulated robustly and is intended to help its audience make necessary decisions.

 

[SMC]

What conspiracy theory have I aired? I am just saying that the Pentagon Report being discussed was formulated robustly and is intended to help its audience make necessary decisions.

You're repeating the nonsense pentagon is reporting without back themselves up with evidence, much like they did with Iraq.