NATO Forces Kill 13 Pak FC's out of a total of 27!

[Tang0]

Nowhere in that article does it defend the actions that caused the deaths of Pakistan's FC. It calls for a joint investigation in fact. Does it call the event an outrage? No, because often enough NATO or Americans are killed by their own bombs. With two military forces operating in close proximity, "Friendly Fire" is inevitable.

It is not in the interests of the US to have instability in Pakistan, or in Afghanistan. However, leaving Afghanistan will only lead to civil war, which probably is not a good thing for both countries. Nowhere does it say that the WoT does not have something to do with the current internal conflict in Pakistan. When it says "Help Stabilize" it is not saying "Make Pakistan better than when we found it". But is it to much to hope that maybe the US could fix some of the problems it has caused through cooperation with the government of Pakistan?

Just because it is not full of outrage over the violation of Pakistan's sovereignty does not mean that it is a dismissal of Pakistan's concerns or arrogant trash.

As for the long term goals of the US in Afghanistan, I will say this: The US has always been terrible at Empire building, and has no intention to try again any time soon. As for the rest, I can't speculate, look at the comments of senior US officials for more guidance. The official line (I gather) is to "Help build a nation which will not harbor or be a breeding ground for Muslim extremists" Last time I checked, that goal is still a ways away.

At the same time, as it stands, FATA is a "breeding ground for Muslim extremists", and the US is desperately seeking a way to make it not so while avoiding a conflict with Pakistan, or destabilizing Pakistan enough to induce a civil war. Of course, the US is on the other side of the world, politically, geographically, and religiously, and will proceed to step on all types of feet before it figures out a course that works at least so-so.

To sum it up: Pakistan and Afghanistan have nothing the US wants or needs, and in fact, the US would gladly leave the region in peace. However, from their perspective, they are in to deep to just leave now, because as soon as they did, the situation would revert to something worse than when they arrived.

Anyway, I have tried to explain the position of the US government. I know well that their policies have been largely unsuccessful, but please, don't cry out for blood unless someone is actively trying to hurt you or take something from you.

I have said all I can say on the subject.

 

[muse]

Tango

Why get your panties in a twist? All I did was ask you to expand on your point and you defensive on me -

Thank you for the response, however, I did not mean to put you on the spot to explain US govt. policy, merely to expand on your point - you are exactly right, that the editorial does not call the killing of uniformed Pakistani personnel an outrage -- but it is an outrage.

But beyond that, it is a disservice when in what is now customary, it shifts blame for the lack of American success on others and thereby perpetuates the obscenity of these wars. By the way, Just because some cannot admit it, does not mean that there is not a civil war in Afghanistan. PLease trust me on this, that it is a civil war. I wish I could explain this statement to you, I can't, not just yet anyway.

And as for not calling for blood - sure, I take your point - let's be clear, "justice" has to be done; is that better? - actually it is - that such justice should serve to induce "sobriety" and the sure knowledge of responibility, it would be all the better for all concerned.

 

[Tang0]

Don't worry, my panties are not all in a twist. I will get a little defense as a US citizen when I hear statements that could be interpreted as calling for the death of those I am sworn to protect. But yeah, I just have to much time on my hands at the moment, and spend it making longwinded explanations of US policy on the internet to foreigners. Sometimes it is fun.

I agree, there is a Civil War of sorts going on right now in Afghanistan, but it is not anywhere near as bad as it could be.

Yes, everyone who is killed before their time deserves justice of some sort. I should hope that the US command dose not "Shrug off" this event, and all signs point to the fact that it will not.

Is there blame shifting in the editorial...Yes. All humans do it to one degree or another. It is completely incomprehensible to a western citizen living in todays world that a democratically elected government with a strong Army to be so incapable of dealing with matters in its own borders. (People forget things...Like I don't know...The US civil war?) As such, they blame Pakistan for not trying hard enough. It is incomprehensible to most foreigners that the people of the US could be indifferent to the damage their policies cause abroad. As such, they sometimes shift blame on "CIA" or "Those American Jews" when it is completely uncalled for. Sorry, it happens sometimes.

 

[muse]

So sure about "foreigners" and imagine that you are the only one whose duty it is to protect - are you? Anyway some of us do our duty and do not forget that it's best to not push, just cause there are those who push back. That's how this mess got started.

 

[Tang0]

Your language structure would seem to identify you as a non-native American English speaker. This of course could be entirely false, so I will not comment further. If you have ever sworn an oath to defend the citizens of the United states, I apologize for the presumption. Nor will I speak any more of my nationality, as it is impossible to verify. (IP's are not hard to spoof)

 

[thorosius]

Its just a matter of time! the instant a bunch of American die on our border they will retaliate by invading the border area, inturn igniting pastun retaliation. Our army should defend our land. And kill whatever comes accross the border, nothern alliance cowards or Americans. We aren't paying them for their allowances and be sitting ducks we are paying them to shed blood, if our sovereignty is threatened!

Its always been the dream of the Americans to have solid control over the Pakistani territory. The killing of the FC personel is just a step. American colonial approach can only be stopped by war just like Russia!

 

[Rabbit]

Thorosius:
I think one of the most frequent complaints I've read on this forum is about our disregard for Pakistan, not our continuous dream of having solid control of it.

Muse:
I don't think Tang0 was trying to be derogatory by saying "foreigners". In fact, I think he was agreeing with a number of your points including what we call the Iraq War being a civil war. To illustrate both of your points: if you look at the USA's history, the "South" (former Confederate regions) teach their children about the "War of Northern Aggression" while the rest of our country learns about the "Civil War".

 

[Tang0]

For those advocating some type of open conflict with coalition forces, I point to these statistics.

Country ||Millitary expenditures In Billion Dollars per year
United States 335.7
Japan 46.7
United Kingdom 36
France 33.6
China 31.1
Germany 27.7
Saudi Arabia 21.6
Italy 21.1
Iran 17.5
South Korea 13.5

See Pakistan on that list? No, hmmm, maybe it is best to try and resolve these issues without resorting to violence? Just a suggestion...

Note: These statistics are from 2001, since then the U.S military budget has topped $700 billion

More accurate statistics;
World Military Spending - Global Issues

 

[roadrunner]

wow, 25 pages. The US just bombed its own allies again, nothing new. They've bombed just about all their allies in the WoT, Pakistan was going to get it sooner or later. Reminds me of the incident when the US tried to bomb an Afghan prison where Taliban were hiding, ended up bombing their own troops..Dostum ended up running away from the prison before the US re-targeted.

 

[ejaz007]

Did Karzai speak on behalf of US?
Monday, June 16, 2008
By Rahimullah Yusufzai

PESHAWAR: Afghan President Hamid Karzai must have been very angry and frustrated that he put all diplomatic niceties aside and threatened to send his troops across the international border into Pakistan to combat Taliban commanders such as Baitullah Mahsud and Maulvi Omar.

His tone was bitter in the press conference that he addressed in Kabul on Sunday. The rise in Taliban attacks across Afghanistan and the setback that his forces are suffering must be weighing heavily on his mind when he spoke those words. There couldn’t be a bigger embarrassment for his beleaguered government than the jailbreak in Kandahar following a spectacular Taliban attack that freed more than 1,000 inmates. This must be one of the biggest jailbreaks in history.

President Karzai should know that sending Afghan troops across the Pak-Afghan border would constitute violation of Pakistan’s territory and resisted. Pakistan’s armed forces until now have not made any effort to stop violations of its airspace by US gunship helicopters, jet-fighters and drones but they would certainly not allow Afghan troops to intrude into Pakistani territory to hit targets.

This is the first time that Mr Karzai has hurled a threat to send his soldiers into Pakistan. Earlier, he was pleading with US-led Nato forces to take action against the bases of militants that in his view operated in Pakistan. His argument was that the Nato troops should focus on targeting Taliban hiding in Pakistan instead of launching attacks against the militants in Afghanistan. There is also this feeling that the Afghan President was speaking on behalf of the US, which has lately increased pressure on Pakistan by opposing its peace accords with Taliban militants and launching airstrikes in the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan.

One is sure President Karzai doesn’t mean to carry out his threat to send Afghan troops across the border to Pakistan. The only manner in which he can hope to do so is to convince the US and its Nato allies to undertake such a mission in Pakistan and then order some of his Afghan soldiers to accompany the Western forces. The US until now has refrained from sending its ground troops into Pakistan and has instead relied on its pilotless Predator planes to carry out airstrikes against suspected hideouts of militants in South Waziristan, North Waziristan and Bajaur. Also, it is no secret that the fledgling Afghan National Army is confronted with major military challenges at home due to the spreading Taliban insurgency and ordering it to launch strikes in another country would be unwise.

Pakistan has been insisting that its own forces would carry out operations against militants in its territory. It has resisted demands by the US that its troops be allowed to conduct operations in Pakistan. The issue has caused friction in their ties. The relationship has become uncertain following the recent US airstrikes that killed several civilians and 13 Pakistani paramilitary soldiers manning a border post in Mohmand Agency.

Mr Karzai cited the right of self-defence as the reason that gave Afghan forces the excuse to go after the Pakistani Taliban commander Baitullah Mahsud. It wasn’t clear if he meant the Afghan Taliban leader Mulla Mohammad Omar or the Pakistani Taliban spokesman Maulvi Omar when he issued a similar warning. It appears that he meant the spokesman Maulvi Omar, who like Baitullah Mahsud is a Pakistani and has admitted sending fighters across the border to Afghanistan to fight US-led coalition forces. While it is wrong on the part of these Pakistani Taliban commanders to send their men to Afghanistan to attack Afghan and Nato forces, still it doesn’t give Afghan National Army the right to cross the international border and operate in Pakistani territory. As Pakistan Army isn’t crossing the Durand Line border to enter Afghanistan and fight there, the same principle would apply to the Afghan National Army. Crossing the border by regular armies of the two neighbouring countries would complicate the situation and fuel hostility in their already uneasy relations. A better option would be to pool efforts to stop the militants infiltrating the long and porous Pak-Afghan border. It is another matter that such efforts didn’t succeed in the past. One probable reason for this is that all the armies fighting the militants and ranging from the US and Nato forces to those from Afghanistan and Pakistan have been under-estimating the strength of the resilient and resurgent Taliban.

Did Karzai speak on behalf of US?

In the light of attack on FC this threat is worth noticing. Is it a part of some scheme being hatched by the US?

 

[ejaz007]

Bush planning final strike at bin Laden
Monday, June 16, 2008
‘Al-Qaeda chief may be hiding in Bajaur tribal agency’

LONDON: President George W Bush has enlisted British special forces in a final attempt to capture Osama bin Laden before he leaves the White House, the Sunday Times has reported.

As Bush arrived in Britain on Sunday on the final leg of his eight-day farewell tour of Europe, defence and intelligence sources in Washington and London confirmed that a renewed hunt was on for the leader of the September 11 attacks. “If he (Bush) can say he has killed Saddam Hussein and captured bin Laden, he can claim to have left the world a safer place,” said a US intelligence source.

The Special Boat Service (SBS) and the Special Reconnaissance Regiment have been taking part in the US-led operations to capture bin Laden in northern Pakistan. It is the first time they have operated across the Afghan border on a regular basis.

The hunt was “completely sanctioned” by the Pakistani government, according to a UK special forces source. It involves the use of Predator and Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles fitted with Hellfire missiles that can be used to take out specific terrorist targets.

One US intelligence source compared the “growing number of clandestine reconnaissance missions” inside Pakistan with those conducted in Laos and Cambodia at the height of the Vietnam war.

America rarely acknowledges the use of Predator and Reaper drones, but the most recent known strike was on a suspected al-Qaeda safe house in North Waziristan earlier in June. Villagers said the house was empty.

Intelligence on the whereabouts of bin Laden is sketchy, but some analysts believe he is in the Bajaur tribal zone in northwest Pakistan. He has evaded capture for nearly seven years. “Bush is swinging for the fences in the hope of scoring a home run,” said an intelligence source, using a baseball metaphor.

A Pentagon source said US forces were rolling up al-Qaeda’s network in Pakistan in the hope of pushing bin Laden towards the Afghan border, where the US military and bombers with guided missiles were lying in wait. “They are prepping for a major battle,” he said.

The main operations in Pakistan are being undertaken by Delta, the US Army special operations unit, and the British SBS. Special forces are being sent to capture or kill al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters based on intelligence provided by the Special Reconnaissance Regiment and its US counterpart, the Security Co-ordination Detachment.

The step-up in military activity has increased tensions between Pakistan and the US. A senior Pakistani government source said President Pervez Musharraf had given tacit support to Predator attacks on al-Qaeda.

Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, said last week that the US would “partner (the Pakistanis) to the extent they want us to” to combat insurgents. Pakistan lodged a strong diplomatic protest last week over what it claimed was an air strike on a border post with Afghanistan that killed 11 of its troops. The United States declined to accept this version of events. “It is still not exactly clear what happened,” said Stephen Hadley, the national security adviser.

Bush planning final strike at bin Laden

 

[muse]

Is the Pope really Catholic??


Get a grip!

How about this, turn the issue of relations with the US and any possible role in helping the US out of the mess it is in Afghanistan over to te "democractic", "independent" etc., Majlis - why not? they have "sacrificed" (their integrity?) and now deserve the opportunity to show the people of Pakistan exactly how different they are from the "dictator".

 

[ejaz007]

Considering the events happening I do think US is again planning on carrying out strikes in the Afghanistan and perhaps in the adjoining areas of Pakistan. Bush personally has nothing to loose. His tennure is ending and he has so far failed to achieve any of the major targets he had set. Bin Laden is still at large and Iraq is still not in US control. Taliban are making a come back and US is suffering casualties.
Bush is prepared to take the risk and in doing so if he succeeds in capturing or killing Bin Laden then his party might have a chance of winning the elections. WOT shall be revived and Bush will tell his people how safe US is because of his policies (and how unsafe Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are).

 

[muse]

Bush planning a "final" strike...

Doesn't that mean that he knows where Bin Laden is? And if he knows, how long has he known this, and why has he not shared this with the American public and his "allies"? You will note that no US media, especially the "free and fair" variety will ask such questions, not even in a election year, instead of voices of criticism, they are cheer leaders in these final days of the global crusade.

Has Bush been "striking" at Bin laden? must have missed that.

 

[Tang0]

What questions precisely do you think the US media is not asking that it should?