NATO tankers set to fire in Pakistan after attack

[Tuahaa]

I dont know how many of you read Issac Asimov, but quoting one of my fav lines from his books

"Violence is the last resort of the Incompetent"

Well then, you could say that the government was incompetent in response and its nation fell to the 'last resort'

---------- Post added at 06:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:04 PM ----------

Militants have been looting and burning goods convoy for years. Stop sympathizing with their cause.

I wouldn't have if the government did something.

 

[SekrutYakhni]

You have no idea of the consequences if NATO decides to find alternative routes.

 

[Leviza]

Now the blaim game starts b/w Pakistan and NATO/USA ......

WASHINGTON: Pakistan received a stern message from the United States on Thursday — stop cross-border attacks into Afghanistan or face the consequences.

The message was delivered forcefully by both US lawmakers and administration officials.

Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, who is in Washington, received the message from Senator John Kerry on Wednesday and from Senator Carl Levin and Congressman Howard Berman on Thursday.

Senator Levin chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, while Mr Berman chairs the House Foreign Relations Committee.

The Pakistani delegation that participated in the talks came back with the feeling that the Americans were becoming “more and more assertive and less apologetic” on this issue.

The Americans argued that the Haqqani network and other insurgents were using their bases in Fata to attack US and Nato forces. They urged the Pakistanis to “make the strategic decisions they have to make to help resolve the Afghan conflict” or the Americans would be forced to use their military might to subdue the militants.

At the Pentagon, spokesman Col Dave Lapan strongly defended US troops blamed for accidentally killing three Pakistani soldiers in a raid along the Afghan border earlier Thursday.

The colonel noted that a statement released by Islamabad showed that Pakistani troops had fired their rifles, “as a warning”, at US helicopters taking part in the raid.

“You fire at a helicopter in a combat zone, they usually take that as hostile and return fire,” the Pentagon official said.

The Pentagon is now investigating whether the raid that left three Pakistani soldiers dead was the result of a breakdown in communication among the two countries.

“That will be part of this process,” Col Lapan said. “To determine how this happened, why it happened, were protocols followed, were they not followed — those types of things.”

The US media quoted Pentagon officials as saying that Pakistan’s move to block the Khyber Pass supply line in the wake of the deaths of its troops would have little impact on US military operations in Afghanistan.

While the busy border crossing at Torkham is now closed, other key transit points remain open “at last report”, according to Col Lapan, who stressed that the US military had alternate means of bringing in fuel, ammunition and food for its soldiers.

Looks Like they want to impose On Pakistan something which Pakistan dont want to ahead with.....

Source-

 

[Desert Fox]

I dont know how many of you read Issac Asimov, but quoting one of my fav lines from his books

"Violence is the last resort of the Incompetent"

Hey, we weren't the ones who fired the first shot, they did! So this quote of your applies to NATO and not us!

 

[muse]

Forum readers know by now that Pakistan has not blocked all NATO traffic, indeed, they have blocked a single route - but there is much politics and anger associated with these events - especially since these events occurred with CIA chief Panetta in Islamabad - Panetta, incidentally, is reported to be of the view that only US military presence in Pakistan itself, can help the US secure Afghanistan -

while the ISAF/NATO have argued "Self Defense" and "Rules of Engagement" - fact of the matter is the crews who fired upon Pakistani FC had to get an OK to fire from officers higher up in the chain at Bagram or even in Qatar -- this is interesting because it suggests that reports about the point of view and the message Mr. Panetta brought to Pakistani leadership, are certainly highlighted -- but a more likely scenario, is that an officer high up in the chain screwed up - yes, it's not sexy, but it's real life .

Now, what if there is a consensus in the near future that this was no screw up ??

As we have in the "Pak-US Relationship" threat on the strategic board, Mr. Zardari has a decision to make, the decision is really on a personal level, about legacy, some will say, personal honor, but Mr. Zaradari is quite beyond such calculations - on the strategic level, Mr. Zardari's decision will have the effect of freeing Pakistan from the strangle hold of the US and the West or of strengthening the strangle hold of the US -- either way, Mr. Zardari is at a crossroads with fatal consequences for him:


US envoy expects quick reopening on Pakistan border

Friday, 01 Oct, 2010


WASHINGTON: A senior US envoy on Friday voiced optimism that Pakistan would quickly reopen the Afghanistan border, saying that an extended closure would have a “colossal” impact.

Pakistan announced Thursday it would shut the main land route for Nato supplies into Afghanistan after the military accused alliance helicopters of killing three Pakistani soldiers.

Richard Holbrooke, the US special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, called the soldiers' deaths “very unfortunate” and blamed the ill-defined terrain.

But Holbrooke disputed Pakistani officials' account that the border was closed, saying that traffic was still going through but “moving more slowly.”

"It's inconceivable to me that the closing of the routes, the alleged closing, which is not a full closing anyway, would continue more than a short period of time," Holbrooke told a forum in Washington.

“If you go to Torkham on the Khyber Pass and you look at it from a helicopter,” Holbrooke said, “once they start closing that thing it's going to have a colossal effect on the region.”

Pakistan is a key US partner in the campaign against the Afghan Taliban, who are fighting a nine-year insurgency against now more than 152,000 US-led foreign troops.

But Pakistan has faced accusations in the West that its powerful military and intelligence service have played a double-game and maintained longstanding relations with the Taliban.

In southern Pakistan, heavily armed gunmen on Friday set ablaze more than two dozen trucks and tankers carrying fuel and supplies for NATO forces in Afghanistan. -AFP

 

[SekrutYakhni]

^^NATO supply lines will get back to normal. Crooks in the house and Brussels think their 'mighty' is at work. You will taste the 'flavour' of nature right in front of your eyes down the road.

I remember the verse in Quran which means that Crooks will make decisions to save themselves and impose their agenda; however, those decisions will turn against them.
If you know what I mean---

 

[Aeon]

Second attack on NATO convoy in Pakistan
Friday, 01 Oct, 2010

ISLAMABAD: Assailants in Pakistan launched two separate attacks on Friday on vehicles carrying fuel for NATO and American forces in Afghanistan, highlighting the vulnerability of the US-led mission a day after Pakistan closed a major border crossing.

A truck driver and his assistant were burned alive in the second attack on a single tanker in the parking lot of a restaurant in southeastern Baluchistan province, said police officer Mohammad Azam. He said ''anti-state elements'' were behind the attack.

That term could refer to militants, separatist rebels active in the region or even common criminals.

Earlier Friday, suspected militants torched 27 tankers carrying oil for troops in Afghanistan in Sindh province.

Around 80 percent of the fuel, spare parts, clothing and other non-lethal supplies for foreign forces in landlocked Afghanistan travels through Pakistan after arriving in the southern Arabian sea port of Karachi. The alliance has other supply routes to Afghanistan, but the Pakistani ones are the cheapest and most convenient.

The Pakistani government shut one of the two border crossings into Afghanistan on Thursday in apparent protest of a NATO helicopter incursion that killed three of its soldiers on the border.

The events raised tensions between Pakistan and the United States, which have a close but often troubled alliance in the fight against militants.

 

[Frank Martin]

Poor NATO force..What else they need to bear in this War

 

[Awesome]

There is an ongoing survey being asked on the media about how to react to Nato's violence against Pakistan, options are:

1) Protest
2) Counter-attack
3) Negotiate

Saw it on Geo/Dawn. Lets see what the result is going to be.

Nato has to be told in very aggressive and unfriendly terms that Pakistan cannot tolerate the continuous killing of anybody in Pakistan by their people. Even killing the most heinous criminal is the responsibility of Pakistani authorities not theirs.

 

[muse]

Isn't it interesting that the Pakistani government has not stopped these trucks from being refilled - and even more interesting that the Pakistani government is not stopping the refineries from pushing this JP8 into pipelines and storage tanks - some one is not being truthful, not being fully forthcoming - can you guess who?

 

[Tuahaa]

Damn, I should get GEO Tv (as much as I hate it) or some Pakistani news source (Dawn) in Dubai.

 

[Tuahaa]

Isn't it interesting that the Pakistani government has not stopped these trucks from being refilled - and even more interesting that the Pakistani government is not stopping the refineries from pushing this JP8 into pipelines and storage tanks - some one is not being truthful, not being fully forthcoming - can you guess who?

The truck burnings were carried out by angry people.

Our great government will continue supporting the message of disrespect of a nati-, I mean, an honest mistake and friendly fi-, I mean, friendliness!

 

[Aeon]

The truck burnings were carried out by angry people.

Our great government will continue supporting the message of disrespect of a nati-, I mean, an honest mistake and friendly fi-, I mean, friendliness!

You mean frienemy-ness?

 

[Awesome]

Forum readers know by now that Pakistan has not blocked all NATO traffic, indeed, they have blocked a single route - but there is much politics and anger associated with these events - especially since these events occurred with CIA chief Panetta in Islamabad - Panetta, incidentally, is reported to be of the view that only US military presence in Pakistan itself, can help the US secure Afghanistan -

while the ISAF/NATO have argued "Self Defense" and "Rules of Engagement" - fact of the matter is the crews who fired upon Pakistani FC had to get an OK to fire from officers higher up in the chain at Bagram or even in Qatar -- this is interesting because it suggests that reports about the point of view and the message Mr. Panetta brought to Pakistani leadership, are certainly highlighted -- but a more likely scenario, is that an officer high up in the chain screwed up - yes, it's not sexy, but it's real life .

Now, what if there is a consensus in the near future that this was no screw up ??

As we have in the "Pak-US Relationship" threat on the strategic board, Mr. Zardari has a decision to make, the decision is really on a personal level, about legacy, some will say, personal honor, but Mr. Zaradari is quite beyond such calculations - on the strategic level, Mr. Zardari's decision will have the effect of freeing Pakistan from the strangle hold of the US and the West or of strengthening the strangle hold of the US -- either way, Mr. Zardari is at a crossroads with fatal consequences for him

Depends on how you look at it, perhaps some good would come from this, because Zardari is expected to side with the US by continuing on with the Nato supply route, by not giving any aggressive reaction back to the US, by further accepting their aid.

Zardari's departure and all those are hell bent on establishing Pakistan as a US colony would just fasten their way out of Pakistan.

The idea is not to pick a war with the US, the idea is as you said it, free ourselves from the clutches of America. I hope this repeated act of violence from America proves to be a catalyst that leads up to that eventuality.

 

[muse]

The truck burnings were carried out by angry people.

No one is challenging the idea that "angry" people or "happy people are burning trucks -- what's being asked is how come trucks are still being refilled with JP8 destines for Afghanistan, if as the Pakistani govt contends, it has stopped these supplies -- isn't it curious that the govt says it won't allow supplies but continues to allow trucks to refill with jp8 -- no JP8, no nothing in Afghanistan