NATO's Shame - NATO Aware it was Firing at Pakistani Troops

[araz]

............. which is exactly what I do too, perhaps in a different writing style!

Which I have labelled as hiding behind the skirt of verbosity. Sir please don't think for a second that I mean any disrespect. I appreciate your point of view, even though it does not marry up with most of the forum members views
Araz

 

[MastanKhan]

Knee jerk reactions are many times just plain too emotional to be useful or productive. Taking one's time may not be a cover-up but rather a thorough job.

I am not regarding the Pakistani report as worthless. All I am saying is to let the other side speak too.

That is all.

Hi,

In the u s---that thorough job means a cover up---let time take its toll---let the temperature go down---and then let the tap dancing begin---.

Nato has never been truth full in any of the incidences over the 20---30 years----it has always been a cover up---. How about the case about the ski lift in italy---where over a 100 people were killed---or about the chinese embassy bombings where 200 chinese were killed and 100's of strikes in afg and iraq where innocent have been killed because the "christian" pilot did not want to miss out on the oppurtunity to kill the muslim and didnot want to land back at the base----.

The missionary zeal is as evident in the american forces as much as it is in the al qaeda and taliban forces---the american forces enjoy killing the pakistani troops and the taliban in the similiar manner as the taliban want to kill the americans---.

Pakistanis millitary has a misconception----the american soldier and officer would seek greatest of pleasures in killing pak millitary personale if given a free hand---at mid level---they would not miss a beat to miss an oppurtunity---,

The hatred in the american forces against the pak millitary is at its highest---. The recent statement of a medal of honor winner---a 23 year old who is in america wants to kill the pakistani forces---this yopung soldier spewed so much hatred and venom against palkistan---it was shocking----. And who would america listen to----a living legend---a living medal of honor recipient or anyone else.

Pakistan has lost this battle against the american forces in the media---.

Now---please don't put a spin----your quote " I am not regarding the Pakistani report as worthless. All I am saying is to let the other side speak too "----you can't have your cake and eat it too----your posts have too much venom against pakistan on this issue----you are repeatedly highlighting the 'nato' inquiry but your approach to pak millitary statements is extremely condescending---and there is a reason behind it-----which is very obvious to you and to the reader as well.

 

[PakShah]

NATO 'knew' it was firing at Pakistan troops


Pakistani officials say NATO forces even apologised to their officers throughout the deadly cross-border attack.
Last Modified: 15 Dec 2011 23:07

The attack that left 24 Pakistani troops dead sparked angry protests across the country [AFP]


Pakistani officials say NATO forces knew they were opening fire on Pakistani forces, and even apologised to Pakistani officers, throughout the friendly fire incident on a military checkpoint that killed 24 troops near the Afghan border in November.

Pakistani officials on Thursday briefed reporters in Washington on their findings, drawn from interviews with survivors and local residents in the remote, mountainous area.

Results of NATO's official investigation are due next week.

Al Jazeera’s Rosiland Jordan, reporting from Washington, DC, said it could be an attempt by Pakistani officials to shape public opinion before the NATO report is released.

“The Pakistanis do want to get out in front, they do want to get their side of story, which is that they were attacked unprovoked. When they told NATO and ISAF that they needed to call back their helicopters, they were told that they would yet the attack continued," she said.

"The Pakistanis, as you might expect, they are quite angry because an official apology has not been offered to their government."

The officials presented the assembled reporters a recreation of the incident from the Pakistani army's point of view, with
Powerpoint charts, maps, photographs and information drawn from interviews with surviving troops.

Contact re-established

A slide titled "Mistaken Identity Not Possible" detailed the numerous ways NATO and the Pakistanis keep track of each other at the border, including NATO's monitoring of the Pakistani border posts' radio transmissions, which were frantically reporting being under fire by NATO aircraft.

US officials believe confusion and miscommunication between a joint US-Afghan patrol and the Pakistani border posts led to the tragedy.

Pakistani military officials have re-established contact, but have kept closed two border crossings used by NATO into Afghanistan, in protest over the deadliest incident yet involving NATO forces against Pakistan.

General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, Pakistan's army chief, has re-established contact with US General John Allen, the coalition's top commander in Afghanistan.

Two Pakistani military liaison officers have also returned to NATO coordination centres in Kabul, Al Jazeera’s Bernard Smith reported from the Afghan capital.

They were withdrawn recently for consultation over border issues.

The attack sparked anger across the country, where many Pakistanis said that the NATO mission, which the US took part in, violated its sovereignty.

Source: Al Jazeera and agencies


NATO 'knew' it was firing at Pakistan troops - Central & South Asia - Al Jazeera English

 

[lem34]

My friend.
Lets take a deep breath and a sip of coffee, and analyse the incident closely. The fact is that without hearing both sides of the story we cant make a sane decision. So much as we want to believe the Pakistani story , we have to wait and see what the other side says. As to this being an open declaration of war, had that been the case, you would not be sitting and writing this post. So lets not go into state of panic. Even now, they are trying their best to appease us and highlight the fact that we are important to them. This simply means that we can be of use to them. Open declarations end in war and you don't wage war with countries you need. You are very right in that we should be very alert to any future developments.
Your view about the democratic set up could not be further from the truth, however, paradoxically we need to maintain the same faces as the front for the sake of "continuity of democracy" and values that are acceptable to the world.
Your other assessment seems a bit extreme but let us assume it to be true and take it further. Do you think that the politicans led by Mr 99% will not sell out at the first available opportunity? I dont think it is the love of the Awam, that is stopping them. The other thing is what if some one comes along and decides enough is enough, and lets break off you relationship with the USA. Why do you think they will allow the Billions of rice and cotton and cotton products to come into US. What happens then? Or take it a bit further and assume that they enforce a boycott on you and the world obliges, what will you do? See it is easy to talk the talk, b8t are you really capable of walking the walk, when push comes to shove.
Take it a bit further and you respond in kind and shoot a plane down, what would happen when US asks you to apologize? Will you resist? and on what basis? lastly lets take it to the extreme and say the US decides to invade Pakistan? What do you do and where do you go. You do realize that the Western border could be just a sham and the actual attack could come from over the sea, or in the extreme case from the East as well. Wind jammer may know the incident with hafeez Piracha that i am referring to( and no it did not have anything to do with india) . If it is a three pronged attack with a massive aerial barrage how do you defend with your current capabilities?
You guys need to think before you write. You see we have all felt hurt by the insult of our boys having been martyred inspite of the US calling us allies. But diplomacy requires that buttons be pushed in such a manner that you get the maximum advantage without tipping the apple cart. Who does it better is a question of time and that , my dear friend is a cruel lesson we wait to learn.
Araz

I hear what you have to say. But other countries have managed to defy america and survive. What we lack is sincerity in our leaders and what he have in abundance in our educated ruling elite (not neccesarily intellectual giants) are simply traitors

 

[Safriz]

Every year on 26th of November at least on PDF this day should be remembered.
We shouldn't forget this betrayal from NATO.

 

[VelocuR]

I don't think this article has been posted before....

War on terror cooperation: 9 written agreements come to light

FM Khar reveals secret pacts with US, NATO, ISAF in parliamentary committee briefing


ISLAMABAD: As Pakistan reviews its foreign policy towards the United States, other curious details are beginning to emerge about the recent history of the strained alliance.

After a decade of secrecy, the government on Thursday spilled the beans by telling a parliamentary panel that Pakistan’s ‘war on terror’ cooperation with the US-led international forces stationed in Afghanistan was under nine written agreements — seven related to defence and two foreign affairs.

The parliamentary committee on the national security (PNSC), tasked with furnishing recommendations for the government in its review of the relationship with the US, had directed authorities to submit the drafts of these deals, after the revelation was made at a meeting here.

Chaired by Senator Raza Rabbani, the meeting was briefed by Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar and the secretary of the defence ministry about these agreements — all of which were signed during the regime of former president Pervez Musharraf.

The committee was given the task of preparing recommendations for the government to re-evaluate Pakistan’s ‘war on terror’ role after Nato airstrikes on its border check posts in the Mohmand Agency killed two dozen soldiers late last month.

At a two-day conference of Pakistan’s envoys deployed in key world capitals earlier in the week, the government had already revealed that there were two deals with the US to regulate logistical supplies for Nato troops in Afghanistan.

Raza Rabbani told the media after the meeting that the committee was expected to finalise its recommendations by the closing week of the month when it meets again on December 24 to look into the matter.

Meanwhile, the chairman told journalists that the panel would meet on December 21 to start deliberations on the Memogate scandal — another thorny controversy the panel had been asked to probe by Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani.

Khar said Pakistan would participate in the war on terror in the future on its own terms, and its relations with the US would be much more clear and unambiguous.

The minister termed a decision by the US Congress to freeze Pakistan’s aid unfortunate and warned that Washington and not Islamabad would be responsible if efforts to combat terrorism in Afghanistan suffered any blows in the future.

She said Pakistan’s relations with the US were currently “on hold” and would start moving forwards again only when parliament redesigns the policy guidelines based on the recommendations of the panel on national security.

“It will be a partnership which has less grey areas, which has a clear mandate of the public and parliament of Pakistan; and therefore, we will be able to pursue this partnership much more vigorously,” she added.

Khar also said she was confident because Pakistan did the internal re-evaluation that was needed. “It will not only strengthen the space within the country or give us ownership of our foreign policy … but it will also strengthen the partnership that we pursue with any other country.”

At the envoys’ conference recently held in Islamabad, the foreign minister said that Pakistan does not wish to ruin its relationship with the US or engage in any war.

The recommendations formulated during the conference were put forward before the committee. The foreign minister also said that Pakistan should not be worried by cuts in US aid.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 16th, 2011.

 

[VCheng]

............... The fact is that without hearing both sides of the story we cant make a sane decision. So much as we want to believe the Pakistani story , we have to wait and see what the other side says. ...........
Araz

...........................
Now---please don't put a spin----your quote " I am not regarding the Pakistani report as worthless. All I am saying is to let the other side speak too "----you can't have your cake and eat it too----your post have too much venom against pakistan on this issuer----you are repeatedly highlighting the 'nato' inquiry but your approach to pak millitary statements is extremely condescending---and there is a reason behind it-----which is very obvious to you and to the reader as well.

Araz is saying the SAME thing as I am saying; so do your comments apply to that as well?

Impartiality is not "venom"; it is the triumph of cold logic over raw emotions.

I would openly state that is exactly what Pakistan needs, as is evident here too: Please learn to think with your brains!

Oh, and should anybody hate me for saying that, I iwll quote the words of the Vice-Chair of the TT here again:

..............

You guys need to think before you write. You see we have all felt hurt by the insult of our boys having been martyred inspite of the US calling us allies. But diplomacy requires that buttons be pushed in such a manner that you get the maximum advantage without tipping the apple cart. Who does it better is a question of time and that , my dear friend is a cruel lesson we wait to learn.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

"Friendly Fire" is NOT a sufficient explanation.

We need to know the timelines and all the communications to see what happened, in what order, and what/where/when of any mistakes that were made and propagated. We need to reconcile any differences should they exist between the two sides.

We then need to see what must be done to prevent such instance from happening again. Ever.

NATO cannot get off the hook so easily this time.

1. Pakistan has indicated that the Liaison officer was given the wrong coordinates initially
2. The liaison officer was contacted again after the posts were attacked and informed by NATO that the wrong coordinates had been initially provided
3. The liaison officer was informed by the US/NATO that the attack was being called off, but the attack continued for another hour.

Outside of calling Pakistan's account a complete fabrication, what will the NATO report offer that explains the sequence of events as being anything other than a deliberate attack on the Pakistani posts?

Outside of calling the details provided by Pakistan a 'fabrication', the only thing the NATO report can clarify is whether:

1. The deliberate attack was at the behest of high level military and defence officials (Defense Secretary Panetta and Gen. Allen)

2. Whether it was at the behest of trigger happy US Army/AF/Marine rednecks who chose to continue attacking Pakistani troops despite orders to cease.

3. Whether the individual/individuals responsible for coordinating the air-strikes at the tactical level were the ones lying and deliberately allowing the airstrikes to continue, with ignorance at the higher levels and at the ground level.

Any of the above applicable scenarios should result in dismissal from service and trial for murder for the individuals involved, if the US/NATO is sincere in holding those at fault accountable.

 

[VCheng]

1. Pakistan has indicated that the Liaison officer was given the wrong coordinates initially
2. The liaison officer was contacted again after the posts were attacked and informed by NATO that the wrong coordinates had been initially provided
3. The liaison officer was informed by the US/NATO that the attack was being called off, but the attack continued for another hour.

Outside of calling Pakistan's account a complete fabrication, what will the NATO report offer that explains the sequence of events as being anything other than a deliberate attack on the Pakistani posts?

Outside of calling the details provided by Pakistan a 'fabrication', the only thing the NATO report can clarify is whether:

1. The deliberate attack was at the behest of high level military and defence officials (Defense Secretary Panetta and Gen. Allen)

2. Whether it was at the behest of trigger happy US Army/AF/Marine rednecks who chose to continue attacking Pakistani troops despite orders to cease.

3. Whether the individual/individuals responsible for coordinating the air-strikes at the tactical level were the ones lying and deliberately allowing the airstrikes to continue, with ignorance at the higher levels and at the ground level.

Any of the above applicable scenarios should result in dismissal from service and trial for murder for the individuals involved, if the US/NATO is sincere in holding those at fault accountable.

I agree with your arguments above; however, presently, there is no option but to wait for 12-23. I hope we can discuss this important post of yours at that correct point in time.

Pakistan can derive important political and military gains once its stand is confirmed, I am sure, if it plays its hand well.

 

[VelocuR]

AgnosticMuslim, sir it is my small request for you, please kindly ban VCheng extending to longer next time and disable thanks buttons. He will continue to make us very angry and twist words. As your debates many times with him, it wouldn't change him a better person or logical senses.

VCheng suggest us to wait for December 23rd reports again, MastanKhan explained it clearly regarding history of NATO mischevious actions.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I agree with your arguments above; however, presently, there is no option but to wait for 12-23. I hope we can discuss this important post of yours at that correct point in time.

Pakistan can derive important political and military gains once its stand is confirmed, I am sure, if it plays its hand well.

Again, outside of calling the Pakistani account a 'fabrication', there is nothing the report on 12-23 can offer, in terms of an explanation, that I did not outline in my previous post.

So what potential other scenario do you expect the NATO report to offer, as an explanation for what happened?

 

[VCheng]

.........................
So what potential other scenario do you expect the NATO report to offer, as an explanation for what happened?

I would respectfully decline to speculate at this point in time. It is only a few more days.

Edit: I will not post in these threads until 12-23 voluntarily. This is my last post here.

 

[lem34]

I would respectfully decline to speculate at this point in time. It is only a few more days.

That is insincere cheng normally you are well into speculating go and check your old threads and posts

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I would respectfully decline to speculate at this point in time. It is only a few more days.

Edit: I will not post in these threads until 12-23 voluntarily. This is my last post here.

This is not a hunt for the Higgs-Boson, there are a very limited number of things that could have happened.

 

[VelocuR]

I would respectfully decline to speculate at this point in time. It is only a few more days.

wtf, can you share with us in some of your thought. You are rightly decline to explain just because of few more days or copy paste from NATO reports coming soon!