Singh Balwinder
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2011
- Messages
- 86
- Reaction score
- 0
How can you assure that they were victims of drone attacks?
One by one, victims of drone attacks full of condemnation
- Thread starter Respect4Respect01
- Start date
Last Hope
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 7,275
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
I always hated drones.
But from other point of view, the Government and Army is asking for more drones and it is good.
Drones attack the places where Pakistan Army can NOT enter or even think of doing it. Too dangerous it is.
How drones work?
CIA agents are in the areas locating the terrorists, and they somehow put some sim card size chip on them, or their car or what ever.
The chip is traced by sattellites and drones are sent to attack the location.
This was basic.
The actual part is here:
Drones usually dont strike their desired targets.
Either on purpose (hencing proving that terrorists are the one who fly drones)
or the 'Targets' are too smart and throw the chip somewhere else.
We need more drones, but 100% target accuracy must be guranteed with no loss to civilian or property, which US have always failed to prove.
Only option left, PAF must operate self-made drones (Ababeel) and stop US drones.
But from other point of view, the Government and Army is asking for more drones and it is good.
Drones attack the places where Pakistan Army can NOT enter or even think of doing it. Too dangerous it is.
How drones work?
CIA agents are in the areas locating the terrorists, and they somehow put some sim card size chip on them, or their car or what ever.
The chip is traced by sattellites and drones are sent to attack the location.
This was basic.
The actual part is here:
Drones usually dont strike their desired targets.
Either on purpose (hencing proving that terrorists are the one who fly drones)
or the 'Targets' are too smart and throw the chip somewhere else.
We need more drones, but 100% target accuracy must be guranteed with no loss to civilian or property, which US have always failed to prove.
Only option left, PAF must operate self-made drones (Ababeel) and stop US drones.
desioptimist
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2010
- Messages
- 2,084
- Reaction score
- 0
Why do you think you have better technology which will give you accuracy.
The civilian fatalities is not due to hardware malfunction or lack of accuracy, but bad intelligence, which I believe is provided by pakistani agencies, tribals as well as americans themselves.
And no, CIA does not go around putting chips on anything, they give coordinates. Sometime inform suspected activities.
Sometimes the drone handler can see and react to the activities below on ground without anybody giving intelligence. That's how celebration fires are also sometimes attacked by drones.
niaz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 5,164
- Reaction score
- 211
- Country
- Location
Like most Pakistanis I was against the drones until the Mehran attack. Now I am convinced that TTP, Al-Qaida and sectarian parties have so much support in the form of JI, JUI and Khilafat lovers that terrorists cannot be eliminated by Pakistani forces alone. I was surprised to find that I was not the only one with this view point. An article published by a retired PA Brigadier is noted below for member’s perusal.
Our one-sided view on drones
Asad Munir
Saturday, June 11, 2011
In a unanimous resolution on May 14, the joint session of parliament called for an immediate halt to US drone attacks, failing which Pakistan would be “constrained” to consider necessary countermeasures, including withdrawal of transit facilities allowed to the US-NATO forces. Since then there have been at least eight drone strikes in North and South Waziristan, but there is no reaction worth the name, let alone the countermeasures recommended in the resolution.
Is Pakistan in a position to face the consequences in case the countermeasures are taken? The answer is a big no. So why are we trying to deceive the people of Pakistan? Why can’t the government apprise them about the effectiveness of the drones, and the number and names of those terrorists killed in the strikes who have been responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent Pakistanis?
There have been about 249 drone strikes in different parts of FATA since 2004. Except for three attacks, most of the strikes have targeted and killed terrorists and their facilitators. The strikes have played a major role in the elimination of some of those who were directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of more than 35,000 innocent Muslim Pakistanis and armed forces personnel. The drones have killed many prominent commanders of Al-Qaeda, which is operating in Pakistan since 2002.
There are a number of them, but the more important names include Khalid Habib, a Moroccan and commander operating in the Mahsud area of South Waziristan, Abu al-Laith al-Libi, commander of North Waziristan, Tahir Yaldashev, commander of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) who was responsible for the killings of prominent tribal maliks, Baitullah Mahsud, who was reported to have been involved in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, Abu Suleiman Aljazairi and Abu Kash.
Ilyas Kashmiri, the news about whose death is not yet confirmed, is alleged to have been the mastermind behind many attacks on the armed forces and on defence installations, including Mehran Base. The huge army land and air efforts resulting in hundreds of casualties may not have achieved what the precision strikes by drones have accomplished.
No one has the accurate estimates of the casualties caused by the drones. As a practice, the Taliban always surround and cut off access to the site of drone attacks to prevent people from knowing as to how many and who perished in the strike. The mere fact that the Taliban are the one cordoning off the area indicates that the casualties are actually those of terrorists and their facilitators.
These terrorist groups have a very effective media propaganda system. In case there had been a large number of civilian casualties, their names, photographs and other details would have been displayed on various jihadi sites. The three strikes based on inaccurate and faulty intelligence resulting in the deaths of innocent civilians were, shown to the media: Damadola 2006, South Waziristan 2008, and North Waziristan 2011.
According to the New American Foundation, the total drone number of casualties resulting from drone strikes ranges between 1,520 and 2,408. Out of these, between 1,227 and 1,937 were confirmed terrorists from Al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan, the Haqqani group, the Taliban and other outfits. So, according to the data of the New American Foundation, the maximum number of civilian casualties caused by drones has been 471 in seven years. However, out of these civilians most would have been facilitators, providing boarding, lodging, transport and other facilities to the terrorists, and therefore cannot be described as innocent civilians.
According to the Long War Journal, the total casualties are 1,954, out of which 138 are civilians. The Brooklyn Institute estimates that ten civilians are killed for every single terrorist eliminated. Their data is based on various news reports.
The figures released by the army commander about strikes in North Waziristan for the 2007-2011 period should be more authentic, as he is present on the ground and therefore has more reliable means of information than that gathered by the Americans. According to his statement, 964 militants died in 164 drone attacks in four years, in North Waziristan. Out of these, 793 were locals and 171 foreigners, including Arabs, Uzbeks, Chechens, Filipinos and Moroccans.
Parliament, certain political parties and the media are raising the issue of the country’s sovereignty being violated by the drones. It is a fact that the US drones are violating our sovereignty, but what about the people’s sovereignty? The people of Pakistan were deprived of their choice to elect their representatives for decades. Their sovereignty is as important as that of the state. In 1980, Zia opened our borders to Muslim jihadis, from all over the world, to participate in the so-called jihad. None of them required any visa or travel documents.
That was a severe blow to our sovereignty against which the print media never raised its voice. A reasonably liberal country was converted into a battlefield. Even now, there are more than one thousand foreign militants using our soil for terrorist’s activities. These terrorists, besides violating our sovereignty, are involved in the killing of thousand of innocent Pakistanis.
The drone is an unmanned machine, with no US pilot violating our border. But the terrorists are roaming our cities, towns and villages, killing Pakistanis and destroying our defence installations. We must raise our voice against these foreign terrorists since we organise dharnas against drones.
The political parties, as institutions, are required to educate their supporters. They should not formulate policies keeping in view the opinion of their voters, which may be flawed and based on misinformation, emotional and irrational rhetoric. The PPP, instead of supporting Salmaan Taseer’s bold and just stance, went on the defensive once he was assassinated. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto would certainly have reacted in a different way to the death of a great PPP leader, who lost his life promoting the cause of the party.
The rightist parties have an agenda. They have to appease their conservative voters. Nevertheless, the so-called liberal parties, the PPP, the ANP, the MQM and the nationalist parties should apprise their followers about the effects of the drone attacks. The coalition government should release data on these strikes. It should take the people into confidence and make it clear that the drones are operating in our areas with our consent. The number of civilian casualties is much less compared to those resulting from bombing by the air force and artillery and mortar fires.
The violation of our sovereignty by foreign militants is more dangerous than the action of the drones. The strikes by drones are indirectly supporting our operations against those terrorists who are killing innocent Pakistanis and attacking defence installations.
The writer is a retired brigadier who has served as head of the MI and the ISI for Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Fata and the Northern areas.
Our one-sided view on drones - Asad Munir
Our one-sided view on drones
Asad Munir
Saturday, June 11, 2011
In a unanimous resolution on May 14, the joint session of parliament called for an immediate halt to US drone attacks, failing which Pakistan would be “constrained” to consider necessary countermeasures, including withdrawal of transit facilities allowed to the US-NATO forces. Since then there have been at least eight drone strikes in North and South Waziristan, but there is no reaction worth the name, let alone the countermeasures recommended in the resolution.
Is Pakistan in a position to face the consequences in case the countermeasures are taken? The answer is a big no. So why are we trying to deceive the people of Pakistan? Why can’t the government apprise them about the effectiveness of the drones, and the number and names of those terrorists killed in the strikes who have been responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent Pakistanis?
There have been about 249 drone strikes in different parts of FATA since 2004. Except for three attacks, most of the strikes have targeted and killed terrorists and their facilitators. The strikes have played a major role in the elimination of some of those who were directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of more than 35,000 innocent Muslim Pakistanis and armed forces personnel. The drones have killed many prominent commanders of Al-Qaeda, which is operating in Pakistan since 2002.
There are a number of them, but the more important names include Khalid Habib, a Moroccan and commander operating in the Mahsud area of South Waziristan, Abu al-Laith al-Libi, commander of North Waziristan, Tahir Yaldashev, commander of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) who was responsible for the killings of prominent tribal maliks, Baitullah Mahsud, who was reported to have been involved in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, Abu Suleiman Aljazairi and Abu Kash.
Ilyas Kashmiri, the news about whose death is not yet confirmed, is alleged to have been the mastermind behind many attacks on the armed forces and on defence installations, including Mehran Base. The huge army land and air efforts resulting in hundreds of casualties may not have achieved what the precision strikes by drones have accomplished.
No one has the accurate estimates of the casualties caused by the drones. As a practice, the Taliban always surround and cut off access to the site of drone attacks to prevent people from knowing as to how many and who perished in the strike. The mere fact that the Taliban are the one cordoning off the area indicates that the casualties are actually those of terrorists and their facilitators.
These terrorist groups have a very effective media propaganda system. In case there had been a large number of civilian casualties, their names, photographs and other details would have been displayed on various jihadi sites. The three strikes based on inaccurate and faulty intelligence resulting in the deaths of innocent civilians were, shown to the media: Damadola 2006, South Waziristan 2008, and North Waziristan 2011.
According to the New American Foundation, the total drone number of casualties resulting from drone strikes ranges between 1,520 and 2,408. Out of these, between 1,227 and 1,937 were confirmed terrorists from Al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan, the Haqqani group, the Taliban and other outfits. So, according to the data of the New American Foundation, the maximum number of civilian casualties caused by drones has been 471 in seven years. However, out of these civilians most would have been facilitators, providing boarding, lodging, transport and other facilities to the terrorists, and therefore cannot be described as innocent civilians.
According to the Long War Journal, the total casualties are 1,954, out of which 138 are civilians. The Brooklyn Institute estimates that ten civilians are killed for every single terrorist eliminated. Their data is based on various news reports.
The figures released by the army commander about strikes in North Waziristan for the 2007-2011 period should be more authentic, as he is present on the ground and therefore has more reliable means of information than that gathered by the Americans. According to his statement, 964 militants died in 164 drone attacks in four years, in North Waziristan. Out of these, 793 were locals and 171 foreigners, including Arabs, Uzbeks, Chechens, Filipinos and Moroccans.
Parliament, certain political parties and the media are raising the issue of the country’s sovereignty being violated by the drones. It is a fact that the US drones are violating our sovereignty, but what about the people’s sovereignty? The people of Pakistan were deprived of their choice to elect their representatives for decades. Their sovereignty is as important as that of the state. In 1980, Zia opened our borders to Muslim jihadis, from all over the world, to participate in the so-called jihad. None of them required any visa or travel documents.
That was a severe blow to our sovereignty against which the print media never raised its voice. A reasonably liberal country was converted into a battlefield. Even now, there are more than one thousand foreign militants using our soil for terrorist’s activities. These terrorists, besides violating our sovereignty, are involved in the killing of thousand of innocent Pakistanis.
The drone is an unmanned machine, with no US pilot violating our border. But the terrorists are roaming our cities, towns and villages, killing Pakistanis and destroying our defence installations. We must raise our voice against these foreign terrorists since we organise dharnas against drones.
The political parties, as institutions, are required to educate their supporters. They should not formulate policies keeping in view the opinion of their voters, which may be flawed and based on misinformation, emotional and irrational rhetoric. The PPP, instead of supporting Salmaan Taseer’s bold and just stance, went on the defensive once he was assassinated. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto would certainly have reacted in a different way to the death of a great PPP leader, who lost his life promoting the cause of the party.
The rightist parties have an agenda. They have to appease their conservative voters. Nevertheless, the so-called liberal parties, the PPP, the ANP, the MQM and the nationalist parties should apprise their followers about the effects of the drone attacks. The coalition government should release data on these strikes. It should take the people into confidence and make it clear that the drones are operating in our areas with our consent. The number of civilian casualties is much less compared to those resulting from bombing by the air force and artillery and mortar fires.
The violation of our sovereignty by foreign militants is more dangerous than the action of the drones. The strikes by drones are indirectly supporting our operations against those terrorists who are killing innocent Pakistanis and attacking defence installations.
The writer is a retired brigadier who has served as head of the MI and the ISI for Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Fata and the Northern areas.
Our one-sided view on drones - Asad Munir
sur
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2009
- Messages
- 2,829
- Reaction score
- 4
Drone attacks ARE the very cause of generating more & more suicidals with every attack; filled with feelings to revenge murder of their loved ones,,,.
This is like proposing the cause-of-trouble as a solution,,,
This is trying to put-out fire with gasoline...
Hulk
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2009
- Messages
- 7,582
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
Dude the situation is like this, tribal areas do not want to follow what GOP wants them, that is stop giving sanctuaries to rouge elements.
US ask's Pakistan to control tribal areas which so far they were not controlling. They were part of Pakistan but not in government control.
The Pakistani's government starts operation in some areas but faces heavy causality, they discuss this with the US counterparts and they offer drones as alternate, another alternate offered is supplying NATO forces. The PA says that having NATO troops in Pakistan will not go well with people and agrees with drone strikes, even provides intelligence (Often claimed by GOP, Rehman Malik). Now the GOP sees this is good tool if things goes wrong, blame it on US and say we have not allowed drone strikes.
How come you not allow strikes but also claim providing intelligence
The situation is simple, lawless land which helps rouge elements is not good for world, especially when they bread terrorist who have capability and ambition to terrorize the world.
So that needs to be controlled. So drone is something that PA asked as a helping tool since they felt it saves life of their troops (Wikileaks).
So why blame us, they care less if need drone or not, all they are asking is to control their area. Now do not bring Afghanistan example here, since that is pathetic analogy, Afghanistan is not US territory, they are just helping it to stabilize it. On the other hand Pakistan is and was your territory and for strategic interest you let the rouge elements have best of the time in your land and now you are finding it hard to put back the jinni in the bottle.
IMO PA is responsible for the situation of Pakistan today, because they did not gauged the repercussions when they allowed their territory to be used for Jihad. Actually they were counting dollars when offer came from US and now they blame it on them.
US ask's Pakistan to control tribal areas which so far they were not controlling. They were part of Pakistan but not in government control.
The Pakistani's government starts operation in some areas but faces heavy causality, they discuss this with the US counterparts and they offer drones as alternate, another alternate offered is supplying NATO forces. The PA says that having NATO troops in Pakistan will not go well with people and agrees with drone strikes, even provides intelligence (Often claimed by GOP, Rehman Malik). Now the GOP sees this is good tool if things goes wrong, blame it on US and say we have not allowed drone strikes.
How come you not allow strikes but also claim providing intelligence
The situation is simple, lawless land which helps rouge elements is not good for world, especially when they bread terrorist who have capability and ambition to terrorize the world.
So that needs to be controlled. So drone is something that PA asked as a helping tool since they felt it saves life of their troops (Wikileaks).
So why blame us, they care less if need drone or not, all they are asking is to control their area. Now do not bring Afghanistan example here, since that is pathetic analogy, Afghanistan is not US territory, they are just helping it to stabilize it. On the other hand Pakistan is and was your territory and for strategic interest you let the rouge elements have best of the time in your land and now you are finding it hard to put back the jinni in the bottle.
IMO PA is responsible for the situation of Pakistan today, because they did not gauged the repercussions when they allowed their territory to be used for Jihad. Actually they were counting dollars when offer came from US and now they blame it on them.
CallsignAlzaeem
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2011
- Messages
- 263
- Reaction score
- 0
I dare even if the government allows ,Our military establishments hasnt got enough balls to shoot down the drone.
wmdisinfo
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 15, 2011
- Messages
- 633
- Reaction score
- 0
if a drone hits ur house and all your family memers are dead and you cant even find thier bodies with no reason what so ever what are you gonna do?and what are you gonna do with the people who starts calling you a terrorist without even looking for any evidence or proof like you.what will u do?
roadrunner
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,696
- Reaction score
- 0
quite a few people on this thread should be put into a house which a drone is about to fire on.
they'll soon change their weak minds.
they'll soon change their weak minds.
nightcrawler
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,400
- Reaction score
- 0
Very very good thread; must mention this on my blog
Ignited Mind
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,772
- Reaction score
- 0
Definitely. Those with even the slightest of sympathy towards terrorists should be droned. Be them PDF members or otherwise.
TruthSeeker
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2008
- Messages
- 6,390
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
This thread is typical Pakistani sympathizer propaganda. No context. Why don't you post a thread with pictures of all the children killed by suicide attacks in peaceful Pakistani markets? This thread is just anti-American bull crap, pure and simple. These children were killed by the TTP for all we know.
TruthSeeker
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2008
- Messages
- 6,390
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Well when my house houses al Qaeda and TTP fighters, I deserve a drone strike!!
Awesome
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2006
- Messages
- 22,023
- Reaction score
- 5
Its a valid point yaar, if we support this and tomorrow it turns out they are not victims of drone strikes, then it hurts the movement against it. Such things should be properly cited. Apna case mazboot karo, khaali jazbaat nahi.
niaz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 5,164
- Reaction score
- 211
- Country
- Location
Hon sir,
There is little doubt that US Drones are killing TTP or Al-Qaida leadership along with quite a few innocents. It has become a catch 22. Drone attacks because Al Qaida and Taliban find sanctuary in FATA and shedding of innocent Pakistani blood by TTP because US continues drone attacks. Don’t you think that best way to stop the drone attacks is to deny safe haven to Afghan Taliban in Pakistan territory?
Pray tell me, was any of the the 34 shoppers killed last night at the Khyber market or even one of 35000 or so innocent Pakistanis killed in terrorist bombings any way connected or responsible for the US drone attacks? How can then anyone explain away the suicide bombings and other attacks on Pakistani civilians so easily? Is the life of the Pakistani victims of TTP bombings of lesser value than of those killed in the drone attacks in FATA?
IMO, explaining away action of TTP terrorists as revenge tantamount to condoning suicide bombings. This may be acceptable to you and many others but not to me. I feel sorry for the women and children killed in the drone attacks, but when their elders provided sanctuary to Taliban terrorists in their home, they did it despite the risk of being bombed. On other hand, 35000 Pakistanis killed by TTP were totally innocent. Their only crime was to be born citizen of a country where human blood has no value as long as it is shed in the name of Islam.
I am Pakistani first and a Muslim second. My rationale is that when I visit a country, I am defined by my nationality. For example when I am denied entry and deported (as thousands of Pakistanis are from the Middle East each year), they don’t say that they would relent if I were a Muslim. On the contrary, thousands of unbelievers can enter countries such as UAE, Kuwait or Qatar without a prior visa if they belong to certain group of countries (24 in case of UAE) whereas Muslims Pakistanis are denied.
Pakistan’s problem is that majority put Pakistan a distant second. This is because of the influence of Takfiris, Salafin and Khilafat lovers in our midst who have misplaced priorities and who exploit Islam to achieve their goal of achieving political power.
1973 Pakistan’s Constitution clearly states that anyone who attacks Pakistan’s armed forces is committing treason. TTP planned and killed hundreds of Pakistani troops as well as destroyed military assets. TTP also destroy schools, hotels, and religious shrines, even dig up graves of the Sufi saints (as they did in Swat). Despite the fact TTP leaders brazenly acknowledge such actions; you flippantly explain away their actions as revenge. Taliban and their supporters are traitors to the Pakistan State. Would you have Pakistan fight the US so that TTP leadership can keep their safe havens in Pakistan?
Nevertheless your point of view is shared by thousands of Pakistanis. To me this is a great tragedy and main reason for spread of lawlessness in the country.
Similar threads
