Osama bin Ladens death: Updates & Discussions
- Thread starter Beacon
- Start date
Roby
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2009
- Messages
- 887
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
farhan_9909
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2009
- Messages
- 8,989
- Reaction score
- 10
- Country
- Location
As if ISI is their Baap ki jageer
pakdefender
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2009
- Messages
- 5,671
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
time to catch some more raymond davis types
Emmie
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2011
- Messages
- 5,756
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
No wonder its times of India..! Yeah, Pakistan itself should investigate any possible officeholder involved shielding OBL, if one found must be brought to the justice... Who will name CIA agents working in Pakistan without permission, feared in thousands?
They also built a case against the ISI chief before, but the ISI refused to try him here in the US courts. So what's new? They'll say 'no' to them again. Or they might 'sacrifice' some people they know have no value to them. Business as usual.
foxbat
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 4,093
- Reaction score
- -7
- Country
- Location
More like summoned to USA.. Like Nawaz Sharif was during Kargil
---------- Post added at 09:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:00 PM ----------
Time to try and save Pasha and Kayani..
Hulk
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2009
- Messages
- 7,582
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
Forget about us, Pakistan should try to fix responsibility of their forces for their own benefit. Stop living in denial, even if there is remote possibility of someone from ISI involved investigate it. PA/ISI should be responsible to protect the nation, not to decide foreign policy.
third eye
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 18,519
- Reaction score
- 13
- Country
- Location
A long article, worth reading. Am C&P relevant parts ..
After Osama bin Laden: They got him | The Economist
.......
Americas first lead came four years ago. Thanks to information acquired by interrogating detainees, officials identified one of the few al-Qaeda couriers trusted by Mr bin Laden. Two years later, they pinpointed the area of Pakistan in which he operated. But it was not until last August that they worked out precisely where this man and his brother lived: in a large house built in 2005 on what were then the outskirts of Abbottabad. It was surrounded by walls up to 18 feet high. Though large and expensive, it had no phone or internet connection, and few outward-facing windows. In addition to the two brothers, a third family was in residence. After careful analysis the Americans concluded that this family was Mr bin Ladens.
Pakistans government, bracing itself for public anger and revenge attacks, grimly declared that it was caught unawares by the raid. Much harder to swallow are its claims that Pakistans blundering spies had no idea that Mr bin Laden had been kept, probably for years, not in a remote cave on the Afghan frontier but cradled in the arms of retired and serving generals in a pleasant hillside town. It prefers to plead incompetence, since admitting to the alternative is far more painful: that the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate (ISI), or rogue elements in it, had long harboured Mr bin Laden and that Pakistans leaders acquiesced in his killing, if at all, only moments before it was done.
That seems, to many, the likelier explanation. Mr bin Ladens prolonged stay, with many of his relatives flocking in from Yemen, required a network of help. That he had relatively few guards on the spot also suggests he trusted others for security. Ordinary residents of Abbottabad were expected regularly to show their ID cards.
........
And now, Pakistan
Certainly it will be harder in Pakistan, where the government, and especially the ISI, now looks humiliated. Indias hawks mock that their bitter rival can never again be trusted; noisier American congressmen want Pakistans $3 billion military and civilian aid budget slashed. President Zardari and other civilian leaders have floundered for a response. Relations with America were already chilled, especially between spy agencies, and have turned icy as criticism of the ISI grows.
Spooked, the Pakistanis are already warning the Americans not to consider more such raids. But that is clearly a temptation. An obvious next target would be Mullah Omar, the ageing Afghan Taliban leader, whom the ISI is also accused of protecting. American agents snooping in Pakistans cities in the past year may well have turned up other useful leads, but chosen not to act until Mr bin Laden was dealt with. Some conspiracy theorists even fret that the Americans may go after Pakistans nuclear arsenal next.
Mr Obama bent over backwards after the raid not to rub Pakistans face in the embarrassment of it all. His administration did not warn Pakistan that it was about to launch an attack deep inside its territory, as if there was no trust there. Nonetheless, Mr Obama said, its important to note that our counterterrorism co-operation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding.
Jay Carney, the presidents spokesman, fielding reporters questions on May 3rd, admitted that relations with Pakistan were complicated. Americas problem with the Pakistanis, remarked Lindsey Graham, the senior Republican senator from South Carolina, was that you cant trust them, and you cant abandon them.
Many foreign leaders agree. Britains prime minister, David Cameron, who spoke on May 3rd, wants continued help for Pakistans civilian leaders while, at the same time, demanding that its military chiefs come clean about their spies.
Winding down a war
Any Western pressure will be calibrated with the war next door, in Afghanistan, in mind. It is unclear how much will change there after the beheading of al-Qaeda. Optimists see glimmers: for example, the hope that America may at last push Pakistan to start a long-postponed campaign against the Haqqani network, which attacks Western forces in east Afghanistan from Pakistani bases.
If the more powerful Taliban accept that Mr bin Laden is dead, they may feel excused from their Pashtunwali honour code about protecting guests and disavow their ties with al-Qaeda. A Western demand for them to do so has been the biggest block to the planned peace talks. Equally important, the Taliban may be spurred towards talks themselves, fearing that whatever support they get from inside Pakistan is now in jeopardy.
Yet it is not clear that the Taliban will grow any more amenable just yet, and such talks might not get far. Too many disparate groups would have to be involved. The Talibans leaders will watch to see if Mr bin Ladens death softens Westerners already flagging will to fight on in Afghanistan, and whether plans harden to get many of the troops out within the next three years.
Plenty of Americans fervently hope they will be. After almost ten bloody years, the war in Afghanistan is unpopular, especially in Mr Obamas own party. Many Democrats were appalled by his decision in 2009 to send 30,000 more troops. Now they see an unexpected opportunity. Since it was the search for Osama bin Laden that drew America into Afghanistan, isnt his elimination the perfect moment for America to declare victory and pull out?
For the present, there is little evidence that the president himself sees things that way. The official word from the White House and from Americas ambassador in Kabul is that NATO still has plenty of hard work to do before handing the war over to the Afghan government and army in 2014 as planned. Under the presidents current plan, the White House was already primed to start a review of the war in the coming weeks, to be followed in July by the start of a drawdown of some of its 100,000 soldiers in Afghanistan.
The exact number would depend on the outcome of the review. Before Mr bin Ladens death most insiders in Washington expected that this would be modesta few thousand or so. Mr Carney, the press spokesman, insists stoutly that nothing has changed: Mr Obamas original plan was very much in place, and the pace of the withdrawal would depend on conditions on the ground in Afghanistan. But on Capitol Hill and in Washingtons think-tanks, some are more impatient.
Not all are Democrats. Senator Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, says that with al-Qaeda mostly gone from Afghanistan, decamped to Pakistan and Yemen, it is folly for America to keep 100,000 troops there at a cost of $100 billion a year, and to indulge in grand nation-building ambitions. John Kerry, the committees Democratic chairman, said the killing created the possibility of re-evaluating what kind of transition we need in Afghanistan.
There are, however, many voices on the other side of the debate. Senator Graham said it would be a huge mistake and a catastrophic blunder to think that killing Mr bin Laden ended the need for American action in Iraq and Afghanistan. You dont win the war by killing terrorists, he said. Over time, you win the war by investing in those who will live in peace with us. Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senates Homeland Security Committee, said that to withdraw quickly would be to repeat the mistake America made when it abandoned Afghanistan to the Taliban after the Soviets departed.
It is impossible to be sure which way Mr Obama will jump. On the one hand, the raid on Abbottabad has delivered an immediate boost in the polls, including, according to the Pew Research Centre, a 17-point leap in the number of Americans who approve of his handling of the war. That, says Paul Pillar, a former CIA analyst for the Middle East and South Asia, gives the president some additional wiggle room if he wants to bring home more troops in July than he previously intended. But Mr Obama is also bound to be wary of doing anything that might squander his new-found standing as a potent warrior against Americas enemies. Quite aside from the merits of the case, a dash for the exit might provoke a clash with his top brass, who are wary of leaving Afghanistan in disorder.
This has been a triumphant week in the fight against al-Qaeda. But the very success of the daring raid on Abbottabad has raised a host of fresh questions. Some are about the raid itself, and the details of Mr bin Ladens deathdetails the Obama administration has decided to part-conceal by not releasing photographs of his body, shot through head and chest, in case they inflame his supporters.
The most important question, however, concerns the form that global jihad will now take. Al-Qaeda may be in retreat in many ways, but it is far from beaten. It has adapted before, and is still changing. A movement that prizes martyrdom will not let the propaganda opportunities of its symbolic leaders execution be wasted. Indeed, Mr bin Ladens value as a recruiting sergeant for disaffected young Muslims may be even greater in death than in life.
After Osama bin Laden: They got him | The Economist
.......
Americas first lead came four years ago. Thanks to information acquired by interrogating detainees, officials identified one of the few al-Qaeda couriers trusted by Mr bin Laden. Two years later, they pinpointed the area of Pakistan in which he operated. But it was not until last August that they worked out precisely where this man and his brother lived: in a large house built in 2005 on what were then the outskirts of Abbottabad. It was surrounded by walls up to 18 feet high. Though large and expensive, it had no phone or internet connection, and few outward-facing windows. In addition to the two brothers, a third family was in residence. After careful analysis the Americans concluded that this family was Mr bin Ladens.
Pakistans government, bracing itself for public anger and revenge attacks, grimly declared that it was caught unawares by the raid. Much harder to swallow are its claims that Pakistans blundering spies had no idea that Mr bin Laden had been kept, probably for years, not in a remote cave on the Afghan frontier but cradled in the arms of retired and serving generals in a pleasant hillside town. It prefers to plead incompetence, since admitting to the alternative is far more painful: that the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate (ISI), or rogue elements in it, had long harboured Mr bin Laden and that Pakistans leaders acquiesced in his killing, if at all, only moments before it was done.
That seems, to many, the likelier explanation. Mr bin Ladens prolonged stay, with many of his relatives flocking in from Yemen, required a network of help. That he had relatively few guards on the spot also suggests he trusted others for security. Ordinary residents of Abbottabad were expected regularly to show their ID cards.
........
And now, Pakistan
Certainly it will be harder in Pakistan, where the government, and especially the ISI, now looks humiliated. Indias hawks mock that their bitter rival can never again be trusted; noisier American congressmen want Pakistans $3 billion military and civilian aid budget slashed. President Zardari and other civilian leaders have floundered for a response. Relations with America were already chilled, especially between spy agencies, and have turned icy as criticism of the ISI grows.
Spooked, the Pakistanis are already warning the Americans not to consider more such raids. But that is clearly a temptation. An obvious next target would be Mullah Omar, the ageing Afghan Taliban leader, whom the ISI is also accused of protecting. American agents snooping in Pakistans cities in the past year may well have turned up other useful leads, but chosen not to act until Mr bin Laden was dealt with. Some conspiracy theorists even fret that the Americans may go after Pakistans nuclear arsenal next.
Mr Obama bent over backwards after the raid not to rub Pakistans face in the embarrassment of it all. His administration did not warn Pakistan that it was about to launch an attack deep inside its territory, as if there was no trust there. Nonetheless, Mr Obama said, its important to note that our counterterrorism co-operation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding.
Jay Carney, the presidents spokesman, fielding reporters questions on May 3rd, admitted that relations with Pakistan were complicated. Americas problem with the Pakistanis, remarked Lindsey Graham, the senior Republican senator from South Carolina, was that you cant trust them, and you cant abandon them.
Many foreign leaders agree. Britains prime minister, David Cameron, who spoke on May 3rd, wants continued help for Pakistans civilian leaders while, at the same time, demanding that its military chiefs come clean about their spies.
Winding down a war
Any Western pressure will be calibrated with the war next door, in Afghanistan, in mind. It is unclear how much will change there after the beheading of al-Qaeda. Optimists see glimmers: for example, the hope that America may at last push Pakistan to start a long-postponed campaign against the Haqqani network, which attacks Western forces in east Afghanistan from Pakistani bases.
If the more powerful Taliban accept that Mr bin Laden is dead, they may feel excused from their Pashtunwali honour code about protecting guests and disavow their ties with al-Qaeda. A Western demand for them to do so has been the biggest block to the planned peace talks. Equally important, the Taliban may be spurred towards talks themselves, fearing that whatever support they get from inside Pakistan is now in jeopardy.
Yet it is not clear that the Taliban will grow any more amenable just yet, and such talks might not get far. Too many disparate groups would have to be involved. The Talibans leaders will watch to see if Mr bin Ladens death softens Westerners already flagging will to fight on in Afghanistan, and whether plans harden to get many of the troops out within the next three years.
Plenty of Americans fervently hope they will be. After almost ten bloody years, the war in Afghanistan is unpopular, especially in Mr Obamas own party. Many Democrats were appalled by his decision in 2009 to send 30,000 more troops. Now they see an unexpected opportunity. Since it was the search for Osama bin Laden that drew America into Afghanistan, isnt his elimination the perfect moment for America to declare victory and pull out?
For the present, there is little evidence that the president himself sees things that way. The official word from the White House and from Americas ambassador in Kabul is that NATO still has plenty of hard work to do before handing the war over to the Afghan government and army in 2014 as planned. Under the presidents current plan, the White House was already primed to start a review of the war in the coming weeks, to be followed in July by the start of a drawdown of some of its 100,000 soldiers in Afghanistan.
The exact number would depend on the outcome of the review. Before Mr bin Ladens death most insiders in Washington expected that this would be modesta few thousand or so. Mr Carney, the press spokesman, insists stoutly that nothing has changed: Mr Obamas original plan was very much in place, and the pace of the withdrawal would depend on conditions on the ground in Afghanistan. But on Capitol Hill and in Washingtons think-tanks, some are more impatient.
Not all are Democrats. Senator Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, says that with al-Qaeda mostly gone from Afghanistan, decamped to Pakistan and Yemen, it is folly for America to keep 100,000 troops there at a cost of $100 billion a year, and to indulge in grand nation-building ambitions. John Kerry, the committees Democratic chairman, said the killing created the possibility of re-evaluating what kind of transition we need in Afghanistan.
There are, however, many voices on the other side of the debate. Senator Graham said it would be a huge mistake and a catastrophic blunder to think that killing Mr bin Laden ended the need for American action in Iraq and Afghanistan. You dont win the war by killing terrorists, he said. Over time, you win the war by investing in those who will live in peace with us. Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senates Homeland Security Committee, said that to withdraw quickly would be to repeat the mistake America made when it abandoned Afghanistan to the Taliban after the Soviets departed.
It is impossible to be sure which way Mr Obama will jump. On the one hand, the raid on Abbottabad has delivered an immediate boost in the polls, including, according to the Pew Research Centre, a 17-point leap in the number of Americans who approve of his handling of the war. That, says Paul Pillar, a former CIA analyst for the Middle East and South Asia, gives the president some additional wiggle room if he wants to bring home more troops in July than he previously intended. But Mr Obama is also bound to be wary of doing anything that might squander his new-found standing as a potent warrior against Americas enemies. Quite aside from the merits of the case, a dash for the exit might provoke a clash with his top brass, who are wary of leaving Afghanistan in disorder.
This has been a triumphant week in the fight against al-Qaeda. But the very success of the daring raid on Abbottabad has raised a host of fresh questions. Some are about the raid itself, and the details of Mr bin Ladens deathdetails the Obama administration has decided to part-conceal by not releasing photographs of his body, shot through head and chest, in case they inflame his supporters.
The most important question, however, concerns the form that global jihad will now take. Al-Qaeda may be in retreat in many ways, but it is far from beaten. It has adapted before, and is still changing. A movement that prizes martyrdom will not let the propaganda opportunities of its symbolic leaders execution be wasted. Indeed, Mr bin Ladens value as a recruiting sergeant for disaffected young Muslims may be even greater in death than in life.
foxbat
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 4,093
- Reaction score
- -7
- Country
- Location
Bin Laden had Pakistan ‘support network’: Obama | World | DAWN.COM
WASHINGTON: Osama bin Laden had a support network in Pakistan but it is not clear if the Pakistani government was involved, US President Barack Obama said in his first public comments on the issue.
The fact that bin Laden turned up in leafy Abbottabad, home to the Pakistani equivalent of the West Point and Sandhurst military academies, just two hours drive north of Islamabad, has been greeted with incredulity.
We think that there had to be some sort of support network for bin Laden inside of Pakistan, Obama told the CBS show 60 Minutes, according to excerpts of an interview released Sunday.
But we dont know who or what that support network was. We dont know whether there might have been some people inside of government, people outside of government, and thats something that we have to investigate and, more importantly, the Pakistani government has to investigate.
The Pakistani government has promised a probe but rejected charges that extremists like bin Laden are extended safe haven.
They have indicated they have a profound interest in finding out what kinds of support networks bin Laden might have had, said Obama.
But these are questions that were not going to be able to answer three or four days after the event. Its going to take some time for us to be able to exploit the intelligence that we were able to gather on site.
Since the pre-dawn raid last Monday that killed bin Laden, the number one enemy of the United States, outraged US lawmakers have called for billions of dollars in aid to Pakistan to be cut back or pulled entirely.
The Obama administration last year said it would seek another $2 billion for Pakistans military, on top of a five-year, $7.5 billion civilian package approved in 2009 aimed at weakening the allure of extremists.
For a decade, Islamabad has been Americas wary Afghan war ally, despite widespread public opposition and militant bomb attacks across the nuclear-armed country that have killed several thousand people.
Pakistan has never been fully trusted by either Kabul or Washington, which accuse its powerful military of fostering the Afghan Taliban it spawned during the 1980s resistance to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
Pakistani intelligence officials deny the nations Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency had any idea bin Laden was holed-up in a compound in Abbottabad, which was raided in 2003 while still under construction.
WASHINGTON: Osama bin Laden had a support network in Pakistan but it is not clear if the Pakistani government was involved, US President Barack Obama said in his first public comments on the issue.
The fact that bin Laden turned up in leafy Abbottabad, home to the Pakistani equivalent of the West Point and Sandhurst military academies, just two hours drive north of Islamabad, has been greeted with incredulity.
We think that there had to be some sort of support network for bin Laden inside of Pakistan, Obama told the CBS show 60 Minutes, according to excerpts of an interview released Sunday.
But we dont know who or what that support network was. We dont know whether there might have been some people inside of government, people outside of government, and thats something that we have to investigate and, more importantly, the Pakistani government has to investigate.
The Pakistani government has promised a probe but rejected charges that extremists like bin Laden are extended safe haven.
They have indicated they have a profound interest in finding out what kinds of support networks bin Laden might have had, said Obama.
But these are questions that were not going to be able to answer three or four days after the event. Its going to take some time for us to be able to exploit the intelligence that we were able to gather on site.
Since the pre-dawn raid last Monday that killed bin Laden, the number one enemy of the United States, outraged US lawmakers have called for billions of dollars in aid to Pakistan to be cut back or pulled entirely.
The Obama administration last year said it would seek another $2 billion for Pakistans military, on top of a five-year, $7.5 billion civilian package approved in 2009 aimed at weakening the allure of extremists.
For a decade, Islamabad has been Americas wary Afghan war ally, despite widespread public opposition and militant bomb attacks across the nuclear-armed country that have killed several thousand people.
Pakistan has never been fully trusted by either Kabul or Washington, which accuse its powerful military of fostering the Afghan Taliban it spawned during the 1980s resistance to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
Pakistani intelligence officials deny the nations Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency had any idea bin Laden was holed-up in a compound in Abbottabad, which was raided in 2003 while still under construction.
singhvivek73
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2011
- Messages
- 103
- Reaction score
- 0
Osama Bin Laden Aided by Rogue or Retired Elements of Pakistani Intelligence, Government Official Says -
A senior official in Pakistan's civilian government told ABC News, "Elements of Pakistan intelligence -- probably rogue or retired -- were involved in aiding, abetting and sheltering the leader of al Qaeda," the strongest public statement yet from the Pakistani government after the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound.
This is based on the government's judgment that the number of years bin Laden spent in Abbottabad -- and it now appears in a village outside the city of Haripur -- would have been impossible without help, possibly from someone in the middle tier of ISI, Pakistan's intelligence agency, who grew up fighting alongside the mujahidin against the Soviets, said the official.
According to the official, the military and ISI have been weeding some of them out but many remain. < more in the link below >
Osama bin Laden Aided by Rogue Elements of Pakistani Intelligence, Says Government Official - ABC News
A senior official in Pakistan's civilian government told ABC News, "Elements of Pakistan intelligence -- probably rogue or retired -- were involved in aiding, abetting and sheltering the leader of al Qaeda," the strongest public statement yet from the Pakistani government after the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound.
This is based on the government's judgment that the number of years bin Laden spent in Abbottabad -- and it now appears in a village outside the city of Haripur -- would have been impossible without help, possibly from someone in the middle tier of ISI, Pakistan's intelligence agency, who grew up fighting alongside the mujahidin against the Soviets, said the official.
According to the official, the military and ISI have been weeding some of them out but many remain. < more in the link below >
Osama bin Laden Aided by Rogue Elements of Pakistani Intelligence, Says Government Official - ABC News
Similar threads
