Pak-US intelligence ties at ‘lowest level’

[Luftwaffe]

AchtungSpitfire how naive of you...Guess what without ISI Russians would be have been putting fingers in ur nose and dragging you across the whole afghanistan...
>>>Not when our GI's are dying.

You darn lil Muppet Pakistan has lost more soldiers in war on terror the terror that is funded and supported across the border from afghanistan then NATO/US combine..
I care less about your gi's getting dented and nailed in afghanistan..
Involving the CIA almost always led to the target of opportunity being tipped off
Trust but verify at the top level and no pussyfooting at the operational level by US.

 

[S-2]

It's fascinating the moods of the Pakistanis here. NO PREDATOR...unless you kill Mehsud. That's cool...NO PREDATOR...unless you'll give it to us. That's cool too.

Meanwhile what we have is not a thread but a post referencing a blog that references nothing with respect to it's claims of PREDATOR casualties. Just the blog.

I don't believe it. It's writing says enough. 14 A.Q. killed with hundreds of innocents too.

Sure

A.M. may want to review his Petraeus quote more closely too. A.M., naturally, would like us to believe that we've only one instance of catching the ISI red-handed. That's not what Petraeus said. There's a difference and neither you nor the ISI will EVER know of all the times we've caught you.

It's all about sources and methods.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

A.M. may want to review his Petraeus quote more closely too. A.M., naturally, would like us to believe that we've only one instance of catching the ISI red-handed. That's not what Petraeus said. There's a difference and neither you nor the ISI will EVER know of all the times we've caught you.

It's all about sources and methods.

Would you be kind enough to giv us a hint of those sources .

And by the way our ISI will do exactly wats the best interest of our country and i believe that you army didnt came to afghanistan to fight AQ or the war loving taliban .

Its our nukes and the task of balkanization of our country with help of our enemies which CIA has actually been cought many times redhanded helping them and providing overcover in Afghanistan.
We are friends but we all hold a sharp dagger in the backhand just waiting for the right moment .

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

A.M. may want to review his Petraeus quote more closely too. A.M., naturally, would like us to believe that we've only one instance of catching the ISI red-handed. That's not what Petraeus said.

I thought that was what he said; 'one unambiguous case and contacts'?

There's a difference and neither you nor the ISI will EVER know of all the times we've caught you.

It's all about sources and methods.

You have been hanging around with some of the fanboys on this forum for too long. Apparently only the CIA and S-2 now know that which no one else does.

Get over yourself!

As Rummie said, "there are unknown unknowns ..''

 

[Neo]

Ouch........
That the funniest I've read from you mate.
Thanks for the laugh.

 

[S-2]

"As Rummie said, "there are unknown unknowns ..''

As compared to "sources and methods"?

I fail to see the symmetry.

I wouldn't know what they are beyond SIGINT and HUMINT. Does that mean sources and methods don't exist? Or that we'd be reticent to reveal them to your government, of all entities?

We've discussed Petraeus' comment before and he makes clear that we've an instance of transgression by your forces. Now, nevermind that ONE is sufficient to meet our requirements, the incident didn't correlate with the intercepts prior to the Kabul bombing.

Have you forgotten? If so, now we have TWO. Neat, eh? Still, my essential point remains. You won't know, ever, everything of our collection operations in this region.

Do you dispute this point or do you simply believe a.) Pakistanis were only engaged in these activities ONCE and happened to get caught or, b.) we've been unable to collect additional instances.

If either a or b you'd be very, very wrong. I know that as a fact. Our SIGINT is superb in this area and our HUMINT has improved considerably with the help of those Indian consula...whoops, sorry.

Sources and methods.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

"As Rummie said, "there are unknown unknowns ..''

As compared to "sources and methods"?

I fail to see the symmetry.

When there is nothing substantial to show, and only chest thumping along the lines of 'well, y'all will never know how many times we've caught you', then there is complete symmetry.

I wouldn't know what they are beyond SIGINT and HUMINT. Does that mean sources and methods don't exist? Or that we'd be reticent to reveal them to your government, of all entities?

We've discussed Petraeus' comment before and he makes clear that we've an instance of transgression by your forces. Now, nevermind that ONE is sufficient to meet our requirements, the incident didn't correlate with the intercepts prior to the Kabul bombing.

Have you forgotten? If so, now we have TWO. Neat, eh? Still, my essential point remains. You won't know, ever, everything of our collection operations in this region.

Do you dispute this point or do you simply believe a.) Pakistanis were only engaged in these activities ONCE and happened to get caught or, b.) we've been unable to collect additional instances.

If either a or b you'd be very, very wrong. I know that as a fact. Our SIGINT is superb in this area and our HUMINT has improved considerably with the help of those Indian consula...whoops, sorry.

Sources and methods.

I am sure you guys have excellent HUMINT and SIGINT - yet the best of that is that 'someone' tipped off on a Pakistani raid, out of dozens of other raids.

You have squat - even with the embassy bombing the 'smoking gun' was that the ISI had 'contacts' with Haqqani - contacts that Petraeus maintains are a legitimate part of intelligence operations.

We never hid those contacts. I mentioned to you a while back that the US knew exactly what was going on with the Quetta Shura and went along with it, even though it didn't like it. I believe that has pretty much been established at this point between Gates and Hollbrookes statements on Baluchistan and the Shura.

And even the 'one unambiguous instance' we have counts only if we allow the US the benefit of the doubt of being a credible source of information, and not manipulating it to serve its own ends, given that significant disagreements between the US and Pakistan are now in the open.

You have great capabilities, but despite that you only have bits and pieces - that too me indicates that the emphasis of those capabilities continues to be to prove a negative, or close to it.

Clutching at straws.

 

[S-2]

A.M. it's o.k. You can't be expected at this point to be considered an impartial witness. Now you call to question the veracity of Petraeus' comment altogether. I understand. Your narrative requires such.

You haven't grasped the salient facts that my nation's leaders are constructing policy after seven years and much wizened observation of events. We're not grabbing rabbits out of our hat regardless of how desperate you seek the applause of your irhabi peers here.

Until last year, there was not any open acknowledgement of "contacts". Further, we haven't bought off on the value of your "contacts" versus the patent and measurable harm. Your rationales are pure Bismarckian dominance of Afghanistan in our absence-the same as always.

That's thoroughly unacceptable.

How are you able to determine we have "only bits and pieces"? What really do you or I know of what we have? Be fair for a moment.

I know nothing first-hand. I know people who do. They don't tell me and I don't ask. Where I to do so, they'd quit talking to me altogether. Thus I'm left to my key leaders and yours to believe.

If my key leaders insist a "concern" for these issues and a general with great responsibility mentions an event to the press, you may assume that we are worried. All that follows will be speculation as to the basis for such but that's all you'll be tangibly able to draw forth.

I know that too so who are you kidding? We are CONCERNED over your "contacts". We don't find them a natural relationship in the midst of war as we hardly believe those contacts constitute an intelligence network. We're that so, I'm certain our leaders wouldn't even make an issue of such.

It's not like you're trumpeting a penetration op by the ISI against Haqqani to our decision-makers.

My mind is made up. You may persist in denying that these relationships exist and go beyond "contacts" but if the big guys are worried, so am I.

You don't know a thing happening along your border. You really don't. So believe your government as, since I don't know either, will believe mine. Our beliefs matter not at all.

The perceptions of my nation's key leaders, though, do matter. I'm certain you know how they feel.

Thanks.

 

[Patriot]

Not only that, the US could not TRUST that, if "tipped", it was not disinformation designed to create an incident of civilian deaths. Was the ISI and GoP in favor of drone strikes or not. Does any one know? Did the GoP even know its own position on this? How could the US rely on BM location "tips"from the GoP given the outrage being expressed daily to the press by the GoP??

Are you saying ISI will give wrong info to CIA to kill Pakistani citizens just for the sake of bad PR of CIA?Do you really believe that?ISI Agents are also Pakistanis you know.They are not aliens and are humans.They are there to protect Pakistan not kill innocent Pakistanis just to give CIA bad PR.America is already hated here.They don't have to do this.You can then also say that CIA hijacked Planes to hit buildings on 9/11 so that USArmy can invade Afghanistan.

 

[Torpedo]

Well he is not uprotected he's sheltered by Your Raw and may be mousad and CIA.

Welcome to the blame-RAW-for-bad-digestion Club.

Do you know how much collateral damage the airstrike by our planes will cause?

Read carefully. He talks about airborne commando operation.

Drones are most approprite for this.You dont care for civillians but we do because they are our citizens.

Asking for drones and talking of civilians' safety? Go get your facts corrected. Do you know the ratio of innocent:militant deaths by drone strikes?

Besides who are you to represent the whole world? and what problem you have on our aquisition of drones?

Shows you are interested only in drones, not in BM.

Yet again
Lack Of will to kill terrorists=Anti Pakistan Propaganda.

Whatever you call it....

 

[fatman17]

Drones? My foot!

Till when you expect the world to heed to your pathetic excuse of lack of military apparatus? All you need is a commando team zeroing in on his location. Or a quick surgical air-strike, with whatever kind of aeroplanes you have got.

He lives in Pakistan, you know where he is. What the heck is stopping you? Is it just the lack of will?

since you are so ccoksure - you tell us!

 

[fatman17]

Welcome to the blame-RAW-for-bad-digestion Club.

and welcome to the blame-ISI-for-bad-digestion Club!!!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

My mind is made up. You may persist in denying that these relationships exist and go beyond "contacts" but if the big guys are worried, so am I.

Its simple really - I trust my Military officials over yours. It is the Pakistani military and intelligence institutions that are dealing with a violent insurgency on our soil, with their kith and kin in mortal danger from the fall out, while yours fight in a nation thousands of miles away while the US largely continues with life as usual.

As SA said, the PA and ISI aren't evil Aliens and monsters bent on wreaking havoc on their own, despite the West almost caricaturing them in that light.

In the absence of anything significant to validate the allegations from your side, I see no reason to buy into the US version.

 

[Torpedo]

Welcome to the blame-RAW-for-bad-digestion Club.

and welcome to the blame-ISI-for-bad-digestion Club!!!

Proofs matter, sir. Right now, India is successful in making ISI look bad.

By the way, I can't recall myself blaming ISI baselesely.

 

[RescueRanger]

To all those who think US Signals and Human Intel are top knotch in that area... Then how come Lord of the Turban Brigade "Mr. Bin Laded" continues to allude you. I find it hard to stomach that the US (a hypo power, the only one) cant track down a man on a dialysis machine, hiding in some cave.

When it comes to the US in Afghanistan (its a work in progress) where Pakistan is concerned ( our commitment and capacity is suspect). How interesting to see these double standards at work, partners are never equal (are they)?

As far a I am concerned it boils down to laim excuses and bravado, nothing more.