Pakistan Issues Demarche to US over Drone Strikes - US Argues Strikes Legal

[VCheng]

And given that Pakistan would only be piloting the drones and authorizing any strikes on Pakistani soil after reviewing any processed intelligence, Pakistan would not have any access to 'sensitive technology' involved in the complete system.

"Piloting" and "reviewing the intelligence" gathered is the very definition of compromising the system!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Piloting and reviewing the intelligence gathered is the very definition of compromising the system!

How is piloting a drone such a remarkable and classified operation compared to piloting an F-16 or operating the Falco UAV's Pakistan currently has?

Reviewing the intelligence gathered to prevent massacres of innocents, as happened with the strike after Davis was released, is precisely what is needed to minimize collateral damage in drone strikes.

 

[VCheng]

How is piloting a drone such a remarkable and classified operation compared to piloting an F-16 or operating the Falco UAV's Pakistan currently has?.............

F-16s and Falcos are at least two or three generations behind the present capabilities of the US drone program, probably, may be, quite possibly, or may be not, and these could be developed even further, may be, if and when needed, likely.

Reviewing the intelligence gathered to prevent massacres of innocents, as happened with the strike after Davis was released, is precisely what is needed to minimize collateral damage in drone strikes.

The primary goal is to eliminate terrorist sanctuaries, while minimizing collateral damage.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

F-16s and Falcos are at least two or three generations behind the present capabilities of the US drone program, probably, may be, quite possibly, or may be not, and these could be developed even further, may be, if and when needed, likely.

It does not matter how far behind the F-16's are, piloting a UAV is not going to suddenly become some sci-fi secret compared to the other UAV's and fighter jets out there (F-35, Eurofighter, Rafale etc.). Merely piloting a UAV will not offer those doing so any insight into the technology behind the controls - you are trying to paint the issue as something it is not to offer a poor defence of the US paranoia in rejecting the various alternatives proposed by Pakistan.

The primary goal is to eliminate terrorist sanctuaries, while minimizing collateral damage.

Massacring hundreds of innocent people on flawed intelligence is not going to 'eliminate terrorist sanctuaries', and Pakistani oversight and review would help prevent such massacres of innocents by the US.

 

[VCheng]

It does not matter how far behind the F-16's are, piloting a UAV is not going to suddenly become some sci-fi secret compared to the other UAV's and fighter jets out there (F-35, Eurofighter, Rafale etc.). Merely piloting a UAV will not offer those doing so any insight into the technology behind the controls - you are trying to paint the issue as something it is not to offer a poor defence of the US paranoia in rejecting the various alternatives proposed by Pakistan.

Okay. Obviously, good defense or poor, it is not for you or me to decide what constitutes paranoia and what constitutes due and proper caution to maintain security of a critically important system. As your mind seems to made up, I will not try to change it, and will maintain mine as well.

Massacring hundreds of innocent people on flawed intelligence is not going to 'eliminate terrorist sanctuaries', and Pakistani oversight and review would help prevent such massacres of innocents by the US.

As I said, drone attacks continue to eliminate militants slowly but surely, and although not ideal, they are still more effective than any other option available to USA.

It is evident that our different opinions will not converge. So be it.

======================================================

Back to the topic, does Pakistan plan on elevating the issue over and above yet another demarche after the next drone attack, should it happen? After all, something more effective than words with minimal credibility would be needed to consider changes to any policies.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Okay. Obviously, good defense or poor, it is not for you or me to decide what constitutes paranoia and what constitutes due and proper caution to maintain security of a critically important system. As your mind seems to made up, I will not try to change it, and will maintain mine as well.

You have offered nothing to illustrate how piloting a UAV would somehow be so remarkably 'classified' from piloting all the other UAVs and advanced fighter jets out there, so please don't expect me to buy your inane mumbo jumbo about 'classified technology'.

As I said, drone attacks continue to eliminate militants slowly but surely, and although not ideal, they are still more effective than any other option available to USA.

Pakistani approval/review of drone strikes would only reduce the current collateral damage, and therefore improve the effectiveness of the drone strikes, and therefore the argument against Pakistani review of the strikes is an invalid one.

Back to the topic, does Pakistan plan on elevating the issue over and above yet another demarche after the next drone attack, should it happen? After all, something more effective than words with minimal credibility would be needed to consider changes to any policies.

IMO, given the clear intent of the US to continue with illegal military operations on Pakistani soil, and massacre Pakistani soldiers without even an apology afterwards, clearly points to a situation where Pakistan should escalate along the lines that have been mentioned.

 

[VCheng]

Is this different second attack on miramshah area?
It must be very difficult to fill in shoes of Pakistani politicians, they have to pacify three fronts
1. civilians demanding stoppage of drone strikes
2. Americans who are getting increasingly aggressive and are not heeding any demands or even a fake apology
3. army with G Kiyani last year proudly proclaiming any drone entering Pakistan will be shot down.

You are right, Pakistan has played its trump card and americans have shown by two drone attacks that they are not concerned of opening of NATO supply route.

Yes, it seems that Pakistan and its leadership, both civil and military, have hard choices to make, and implement, in the days ahead.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

you can't compare a reccon UAV to an armed manned aircraft.....symbolically they use remote operated (armed) drones over manned aircrafts because it spares the risks of their pilots and also gives it a more ''robotic'' rather than ''humanized'' dimension even though the unmanned aircrafts are remotely piloted by humans - who are susceptible to emotion or flawed judgement

over a decade on, it seems that at times they have failed to understand that in those areas - anyone could look like a militant. You even have young boys clutching an AK with 2 or 3 bullets in the magazine. A lot of the tribespeople have beards, wear traditional garb and could pass as ''terrorists'' by American/western standards (it's very superficial)

i dont know what agreement exists between GovUSA and GovPak. Obviously a clandestine one. Both sides are playing double games with the minds of the general public on both sides.

it's erroneous however to think that the security establishment would be unable or unwilling to bring down those unmanned intruding aircrafts...all they need is the orders, they cant act unilaterally.

Pakistan and US have had issues determining who the enemy is....Our enemies are not necessarily theirs, and vice versa. Vested interests come into play, but so does differing strategies. Pakistan's approach is that we'd rather work with the people in FATA and build coalitions against the militants. To an extent, our strategy has succeeded. I always cite the example of agencies like S.Waz Orakzai and my native Kurram - where former militants and their sympathetics are actually cooperating with the State. We've lost some ''allies'' actually because they demanded arms and the State (rightly) was hesistant to just start doling arms. But on the whole part, for moral reasons I think the tribespeople of FATA would feel obligated and would favour cooperating with security forces simply because they are fed up of the fighting and bloodshedding - many have been affected by it. Local economy (which as it is, is quite modest and agrarian based; mostly informal) has been detrimentally effected

when you have people in your constituency, you want to keep them on your side......when a drone hits suspects in Miranshah and say it kills 4 militants and 1 bystander - you have 4 dead militants and the family of 1 victim civilian who will then say ''f*ck this, we will swear revenge''

Pakmil did not have a trigger happy approach when it went into Swat to clean up the place of the miscreant *****. To be very honest with you, there were some casualties - there was damaged property. But Pakmil also helped the people on the ground and then rebuilt whatever was damaged...not just personal property, but even public property destroyed by the militants themselves (e.g. girl schools, the famous Ski resort, etc.)

we didn't just go in doing mass killings.....we had what is called a ''strategy'' .....and for the most part, it's worked wonderfully.

NATO's mission however is doomed for failure......and that is why after all these sunk costs, they are forced to now negotiate with the talebs; allow them to set up political offices in ''neutral'' countries, etc.


instead of heeding to our warnings in 2001, they resort to blame games and scape-goating in 2011-12.



it will, however, prove to be a failed strategy. As failed as the NATO campaign itself. But please don't just take my word for it. Observe yourselves.








p.s. when rogue NATO troops pee on dead bodies, burn Qurans and go on mass shooting sprees (not to mention false imprisonment of innocent people) there's no need to talk of Pakistan undermining the NATOs mission....they've done fantastically at undermining it on their own!




















READ and never forget the HISTORY of Afghanistan......understand whom you are dealing with and never ignore historical perspective.