Trial of Kayani for not defending Pakistan

[jetti]

US is looking for an excuse to decimate Pakistan's military and Kayani has resisted the bait.

When fighting a superpower, the worst thing you can do is to fight head on. There are always alternative ways to engage someone at their weaker points (supply routes, insurgency, etc.). For a change, Pakistan is defending itself using brains, not brawn. Against America, Pakistan's brawn is negligible.

i dont think the US is as wicked as you think. THey have nothing to gain by decimating the Pak army

 

[Khan_patriot]

I move for a trial of General Kayani for:

1. Allowing repeated drone attacks after repeated resolutions from the parliament against them
2. Not shooting down the US raid Choppers on May 2 after the PAF reportedly had a lock on them
3. For failing to reign in on the culprits of the November, 2011 attackers on Salala Checkpost

He personally is responsible for these failures as defending Pakistan comes under standing orders of the military. If he has been ordered not to defend Pakistan by the President, then he has to come out and declare this position.

Please support the motion.

dude if anyone has to be tried its the PM, or the COMMANDER IN CHEIF OF THE ARMED FORCES and that would be Zardari, and since thats not happening then you should be tried for ''conspiring against the government'' and ''attempting to stir up anti-government sentiments''.......

 

[majesticpankaj]

If Iran can hold against mighty US and its allies..why can't pakistan ? You have China with you. You are a nuclear power. That is simply depressing.

 

[F.O.X]

I move for a trial of General Kayani for:

1. Allowing repeated drone attacks after repeated resolutions from the parliament against them
2. Not shooting down the US raid Choppers on May 2 after the PAF reportedly had a lock on them
3. For failing to reign in on the culprits of the November, 2011 attackers on Salala Checkpost

He personally is responsible for these failures as defending Pakistan comes under standing orders of the military. If he has been ordered not to defend Pakistan by the President, then he has to come out and declare this position.

Please support the motion.

And if he takes Action You will be saying that Army is Acting out of its authority , it is the CIVIL government job to tell Army what to do , it is only supreme courts job to Punish culprit's who cares if these guys are terrorists since we have No Proof Lets just set them free so they can blow some more innocent people .

If Army takes actions & do not listen to others they are Dictators .

If they don't take any action & listen to Government then lets Just be against them anyways since we don't like them .


Give them a Break , they know what to do & they are doing it batter then your so Called Democratic Government .

 

[Respect4Respect01]

in my opinion he was one of the worst general in Pakistan, but if you calm down and think for a while then you will notice that he did alot for the Army which is good. Kiyani couldn't do much because his hands were tied to so called "democracy".

 

[emperorfurkan]

Well whatsoever , its not the Fault of Pakistani Government and Not the Fault of the Army , its Just that Pakistan is totally being run by Western Investors and Bureaucrats , so Pakistani Government cant make a Opinion of its own , they have to Run just accordinly the western Governments want , if they want Drone strike so Drone Strike will take place no matter where in Pakistan but they will have strikes , Army is Just a Puppet Na ! Understand the Hard Bitter Truth

 

[53fd]

The military has made it very clear that they will shoot the drones down if they are given the orders by the civilian government. Likewise, the military has also said that the decision to restore (or not to restore) the NATO supply routes also lies with the Parliament. As far as I see it, they have respected the decisions of the civilian authorities.

 

[VelocuR]

YES! I have said numerous times, Kiyani should be tried in the motion due to his behaviours and bad professionals.


According to the new Pakistani defense policy, "Any object entering into our air space, including U.S. drones, will be treated as hostile and be shot down," a senior Pakistani military official told NBC News. (after Salala incident)

 

[VCheng]

I move for a trial of General Kayani for:

Okay, let's have a mock trial here.

1. Allowing repeated drone attacks after repeated resolutions from the parliament against them

It is not up to him to allow or disallow drone attacks, for that is a decision taken by USA.

2. Not shooting down the US raid Choppers on May 2 after the PAF reportedly had a lock on them

Kayani is Chief of Army Staff, not the PAF. What about the consequences of shooting a US chopper down that night?

3. For failing to reign in on the culprits of the November, 2011 attackers on Salala Checkpost

The Salala incident has no identifiable or prosecutable "culprits".

He personally is responsible for these failures as defending Pakistan comes under standing orders of the military. If he has been ordered not to defend Pakistan by the President, then he has to come out and declare this position.

Please support the motion.

There is a difference between the person and the office he holds. Also, orders given to him may need to be confidential; why does he have to "declare" what the President has ordered (or not) him to do?

 

[Awesome]

I made a it a point to mention in my OP that an Army doesn't need orders from the Presidency to defend the country. If it sees an attack happening it first defends the country. To say that President should first say defend the country and then we will defend it, is a cop out - President has never said "Don't defend", so the fault still lies with the chief.

If the President has said don't defend against drone attacks, then Kayani just needs to say that, we will forgive him and start pursuing the President.

The right to collaborate with a foreign military should always rest with the parliament.

Okay, let's have a mock trial here.

It is not up to him to allow or disallow drone attacks, for that is a decision taken by USA.

Cute, but to be explicit, he can shoot down the drones in defence of Pakistan which is his duty.

Kayani is Chief of Army Staff, not the PAF. What about the consequences of shooting a US chopper down that night?

Who is he to decide on the consequences? His job is to defend Pakistan.

The Salala incident has no identifiable or prosecutable "culprits".

The know Bagram air base and Kandahar air base. The attack came from there, pursue your attackers, launch a barrage of missiles onto those bases.

There is a difference between the person and the office he holds. Also, orders given to him may need to be confidential; why does he have to "declare" what the President has ordered (or not) him to do?

So let there be a trial, if there are confidential orders let the judicial branch of the government make a decision on it according to the norms and procedures. I've not said hang Kayani, I'm all for giving him a fair trial.

 

[VCheng]

I made a it a point to mention in my OP that an Army doesn't need orders from the Presidency to defend the country. ...................

Actually, yes, the Army needs approval from its Commander-in-Chief for any action, including defensive retaliation.

Or would you care to provide some evidence for your contention that it does not?

 

[humanfirst]

Drones were flying and bombing the $hit out of tribal areas when army was ruling pakistan.There was no civilian govt then,did army shoot the drones down?But instead they allowed shamsi airbase to be made a drone station.Yet the army fanboys claim it all as fault of civilian govt!Even today,army have more than enough influence in civilian govt to pursue them to stop drone strike if they intented.But the fact is they dont want drones to stop,civilian govt dont want it either.

 

[Awesome]

Pakistan lawmakers to debate end to U.S. drone strikes - CNN.com

Btw, the explicit orders are about to be given as well... Even though plenty of resolutions already make it incumbent upon Kayani to defend, but parliament a power higher than the President or PM is about to give the orders. The Parliamentary Committee has already given the verdict, now its only a matter of voting to make it a resolution.

Points:

1. No more drone attacks
2. Supply route and air supply route to be decided by Parliament
3. No overt or covert operations.

 

[Jango]

2. Not shooting down the US raid Choppers on May 2 after the PAF reportedly had a lock on them
Please support the motion.

Air Force and Army, 2 different things.

 

[Awesome]

Actually, yes, the Army needs approval from its Commander-in-Chief for any action, including defensive retaliation.

If I'm going to fly a remote control UCAV towards DC, you think USAF would call Obama, "Hellooo Obama, may I shoot down this plane that is coming to blow you up?"

Or would you care to provide some evidence for your contention that it does not?

More like anecdotal as Pakistan army has taken down Indian aggression time and again.