US Apologizes to Pakistan For Salala Attack

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Just to bring in India every time is not a good escape route for one's incompetence.



Now you are going as far as the Fox News too, I guess it was agreed even in PDF that FOX is full of crap!

You can keep whining to prove they didnt apologize...nobody really gives a damn.... reality is out there... they APOLOGIZED.... Get over it...

 

[batmannow]

Panetta wont be a happy man
he might take it on the tribal gathering like a wedding, funeral or a festival to express his frustration like previous drone strikes
there is nothing to celebrate
hope this war ends soon

one thing americans have realized already, that pakistan have the upper hand in afghanistan!

 

[SamantK]

You can keep whining to prove they didnt apologize...nobody really gives a damn.... reality is out there... they APOLOGIZED.... Get over it...

I dont see the reason to get over with it since I was never on any side.

The supply lines will be opened was known, when and how was the question. If this is how it is done, who really cares?

After all you have to accept that whether some Pakistanis agree or not with this so called apology, the Pakistani Establishment has agreed to accept it as an Apology.. hitting back would not do well in this case for Pakistan.

Im not blaming anyone here but merely pointing out how convincing and cunning Americans are ..

 

[Meengla]

I don't know why some people are hell-bent to portray it as a non-apology? As @Agno correctly says above, 'perception' is more important. I just quickly browsed through Yahoo, MSN, NYT, WashingtonPost, FoxNews sites. The topmost or the front-page news is Clinton's 'apology' or being 'sorry'. Obama can clarify the 'apology' during the Presidential Debates--that's another story. It will NEVER change the perception that America apologized to Pakistan. We live in a world with fleeting attention-spans and a mass-media targeting Forrest Gumps of this world.
We need to now debate on what kind of quid pro quo is involved.

 

[SamantK]

I don't know why some people are hell-bent to portray it as a non-apology? As @Agno correctly says above, 'perception' is more important. I just quickly browsed through Yahoo, MSN, NYT, WashingtonPost, FoxNews sites. The topmost or the front-page news is Clinton's 'apology' or being 'sorry'. Obama can clarify the 'apology' during the Presidential Debates--that's another story. It will NEVER change the perception that America apologized to Pakistan. We live in a world with fleeting attention-spans and a mass-media targeting Forrest Gumps of this world.
We need to now debate on what kind of quid pro quo is involved.

No we are not bent on that, all we are bent on was why this wording when it is an Apology, hope you understand. After all US has a title to live by.

 

[newdelhinsa]

 

[Meengla]

No we are not bent on that, all we are bent on was why this wording when it is an Apology, hope you understand. After all US has a title to live by.

I think I had mentioned that the domestic political compulsions are certainly a strong factor in an election-year for Obama. Just read a comment on Washington Post, calling Obama 'the apologizer in chief'.
You will find very few takers for the semantics in this case. Perception will hold the ground. End of argument on that. I know, you know, and a bunch of us know that it was not the 'sorry' Pakistanis wanted initially but it is still a hard-won 'sorry' which gives a 'moral victory' to Pakistan along with a 'plausible denial' on behalf of Obama...

 

[Mike2011]

Looks like pakistan is overwhelmed with happiness. pakistan is making wide opening on both sides??

 

[batmannow]

its his dam, opinion!
but in real no one is ready for a nuclear exchange?
not india, or not america?
sanctions will not going to work, in isolation pakistan can be 1000% more dangerous, thn today!
this guy, is selling media, let him sell.
but reality is to different?

Looks like pakistan is overwhelmed with happiness. pakistan is making wide opening on both sides??

looks like indians getting more desperate!

 

[Hyperion]

I don't know why some people are hell-bent to portray it as a non-apology? As @Agno correctly says above, 'perception' is more important. I just quickly browsed through Yahoo, MSN, NYT, WashingtonPost, FoxNews sites. The topmost or the front-page news is Clinton's 'apology' or being 'sorry'. Obama can clarify the 'apology' during the Presidential Debates--that's another story. It will NEVER change the perception that America apologized to Pakistan. We live in a world with fleeting attention-spans and a mass-media targeting Forrest Gumps of this world.
We need to now debate on what kind of quid pro quo is involved.

The only sensible argument - Kudos!

I would say many other good things, only if, you weren't an Apple basher

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

I dont see the reason to get over with it since I was never on any side.

The supply lines will be opened was known, when and how was the question. If this is how it is done, who really cares?

After all you have to accept that whether some Pakistanis agree or not with this so called apology, the Pakistani Establishment has agreed to accept it as an Apology.. hitting back would not do well in this case for Pakistan.

Im not blaming anyone here but merely pointing out how convincing and cunning Americans are ..

Yet the world sees it as an apology? be it wall street journal,time,washington post,new sentinel,dailymail uk,ABC,New york times,CNN,Boston,BBC.... and even ur TOI..


Its called reality my dear watson! accept it... drink some chilled water... digest it (i know its hard for you guys) and stop ur nonsense..

 

[SamantK]

Yet the world sees it as an apology? be it wall street journal,time,washington post,new sentinel,dailymail uk,ABC,New york times,CNN,Boston,BBC.... and even ur TOI..


Its called reality my dear watson! accept it... drink some chilled water... digest it (i know its hard for you guys) and stop ur nonsense..

Oh dear ignorant poster before naming the news sources did you read them yourself?

Here is an excerpt

The BBC's Kim Ghattas says Washington had resisted saying sorry as there is deep anger among Americans about the death of US soldiers in Afghanistan from attacks by militant groups with alleged connections to Pakistan's ISI intelligence agency.

BBC News - Pakistan to reopen supply lines to Nato Afghan forces


New York times had to say this

In her statement on Tuesday, Mrs. Clinton again expressed “deepest regrets for the tragic incident” last November and offered the administration’s “sincere condolences to the families of the Pakistani soldiers.” But the clincher for Pakistan seemed to be Mrs. Clinton’s using the word “sorry.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/04/w...s-afghan-routes-to-nato-after-us-apology.html

But then again, if you people are satisfied, who really cares!

 

[Donatello]

Oh dear ignorant poster before naming the news sources did you read them yourself?

Here is an excerpt

BBC News - Pakistan to reopen supply lines to Nato Afghan forces


New York times had to say this


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/04/w...s-afghan-routes-to-nato-after-us-apology.html

But then again, if you people are satisfied, who really cares!

Exactly, who gives a shyt about what Indians say?

 

[SamantK]

Exactly, who gives a shyt about what Indians say?

Certainly who cares, read my last sentence..

But there are few Pakistani in these forums who have expressed the same thing which I have.. read back few pages..

 

[VelocuR]

......................

Next time, if you are arrogant here.....Don't be stupid, read english carefully.

CNN Source

(CNN) -- Pakistan has decided to reopen supply routes that the United States and its allies have used for their troops in Afghanistan, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Tuesday.

Clinton also apologized for a friendly-fire incident last November in which coalition forces killed 24 Pakistani Army soldiers at a checkpoint.

Clinton's announcement comes as representatives from the two nations discussed the re-opening of ground supply routes into Afghanistan during meetings this past weekend that included Gen. John Allen, the commander of U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan, said a senior U.S. official who wasn't authorized to speak publicly about the sensitive negotiations.

The talks had been stuck on two key issues -- Pakistan's demand to charge more per container shipped across its border, and Pakistan's demand the United States apologize for the friendly-fire incident last November.

U.S.-Pakistan relations plunged to an all-time low when NATO fighter jets attacked a Pakistani checkpoint near the Afghan border, killing the 24 Pakistani soldiers.

The U.S. government expressed regret over the incident but had not issued a direct apology -- until Clinton's statement Tuesday.

"We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military. We are committed to working closely with Pakistan and Afghanistan to prevent this from ever happening again," Clinton's statement said. Clinton spoke with Pakistan's foreign minister by phone Tuesday morning, she said.

"The Foreign Minister and I were reminded that our troops -- Pakistani and American -- are in a fight against a common enemy. We are both sorry for losses suffered by both our countries in this fight against terrorists," Clinton said in the statement. "We have enhanced our counter-terrorism cooperation against terrorists that threaten Pakistan and the United States, with the goal of defeating Al-Qaida in the region."

Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, Sherry Rehman, said her country appreciated Clinton's statement and hopes "that bilateral ties can move to a better place from here."

"I am confident that both countries can agree on many critical issues, especially on bringing peace to the region," the ambassador said in a statement.

Regarding the U.S. apology, Qamar Zaman Kaira, Pakistan's minister for information and broadcasting, said that Pakistani leaders "are not calling this a big victory or someone else's defeat."

"The government and military of Pakistan has made them realize on principle that they should apologize to the Pakistani nation, and they did," Kaira said.

Kaira expressed concerned about a domestic backlash by opposition parties about reopening the routes, but "hopefully Pakistani people will not listen to them," Kaira told CNN.

Pakistan will continue to press the U.S. administration to stop drone attacks, Kaira said.

Under Tuesday's announcements, Pakistan agreed not to impose any transit fee with the re-opened routes, Clinton said in a statement.

Pakistan had been seeking $5,000 per truck as a condition to reopen the supply lines, U.S. officials said. The Pakistani routes offer a shorter and more direct route than the one NATO has been using since November that goes through Russia and other nations and avoids Pakistan altogether.

Pakistan's Foreign Minister Hina Rubbani Khar told Clinton "that the ground supply lines (GLOC) into Afghanistan are opening," Clinton said in the statement.

"Pakistan will continue not to charge any transit fee in the larger interest of peace and security in Afghanistan and the region," Clinton said. "This is a tangible demonstration of Pakistan's support for a secure, peaceful, and prosperous Afghanistan and our shared objectives in the region."

The action will also help the United States and the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force conduct a planned drawdown of troops at a much lower cost, she said. "This is critically important to the men and women who are fighting terrorism and extremism in Afghanistan."

Pakistan closed the supply routes after a NATO airstrike in November killed the 24 Pakistani soldiers near the border with Afghanistan. Clinton said Tuesday she offered her "deepest regrets" to the Pakistani foreign minister for the "tragic incident" in a phone call Tuesday morning.

NATO insisted the airstrike was an accident. President Barack Obama previously had offered condolences but stopped short of apologizing.

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta indicated recently the United States was not amenable to an apology.

"We've made clear what our position is, and I think it's time to move on," Panetta said in an interview with Reuters in June.

Gen. John Allen, commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said he welcomes the decision to reopen the supply lines "as a demonstration of Pakistan's desire to help secure a brighter future for both Afghanistan and the region at large," the NATO-led force said in a statement.

Per current practice, no lethal equipment will move into Afghanistan on the supply routes, except for equipment for the Afghan National Security Forces, Clinton said Tuesday.

A senior U.S. official had said Monday the United States and Pakistan were "moving closer" to an agreement on the supply routes.

Allen has traveled to Pakistan several times in recent weeks to meet with Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Pakistan's chief of army staff, the NATO-led force said Tuesday, and continue building "the increasingly important and positive military-to-military relationship between Pakistan and ISAF."

Later Tuesday, Pakistan's Defense Committee of Cabinet, a group of top civilian and military leadership, announced it decided to reopen the routes after meeting at Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf's house.

The committee "also decided that no lethal cargo will go into Afghanistan except equipment for Afghan National Security Forces" and "reconfirmed that Pakistan will continue not to charge any transit fee," the committee said in a statement released in Islamabad.

"The DCC stressed that, as recommended by the Parliament, Pakistan's future relations with the US must be based on mutual respect and mutual interest and conducted in a transparent manner," the statement said.