US might strike in Pakistan:White House

[BanglaBhoot]

Pakistan rejects 'Bin Laden raid'

BBC News - July 23, 2007

Pakistan has responded angrily to suggestions from the United States that American forces might be sent into Pakistan to strike at Osama Bin Laden.

A senior US official has said he believed the architect of the 2001 suicide attacks on New York and Washington was in northern Pakistan.

Pakistani FM Khurshid Kasuri said Bin Laden was not in the country.

A recent US intelligence report says al-Qaeda is intensifying efforts to put operatives into the US.

The report says the nation is at a heightened risk of attack.

Analysts warn that al-Qaeda's leaders have found a "safe haven" in Pakistani tribal areas which has allowed them to regroup.

All options available

US director of national intelligence Mike McConnell said recently he believed Bin Laden was in northern Pakistan, near the Afghan border.

President Bush's homeland security adviser Frances Townsend said that in the pursuit of Bin Laden, no options were off the table.

Pakistani foreign minister Khurshid Kasuri said he did not believe that the al-Qaeda leader was in Pakistan - and in any case, if the US shared its intelligence, Pakistan's army could do a better job.

Pakistan Interior Minister Aftab Sherpao said: "Our stance is that Osama Bin Laden is not present in Pakistan.

"If anyone has the information he should give it to us, so that we can apprehend him," he was quoted as saying by the AFP news agency.

President Pervez Musharraf last week vowed to root out extremists "from every corner of the country".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6911231.stm

 

[KashifAsrar]

ToI feed dated 24th July 2007.
Kashif

US to flatten Pak tribal region if attacked by Qaida from there


New York: American intelligence officials have said that should a resurgent Al Qaida think of attacking the United States again after a gap of six years from Pakistan’s volatile Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), the Bush administration would not hesitate to move in troops to “flatten” the area.
In a report by the New York Times, Washington now believes that the recent events taking place in Pakistan, have at last presented it with an opportunity for a serious campaign against Islamic radicals in Pakistan. The breakdown of a ceasefire between elders in Pakistan’s tribal areas and the Musharraf regime, combined with Musharraf ’s determination to crack down on extremists in his country, may finally have given Bush something his predecessor, Bill Clinton, never had: “A partner who may at long last be persuaded to go after an entrenched terrorist haven,” says the paper.
As a National Intelligence Estimate released last week has made clear, the Al Qaida has reconstituted itself in the wild tribal areas of north western Pakistan. It is now stronger than at any other time in years, and is actively plotting new attacks.
In Pakistan, experts argue that should Musharraf begin an aggressive campaign against Qaida and the Taliban, it wouldn’t be to please Washington, but to project an image of “being a forceful leader before his countrymen go to the polls.”
“There is recognition on Musharraf ’s part that he has an opportunity now that may not exist in a future political configuration because his power may wane,” the NYT quotes Daniel Markey of the Council on Foreign Relations, as saying.
The paper further goes onto say that the Bush administration is captivated by Gen Musharraf because “he is a secular moderate”, and “not to be confused with a civil libertarian.”
The view in Washington now appears to be that the Musharraf government has, at long last, gotten the message that the FATA is an area fanning extremist violence, and therefore, requires decisive attention. According to the paper, no one in Washington believes that Pakistan’s intelligence service has been purged of Taliban sympathizers.
“When Americans hear Musharraf ’s promises, they are once burned, and twice skeptical,” the NYT reports, based on comments by a former CIA official with extensive experience in Pakistan and Afghanistan. “The Pakistani Army is designed, trained and equipped to fight India in Kashmir and deter New Dehli with nuclear weapons. That requires a dramatically different kind of strategy from what is needed in the tribal areas, whose leaders do not consider themselves part of Pakistan,” the paper quoted the former official as saying. ANI

Islamabad says US attacks against militants on its soil unacceptable

Amid US assertions that Osama bin Laden was hiding in its tribal areas, Pakistan on Monday said Washington’s threats of possible attacks against militant hideouts on its soil were “ill conceived” and “dangerous”, which would “further complicate” their cooperation in war on terror. No military action from any other country would be allowed within the territory of Pakistan, PM Shaukat Aziz said, reacting to statements from American officials in the aftermath of the US National Intelligence Estimate. “Pakistan can handle its own requirements of troops. We do not need any other troops from anywhere to come and help. The sovereignty, integrity and security (of the country) is responsibility of Pakistan,” Aziz said. “Clearly we cannot allow in Pakistan any group which jeopardises its security and/or security of another country. We are very capable of defending ourselves and securing ourselves. We believe we can handle our responsibilities and continue to cooperate with everybody.” AFP

 

[PakForce Unlimited]

No invasion, US assures Pakistan



By Our Correspondent


WASHINGTON, July 23: The White House assured Islamabad on Monday that it had no plan to carry out an invasion, but at the same time it said that the United States retained the right to attack ‘actionable targets’ inside Pakistan. “I think there has been this notion afoot, or at least an attempt or an inclination, somehow we’re going to invade Pakistan,” noted White House press secretary Tony Snow.

“We always maintain the option of striking actionable targets, but we also realise that Pakistan is a sovereign government and a very important player in the war on terror,” he added.

Mr Snow was commenting on a statement by the Foreign Office in Islamabad that Pakistan would resist any attack on a target inside its territory.

“Some US authorities are giving certain statements and comments that tribal areas of Pakistan have been turned into safe havens for Al Qaeda militants and the US can go for military strike inside Pakistan,” Foreign Office spokesperson Tasneem Aslam said at a briefing in Islamabad.

“Let us make it clear that any military action inside our borders under an excuse of hunt for Al Qaeda militants will not be acceptable,” she said. “If any such attack is made, it will be a sheer breach of international laws. A stiff resistance will come out against it.”

Her comments apparently irked American journalists. They pressed Mr Snow for a response at a regular White House briefing.

The White House spokesperson, however, refused to indulge in a war of words with Islamabad, preferring instead to quietly reiterate the US position and reminded the journalists that Pakistan is a ‘great ally’ in the war against terror.

Link: http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/24/top2.htm

 

[Always Neutral]

Just to prove the point, Musharraf should remove the forces from tribal areas only then US will realise what Pakistan Army has been protecting US soldiers from. Otherwise they'll always whine about us not doing enough and threaten us with invasions.

But Thorosius if Pakistan does that then USA will stop its aid as well as freely operate with air strikes which will kill very many innocent civilians. You will remember that even the Taliban were no match for the US Airforce which pounded the Taliban into submission when they invaded Afghanistan.

I doubt USA will deploy troops in that area. Also you will be indirectly accepting that Pakistan has no control on those areas.

I am not sure what the solution is but Pakistan Army cannot withdraw from there.

Regards.

 

[Bull]

Whats US trying to achieve by making such open statements which undermine the very position of Mushraff. Have they grown tired of Mushraff?

 

[foxhound]

It's the usual 'stick and carrot' policy of the USA. It all depends on how strong the 'hawks' in the US are? who the hawks are? i.e their background...are they right wing christians...or part of the jewish lobby...or the Indian lobby?....this is I hope Pakistan is aware of and starts to concentrate on it's traditional friends in the white house/congress (i.e the arab lobby and the friends of Pak lobby).....it all depends how strong these lobby's are?

In the scenario that the US will strike in Pakistan.....pretty much depends on Pakistan's resolve in this issue. The US have unfortunately been too arrogant across the world and hence are despised. Even their allies in war (the Brits) have had rebuked many Us Servicemen on numerous occassions. I do not think the US will strike in Pakistan (unless the Pak government authorises it....i.e mainly air support)....Pakistan is not as weak or as unstable as one would like to believe!

If the US would exercise its option of striking Pakistan then the following circumstances need to be considered....as follows!

1) Pak is a major non-Nato ally and any withdrawal from the so called 'war on terrorism' would actually guarantee a loss in this direction.
2) The US cost of this war on terrorism has amounted to approximately $800 billion in Iraq alone. The cost of it's operations in Afghanistan is also daily increasing. PLEASE NOTE, DESPITE US + Allies CAPABILITIES IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN, IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR STATE OF THE ART TECHNOLOGY......THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE to APPREHEND the so called terrorists it is seeking...NOR HAVE THEY BEEN ABLE TO BRING ABOUT MUCH PEACE IN AFGHANISTAN OR IRAQ.....IN AFGHAN>>>ONLY KABUL AREA IS SECURED.
3) The political will and the increase in international public rsponse on this war on terrorism is now seeing the tide against this form of conflict. INFACT SINCE THE US PURSUIT OF THIS STRATEGY....ACCORDING TO THE INTEL PEOPLE.......THERE ARE NOW MORE TERRORIST THAN ONE HAD EVER ANTICIPATED.
4) Also if the US attacks a sovereign country (Pakistan)....then they would definately have no access of Pakistani airspace.....it would be a logistics nightmare for the US + Allies forces...i.e to supply equipment (food/ammunition etc) from the Arabian Sea.
5) By striking Pakistan....there is a higher chance that this will feed into the exremist/radical views.....i.e so called moderates will tend to agree with the radicals against this absurdity of the US action.
6) Pakistan militarily IS NO MATCH FOR THE US....HOWEVER, IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY FOOLISH/STUPID IF ONE THINKS IT WILL BE A WALK OVER. IT IS A FULLY FLEDGED NUCLEAR POWER WITH THE ABILITY TO CAUSE MUCH MAYHEM IN THE REGION.
7) Pak's long range ballistic missiles actually put any nation in it's range as a potential target (possibly even Diego Garcia).
8) Pak Armed forces are a professional/volunteer force who have accounted quite well in it's previous conflicts.....not like IRAQ where most of it soldiers were restricted in their training (so that they did not pose a threat to Saddam/regime) and also had largely a conscript force.
9) Pakistan's population of 160 million+ would rally (i.e due to nationalism etc)....the US will now have a worser situation from it.


What Pakistan needs to do is keep good relations and do it's propaganda around the world.....i.e try to isolate the 'hawks' that are gainst it.

1) 'Milk' the US of as muuch sophisticated hardware as possible but have contingencies for a worst case scenario.
2) try to generate it's economic development with many other nations as possible (such as the Emirates investing approx $50 billion dollars in Pak etc). Pakistan can do it...it needs to diversify it's economic and military acquisitions.
3) it needs to build stronger ties with the Muslim world (i.e Indonesia to Morrocco) and also other friendly nations.


The US and the so called Intelligence analysts have screwed up so many times (just look at Iraq with their WMD claim).... I personally do not think that Bin laden is in Pakistan...my own belief is that there is a 99% chance that he died during the Tora Bora era?...he is only used so that whenever something m,ajor happens....video recordings of him are shown etc. From what I can remember he had kidney problems and needed a kidney dialsis machine?...unless you wanna believe that he may have this machine wioth a mobile generator??

Pakistan NEEDS TO PLAY THESE POLITICS VERY COOL.....the ART of FIGHTING WITHOUT FIGHTING (please see SunTzu for further elaborations).....LET THE US BARK but PLAY IT SKILLFULLY!!

 

[blitz]

US will not declare open war people, so relax. What they will do is what they have been doing for a while now, but on a larger scale. They will pursue targets across the border, carry out missile strikes etc etc. But they will keep the incursions low key enough that it doesn't become a public embarrassment for Mushy.

All these media leaks about attacking inside Pakistan are to build up pressure upon mushy to engage the tribals. The US is edging Mushy to do their dirty work, while Mushy wants the US to do his dirty work. Dirty games all around.

Id hate to be Mushy right now. Hes screwed either way. lol

 

[thorosius]

But Thorosius if Pakistan does that then USA will stop its aid as well as freely operate with air strikes which will kill very many innocent civilians. You will remember that even the Taliban were no match for the US Airforce which pounded the Taliban into submission when they invaded Afghanistan.

I doubt USA will deploy troops in that area. Also you will be indirectly accepting that Pakistan has no control on those areas.

I am not sure what the solution is but Pakistan Army cannot withdraw from there.

Regards.

I dont think they will be willing to lose a useful ... what shall we say .. a hound (Nearly all the AQ leaders were caught by Pakistan). Besides they already have 3 known airbases inside our land.
Considering the US reluctance to do something about Ahmedinejad, it seems like US shies away where ever there is a possibility of increase in US death toll. Pakistan should give them a little taste of what may happen if this bullying goes on, just a tini mini bit.

 

[blitz]

thorosius, its a dangerous game. Of course Pakistan could put some real hurt on US troops entering Pakistani territory, but what happens when the opposing NATO commander escalates it? Say PA troops engage NATO troops, and the NATO commander uses artillery ? What will PA commander do ? Respond with artillery ? Then if the NATO commander targets PA artillery to neutralize it, what will PA do ? Send in air strike ? etc etc

 

[Ababeel]

US must clear its own mess first which is creating all these problems every where in the world.
Solve the problem of Palestine, get out of Iraq and Afghanistan first and stop dreaming and conspiring to control the oil wealth in muslim countries. This will really solve the problems, otherwise more voilence and hooliganism of it will result in more dangerous attacks in future on unpecedented levels. Neocons should have a relook on their ***** policies specially regarding muslims. Only this will be the solution of the problems and not the hell attacking others.

 

[Adux]

Americans are going to beat the crap out of very tom dick and harry. If i was a neocon, i would want another osama attack on US soil of a great magnititude, you could kiss middle-east good bye.

 

[IceCold]

Well kbagdadi i wished u could been the advisior of bush but since its not the case so we can expect anything from the usa but on the other hand usa will never ever put mushraf regime into trouble as the recent interviews with all the top govenment spokes person and also bush has reinstated that they will not put musharaf into any more toruble then he already is. Attacking on tribal areas means that president faces extreme oppostion forcing him to leave and the next government can be of any fanatic mullah and that will be the last thing united states would ever want. So this is just a political game they are playing to pressurize pakistan and to show their own people about there seriousness on war on terror. Afterall bush popularity is getting weaken day by day and he has to do something abt that too.

 

[Adux]

Bush doesnt need to do anything to do about his popularity, he isnt running for President next year

 

[BanglaBhoot]

Pakistan opposes military strike: Kasuri

The Financial Express - July 25, 2007

ISLAMABAD, (Pakistan), July 24 (Agencies) : Pakistan's foreign minister Tuesday repeated an earlier warning that a US strike against Osama Bin Laden could lead to dozens of civilian deaths.

Speaking to the BBC on a US assertion that nothing can be ruled out in the fight against the al-Qaida leader, Khurshid Kasuri said his country's public opinion would be against any such military strike if Bin Laden is confirmed to be in Pakistan.

The BBC report quoted White House spokesman Tony Snow that while the United States recognised the sovereignty of Pakistan, President George Bush's administration retains the option of striking actionable targets.

Although Pakistan has claimed bin Laden is not in its territory, latest US intelligence says al-Qaida has found a sanctuary in Pakistan's tribal areas

Meanwhile: The US military has offered to provide air support and "supporting fires" for Pakistani military operations against Al-Qaeda but in the past has been rebuffed, US defense officials said Monday.

General Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, disclosed the offer of US military and intelligence assistance Friday in a meeting in Schweinfurt, Germany with family members of US troops.

Pace's comments were first reported by a CNN correspondent traveling with the general. Defense officials Monday confirmed his remarks but said the offer was not new, but rather of a longstanding character.

Nevertheless, it comes amid intensifying US pressure on Musharraf to take military action against Al-Qaeda safe havens in the tribal areas along the border Afghanistan.

A US defense official who was present at the meeting in Germany said Pace talked about US military and intelligence assistance to Pakistan in the context of a long relationship with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf.

"He did say 'kinetic.' He also said 'intel sharing,'" said the official, referring to notes.
The official said that when asked later what he meant by "kinetic," Pace said, "Air support, supporting fires. If he (Musharraf) were to ask, we would see how we might be able to help. I'm not predicting anything.'"

Pace said the offer did not include US ground troops. "Supporting fires" usually refers to artillery or rocket fire which could be delivered over long distances from US positions near the border.

The official said Pace insisted it was not a new offer, but "part of an ongoing dialogue." The Pakistanis have not taken up the offer in the past, the official said.

A US intelligence estimate released last week said Al-Qaeda has grown stronger and is plotting attacks against the United States from its haven in Pakistan.

White House Homeland Security adviser Frances Townsend on Sunday refused to rule out a US military incursion into the remote border with Afghanistan to eradicate a resurgent Al-Qaeda militant network.

A Pakistani foreign ministry spokeswoman said Monday that any US attack on Pakistani territory would be unacceptable.

Unrest has flared in the Pakistani tribal areas since Pakistani forces stormed a mosque in Islamabad earlier this month to clear out armed Islamic militants. At least 75 people were killed in the operation.

On Monday, heavy fighting killed at least 35 Islamic militants and two government troops in a Pakistani tribal area dubbed an Al-Qaeda safe haven by Washington, the Pakistani military reported.

The US military has available fighter aircraft and bombers that routinely operate in neighboring Afghanistan.

US F-15E fighters and B-1 bombers have conducted strikes this month in Afghanistan, while other US and British aircraft have flown reconnaissance and surveillance missions, according to US Central Command.

Intelligence gathered in the border area by US satellites and drones is shared with the Pakistani military.

But relations between US and Pakistani military officials along the border have long been tense despite greater recent efforts to communicate and coordinate their movements.

No US military teams operate inside Pakistan, a Pentagon spokesman said.

But armed drones believed to be controlled by the CIA have been used in at least three missile attacks in Pakistan on Al-Qaeda targets over the past two years, sparking protests over civilian deaths.

http://www.thefinancialexpress-bd.com/search_index.php?page=detail_news&news_id=5551

 

[IceCold]

Bush doesnt need to do anything to do about his popularity, he isnt running for President next year

BUsh isnt but the republicans are