What's new

US responsible for the Murder of Pakistani Troops - Pak Rejects NATO Probe

I would favor the pragmatic approach winning yet again. What say you?
I would have been in favor of 'cold blooded pragmatism' had the NATO report not tried to white-wash US actions in the attack on the Pakistani posts, and included an unconditional apology - my comments over the last couple of days suggested as much, if you remember.

However, given the US report, and the statements of US officials, I will not support continued engagement with the US. The US claims it can use the NDN, great, use it, along with the airspace over there. Pakistan should block all NATO transit through the air as well.

---------- Post added at 04:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:41 PM ----------

An Afghan border police commander said NATO troops hardly ever open fire unless they are attacked.

Right, that is why we have all those instances of weddings, funerals and children playing in fields being blown to pieces by the US ...
 
I would have been in favor of 'cold blooded pragmatism' had the NATO report not tried to white-wash US actions in the attack on the Pakistani posts, and included an unconditional apology - my comments over the last couple of days suggested as much, if you remember.

However, given the US report, and the statements of US officials, I will not support continued engagement with the US. The US claims it can use the NDN, great, use it, along with the airspace over there. Pakistan should block all NATO transit through the air as well....................

I understand you clearly, and your reasoning. But that is a personal opinion, and I still think that the Pakistani leadership will find continued pragmatism to its advantage.
 
The thing is and i have asserted this before that the americans interests are divergent so when people say the two countries cant do without each other i would beg to differ. Its not just about terrorism at all. If that was the case pakistan and and America would have no problems at all.America wants to contain china by bolstering india, this crosses a red line for us. China is our foremost ally and we have unresloved issues with india, America wants to regime change in Iran etc. Pakistan has no issue or desire to get drawn there, etc etc.Pakistans future is with russia china iran etc, America wants pa to be no more than a para military and defang the nukes for aipac and israelis. so pakistan is poor needs money so what??? america needs pakistan far more. Americas central asia and by extrapolation its interests in middle east get threatened if pakistan is not on side. They can not build india and defang pakistan its just not going to happen its like putting stone into water and expecting it to disolve it aint gonna happen
 
General Clark said that after the allied ground force initially came under fire from the Pakistani side, the Pakistanis continued their attack despite American aircraft dispensing flares and conducting low-level, high-speed passes by F-15E fighter jets — neither of which the Taliban would do — to warn off the Pakistanis.

I have another question about the statement of Gen. Clark above - if Pakistani forces had fired at individuals they believed to be Taliban militants, given the lack of intimation by ISAF that an operation was being conducted at night at that time and location, why would Pakistani troops automatically assume that 'aircraft dispensing flares and making high speed passes' were related to the 'militants' being fired upon?

And IMO this gets more damning, if ISAF jets were 'dispensing flares and making high-speed passes to warn Pakistani troops that they were attacking US forces', then that means that the US forces were aware that the posts were Pakistani Army/FC posts, and that would mean that the US should have then immediately contacted the Pakistan liaison officer/Pakistan Army command in Pakistan, and informed them of what was happening so that the firing could be called off. US troops should have also started retreating back into Afghanistan during that time.

Gen. Clark's statement appears contradictory, and IMO establishes 'deliberate intent' to target Pakistani Army positions.

Seems like lies to cover lies to cover lies have resulted in the US Military being 'outed' in terms of what really happened.
 
I have another question about the statement of Gen. Clark above - if Pakistani forces had fired at individuals they believed to be Taliban militants, given the lack of intimation by ISAF that an operation was being conducted at night at that time and location, why would Pakistani troops automatically assume that 'aircraft dispensing flares and making high speed passes' were related to the 'militants' being fired upon?

And IMO this gets more damning, if ISAF jets were 'dispensing flares and making high-speed passes to warn Pakistani troops that they were attacking US forces', then that means that the US forces were aware that the posts were Pakistani Army/FC posts, and that would mean that the US should have then immediately contacted the Pakistan liaison officer/Pakistan Army command in Pakistan, and informed them of what was happening so that the firing could be called off. US troops should have also started retreating back into Afghanistan during that time.

Gen. Clark's statement appears contradictory, and IMO establishes 'deliberate intent' to target Pakistani Army positions.

Seems like lies to cover lies to cover lies have resulted in the US Military being 'outed' in terms of what really happened.

I feel compelled to congratulate you on your excellant expose there
 
Afghanistan disaster

Brian Cloughley | Opinion | From the Newspaper Yesterday

THE ninth international conference on Afghanistan in early December in Bonn was a useless talk-shop involving over 1,000 well-meaning but powerless delegates from 90 countries.

Pakistan was right to have refused to attend, not just because of the Nato killing of 24 of its soldiers, but because there was no point in listening to the banal offerings of those who went along for the ride.

Dozens of foreign ministers pontificated and, given their impractical platitudes, it is not surprising that confusion as well as chaos reigns in Afghanistan.

Concurrently, with the beginning of the Bonn jamboree, the deputy commander of foreign forces in Afghanistan, British Lt Gen James Bucknall, pronounced that “Having made this investment in blood, I am more determined … We almost owe it to those who have gone before to see the job through … If I didn’t think we could do this I would take a very different view but I am confident we can do it.”

What ‘job’ is he going to see through? Could it be the impossible job of making Afghanistan governable? Bucknall’s grasp of affairs was encapsulated by his pronouncement that “Kabul has about 20 per cent of the population and less than one per cent of total violence in the country. Not only is the seat of government unaffected, but Kabul is a flourishing capital city that is much safer than Karachi”.

Two days after this imbecilic declaration a “massive blast at the entrance to a shrine in central Kabul where Shiite Muslims had gathered to mark Ashura left at least 48 people dead”.

And Bucknall seems to have forgotten the hotel bombing of June 28 (22 dead); the storming of the British Council on Aug 19 (12); the attack on the US embassy on Sept 13 (25 killed, but no Americans, so the ambassador considered it “not a very big deal”); and the destruction of a bus carrying foreign troops on Oct 29 (13 corpses), none of which were indicative of Kabul being “a flourishing capital city”.

If these were “one per cent of total violence in the country”, what is the 99 per cent?

Nor is the general (doubtless to be ennobled on retirement as Lord Bucknall of Disneyland) alone in maintaining that every day in every way things are getting better and better in Afghanistan.

The US secretary of defence, the Wizard of Whiz, Leon Panetta, declared on Dec 14 that “we are winning this very tough conflict here in Afghanistan”, but that, of course, it’s all Pakistan’s fault that there are setbacks, because “we’ve got to make sure that if we’re gonna secure this country, the Pakistanis better damn well secure their country as well”.

This is an insult to over 3,000 Pakistani soldiers who have given their lives for the security of their country — and the interests of America.

Isaf, the absurdly named International Security Assistance Force, produces a daily update of its activities, written by people whose command of English is as original as Bucknall’s and Panetta’s is of reality. Nothing bad ever happens to Isaf, you understand, and all successes are ‘multiple’.

For example, on Dec 4 “multiple insurgents were killed and two were wounded during a coalition air strike in Tagab district”, while in Kandahar the “security force detained multiple suspected insurgents”. Not to be excluded from multiplicity, “a combined Afghan and coalition security force captured a Haqqani leader” who — wait for it — was “involved in multiple roadside bomb and small arms attacks against Afghan forces in Nagarhar [would that be Nangarhar?] province”.

My favourite, however, is the breathless and ungrammatical report on Dec 3 that “multiple weapons were seized to include five AK-47 assault rifles, a pistol, multiple grenades and a chest rack”? What? — No multiple chest racks?

On Nov 19, foreign troops killed two Afghan policemen. In Alice in Wonderland style, this was reported by Isaf as a “combined Afghan and coalition security force was fired upon by individuals at an Afghan National Security Force checkpoint …
Individuals at hasty an ANSF checkpoint [sic] engaged the security force with rocket-propelled grenades, mortar and small arms fire.

“The security force requested air support in an attempt to de-escalate the situation. After multiple [what else?] attempts to identify themselves as friendly forces, the security force was unable to stop the threat and engaged the checkpoint in self-defence, killing two individuals … An investigation will be conducted”.

In other words, foreign soldiers called in gunships to help them wipe out Afghan policemen who most certainly had not engaged them with mortars and RPGs (it is absurd to suggest that this happened), and no action whatever will be taken against them for their killing of so-called allies.

If any investigation is held, its results won’t be made public. The Isaf account is an insulting fabrication from start to finish.
There are countless episodes like this — as on Dec 17 when yet another bungled foreign ‘night raid’ killed the wife of Dr Hafizullah, the head of the anti-narcotics department in Paktia province. The Isaf version of that shambles is despicable.

The Afghan war is a disaster. Indeed, Afghanistan is a disaster. As President Karzai said on Dec 18 “we — the United States, Nato and Afghanistan government together — have not been able to provide the Afghan people with their individual personal security”. He has rarely uttered truer words. But Pakistan suffers, too, from the catastrophic effects of America’s war.

The writer is a defence analyst.

Afghanistan disaster | Opinion | DAWN.COM
 
I was starting to get the feeling that this was watershed for pakistan but have you guys noticed a number of american press are suggesting that transit routes are about to be reopened?? anyone else notice it? Propaganda? can PA allow this charde to continue again? will pa sign its death warrent?
 
I was starting to get the feeling that this was watershed for pakistan but have you guys noticed a number of american press are suggesting that transit routes are about to be reopened?? anyone else notice it? Propaganda? can PA allow this charde to continue again? will pa sign its death warrent?

Please also observe the 'political tamasha' being engaged in by the PPP, and Gillani's comments against the military.

The Defence Ministry said that 'it has no control over the Army', is that because the Defence Ministry tried to prevent the COAS and DG ISI from submitting their replies to the court in an attempt to 'save Zardari' from justice?
 
I was starting to get the feeling that this was watershed for pakistan but have you guys noticed a number of american press are suggesting that transit routes are about to be reopened?? anyone else notice it? Propaganda? can PA allow this charde to continue again? will pa sign its death warrent?

It was the foregone conclusion from that fateful day itself.. The question was not IF THEY WILL BE OPENED.. It was WHEN THEY WILL BE OPENED and AT WHAT PRICE. Pakistan is not foolish enough to make a permanent enemy of USA..
 
Please also observe the 'political tamasha' being engaged in by the PPP, and Gillani's comments against the military.

The Defence Ministry said that 'it has no control over the Army', is that because the Defence Ministry tried to prevent the COAS and DG ISI from submitting their replies to the court in an attempt to 'save Zardari' from justice?

Zardari and co with americans want to agree to reopen routes. If PA inists no and moves against PPP. Americans get the high moral ground and state sanctions etc PA out of control. But you know they should as our guardians never have allowed the likes of zardai near the role of president. having said that the guys in army and isi are there on merit and will outflank idiot zardari. but then zardari has always been ready for this by having bulk of his assets in america.

---------- Post added at 10:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:50 PM ----------

It was the foregone conclusion from that fateful day itself.. The question was not IF THEY WILL BE OPENED.. It was WHEN THEY WILL BE OPENED and AT WHAT PRICE. Pakistan is not foolish enough to make a permanent enemy of USA..

hold on mate its more than likely western press is just propaganda on past track record. and if you ha read earlier posts you would have realised that pakistan and americas interests diverge there is little to form an alliance. I think its wishful thinking on indians part. Let me tell you you & americans will never get what you want in afghanistan and or PA
 
Please also observe the 'political tamasha' being engaged in by the PPP, and Gillani's comments against the military.

The Defence Ministry said that 'it has no control over the Army', is that because the Defence Ministry tried to prevent the COAS and DG ISI from submitting their replies to the court in an attempt to 'save Zardari' from justice?


Nah man,don't turn this incident into something it is not......possibly to deflect disaffection from the military.Why must anybody be spared from review?
 
hold on mate its more than likely western press is just propaganda on past track record. and if you ha read earlier posts you would have realised that pakistan and americas interests diverge there is little to form an alliance. I think its wishful thinking on indians part. Let me tell you you & americans will never get what you want in afghanistan and or PA

See dude, Pakistan opening supply routes have no benefit for India.. So wishful thinking logic doesnt work. As a matter of fact, Pakistan standing its ground and further antagonizing USA is more in India's interests..

But almost everyone thinking with a clear mind knows that its a question of when and not if...
 
See dude, Pakistan opening supply routes have no benefit for India.. So wishful thinking logic doesnt work. As a matter of fact, Pakistan standing its ground and further antagonizing USA is more in India's interests..

But almost everyone thinking with a clear mind knows that its a question of when and not if...

Simply not so mate you are missing the point. Closing of this routes means american hold on afghanistan is unsustainable long term esp with financial constraints. If americans have to leave say goodby to indian investment of 3 bill at least. we are not antagonising them. We simply are not assisting them in an attempt to contain china a subtle difference

there are two issues. pak will assist in terrorism but will not and can not assist in wider geo games and thats what its really about

in fact even our resident american champion cheng was expressing surprise earlier this week that routes have not been open. there may be more surprises yet
 
Simply not so mate you are missing the point. Closing of this routes means american hold on afghanistan is unsustainable long term esp with financial constraints. If americans have to leave say goodby to indian investment of 3 bill at least. we are not antagonising them. We simply are not assisting them in an attempt to contain china a subtle difference

there are two issues. pak will assist in terrorism but will not and can not assist in wider geo games and thats what its really about

in fact even our resident american champion cheng was expressing surprise earlier this week that routes have not been open. there may be more surprises yet

I guess both you and I are here to see the outcome of this.. There will be certainly a face save given to the Pak Govt, but open they will...
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom