was
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2007
- Messages
- 1,163
- Reaction score
- 0
US UAV shot down in Pakistan
- Thread starter Dynamic_Dynasty
- Start date
Task Force Black
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 79
- Reaction score
- 0
Indeed NATO and the US does respect Pakistans borders.
All UAV crash debris can be dropped off to us at Brigade HQ at Tarbela once inspection is complete. Pakistan simply doesn't need to shoot down UAV's.
Task Force Black
All UAV crash debris can be dropped off to us at Brigade HQ at Tarbela once inspection is complete. Pakistan simply doesn't need to shoot down UAV's.
Task Force Black
Task Force Black
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 79
- Reaction score
- 0
actually us want to spread hate in the poeple. more pa strike in tribal areas and more poeple are angry versus pakistan. that,s why us always says do more do more. they are using islamic jehad against pakistan just like we did against the soviets. alongside with their afghani puppet and those bastards hindus and jews.
a question why the taliban never attacks the us supplys covoys passing via pakistans tribal area?????
Interesting stance. Afghani puppet, bastard hindus and jews [sic] causing hate to spread in the people.
Doctor Farrukh Saleem very recently went on record from Islamibad to suggest that a great many in Pakistan seem to be in a form of denial, and that the now something in the region of 10,267 casulties far exceeds the losses from the 1965 Pakistan-India War. He suggests the greatest martial exponents that cause this loss are not driven from external sources at all, quite the opposite.
Not wanting to undergo a character appraisal of the good Doctor, would that stance prove unpopular in light of the above passage?
Kasrkin
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,471
- Reaction score
- 0
I believe Task Force Black has a point there, but that does not mean Afghans and Indians are not involved in this violence. After all Afghans and Indians have everything to gain through this. Pakistan certainly deserves better from these Afghans. Indians...well thats an old story.
AgNoStiC MuSliM
ADVISORS
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,259
- Reaction score
- 87
- Country
- Location
Yeah - and where did the Jews come into all of this? I have a Jewish uncle in fact (through marriage) nicest guy you could ever meet.
dr.umer
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2008
- Messages
- 1,460
- Reaction score
- 0
At Terbela is it still called "Training Advisory Group"?
I hope you guys are still in HQ SOTF, isn't it?
batmannow
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2008
- Messages
- 18,830
- Reaction score
- -19
- Country
- Location
Bush skirts around issue of sovereignty
By Anwar Iqbal
September 24, 2008 Wednesday Ramazan 23, 1429
NEW YORK, Sept 23: Presidents George W. Bush and Asif Ali Zardari on Tuesday showed a keen awareness of the sensitivities of the Pakistani people and avoided using words and terms that could have had a negative impact on the people.The US president while talking about the issue of militancy avoided using the terms war on terror although his meeting with Mr Zardari focussed on joint efforts to fight insurgency in Fata.
Mr Bush also noted Mr Zardaris concerns at the violation of Pakistans sovereignty by US forces but made no commitment.
Your words have been very strong about Pakistans sovereign right and sovereign duty to protect your country, and the United States wants to help, said Mr Bush while addressing the Pakistani president sitting next to him.
Instead of the war on terror, Mr Bush chose to stress US economic assistance to Pakistan, offering to help spread prosperity in that country.
We want our friends around the world to be making a good living. We want there to be economic prosperity and we can work together, he said. And then he quietly reminded the media that Mr Zardari and he would also be talking about security issues.
Both leaders appeared comfortable in each others presence. Mr Bush smiled broadly as he spoke about his countrys relations with Pakistan.
After all, Pakistan is a close and important friend, said the US leader while expressing his deepest condolences for the victims of Saturdays deadly blast in Islamabad.
I know that your heart went out to the families of those who suffer and so does the collective heart of the American people, said Mr Bush while turning towards Mr Zardari. We stand with you.
He then spoke of his meeting with Mr Zardaris children at the Beijing Olympics, saying: I got to know you a little bit in an interesting way when I met your children at the Olympics.
The meeting with the children, he said, reminded him of the great suffering that the Pakistani president had been through with the loss of his wife.
And I thank you very much for staying involved in public service to honour her legacy, said Mr Bush. Pakistan is an ally, and I look forward to deepening our relationship.
The US president then turned to a subject not directly related to Pakistan but is a major issue in the US: a package to deal with the current economic crisis.
President Zardaris response to Mr Bushs remarks was brief and formal but he was generous in praising the US leaders continued support for Pakistan.
As always, you prove to the world that your heart is in there for us Pakistanis, he said. We respect your feelings, we respect the American ideals. And we bring to this the whole concept of your promise to the world of bringing democracy to Pakistan.
Democracy, he said, had come full circle in Pakistan with the help of all the friends around the world and the Pakistani nation was thankful to the world for this help.
Democracy is the answer. We will solve all the problems. We have a situation. We have issues. Weve got problems. But we will solve them and we will rise to the occasion, said President Zardari.
Thats what my wifes legacy is all about. Thats what democracy is all about.
Democracy, he said, was about taking difficult decisions and doing the right thing for the people of Pakistan and to our two great nations.
We should come together in this hard time and we will share the burden and the responsibility with the world.
Afghan Troop Build-up Eyed for Spring
September 24, 2008
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Up to three more combat brigades could be available to go to Afghanistan beginning next spring, in answer to repeated calls from commanders for more troops, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday.
Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee that more forces can't be committed now without extending combat tours or changing troop deployments. But, in response to prodding from the committee's chairman, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., Gates said they probably could go in the spring and summer of 2009. Each brigade has about 3,500 troops.
Levin objected to a statement in Gates' prepared testimony that said it now may be "possible" to do militarily what must be done in Afghanistan - which has been a secondary priority to the Iraq war for years.
"It seems to me that is just simply not good enough," said Levin. "To say it's possible that we'll do what we must do in Afghanistan does not represent the kind of commitment of forces or resources that our commanders on the ground are asking us for in Afghanistan."
In response, Gates offered the likely troop buildup next spring, but cautioned that the next president will have to weigh how large a U.S. force should be sent to Afghanistan, given that the population does not readily welcome foreign forces there.
"I think we need to think about how heavy a military footprint the United States ought to have in Afghanistan," said Gates, or "are we better off channeling resources into building and expanding the size of the Afghan national army as quickly as possible."
The military shortfall in Afghanistan has been a common complaint from commanders. While the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan has grown from fewer than 21,000 two years ago to more than 31,000 today, the senior U.S. general there said last week that he needs at least 10,000 more ground troops, beyond the 3,700 Army Soldiers due early next year.
The requirements include more helicopters, combat troops, trainers and other support forces. But with about 151,000 forces committed in Iraq, the U.S. has not had the available troops to send to Afghanistan. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has often noted that in Afghanistan "we do what we can, in Iraq we do what we must."
Gates sketched out a complex challenge in Afghanistan in the coming months, where he said the U.S. must listen more carefully to Afghan leaders and work harder to avoid civilian casualties, which inflame the population against the military forces they may see as occupiers.
It will be important to bolster local and provincial governments without creating warlords or other militias in the process.
In other remarks, Gates signaled a turning point in Iraq, saying the U.S. has now entered the endgame there. But he said the progress should not prompt U.S. leaders to abandon caution.
Both he and Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the panel that military commanders believe they need to move cautiously as they cut troop levels in Iraq.
"We do not want to jeopardize the gains that we made. We paid a high price for them," said Cartwright.
He added that support forces are needed in both Iraq and Afghanistan. And building up the U.S. force in Afghanistan depends to some degree on how quickly those support troops can be freed up. Members of the panel pressed Gates on U.S. military operations along the Pakistan and Afghanistan border, and the often tense relations among the three countries.
Gates said Afghan leaders he met with last week spoke more optimistically about relations with Pakistan.
He also noted that U.S. relations with Pakistan are critical since about 80 percent of the military's cargo supplies and 40 percent of the fuel are transported through Pakistan and across the border.
© Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
The reason, behind BUSH' quietness over pakistani sovereignty, was actully a clear signal that he is not, in a position to do some thing about it!
because he is going out from the white house , very soon & he dont wana mess with the CIA officials, who already had planed the new stratgy regarding, WAR OF TERROR.Invading pakistan, and putting basses on the name of WOT inside pakistani areas are very important to attack IRAN & to cut off IRAN, from rest of the world? the question is why? simple answer is OIL & for that reason CIA keeping an eye on BALUCHISTAN & KEEPING THIER SUPPORT TO (BLA)
On the other hand, CIA also want to put restrictions on CHINA, so for that very reason CIA is looking for thier basess IN FATA and in PAKISTANI TRIBAL AREAS.
By Anwar Iqbal
September 24, 2008 Wednesday Ramazan 23, 1429
NEW YORK, Sept 23: Presidents George W. Bush and Asif Ali Zardari on Tuesday showed a keen awareness of the sensitivities of the Pakistani people and avoided using words and terms that could have had a negative impact on the people.The US president while talking about the issue of militancy avoided using the terms war on terror although his meeting with Mr Zardari focussed on joint efforts to fight insurgency in Fata.
Mr Bush also noted Mr Zardaris concerns at the violation of Pakistans sovereignty by US forces but made no commitment.
Your words have been very strong about Pakistans sovereign right and sovereign duty to protect your country, and the United States wants to help, said Mr Bush while addressing the Pakistani president sitting next to him.
Instead of the war on terror, Mr Bush chose to stress US economic assistance to Pakistan, offering to help spread prosperity in that country.
We want our friends around the world to be making a good living. We want there to be economic prosperity and we can work together, he said. And then he quietly reminded the media that Mr Zardari and he would also be talking about security issues.
Both leaders appeared comfortable in each others presence. Mr Bush smiled broadly as he spoke about his countrys relations with Pakistan.
After all, Pakistan is a close and important friend, said the US leader while expressing his deepest condolences for the victims of Saturdays deadly blast in Islamabad.
I know that your heart went out to the families of those who suffer and so does the collective heart of the American people, said Mr Bush while turning towards Mr Zardari. We stand with you.
He then spoke of his meeting with Mr Zardaris children at the Beijing Olympics, saying: I got to know you a little bit in an interesting way when I met your children at the Olympics.
The meeting with the children, he said, reminded him of the great suffering that the Pakistani president had been through with the loss of his wife.
And I thank you very much for staying involved in public service to honour her legacy, said Mr Bush. Pakistan is an ally, and I look forward to deepening our relationship.
The US president then turned to a subject not directly related to Pakistan but is a major issue in the US: a package to deal with the current economic crisis.
President Zardaris response to Mr Bushs remarks was brief and formal but he was generous in praising the US leaders continued support for Pakistan.
As always, you prove to the world that your heart is in there for us Pakistanis, he said. We respect your feelings, we respect the American ideals. And we bring to this the whole concept of your promise to the world of bringing democracy to Pakistan.
Democracy, he said, had come full circle in Pakistan with the help of all the friends around the world and the Pakistani nation was thankful to the world for this help.
Democracy is the answer. We will solve all the problems. We have a situation. We have issues. Weve got problems. But we will solve them and we will rise to the occasion, said President Zardari.
Thats what my wifes legacy is all about. Thats what democracy is all about.
Democracy, he said, was about taking difficult decisions and doing the right thing for the people of Pakistan and to our two great nations.
We should come together in this hard time and we will share the burden and the responsibility with the world.
Afghan Troop Build-up Eyed for Spring
September 24, 2008
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Up to three more combat brigades could be available to go to Afghanistan beginning next spring, in answer to repeated calls from commanders for more troops, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday.
Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee that more forces can't be committed now without extending combat tours or changing troop deployments. But, in response to prodding from the committee's chairman, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., Gates said they probably could go in the spring and summer of 2009. Each brigade has about 3,500 troops.
Levin objected to a statement in Gates' prepared testimony that said it now may be "possible" to do militarily what must be done in Afghanistan - which has been a secondary priority to the Iraq war for years.
"It seems to me that is just simply not good enough," said Levin. "To say it's possible that we'll do what we must do in Afghanistan does not represent the kind of commitment of forces or resources that our commanders on the ground are asking us for in Afghanistan."
In response, Gates offered the likely troop buildup next spring, but cautioned that the next president will have to weigh how large a U.S. force should be sent to Afghanistan, given that the population does not readily welcome foreign forces there.
"I think we need to think about how heavy a military footprint the United States ought to have in Afghanistan," said Gates, or "are we better off channeling resources into building and expanding the size of the Afghan national army as quickly as possible."
The military shortfall in Afghanistan has been a common complaint from commanders. While the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan has grown from fewer than 21,000 two years ago to more than 31,000 today, the senior U.S. general there said last week that he needs at least 10,000 more ground troops, beyond the 3,700 Army Soldiers due early next year.
The requirements include more helicopters, combat troops, trainers and other support forces. But with about 151,000 forces committed in Iraq, the U.S. has not had the available troops to send to Afghanistan. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has often noted that in Afghanistan "we do what we can, in Iraq we do what we must."
Gates sketched out a complex challenge in Afghanistan in the coming months, where he said the U.S. must listen more carefully to Afghan leaders and work harder to avoid civilian casualties, which inflame the population against the military forces they may see as occupiers.
It will be important to bolster local and provincial governments without creating warlords or other militias in the process.
In other remarks, Gates signaled a turning point in Iraq, saying the U.S. has now entered the endgame there. But he said the progress should not prompt U.S. leaders to abandon caution.
Both he and Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the panel that military commanders believe they need to move cautiously as they cut troop levels in Iraq.
"We do not want to jeopardize the gains that we made. We paid a high price for them," said Cartwright.
He added that support forces are needed in both Iraq and Afghanistan. And building up the U.S. force in Afghanistan depends to some degree on how quickly those support troops can be freed up. Members of the panel pressed Gates on U.S. military operations along the Pakistan and Afghanistan border, and the often tense relations among the three countries.
Gates said Afghan leaders he met with last week spoke more optimistically about relations with Pakistan.
He also noted that U.S. relations with Pakistan are critical since about 80 percent of the military's cargo supplies and 40 percent of the fuel are transported through Pakistan and across the border.
© Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
The reason, behind BUSH' quietness over pakistani sovereignty, was actully a clear signal that he is not, in a position to do some thing about it!
because he is going out from the white house , very soon & he dont wana mess with the CIA officials, who already had planed the new stratgy regarding, WAR OF TERROR.Invading pakistan, and putting basses on the name of WOT inside pakistani areas are very important to attack IRAN & to cut off IRAN, from rest of the world? the question is why? simple answer is OIL & for that reason CIA keeping an eye on BALUCHISTAN & KEEPING THIER SUPPORT TO (BLA)
On the other hand, CIA also want to put restrictions on CHINA, so for that very reason CIA is looking for thier basess IN FATA and in PAKISTANI TRIBAL AREAS.
Last edited:
Kasrkin
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,471
- Reaction score
- 0
Calm down Agnostic, I'm not having a go at Jews. I'm just pointing out that the Afghans have always had territorial designs and ambitions against Pakistan. And that they are inherently bitter, jealous and unthankful and have been responsible for unrest in the tribal areas in the past(which they think should be part of their country). Also they are pathetic and dishonourable to so venamountly blame Pakistan when their 'government' is completely corruption ridden, run by drug lords and war lords who ate away all the international aid that came in and they lack the simple trust of the people, therefore Taliban make a come back and make life hell for everyone.
dr.umer
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2008
- Messages
- 1,460
- Reaction score
- 0
Here is the picture from the wreckage of US Drone
View attachment cf3cfcfc1580b24b1c9614e336934e71.jpg
View attachment cf3cfcfc1580b24b1c9614e336934e71.jpg
Attachments
Last edited:
Awesome
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2006
- Messages
- 22,023
- Reaction score
- 5
no pic dude.
AgNoStiC MuSliM
ADVISORS
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,259
- Reaction score
- 87
- Country
- Location
err why do you think I wasn't calm?
My post was a continuation of the response related to was's post, who did mention Jews ...
dr.umer
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2008
- Messages
- 1,460
- Reaction score
- 0
Asim,
I have added the pic and it is working fine with me here.
I have added as attachment as well.
Regards,
Similar threads
