What's new

What stops USA from occupying Pakistan?

P.S. Mastan, CB4, its a little unfair, and not very difficult, to call for a bloody revolution by Pakistanis in Pakistan when you personally are sitting in the US and Canada respectively.

What will a bloody revoltion achieve? WHO will Pakistan and Pakistanis be revolting against?

Themselves.

Because the leadership of a nation comes from within its own people.

Hi,

How are you? Actually some of the big revolutions have started from outside---the bolshevik revolution---the iranian revolution---the pak india independence revolution in way---because two major players were ex-pats----the chinese revolution ( communists ) the iraqi revolution---the over throw of King Idrees---so many of these revolutions start from outside----it is actually a norm----.
 
Asim, the moment you put civilians into the position of militia, you condemn your cities, old, women, and children, to the full military force of the invader per the rules of warfare.

At the point when Pakistan's invaded, would it matter? I agree with the above, since I have said so from the beginning that all moral and ethical restraints of warfare would be off. The point would be simple, fight them and hurt them as much as you can. Sui bhi chabohnay ka moka milay toh chubho doh.

For the sake of Pakistan bass annay wah larna hoga.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mastan, if you want Pakistan to improve, if you want us to fight extremism, then please do say so. But don't tell me to be okay with US invasion otherwise.

Both are extremes, both are wrong and I am ready to fight both and I would encourage all Pakistanis to fight both, Mullah extremism and American extremism.
 
Let me summate the situation from my angle.
Firstly it isnt going to EVER happen.
Secondly our dear friend ^^^^ and his stubborn undertones is insinuating our army would be handicapped to the onslaught. He is mistaken. Our forefathers sacrificed so much for the creation of Pakistan and i am convinced that our nation would and could give the USA the bloodiest nose EVER.
Pakistans army comparison to Iraq or Afghanistan scenario is embarrassing. This battle would be different. Granted the result is not in question. What is in question is what losses the USA would suffer.
The bodybags, the duration, the cost of Pakistans occupation would without doubt be crippling and would tilt the USA over the edge economically. Not to mention the geopolitics and intervention of third parties.
Its truly incredible that a nation of 180 million is given so little crediblity and respect. Granted we have our fair share of scumbags but to give so little credit to the rest is beyond belief and shameful.
No its not ego related or chest thumping excercise - its reality.
 
Asim, read up on the preparations on the Japanese mainland for the coming US invasion. Operation Downfall.

Pakistan and Pakistanis are not close to being in the same league as the fanatical Japanese populace of wartime Japan with the code of the Bushido, and unflinching loyalty to the Emperor.

They were prepared to go at the landing vessels with sharpened bamboo sticks if it came to it.

This is after Iwo Jima and Okinawa.

You think Pakistan would have been able to achieve a small percentage of either?

You know what happened after that?

You take on the invader as a military force, you still have control on how many of your men would die before you throw in the towel.

The moment you throw your women and children into the field, or hid behind them, then they become legitimate targets.

No one in the world, UN, etc. will raise a single voice then.

At least in the earlier scenario you can surrender and sue for peace.

Hi,

How are you? Actually some of the big revolutions have started from outside---the bolshevik revolution---the iranian revolution---the pak india independence revolution in way---because two major players were ex-pats----the chinese revolution ( communists ) the iraqi revolution---the over throw of King Idrees---so many of these revolutions start from outside----it is actually a norm----.

I'm doing good buddy. I agree with most of your points except the "bloody revolution" bit. Who are you going to revolt against? What are you going to revolt against? Who is going to revolt?

From what I and the world is seeing in the Arab world with the so called spring, its a downward spiral, with the world looking on, and countries going deeper into Islamic fundamentalism after the revolt than emerging as modern democratic tolerant secular states.
 
Let me summate the situation from my angle.
Firstly it isnt going to EVER happen.
Secondly our dear friend ^^^^ and his stubborn undertones is insinuating our army would be handicapped to the onslaught. He is mistaken. Our forefathers sacrificed so much for the creation of Pakistan and i am convinced that our nation would and could give the USA the bloodiest nose EVER.
Pakistans army comparison to Iraq or Afghanistan scenario is embarrassing. This battle would be different. Granted the result is not in question. What is in question is what losses the USA would suffer.
The bodybags, the duration, the cost of Pakistans occupation would without doubt be crippling and would tilt the USA over the edge economically. Not to mention the geopolitics and intervention of third parties.
Its truly incredible that a nation of 180 million is given so little crediblity and respect. Granted we have our fair share of scumbags but to give so little credit to the rest is beyond belief and shameful.
No its not ego related or chest thumping excercise - its reality.
Brother,

No one is saying that this war will be easy for USA. It will be challenging.

However, you are severely underestimating US resolve and power projection capabilities.

Iraq reached its prime during 1990 and was arguably the strongest Islamic nation during that time. Iraq scared the entire Middle East.

This is US assessment of Iraq in 1990:

At the time of the invasion of Kuwait, the Iraqi armed forces were, by any measure, a formidable and battle-tested fighting force. Iraq began the crisis with one of the world's larger armies, equipped with great numbers of tanks, armored personnel carriers and artillery, some of which were state-of-the-art models. It had a sizable air force with many top-line fighters and fighter-bombers (F-1s, MiG-29s and Su-24s) and a modern air defense command and control (C2) system. During the last six months of the Iran-Iraq war, the Iraqi army had demonstrated a capability to conduct multi-axis, multi-corps, combined-arms operations deep into hostile territory. The staff could conduct long-range planning; coordination of air and artillery preparations; timing of movements and operations; coordination of complicated logistics requirements; and movement of supplies, equipment, and troops to the right place at the designated time. They had developed excellent operational security and deception.

What this indicates is that US NEVER underestimates its enemy. It will NEVER underestimate Pakistan either.

The firepower that US brought for Iraq in 1991 was much greater in comparison to what it brought for Iraq in 2003.

This is Chinese assessment of Iraq in 1990:

The first Gulf War was a watershed for Chinese military analysts. In 1991, the impressive onslaught of American military power against an opponent similar to the PLA in both weaponry and operational thinking raised concerns that China’s military was woefully ill-prepared to fight a war against a technologically superior opponent, a lesson that subsequent conflicts have reinforced.

What this indicates is that military professionals and analysts (regardless of nationalities) understand the 'ground realities' much better then commoners.

Pakistan is a not a nation of Rambos, and Chuck Norrises. Sultan Rahi type projections look good in moves. Reality is far more different. Yes! A segment of the populace is capable of fighting effectively but major portion of the populace is neither trained or well-armed to fight. Keeping a pistol in your home does no makes you a commando. This is not just the case with Pakistan but also India and lot more nations. US military capability has evolved to such a degree that it can handle any nation in the world.

Almost every military clash between US and Pakistan results in Pakistani forces ending up loosing. Check the history. This should give you sufficient hint.

Pakistan is more geared to fight India because it has vast experience in this aspect. US is an entirely different ball-game in comparison and our military planners already know this.

I fully respect your patriotism and even that of Mr. Asim. However, we should be realistic in our assessment of things. The invader will definitely suffer casualties (the toll can go higher then what has been witnessed in Iraq) but it would be foolish to underestimate US resolve as well.

This disclosure from a competent Iraqi commander should give you a decent clue:

In Usfiyah area. I convened a meeting of the leading officers in the army, along with the army's chief of staff. We reassessed the situation on the new facts that we have only two divisions, and the enemy is advancing on three axes. But the Republican Guard chief of staff conveyed orders from high command to launch an attack immediately, with available force. We carried out this order. Units from the Medina Al-Monawara Division launched an attack, the 10th Armored Brigade and special forces, and the 22nd Armored Brigade from Nabukhath Nassar Division. I tried also to deploy all artillery units available.

It was a terrible night, because the crossing of the Americans on the Euphrates were speeding up the advancement of the enemy to its strategic goal, which is Baghdad.

The advancement of our troops -- and this is my sixth war during my service -- was truly remarkable. They had high spirits and a strong will to fight, in spite of all dangers ahead. I used to tell them that the honor of Iraq and the fate of Baghdad depended on this battle.

I joined the front lines in battle. … I was advancing along with the commander of the Medina Al-Monawara Division, with special forces 3rd Brigade on three axes. On two axes, armored troops were advancing based on the 10th Armored Brigade. On the other axis, special forces were advancing, and I was in the middle.

A fierce battle took place. The enemy used enormous firepower. It looked like napalm. Rocket launchers would fire groups of rockets, about 12 rockets each, that would explode in the air, burning whatever it faces on its way with its flames. The battle continued during April 3 and April 4. The enemy was advancing on two axes. One axis was on the area of Qasr through the bridge heading to Usfiyah, the other one from the bridge heading to Radwaniyah. Another action was from the bridge to the south, heading to the military industrial area.

The battle that took place didn't look even like action movies, because events were so fast. I didn't have a single tank intact; it was either damaged or destroyed. I didn't have a single vehicle left. The battle reached a point where the army commander was fighting with a machine gun. The groups of command and communications were completely destroyed. The soldiers and officers were fighting as a personal effort. The spirit of sacrifice and martyrdom was an honor to our army and all Iraqis and Arabs.

From the dawn of April 3 until sunset, the Air Force destroyed anything that moved. Then the Americans broke through fiercely, as if it was programmed. Anything that moved was hit by tanks, armored vehicles, Apaches, and jet fighters, whether it was civilian or military, Republican Guard or not.

I tried to get back to my headquarters to gather troops, because even my mobile phone was out of order, because our communication group was hit, and all of its members were martyred. There were no leading figures; everybody was fighting. I asked the security personnel of the Medina division to bring me a vehicle, and they did -- a vehicle driven by a major. got in. He was a poor driver, so I left the vehicle, and returned to my headquarters, going along with the American convoy advancing to Usfiyah.


However, I do believe that this war will never happen. Pakistan is not a threat to US regardless of all the issues between the two nations.
 
Pakistani army is not only the security guarantee of Pakistan, there are also other Muslim nations that borrow expertise and manpower from Pakistan; some of them very influential when it comes to fossil fuels weapon.

what did these muslim nations do when US invaded iraq? what did they do when a civil war was instigated and supported in libya? how many of them have US military bases? How many of them depend oon american skilled labour to keep these fossil fuels in production?

If US attacks Pakistan, it will definitely involve India and that will definitely involve other regional nations; that's surely MAD.

rest assured, india will mobilize fores in case pakistan tries something stupid. after that india will just sit on its hands while US goes on about doing the fighting on its own. US forces wont use india to launch attacks. we wont let them

If US occupies Pakistan, then China will be encircled from all sides by US allies, i.e. Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, South Korea, Japan which could involve in active conflict with China and other nations like Phillipines, Vietnam, Myanmar which have or are leaning towards US. US could block all of China's Middle Eastern Oil Supply or Shipping lines at will. Directly or indirectly, this makes China as Pakistan's ally. After all, there is a reason some Chinese diplomat has said that Pakistan is China's Israel. China does have a policy to avoid direct confrontation but there are other ways to fight a war.

What about the central asian petroleum? also russia is probably the single largest producer of petroleum. China can simply stay friendly with russia and get all its needs.

what you suggest is that china has only two choices. go down in a blaze of glory defending pakistan or to go down over time after getting encircled. that is clearly not an exhaustive list of scenarios.

In their heart of hearts, they know what a nuclear weapon is; they know where it can strike and it does not need to be launched by a cruise missile or a fighter plane to hit them or their allies; their are other ways, untraceable, unthinkable.

Lets not go into the unthinkables. The Eldar wont come to deliver your nukes to their intended targets.

Lastly, when the Nation of Pakistan is under attack what do you guys think the people controlling the Nukes will be thinking?

Will they be thinking: Oh we can't do anything at all,
or
Will it be: This is the time we have been preparing for.

Desperate circumstances call for desperate measures.

desperate times do not call for stupid measures. as far nukes are concerned we need to address two points
1) the US will be hellbent on neutralising them asap.
2) pakistan has no delivery method to strike the US

the nukes were meant as deterrence against india and they serve that purpose smashingly. however in the absence of reliable delivery methods to mainland US, they are useless against americans

it would be much more logical to go underground and bleed the americans out in an occupation like the afghans did to the soviets. you cant fight the americans straight up. then find asymmetric ways to combat them
 
Let me summate the situation from my angle.
Firstly it isnt going to EVER happen.
Secondly our dear friend ^^^^ and his stubborn undertones is insinuating our army would be handicapped to the onslaught. He is mistaken. Our forefathers sacrificed so much for the creation of Pakistan and i am convinced that our nation would and could give the USA the bloodiest nose EVER.
Pakistans army comparison to Iraq or Afghanistan scenario is embarrassing. This battle would be different. Granted the result is not in question. What is in question is what losses the USA would suffer.
The bodybags, the duration, the cost of Pakistans occupation would without doubt be crippling and would tilt the USA over the edge economically. Not to mention the geopolitics and intervention of third parties.
Its truly incredible that a nation of 180 million is given so little crediblity and respect. Granted we have our fair share of scumbags but to give so little credit to the rest is beyond belief and shameful.
No its not ego related or chest thumping excercise - its reality.

Your army will fight for five days and then... you are out of oil. You will try to run to get a UN ceasefire. History repeats.

However in this case USA funds the UN. Good luck.
 
Your army will fight for five days and then... you are out of oil.

Isn't it amazing that your daddy is unwilling to start a five day war or let's say battle that will permanently bury the fear of that so-called islamic bomb? Or is it that you're being naive? Your big daddy wouldn't have waited a second to strike Pakistan if there was truth in what you said. Trust me, your big daddy knows better than you do, that's why they have not attacked Pakistan till now.


However in this case USA funds the UN. Good luck.

Immature people often attach too much importance to a lame duck organization like the UN. Do you know why your beloved UN has zero credibility in most of the world? It is because people have found out that it is basically a CIA funded organization.
 

Isn't it amazing that your daddy is unwilling to start a five day war or let's say battle that will permanently bury the fear of that so-called islamic bomb? Or is it that you're being naive? Your big daddy wouldn't have waited a second to strike Pakistan if there was truth in what you said. Trust me, your big daddy knows better than you do, that's why they have not attacked Pakistan till now.




Immature people often attach too much importance to a lame duck organization like the UN. Do you know why your beloved UN has zero credibility in most of the world? It is because people have found out that it is basically a CIA funded organization.


No I was not attaching importance. Whenever a war breaks out Pakistans leaders contact the UN to try to attain a ceasefire when India starts gaining the upper hand. You should know, the UN was instrumental in the creation of your country.

As far as big daddy is concerned, its called a protective umbrella, along with Nato.
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mastan, if you want Pakistan to improve, if you want us to fight extremism, then please do say so. But don't tell me to be okay with US invasion otherwise.

Both are extremes, both are wrong and I am ready to fight both and I would encourage all Pakistanis to fight both, Mullah extremism and American extremism.

Asim,

What else do you think I am saying? You must not take two adversaries at the same time---it is a bad tactical mistake---it is erronous and impractical.

Take the mullah and the fanaticism away---the other threat will dissipate on its own----. Simple as that.
 
Let me summate the situation from my angle.
Firstly it isnt going to EVER happen.
Secondly our dear friend ^^^^ and his stubborn undertones is insinuating our army would be handicapped to the onslaught. He is mistaken. Our forefathers sacrificed so much for the creation of Pakistan and i am convinced that our nation would and could give the USA the bloodiest nose EVER.
Pakistans army comparison to Iraq or Afghanistan scenario is embarrassing. This battle would be different. Granted the result is not in question. What is in question is what losses the USA would suffer.
The bodybags, the duration, the cost of Pakistans occupation would without doubt be crippling and would tilt the USA over the edge economically. Not to mention the geopolitics and intervention of third parties.
Its truly incredible that a nation of 180 million is given so little crediblity and respect. Granted we have our fair share of scumbags but to give so little credit to the rest is beyond belief and shameful.
No its not ego related or chest thumping excercise - its reality.

Hi,

We have been riding the victories and sacrifices of our forefathers for the last 60 + years----the war if it ever was to be fought on pak soil by the americans would be a different kind of war---it would be tactical----.


You kids need to study your geography first and need to look at the tactical choke points---the destruction of those crossings would bring utter starvation and chaos to the community.

I know---the emotions run very high---we will do this---and we will do that---but you can't do much if there is nobody to fight in the first instance---and secondly---when you are crushed under debris of the bridges of the main rivers connecting differnt parts of the country, there is no where to run. As the communication line---electronic and road passages are cut off----and country divided into many a parts---and a nation like pakistan with massive number of people in cities---it is a recipe for a total disaster.

Instead of asking for war with the americans---ask for war against the fanatics---kill them--execute them---eradicate them---it will be easier and you will pay a lesser price.
 
Indian intelligence network in Pakistan & ANA will be part of any full blown military campaign.

During previous naval chief era, Indians proactively offered US for invasion of Gawadar, with backup of US navy.

After the retirement of Traitor N.Bashir, Navy didn't wasted moment in fortifying Gawadar port.

At the moment the plan is to continue to dictate Pakistan via its parliament and terrorism and to press the pedal of terrorism in second half of 2012.
 
Asim,

What else do you think I am saying? You must not take two adversaries at the same time---it is a bad tactical mistake---it is erronous and impractical.

Take the mullah and the fanaticism away---the other threat will dissipate on its own----. Simple as that.

On the contrary, if Pakistan can take out the secular scumbags of PPP Pakistan will move forward in all areas.

No I was not attaching importance. Whenever a war breaks out Pakistans leaders contact the UN to try to attain a ceasefire when India starts gaining the upper hand. You should know, the UN was instrumental in the creation of your country.

As far as big daddy is concerned, its called a protective umbrella, along with Nato.

"The US funds the venerable UN" if this not giving importance nothing is. BTW, with or without the UN we would have gained independence but that is not the topic. The UN is a tool of the world's largest terror organization, the CIA, this is the point.
 
Hi,

Instead of asking for war with the americans---ask for war against the fanatics---kill them--execute them---eradicate them---it will be easier and you will pay a lesser price.

Why not we cutoff relation with those who made FANATICS - ???? in 1980s and after 9/11 ????? hope you get it!
 
Back
Top Bottom