39 replies to this topic

[Simpleton]

Please take this news report with a pinch of salt (rather more than just a pinch), I did, but I hope it's true, yet my skeptism remains sky high.

Bloomberg News

Pakistan Tells White House to Stop Drone Missions After Disputes Fray Ties

By Indira A.R. Lakshmanan on March 12, 2012



Pakistan has told the White House it no longer will permit U.S. drones to use its airspace to attack militants and collect intelligence on al-Qaeda and other groups, according to officials involved in the talks.

U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because the drone program is classified, called the use of unmanned aerial vehicles such as San Diego-based General Atomics’ MQ-1 Predator and its MQ-9 Reaper a critical element in the Obama administration’s anti-terrorism strategy.

Eliminating drone missions would “contribute to a resurgence of extremist groups operating in the tribal areas” along Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan, Peter Singer, author of “Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century,” said in an interview.

Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington, Sherry Rehman, met Vice President Joe Biden’s national security adviser Antony Blinken on March 9 and told him that Pakistan’s political parties have agreed that the drone flights over Pakistan must end, officials involved said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the talks were private.

Pakistan’s sovereignty over its airspace and the civilian casualties that have resulted from drone strikes are emotional issues in Pakistan, where public opinion heavily favors terminating drone missions, Pakistani officials say.

The U.S. will try to reach an accommodation with Pakistani leaders, two American officials said. The U.S. gave Pakistan $4.4 billion in economic assistance, counterinsurgency funding and military reimbursements in 2010, according to the Congressional Research Service.
Essential Strategy

The only chance for a compromise, Pakistani officials said, may be if the U.S. agrees to share intelligence and coordinate strikes first, a strategy Pakistan has long advocated. The U.S. has resisted giving information to Pakistan in advance because of fears that some in Pakistan’s security forces might warn the targets of impending strikes.

The drone program, which President Barack Obama acknowledged publicly for the first time in January, has been part of U.S. counter-terrorism strategy in Pakistan since 2004, officials and counter-terrorism experts say. The administration authorized 53 drone attacks in 2009 and 117 in 2010, compared with 35 in 2008 under former President George W. Bush, according to Bill Roggio, a U.S. military analyst whose website, the Long War Journal, maintains a database of the campaign.
‘Key Leadership’

The drone program is “critical,” because it provides better real-time surveillance and reconnaissance than satellite imagery does, Seth Jones, a senior political scientist in Washington for the Santa Monica, California-based RAND Corporation research institute, said in an interview.

“If it is used selectively,” it can help both the U.S. and Pakistan by taking out “key leadership” of al-Qaeda and other groups such as Tehrik-i-Taliban of Pakistan, which poses a greater threat to Pakistan than it does to the U.S., said Jones, a former representative of the U.S. Special Operations Command at the Pentagon.

Singer said that “for several years, Pakistan has openly said, ‘How dare you violate our sovereignty,’ but it turned out the CIA was flying from Pakistani bases with Pakistan’s permission.”

This time, it’s possible “they really mean it,” after a series of high-profile disputes have damaged relations, said Singer, director of the 21st Century Defense Initiative at The Brookings Institution in Washington.
Frayed by Controversies

U.S. officials are being dispatched to meet with Rehman today to discuss the dispute over drone missions and other sticking points in an alliance frayed by numerous controversies. Those have included the U.S. raid to kill Osama bin Laden without first informing the Pakistani government and the killing of two Pakistanis by a CIA contractor.

The security relationship has been virtually frozen since Nov. 26, when U.S. helicopters from Afghanistan fired on border posts, killing 24 Pakistani soldiers. In protest, Pakistan closed its border to the resupply of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and suspended much military and intelligence cooperation.

While drone attacks have continued this year, their frequency has waned. As of March 10, the U.S. had conducted eight attacks, an average of one every nine days, compared with one strike ever six days in 2011, according to Roggio.

The border attack spurred Pakistan’s political parties to form a parliamentary committee to review the U.S. relationship. A decision on whether to permit drone missions is one of the most anticipated elements of the review, which has not been made public.
Panel’s Recommendations

Pakistani officials said the committee will present its recommendations to a closed session of parliament as early as March 19, and lawmakers will have an opportunity to debate and amend the recommendations. Pakistan’s leaders are expected to share the review with the U.S. by the end of this month, officials on both sides said.

If the U.S. were to continue flying drone missions without Pakistani permission, some Pakistani military officials suggested last year that Pakistan would be within its rights to shoot them down.


“A Predator flies little faster than 100 miles per hour; a World War I pilot could shoot them down,” said Singer. For that reason, and to keep the operation secret, the U.S. used jet- powered semi-stealth technology in the bin Laden raid, flying a Lockheed Martin (LMT) RQ-170 Sentinel, the same type of aircraft that Iran said it had brought down over its airspace last December, Singer said.
Possible Compromise

The best solution may be a compromise that involves the Pakistanis more closely in drone operations, Singer said. “That’s certainly something the Pakistanis have asked for, but it may not be politically feasible in the U.S.”

“The better Pakistan can argue publicly that it’s involved in these strikes,” the better the chances of keeping the program alive, Singer said. Given how much trust on both sides has deteriorated, he said, any such cooperation would likely have to start slowly, choosing a few targets to test the strategy.

Singer said he predicts the U.S. will either reach a secret accommodation with the Pakistanis for continued drone missions, or “try a number of workarounds,” that might include flying stealth aircraft instead. Piloted stealth planes can’t linger over a target as long as drones can, he said.

Either solution has drawbacks, he said, from a “fear that the more information we share with them, the less effective our strikes are going to be,” to a concern that using stealth rather than drone technology means “you’re not going to be able to carry out as many of these operations.”
Ripple Effects

What happens in Pakistan may have ripple effects for U.S. drone programs around the world, in places including Somalia, Yemen and the Philippines, he said.

Testifying before Congress last week, Marine Corps General James Mattis, the head of U.S. Central Command, expressed confidence that the U.S. and Pakistan will overcome tensions.

“We do have a problematic at times relationship with Pakistan. That does not prevent us from working it. And there’s a lot of common ground that we use -- that we operate off of together against this enemy. We don’t have 100 percent common ground about it, but it is not a show stopper,” Mattis told the House Armed Services Committee on March 7.

To contact the reporter on this story: Indira A.R. Lakshmanan in Washington at ilakshmanan@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: John Walcott at jwalcott9@bloomberg.net

[rungroot]

Aho.

[1Pakistani]

LOL .... you are kidding me right????

THERE WAS A DRONE ATTACK JUST TODAY................


Its all hogwash....

[butterfly]

Bull.....

[platinum786]

I will believe it when they are shooting them down.

[Panzer-kiel]

u knw, i see drones all day, sometimes flying at a lower altitude than my own position, but u ask anyone army man who is currently deployed in the Ops area, he will always appreciate the drones as they kill the miscreants easily, and thereby own troops avoid going into IED infested areas and prefect ambush sites!
....btw with a 12.7 mm gun on ma post, shooting it down aint a problem......i just dont want to...

[ajaj]

Panzer-kiel, on 20 March 2012 - 06:34 PM, said:

u knw, i see drones all day, sometimes flying at a lower altitude than my own position, but u ask anyone army man who is currently deployed in the Ops area, he will always appreciate the drones as they kill the miscreants easily, and thereby own troops avoid going into IED infested areas and prefect ambush sites!
....btw with a 12.7 mm gun on ma post, shooting it down aint a problem......i just dont want to...

What about the civilians ? Or when they kill the "wrong" people ? Or when they bomb Salala post? Then you will also sit and say such Bullshit?

[Panzer-kiel]

ajaj, on 30 March 2012 - 03:36 AM, said:

What about the civilians ? Or when they kill the "wrong" people ? Or when they bomb Salala post? Then you will also sit and say such Bullshit?

i dont think there were any drones involved on the Salala post attack......all were manned aircraft......

do read this too...
http://forum.pakista...dpost&p=1373382

...civilian casualties must be avoided ofcourse, no doubt abt that, but then what if the enemy is sittin right with civilians who give them shelter and food and everythin else and also give them a safe route out once own troops are killed??
...but then, even now, ppl dont realise that our country is at war.....from outside, it may some LIC, but man, lemme tell u, on ground there, its a full scale war going on where all types of weapons r being used......and war means casualties, military and non-military both......thats part of all this, we all hav to live with it!

[1Pakistani]

platinum786, on 15 March 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

I will believe it when they are shooting them down.

What is there to believe any way? There was a drone attack just today.

[Felicius]

Please, this is BS of the highest standard!
All the drones moved from Shamsi airbase are parked at the infamous Mehran/Shah Faisal base in Karachi. I saw them myself in February 2012.

However, I'm more pro-drone strikes than our F-16's targeting civilians.
There are innocents dying at both sides; innocent tribals being targeted by drones, and at the same time innocent residents being targeted by suicide bombers. People we think we have another option, we don't.

[BaburMissile]

Nato supplies linked to stopping drone attacks

Asim Yasin
Saturday, March 31, 2012

ISLAMABAD: In line with the understanding reached between the government and opposition parties, the Parliamentary Committee on National Security (PCNS) on Friday withdrew three of the proposals that were part of its earlier report. The proposals entailed Pakistan would not give away airbases to any country, allow the presence of foreign intelligence operatives or tolerate any overt or covert operations in the country.

The PCNS held a meeting here, chaired by chairman Mian Raza Rabbani, to evolve a consensus on the report to be adopted by the joint session of parliament. The meeting also took up PML-Q Secretary General Senator Mushahid Hussain Sayed's proposal to link the resumption of Nato supplies with halting the drone attacks. Sources hinted that the PCNS would incorporate this proposal, suggested by the senator while taking part in the debate on Friday, into the amended draft.

The PCNS withdrew three of its proposals in the light of Thursday's high-level meeting held at the Prime Minister's House in which all the coalition partners of the government, Opposition Leader in the National Assembly Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, Opposition Leader in the Senate Ishaq Dar and the top military leadership, including Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani and DG ISI, participated.

Ch Nisar in this meeting had expressed his party's strong reservations on at least three proposals while the government and coalition partners also supported him. The Parliamentary Committee on National Security had suggested that, "Any use of Pakistani bases or airspaces by foreign forces would require parliamentary approval" while clause 9 of the report suggested that, "There should be prior permission and transparency on the number and presence of foreign intelligence operatives in Pakistan." The Clause 7 added: "No overt or covert operations in Pakistan shall be tolerated."

All these suggestions have now been withdrawn.Talking to the media after the meeting, Rabbani said the opposition's reservations would be addressed and an amended draft would be presented in parliament. He said the PCNS would meet daily till April 5 to finalise the consensus amended draft. He, however, made it clear that April 5 was not the deadline for this purpose.

JUI (F) chief Maulana Fazalur Rehman told journalists that the issues of Nato supplies and halting the drone attacks did not come under the purview of foreign policy. He said the Army chief, in a meeting at the Prime Minister's House, which was attended by leaders of all the parliamentary parties in both houses of parliament, made a categorical statement that there had been no contact with the United States on the resumption of Nato supplies.

Source: http://www.thenews.c...g-drone-attacks

Some sense is prevailing. The people of Pakistan are in no mood to be bullied anymore. The GoP and the establishment are getting the message. There's too much pressure and the people aren't going to forgive.

[BaburMissile]

Will turn to India if Pakistan refuses to open Nato routes: Pentagon

Saturday, March 31, 2012

WASHINGTON: A senior Pentagon official informed lawmakers Friday that if Pakistan did not reopen its Nato supply routes, the United States would be forced to rely on India and the Northern Distribution Network, it has been learnt.

The Pentagon official, however, did not divulge details about how the United States intends to use Indian routes for supplies to be transported to Nato and US troops stationed in Afghanistan.

“If we can’t negotiate or successfully negotiate the re-opening of the Pak GLOC (Ground Lines of Communication) we have to default and rely on India and the Northern Distribution Network, via increased strategic airlift,” Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics Marine Corps Lieutenant General Frank Panter told lawmakers. “Both are expensive propositions, and it increases the [cost of] deployment or redeployment,” he stated before the Readiness Sub-Committee of the House Armed Services Committee.

“There’s always that sensitive issue about the nations. We’re dealing with the Indian network in itself. If, for some reason, there’s additional political strain related to these countries, that restricts the flow as well. Redeployment timelines, by not being able to use the Pak GLOC, will increase along with the cost as well,” he said.

Deputy Chief of Staff Logistics Army Lieutenant General Raymond Mason, however, also reiterated that the Pakistan GLOC remained extremely important for US strategy despite the fact that it has been closed since November 2011.

Source: http://www.thenews.c...routes-Pentagon

Desperation is driving the Yank nuts.

[Panzer-kiel]

BaburMissile, on 31 March 2012 - 09:42 AM, said:

Desperation is driving the Yank nuts.

....now indians will give a demo of how to make an air bridge over a hostile country for transportation of men and supplies 24/7.....!

[BaburMissile]

Panzer-kiel, on 31 March 2012 - 09:54 AM, said:

....now indians will give a demo of how to make an air bridge over a hostile country for transportation of men and supplies 24/7.....!

Like as if that wasn't on the cards? It has only exposed the desperate Yanks in my opinion. Though, for how long can the Yanks keep airlifting their goods in and out of Afghanistan? The Yanks are bluffing.

[Panzer-kiel]

BaburMissile, on 31 March 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

Like as if that wasn't on the cards? It has only exposed the desperate Yanks in my opinion. Though, for how long can the Yanks keep airlifting their goods in and out of Afghanistan? The Yanks are bluffing.

...i am sure our Govt will be KIND enough to grant them safe passage in the near future, ofcourse they cant play this card till elections next yr, yanks will be starving by then!

[rungroot]

Panzer-kiel, on 30 March 2012 - 04:51 AM, said:

i dont think there were any drones involved on the Salala post attack......all were manned aircraft......

do read this too...
http://forum.pakista...=findpost&p=1373382

...civilian casualties must be avoided ofcourse, no doubt abt that, but then what if the enemy is sittin right with civilians who give them shelter and food and everythin else and also give them a safe route out once own troops are killed??
...but then, even now, ppl dont realise that our country is at war.....from outside, it may some LIC, but man, lemme tell u, on ground there, its a full scale war going on where all types of weapons r being used......and war means casualties, military and non-military both......thats part of all this, we all hav to live with it!

For GOD'S SAKE, Panzer, STOP calling this our war.  These same tribal Pakistanis are our undeclared, natural born soldiers, Pakistan is the only country in the world that has a natural born army reserves numbered in the millions.  They are just very religious and will go against anyone who is supporting america, who needless to say is against Islam. They have NEVER been against Pakistan or it's military.  Heck, 35% of Pakistan's military manpower comes from this area.  All that you LITERALLY have to do is start killing some rednecks across the border, just start shooting down Yankee drones, choppers and planes, then just sit back and see how fast the attacks stop on you.  The IEDs will become nonexistent WITHIN hours and every single one of these people will come out in your support.  There is a lot of resentment that Pakistan Army are acting like hired guns for the yankees.  That impression needs to be changed and that can only happen now by being militarily hostile against the us/isaf forces until they get FCK out of Afghanistan and go back home PERMANENTLY.  The present govt can do anything and needs to be changed asap.

[blueazure]

the military is sick of this  war , the will, the weapons, the training was non existent yet the whole war machine was plunged into the area without proper planning as such, it is very hard to tell a real anti pak element from a pro ones. collateral damage was high, killing civilians resulted in more recruitment for anti pak elements, in the end, its like a vicious circle and a trap .  now , no ones on our side , the americans and nato bomb one side, the taliban from the other. our jawans pay the price , the brass makes $$$

[Felicius]

rungroot, on 01 April 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

For GOD'S SAKE, Panzer, STOP calling this our war ......

All that you LITERALLY have to do is start killing some rednecks across the border, just start shooting down Yankee drones, choppers and planes, then just sit back and see how fast the attacks stop on you.  The IEDs will become nonexistent WITHIN hours and every single one of these people will come out in your support.

That will definitely make it our war then; taking on NATO head-on.

Anyways, when you emphasize that this is not our war, I read it also as we should not assist US and/or NATO forces against the Talibans. Then the same logic applies when it comes down to assisting the Talibans against the US and NATO forces.

[Ababeel]

Shehz, on 02 April 2012 - 07:47 AM, said:

Anyways, when you emphasize that this is not our war, I read it also as we should not assist US and/or NATO forces against the Talibans. Then the same logic applies when it comes down to assisting the Talibans against the US and NATO forces.

I dont think Pakistan army is "assisting" Afghan Taliban, Pakistan is not providing them money, neither Pakistani intelligence personel's are operating traning camps in Pakistan and providing them traning, and neither has Pakistani army provided them with weapons (i.e. SAM's). All of these were acts which Pakistan army indulged in during Soviet occupation, but there is no proof to suggest that this has been hapening this time. Afghan resistence are making a windfall from road extortion, & drug trade, and they dont require training expertise because these guys were fighting each other before NATO showed up.

The only blame on Pakistan is that Pakistan is not going after Afghan Taliban on its territory, and the reason for that is Pakistani army first and foremost responsbility is towards Pakistan National Security and currently Pakistan has its hand full with TTP in FATA, Pakistan army is in no position to take on non-TTP groups in addition to TTP and turn FATA into flames, especially when TTP have found safehavens in Afghan country side under NATO presence.

[rungroot]

Shehz, on 02 April 2012 - 07:47 AM, said:

That will definitely make it our war then; taking on NATO head-on.

Anyways, when you emphasize that this is not our war, I read it also as we should not assist US and/or NATO forces against the Talibans. Then the same logic applies when it comes down to assisting the Talibans against the US and NATO forces.

Bro, that is bound to happen one day anyway.

[Caesar]

Panzer-kiel, on 30 March 2012 - 04:51 AM, said:

i dont think there were any drones involved on the Salala post attack......all were manned aircraft......

do read this too...
http://forum.pakista...dpost&p=1373382

...civilian casualties must be avoided ofcourse, no doubt abt that, but then what if the enemy is sittin right with civilians who give them shelter and food and everythin else and also give them a safe route out once own troops are killed??
...but then, even now, ppl dont realise that our country is at war.....from outside, it may some LIC, but man, lemme tell u, on ground there, its a full scale war going on where all types of weapons r being used......and war means casualties, military and non-military both......thats part of all this, we all hav to live with it!

Once again i am with you. The civilians who shelter and aid terrorists who then attack Pak soldiers are in fact terrorists. Therefore in my books there are nothing more than collateral damage of the war. Now I know that some idiot will jump in and start abusing and acusing me of talking BS. But I look at realities and not emotional nonsense.

And you are right .... there is a FULL SCALE WAR imposed on Pakistan from the Western borders. I can assure you there are a number of countries involved in this terrorist war. Some of them are the ones we already KNOW ..... but there are others who we call OUR ALLIES!! There are some Middle-Eastern countries involved who are also involved in directly destablising Pakistan. The sad part is that some of their agents are former pak intelligence and military personnel.

[Jazba-e-Kashmir]

on the other hand, civilians paying taxes and financially supporting their western governments to fund the western/nato forces; who use weapons and utilities from the taxpayers; in Afghanistan are also equal to be responsible for the innocent killings and deaths of innocent Afghanis despite the fact they have not democratically elected and chosen to be part of the war in Afghanistan or the war on terror  for that matter.

Even if we can talk and discuss for oneness for the humanrace and humanity, but the fact remains we have done nothing in order to stop violence and hatred among mankind ourselves. And we can't save humanity unless we save ourselves and be good humble humans rather than complaining about ever single inch of mistakes in humanhistory, rather than learning from them and protect our future generations of not commiting the same mistakes in the future. It isn't going to happen unless we become good humans ourselves, but the main part is humanrace forgets easily due to it part of it's humannature.

As the term "insaan" (human) is related from the Arabic verb "to forget", once humans remember then there can't be forgotten anything, which is philosophy in Islam as well..


Anyway; it can only be said that Panzer Kiel's infantry does a good job, while we on the other hand can talk about love for humanity and saving the humanrace for being ignorant and not killing our own kind.

Just like when the civilian Vietnamese protected their freedom fighters against the american invasion, they were also masskiled, raped, tortured and brutally mowed down. The us soldiers did very well in killing the civilians as well because they protected them.

Truely, superior military commandors and strategists from armed forces are becoming a big comparison like the modern us/nato forces!!
While your killing every Pakistani civilian, don't remember to kill your own soldiers, just like us soldiers shot their own us soldiers in Vietnam!
Oh I forgot, the attack on Salala was done indirectly by the coas-officials since they couldn't stop and had no courage to send PAF fighters to shoot down the attackers on the killed Pak Jawans! Again, truely a big comparison and achievement for the coas-officialis for following modern, superior and huge militaries, just like Vietnam!


Peace

[Felicius]

Ababeel, on 02 April 2012 - 08:35 AM, said:

I dont think Pakistan army is "assisting" Afghan Taliban, Pakistan is not providing them money, neither Pakistani intelligence personel's are operating traning camps in Pakistan and providing them traning, and neither has Pakistani army provided them with weapons (i.e. SAM's). All of these were acts which Pakistan army indulged in during Soviet occupation, but there is no proof to suggest that this has been hapening this time. Afghan resistence are making a windfall from road extortion, & drug trade, and they dont require training expertise because these guys were fighting each other before NATO showed up.

The only blame on Pakistan is that Pakistan is not going after Afghan Taliban on its territory, and the reason for that is Pakistani army first and foremost responsbility is towards Pakistan National Security and currently Pakistan has its hand full with TTP in FATA, Pakistan army is in no position to take on non-TTP groups in addition to TTP and turn FATA into flames, especially when TTP have found safehavens in Afghan country side under NATO presence.

Going on Rungroot's suggestion, to go on killing yankees and shooting down their drones, would be to assist the Taliban. My response was to that one post.
Hence if this is not our war, then why are we taking sides then?

saber56, on 02 April 2012 - 09:26 AM, said:

You seem to have forgotten that this war was to defeat "Al-Qaida", and put pressure on Pakistan to beat Al-Qaida, when NATO and the west are handing over entire countries and using them to overthrow governments in the region that do not play ball.

Going into history finger pointing does not solve anything. Something that happened over 10 years ago, is being used to find a solution for something tomorrow or after 1-2 years from today?

The war was to get Bin Laden, and neutralize Al-Qaeda. Pakistan too didn't want Al-Qaeda spreading. Our peace was with the Taliban then. AL-Qaeda then, and today are terrorists.

Ground realities have changed. If they are harbouring terrorists who will kill our forces tomorrow, then yes they are aiding and abetting terrorists. If they are not neutralized now, then they will kill innocent civilians in mosques and bazaars later. That needs to be stopped.

Hate for Americans is one thing, but that should not be an excuse to have sympathy for terrorists either.

Edited by Shehz, 04 April 2012 - 07:20 PM.

[Felicius]

Exiting from the WOT would be the best move. What are your suggestions, step-by-step?
History, and who done what has zero bearings on the ground realities of today. Look for a solution for tomorrow, that would be a good start.

This is what I understand is happening today:
The terrorists say (not debating who forced them to be terrorists and under what circumstances, too bad what happened yesterday, I am sorry) that if 'We' stop targeting them and stop assisting the NATO, then only they will stop the suicide bombings.

The Pakistani forces say:
They will first stop killing innocent people.
All this time they are living in Pakistan and killing Pakistanis inside mosques, in the streets, and women and children in bazaars. These women and children are not abetting and habouring any Pakistani military jawans, they are truly innocent.

Their women and children, to be considered innocent, must first stop harbouring and abetting terrorists (don't care what their justification is why they are doing it). They must stop first, or we will stop them by any means available to us.
If NATO will do that for us on their own expense (even if we despise them), so be it.

I am with our forces on this one.

Edited by Shehz, 05 April 2012 - 07:38 AM.

[saber56]

Shehz, on 05 April 2012 - 07:36 AM, said:

Exiting from the WOT would be the best move. What are your suggestions, step-by-step?
History, and who done what has zero bearings on the ground realities of today. Look for a solution for tomorrow, that would be a good start.

This is what I understand is happening today:
The terrorists say (not debating who forced them to be terrorists and under what circumstances, too bad what happened yesterday, I am sorry) that if 'We' stop targeting them and stop assisting the NATO, then only they will stop the suicide bombings.

The Pakistani forces say:
They will first stop killing innocent people.
All this time they are living in Pakistan and killing Pakistanis inside mosques, in the streets, and women and children in bazaars. These women and children are not abetting and habouring any Pakistani military jawans, they are truly innocent.

Their women and children, to be considered innocent, must first stop harbouring and abetting terrorists (don't care what their justification is why they are doing it). They must stop first, or we will stop them by any means available to us.
If NATO will do that for us on their own expense (even if we despise them), so be it.

I am with our forces on this one.

We have to diffuse the situation slowly or else as the kettle of resistance boils, the CIA will use that and the steam to overthrow Pakistan.

Also this is draining Pakistan's economy into a deeper mire.

However, I would still question their aim at overthrowing Pakistan by having the Chinese element in note as well.

[BaburMissile]

Shehz, on 05 April 2012 - 07:36 AM, said:

Exiting from the WOT would be the best move. What are your suggestions, step-by-step?
History, and who done what has zero bearings on the ground realities of today. Look for a solution for tomorrow, that would be a good start.

This is what I understand is happening today:
The terrorists say (not debating who forced them to be terrorists and under what circumstances, too bad what happened yesterday, I am sorry) that if 'We' stop targeting them and stop assisting the NATO, then only they will stop the suicide bombings.

The Pakistani forces say:
They will first stop killing innocent people.
All this time they are living in Pakistan and killing Pakistanis inside mosques, in the streets, and women and children in bazaars. These women and children are not abetting and habouring any Pakistani military jawans, they are truly innocent.

Their women and children, to be considered innocent, must first stop harbouring and abetting terrorists (don't care what their justification is why they are doing it). They must stop first, or we will stop them by any means available to us.
If NATO will do that for us on their own expense (even if we despise them), so be it.

I am with our forces on this one.

Exiting the war is no rocket science. In short, quitting the war means that Pakistan should stop acting as a client state of a superpower. Instead of receiving military and civilian aid in exchange for being cooperative to US demands, Pakistan needs to do the right thing itself. What exactly is the right thing to do? Negotiate with militants willing to lay arms. Reintegrate local militants within the society. Handover foreign militants to home countries. Finally, remove militants and miscreants which aren't willing to negotiate and cooperate by all means necessary. Pakistan needs to achieve this preferably with the help of the Americans. However, if the Americans are unwilling to assist, Pakistan should opt for its own timetable depending on the conditions.

There are many types of "terrorists". There are those who are in revolt after their loved ones got killed in drone strikes. There are those who are sowing bloodshed at the behest of malign foreign elements. Then there are those who fought during the Cold War. Yes, I mean those which we trained, armed and financed with the help of our American allies. Which one do you mean? The "terrorist" has many faces.

The locals don't abet "terrorists". Most of the locals are in fact a victim of heinous state policies. The locals never invited the militants to train and reside in their areas. The Pakistani state along with her American ally chose the tribal areas as breeding grounds for the militants. Many foreign militants married and settled in these areas after the Cold War. The Pakistani state turned a blind eye. It's too late now to cry over spilled milk and blame the tribal locals for all the ills of this world. By all means, remove those militants that don't seek peace, but stop labeling the tribal locals as bad villains. The locals shouldn't pay for the sins of dictators.

The US/NATO are gladly taking care of the "terrorists" only by creating more "terrorists". Truth be told, US/NATO could care less about the innocent tribal locals. The indiscriminate drone strikes are a clear testimony. We cannot run away from our responsibilities. We need to stop being weak. Every mistake comes at a price. We made many mistakes in the past and have to face our demons now. Instead of outsourcing our problems we ought to take the onus. Outsourcing the war has come at a very high price. The past decade is ample proof. Let's not exacerbate the situation by repeating the same mistakes. In the end, only Pakistan is going to be the victim.

[Ababeel]

Shehz, on 04 April 2012 - 07:12 PM, said:

Going on Rungroot's suggestion, to go on killing yankees and shooting down their drones, would be to assist the Taliban. My response was to that one post.
Hence if this is not our war, then why are we taking sides then?

Pakistan should not take any sides and get out of this war.

Issue is not Pakistan taking sides, in either case the outcome in Afghanistan will be no different.

If NATO insists upon jumping of the cliff to its certain death in Afghanistan, then there is no reason for Pakistan to follow suit. Pakistan should leave Afghanistan to Afghans, and worry about its national interest which is to get out of this war, and not to jump of the cliff right behind NATO to its death.

[Felicius]

BaburMissile, on 07 April 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

Exiting the war is no rocket science. In short, quitting the war means that Pakistan should stop acting as a client state of a superpower. Instead of receiving military and civilian aid in exchange for being cooperative to US demands, Pakistan needs to do the right thing itself. What exactly is the right thing to do? Negotiate with militants willing to lay arms. Reintegrate local militants within the society. Handover foreign militants to home countries. Finally, remove militants and miscreants which aren't willing to negotiate and cooperate by all means necessary. Pakistan needs to achieve this preferably with the help of the Americans. However, if the Americans are unwilling to assist, Pakistan should opt for its own timetable depending on the conditions.

There are many types of "terrorists". There are those who are in revolt after their loved ones got killed in drone strikes. There are those who are sowing bloodshed at the behest of malign foreign elements. Then there are those who fought during the Cold War. Yes, I mean those which we trained, armed and financed with the help of our American allies. Which one do you mean? The "terrorist" has many faces.

The locals don't abet "terrorists". Most of the locals are in fact a victim of heinous state policies. The locals never invited the militants to train and reside in their areas. The Pakistani state along with her American ally chose the tribal areas as breeding grounds for the militants. Many foreign militants married and settled in these areas after the Cold War. The Pakistani state turned a blind eye. It's too late now to cry over spilled milk and blame the tribal locals for all the ills of this world. By all means, remove those militants that don't seek peace, but stop labeling the tribal locals as bad villains. The locals shouldn't pay for the sins of dictators.

The US/NATO are gladly taking care of the "terrorists" only by creating more "terrorists". Truth be told, US/NATO could care less about the innocent tribal locals. The indiscriminate drone strikes are a clear testimony. We cannot run away from our responsibilities. We need to stop being weak. Every mistake comes at a price. We made many mistakes in the past and have to face our demons now. Instead of outsourcing our problems we ought to take the onus. Outsourcing the war has come at a very high price. The past decade is ample proof. Let's not exacerbate the situation by repeating the same mistakes. In the end, only Pakistan is going to be the victim.

Not disputing that at all Babur, you are correct. All PA can say now is we are sorry, and apologize. Can't turn the clock now.
But still doesn't change the fact, that it is still them who have to stop their terrorism of blowing up people in mosques, bazaars, streets, and stop killing women and children.

They will stop first unconditionally before they can demand PA to stop. If not, then PA will take them out and every 'innocent'' local who abetted them.
And if NATO forces will take them out for PA at their own expense, then sure, why should PA object to it?

History, and who done what has zero bearings on the ground realities of today.

Edited by Shehz, 08 April 2012 - 09:12 PM.

[HKK]

http://dawn.com/2012...ikes-must-stop/


Pakistan says US not listening, drone strikes must stop


ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has spelt out in no uncertain terms that US drone aircraft strikes against militants inside its territory must stop, but Washington is not listening, the country’s foreign minister said.
“On drones, the language is clear: a clear cessation of drone strikes,” Hina Rabbani Khar said.
“I maintain the position that we’d told them categorically before. But they did not listen. I hope their listening will improve,” she told Reuters in an interview late on Wednesday.
The attacks by the unmanned aircraft from Afghanistan, which US officials say are highly effective against militants, fuel anti-American sentiment in Pakistan because they are seen as violations of sovereignty that inflict civilian casualties.
Khar’s sharp comments on the drone strikes came ahead of a two-day visit to Islamabad by the United States’ special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman.
Ambassador Grossman was due to hold bilateral meetings with Pakistani officials and take part in a “core group” meeting with officials from both Pakistan and Afghanistan, where the United States is hoping to revive stalled peace talks with the Taliban.
Ties between Pakistan and the United States, allies in the war on militancy, have lurched from crisis to crisis as they spar over security, assistance and the future of Afghanistan.
An unannounced raid on Pakistani soil by US Special Forces who killed Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden last May plunged relations to a low, and tensions were further stoked in November when a Nato attack across the border from Afghanistan killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
After a review of ties with Washington, a Pakistani parliamentary committee laid out a series of demands, including an end to US drone strikes.
Khar said other methods should be used to take out militants in the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
“We have to look at effective tools which are mutually acceptable. The cost of using tools which are not mutually acceptable is far, far too high. We’re looking at alternatives,” she said, without elaborating.
The commander of the frontline corps in Pakistan’s northwest told Reuters last week that one alternative would be for the United States to share intelligence so that its ally’s F-16 fighter jets could target militants there.

[Alp Arsalan Ghazi]

Theres only one language these inbred porkers understand

Shoot them all down

[Taha]

It is impossible that we take money from US for our expenses and ask them to stop drone attacks

[Jazba-e-Kashmir]

NWA: Drone attacks kill 3 in Miranshah

At least three people were killed in Miranshah as US drones targeted a girls' school on Sunday.



According to the sources, two missiles hit an abandoned girls schools in the town of Miran Shah in the North Waziristan tribal region, killing at least three alleged militants.

The sources added that the US spy planes have been flying for several minutes after the strike, raising fears among the people, of more drone attacks in the area.

Sunday s strike comes as the US is trying to rebuild its relationship with Pakistan, which opposes the missile attacks.

http://dunyanews.tv/...MiNOaWQ9Nzc4MzU=

[ghiyasuddin]

It is shameful if civilian leaders and military leaders take this lying down.

[Jazba-e-Kashmir]

Warning Graphic:

A mother and her children were killed from the drone attacks, she tried to save them but became a fatal result:

http://www.facebook....53844416&type=1


A small innocent girl survived the drone attack, and I think she is so beautifuleven if my eyes got tears of sadness...:
http://www.facebook....53844416&type=1

[MoThSmOkE]

After alot of deliberation, I have come to a conclusion:

- Pakistan Foreign Office announces end of WoT
- Pakistan increases its presence on the western borders
- Warning shots fired on the drones if they violate Pakistan's airspace
- Pakistan continues to fight the terrorists in the tribal areas and closing down any terrorist camps
- Dissolve the system of FATA and have them come into the fold of KP province
- Collective punishment for tribals giving refuge to terrorists
- End to the gun culture

Pros:
- Pakistan's anti US rhetoric would tone down
- There would be alot more internal stability

Cons:
- PA/Politicians would stop getting aid from the USA
- Very hard to achieve as its not in the interest of either the far-right or far-left
- Liberalists and obscurantists would both get mad and retaliate

[PS:Annonymous]

Glad to see you back mothsmoke, what you have said is inevitable in order to stabilize Pakistan. Pakistan cannot continue to be part of WOT, it is unsustainable.

[Simpleton]

Sunday, May 06, 2012
U.S. to intensify drone strikes in Pakistan

By: Online |  May 06, 2012, 6:22 pm |


The United States has decided to intensify drone strikes in tribal areas to mount pressure on Pakistan to restore Nato supply line without tendering apology. Sources told Online that the U.S has absolutely denied demand of apology over Salala check post attack last year added that U.S has informed about its new drone policy to Pakistan. “During recent visit to Pakistan, the US Special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grasman had informed the leadership of Pakistan about the new drone policy and the U.S is not considering apologizing over Salala attack”, sources said. Sources said that Pakistani leadership had denied U.S demands when Mark Grasman had demanded condition less restoration of Nato supply from political and military leadership of Pakistan. Sources also claimed that Hilary Clinton has also canceled Pakistan’s visit which was expected in beginning of May. While Pakistan has declared drone attacks as illegal and demanded end to drones immediately that is affecting the war against terrorism.

[Jazba-e-Kashmir]

Now that's more like it!

That's what us govt. and sell-out Pakistani civili leaders agree on!

The intense drone attacks is surely a proof that the coas-officials don't have any influence to stand up against the drone attacks.
The civil facist dictator govt. of Pakistan doesn't care about the intensive bombing at all.

More innoenct people are going to get killed, more frustrated Pakistanis will become willing to got of weapons pointing it to their own country fellowmen, Pak military forces and the facist us forces.

But no one cares in the civil govt, because there is a eager waiting for ppp to have the khusra to be the follower of hijar-sardar ghaddari's follower.
No one care in the coas officials because they are interested in sending in getting a start on their should, which holds no value at all, and also send their kids overseas for get an education just like the civil leaders. All under the us aid.

Now for the common man, there is nothing to say. They all have to work like slaves and watch their own country fellowmen falling one by one from drone attacks and of course, they can't do anything about it all. Because they would be probably labelled as "extremists" for demonstrating against the attacks.
And they would be labelled a "hinder" for the coas-officials and civil leaders to enjoy us aid in their air conditioned palaces paid by the average slaveworker.

The funny thing the leaders would probably sing just to make fool of the public
Main bhi Pakistan Hoon tu bhi Pakistan hai.
It's all bulls..hit!

If the civil leaders and coas-officials really care, they should have one of their own familymember killed by a droneattack, then they would feel the same as the public.


Peace


PS: sorry if anyone got offended, but i am frustrated that ball-less leaders aren't doing anything for their own people. Even enuchs have more courage to demand for their rights in Pakistan, let them overtake GHQ, be COAS officials and foreign minitry of Pakistan.
Damn, they would just slap everyone from left to right!

[ghiyasuddin]

PA and PAF should be ashamed. Chullu bhar paani mein etc. Goddammit defend your country from attackers!!!!

[MoThSmOkE]

This FATA issue had been brewing since the Afghan war. If our leadership had any foresight, they'd have completely disarmed the tribals after the Soviet war, brought the tribal area and integrated them into KP, we'd not be seeing this day. Check out what happened in Bosnia after the war.

Instead we allowed them to train en masse thinking they'd be our strategic asset. Now the chicken has come home to roost. The tribals are angry that we made a u-turn (lasting a couple of days) on the behest of US, and the US is angry at us for not being able to keep leash on the terrorists. Never mind their failures in Afghanistan.

Either way, my above post still stands. Stop towing the terrorists or the US's line. Make a foreign policy with only stability of Pakistan in mind, and few years down the road all these problems will be history. If the leadership doesn't mend its ways, Pakistan would go down the way of a failed state. Its only so much that a country can withstand.

As for the army, its good that lot of Pakistanis including have waken up to the fact that they aren't a holy cow anymore. They are a mirror image of our politicians who we abhor. Hopefully in the future, they can be kept on the leash and their spending curtailed.