US kills 28 Pakistanis -- US-Pakistani relations at breaking point

[mhgaffney]

This has been brewing for a long time. Nothing but trouble ahead if this war continues.

Bring US troops home now!

MHG


NATO Kills 28 Pakistani Troops, Outrage in Islamabad

By PTI

November 6, 2011 "PTI" -- At least 28 Pakistani soldiers were killed today when NATO helicopters and combat jets fired on two border posts in the country's northwest, prompting army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani to direct his troops to prepare for ''an effective response'' even as authorities cut off all supplies for US forces in Afghanistan.

The attack, the worst single incident of its kind in one decade, looked set to plunge US-Pak relations, already deeply frayed, further into crisis.

A major and a captain of the Pakistan Army were among those killed when NATO aircraft fired at the borders posts in Baizai area of Mohmand tribal region at 2 am.

Fifteen more personnel were wounded and the death toll could rise as some of the injured were in a serious condition, several officials said.

A military statement said the NATO aircraft "carried out unprovoked firing" on the border posts.

Pakistani troops "effectively responded immediately in self-defence to NATO/ISAF's aggression with all available weapons".

Gen Kayani strongly condemned "NATO/ISAF's blatant and unacceptable act".

While lauding the effective response by Pakistani soldiers, he issued orders for taking all necessary steps for "an effective response to this irresponsible act".

Within hours of the attack, Pakistani authorities sealed off the country's border stopping all container trucks and tankers carrying supplies for US and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir called in US Ambassador Cameron Munter to lodge a "strong protest on the unprovoked NATO/ISAF attack", the Foreign Office said in a statement.

[peacepipe]

Considering pakistan is probably playing both sides,I wouldn't be too heart broken.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

US kills 28 Pakistanis

This was a NATO gunship not U.S. but your reading comprehension has never been mistaken for being competent.


Gen Jacobson said a combined force of Afghan and Nato troops were in the area when "a tactical situation developed on the ground", though he gave no more details

It is "highly likely" that Nato aircraft were behind a deadly overnight raid on a Pakistani border checkpoint, a Nato spokesman has told the BBC.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Obama is a dadgum idiot.

[Arkie]

Considering pakistan is probably playing both sides,I wouldn't be too heart broken.

It's ironic a guy named peacepipe isn't too heartbroken over the single worst attack in a decade.

[Requiem]

What are you gonna do when the ISI comes for you?

[Rohirrim]

Obama is a dadgum idiot.

No. You're the idiot. He's actually a pretty smart guy. Harvard? University of Chicago? You're not smart enough to be a janitor in either of those places (no matter what Newt Gingrich says). I don't know what Obama has to do with this thread anyway. Was he flying the helicopter?

[epicSocialism4tw]

No. You're the idiot. He's actually a pretty smart guy. Harvard? University of Chicago? You're not smart enough to be a janitor in either of those places (no matter what Newt Gingrich says). I don't know what Obama has to do with this thread anyway. Was he flying the helicopter?

Obama is a dadgum moron.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7UqPcnoKYIU/TaxfMZZVoDI/AAAAAAAADJ4/vp3NYBnhkYk/s1600/obama-stupid.jpg

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Obama is a dadgum moron.
Whereas you are the board hypocrite/spam monkey. Snail excrement has more going for it than you do.

[Rohirrim]

Obama is a dadgum moron.



You prove my point. Juvenile.

[epicSocialism4tw]

You prove my point. Juvenile.

Obama is a foreign policy moron.

It is what it is.

[W*GS]

http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/full-width/images/print-edition/20111015_ASD001_0.jpg

[W*GS]

Obama is a foreign policy moron.

It is what it is.

What would your reaction have been, epicFail, to this incident if McCain was President?

[Rohirrim]

For all we know at this point, those Pakis at those outposts were working with the Taliban and shielding them, as we know they have done on so many other occasions. Given the lock down on information regarding this attack, nobody really knows much of anything and so everybody is jumping to their own conclusions based on their own political biases.

[Garcia Bronco]

It's ironic a guy named peacepipe isn't too heartbroken over the single worst attack in a decade.

It refers to the pipe...which is a piece...but not actual peace. Because he puts weed in the piece.

[Garcia Bronco]

No. You're the idiot. He's actually a pretty smart guy. Harvard? University of Chicago? You're not smart enough to be a janitor in either of those places (no matter what Newt Gingrich says). I don't know what Obama has to do with this thread anyway. Was he flying the helicopter?

Harvard is a name brand. It doesn't mean one is well educated.

I agree though that this isn't Obama's fault.

[mhgaffney]

Beerslugger does not know that NATO = US????

Unbelievable.

The ISI's support for the Taliban is no secret. It follows from Pakistan's strategic situation -- which is dicey -- given India's military superiority and GW Bush's crazy tilt toward India.

Previously the US sought to remain neutral.

The regional situation is very very dangerous -- and can blow up at any time. Anything can set it off -- such as another Mumbai incident -- or terrorism in Kashmir.

The only answer is to get the H*** out. There is no military solution on the ground. Afghanistan is where armies go to die. It swallowed up an entire British army in the 19th century -- and not even Alex the Great could hold the place for long.

Here's the truth : It is not worth holding. Someone please tell our leaders.

[cutthemdown]

Most likely this was on purpose, we will act like it was a mistake, but both sides know better.

[cutthemdown]

For all we know at this point, those Pakis at those outposts were working with the Taliban and shielding them, as we know they have done on so many other occasions. Given the lock down on information regarding this attack, nobody really knows much of anything and so everybody is jumping to their own conclusions based on their own political biases.

The scuttle at the big contractors that make the drones is pretty soon we will have ones that can fly so far, we won't need their bases. We know that pot would run dry because Pakistan is a terror supporting state and their act of trying to help the war on terror was just because they felt it suited their interests. Those interests are mainly concerning India.

Now it's time to call a spade a spade. Pakistan is Chinas bitch, and we need to rebuild our relationship with India.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Beerslugger does not know that NATO = US????

I know exactly what NATO is and you obviously do not but that's not a surprise as most of your takes reek of ignorance, paranoia or just plain ole BD ......... (Bonehead Disease).

Afghanistan officials (http://news.yahoo.com/pakistan-nato-ignored-attack-pleas-during-raid-062608715.html) claimed Sunday that Afghan and NATO forces were retaliating for gunfire from two Pakistani army bases when they called in airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, adding a layer of complexity to an episode that has further strained Pakistan's ties with the United States.

A complete breakdown in the relationship between the United States and Pakistan is considered unlikely. Pakistan relies on billions of dollars in American aid, and the U.S. needs Pakistan to push Afghan insurgents to participate in peace talks.

NATO officials have complained that insurgents fire from across the poorly defined frontier, often from positions close to Pakistani soldiers, who have been accused of tolerating or supporting them.

The International Security Assistance Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISAF_troop_number_statistics) (ISAF) is a NATO-led security mission in Afghanistan established by the United Nations Security Council on 20 December 2001 by Resolution 1386[1] as envisaged by the Bonn Agreement.[2] It is engaged in the War in Afghanistan (2001–present).
Troop contributors include the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Denmark, Belgium, Czech Republic, Norway, Bulgaria, South Korea, Azerbaijan, and Singapore.

[orinjkrush]

coulda been a mistake. fratricide is not exactly unheard of. however, the Pakis are playing it both ways and prolly brought it on by something they did. who knows. but to blame the US and Obama is unfair and unreasonable. we play by more rules than anyone on the planet.

[mhgaffney]

Beerslugger is not listening to what I'm saying.

The situation in the region is untenable -- and can blow up at any time -- even go nuclear. US troops and the the local population will pay the price.

End the war now!

[W*GS]

The situation in the region is untenable -- and can blow up at any time -- even go nuclear.

That makes you cream your panties.

[cutthemdown]

Beerslugger is not listening to what I'm saying.

The situation in the region is untenable -- and can blow up at any time -- even go nuclear. US troops and the the local population will pay the price.

End the war now!

Us leaving doesn't make it safer. Only gives Pakistan a green light to foment terror on India.

[mhgaffney]

I have bolded the key lines in this op ed from the Guardian.

MHG


Pakistan Has Had Enough

The assumption that it has no choice but to obey America may turn out to be a dire strategic error

By Simon Tisdall

November 27, 2011 "The Guardian" -- Readers of Dawn newspaper, commenting online, were in no doubt how the Pakistani government should respond to Saturday's killing by US forces of 24 soldiers on Pakistan's side of the Afghan border. "Pakistan should acquire anti-aircraft defence systems ... so that in the future Pakistan can give Nato forces a proper reply," said Ali. "This is outrageous," wrote another reader, Zia Khan. "We should cut off all ties with the US. As long as we are getting US [anti-terror] aid ... Pakistan will be attacked in such a manner. They can never be trusted." Another, Obaid, turned his wrath on the Pakistani authorities: "Our self-centred establishment with their fickle loyalties can't even demand that the killers be tried in a neutral court ... What is the ability of our armed forces? If they can't repel or intercept an attack of this intensity, then what's their purpose? This is not a time to get mad. It's time to get even."

The fury of these respondents comes as no surprise, but Washington should treat it with deadly seriousness all the same, for this latest outrage is another fateful signpost on the road to a potential security and geostrategic disaster that may ultimately make Afghanistan look like a sideshow.

The 10-year-old Afghan war, neither wholly won nor lost, is slowly drawing to a close – or so Washington postulates. But what has not stopped is the linked, escalating destabilisation of the infinitely more important, more populous, and nuclear-armed Pakistan. If Washington does not quickly learn to tread more carefully, it may find the first US-Pakistan war is beginning just as the fourth Afghan war supposedly ends.

Anti-American feeling in Pakistan is becoming institutionalised at the higher levels of government, while opposition figures such as Imran Khan see their popularity rise on the back of diatribes aimed at Washington. Pakistan's western-educated, secular political elite is under brutal attack from Islamist militants who revile them as Washington's stooges. The knock-kneed government is mocked and despised for failing to stand up to its infidel paymasters even as Pakistan's own "war on terror" death toll rises into the tens of thousands.

Since 2001, when the Bush administration bluntly told Islamabad it must take sides, be either "for us or agin us" in the newly declared "war on terror", Pakistan has struggled under a plethora of imperious American demands, démarches and impositions that are at once politically indefensible and contrary to the perceived national interest.

The last year has been another humiliating one at the hands of the country's principal ally. Pakistanis have looked on impotently as US special forces flouted its sovereignty and killed Osama bin Laden under the army's nose; as the US stepped up drone terror attacks in Pakistani territory despite repeated protests; and as people-pleasing US senators and Republican presidential candidates have taken to picking on Pakistan and its aid bill in uninformed foreign policy rants.

Hillary Clinton and the Pentagon top brass have responded to Saturday's killing with the usual expressions of regret and of determination to "investigate", without formally admitting responsibility. Their pronouncements are worthless, transparently so.

The belief that weak, impoverished, divided Pakistan has no alternative but to slavishly obey its master's voice could turn out to be one of the seminal strategic miscalculations of the 21st century. Alternative alliances with China or Russia aside, Muslim Pakistan, if bullied and scorned for long enough by its western mentors, could yet morph through external trauma and internal collapse into quite a different animal. The future paradigm here is not another well-trained Indonesia or Malaysia. It is the Islamic Republic of Iran.

[cutthemdown]

Any country as powerful as Pakistan would be wise to never screw with us. We would break out the big boy weapons on them. This stuff from the air we have done to Iraq etc is still nothing compared to what we could do.

No way Pakistan ever tangles with the USA unless we tried to invade them with troops. They will most likely retaliate by further cozing to China, and continuing their terror campaign against our friends in India.

[mhgaffney]

Any country as powerful as Pakistan would be wise to never screw with us. We would break out the big boy weapons on them. This stuff from the air we have done to Iraq etc is still nothing compared to what we could do.

No way Pakistan ever tangles with the USA unless we tried to invade them with troops. They will most likely retaliate by further cozing to China, and continuing their terror campaign against our friends in India.

You miss the point.

Any military move by Pakistan would be strictly defensive.

The worst possible situation would be a decision by the US to escalate a crisis -- started by the US.

When are you going to realize that there is no military solution to this devolving situation with Pakistan?

The US has the military capacity to escalate into the stratosphere and kill innumerable people. But what will this prove -- and what will it solve?
Absolutely nothing.

In the final analysis -- the US has no legitimate reason to be there. We are the aggressor.

The only solution is to stop. Cease. Desist.

Unfortunately, this is invariably interpreted (wrongly) by knee jerks as weakness...

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Beerslugger is not listening to what I'm saying.
The situation in the region is untenable -- and can blow up at any time -- even go nuclear. US troops and the the local population will pay the price.
End the war now!What part of Obama is pulling the troops out of Afghanistan just as he's doing in Iraq, do you not comprehend??

And I guess you're probably another one those who feels Obama should have fixed all of the eight years of Bush f^7*ups by now too, eh?

[mhgaffney]

What part of Obama is pulling the troops out of Afghanistan just as he's doing in Iraq, do you not comprehend??

And I guess you're probably another one those who feels Obama should have fixed all of the eight years of Bush f^7*ups by now too, eh?

WTF are you talking about? Do you even know?

I'm posting from Kovalam India.

This place is worlds apart -- here time seems to stand still.

Lots of westerners here -- and the Indians speak perfect English. In fact, their English is better than that of many Americans (including knee jerks).

Tomorrow I go by taxi to Amma's ashram in Amritapuri.

MHG

www.amma.org

[mhgaffney]

The US attack on Pakistanis was not a mistake. It appears to have been delibrerate.

The US war machine is out of control -- as I have been saying for years. This incident presages a darkening time. If Pak cuts off US supply lines -- what then? Do we nuke Islamabad?

MHG

December 01, 2011

"It was impossible they did not know these to be our posts."

Pak Border Post Attack a Big Loss for U.S. War Policy

by GARETH PORTER
The U.S. military and the Barack Obama administration have been thrown into confusion by the attack on two Pakistani military posts near the border with Afghanistan Saturday morning, even as the attacks provoked the Pakistani government and military leadership into much stronger opposition to U.S. policy in the region.

The decision to attack by helicopter gunships, which killed 24 Pakistani troops and stoked a new level of anti-U.S. sentiment feeling in the country, has caught the U.S.-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan in a rare defense posture, because senior officials don’t know what happened and why.

The unwillingness of ISAF, now commanded by Gen. John Allen, to comment on the episode and the swift call for a full investigation clearly reflect doubts on the part of the chain of command as to the veracity of the account given by the unnamed commander of the U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) unit who ordered the operation across the border in Pakistan.

[mhgaffney]

<IFRAME style="Z-INDEX: 100000; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; POSITION: absolute; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 1px; HEIGHT: 1px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; LEFT: 0px" id=_atssh210 title="AddThis utility frame" height=1 src="//s7.addthis.com/static/r07/sh69.html#iit=1322805140828&cb=0&ab=-&dh=www.orangemane.com&dr=&du=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.orangemane.com%2FBB%2Fshowthre ad.php%3Fp%3D3398941%26posted%3D1%23post3398941&dt=&md=2&inst=1&jsl=0&lng=en-us&ogt=&pc=men&pub=ra-4e2da84c433d54ad&ssl=0&sid=4ed8679466683499&srd=1&srf=0.02&srp=0.2&srl=0&srx=0.5&ver=250&xck=0&og=%5Bobject%20Object%5D&rev=106780&ct=1&xld=1&xd=1" width=1 name=_atssh210 frameborder="0"></IFRAME>
here's the link -- to read the rest - www.counterpunch.org (http://www.counterpunch.org)

[cutthemdown]

The reports are that Nato and the USA have proof we asked the Pakistani military of they had troops in that area, they said no. There is something fishy here, but this isn't just some blatant attack by the USA against Pakistan.

[cutthemdown]

http://tribune.com.pk/story/301117/report-pakistan-gave-go-ahead-before-nato-attack-says-us/

[Rohirrim]

WTF are you talking about? Do you even know?

I'm posting from Kovalam India.

This place is worlds apart -- here time seems to stand still.

Lots of westerners here -- and the Indians speak perfect English. In fact, their English is better than that of many Americans (including knee jerks).

Tomorrow I go by taxi to Amma's ashram in Amritapuri.

MHG

www.amma.org

As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden. Yes. In the garden, growth has it seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.

[Rohirrim]

The US attack on Pakistanis was not a mistake. It appears to have been delibrerate.

The US war machine is out of control -- as I have been saying for years. This incident presages a darkening time. If Pak cuts off US supply lines -- what then? Do we nuke Islamabad?

MHG

December 01, 2011

"It was impossible they did not know these to be our posts."

Pak Border Post Attack a Big Loss for U.S. War Policy

by GARETH PORTER
The U.S. military and the Barack Obama administration have been thrown into confusion by the attack on two Pakistani military posts near the border with Afghanistan Saturday morning, even as the attacks provoked the Pakistani government and military leadership into much stronger opposition to U.S. policy in the region.

The decision to attack by helicopter gunships, which killed 24 Pakistani troops and stoked a new level of anti-U.S. sentiment feeling in the country, has caught the U.S.-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan in a rare defense posture, because senior officials don’t know what happened and why.

The unwillingness of ISAF, now commanded by Gen. John Allen, to comment on the episode and the swift call for a full investigation clearly reflect doubts on the part of the chain of command as to the veracity of the account given by the unnamed commander of the U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) unit who ordered the operation across the border in Pakistan.


Now it appears that the Pakis gave approval for the strike prior to its being carried out:
Pakistani officials gave the go-ahead for Nato strikes that killed 24 of their troops last weekend, according to the latest American account of a raid that has poisoned relations between the two countries.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/8930728/American-officials-claim-Pakistani-Army-officers-approved-fatal-air-strike.html

Oops!

[cutthemdown]

Pakistanis probably wanted those troops taken out because they were helping the Taliban. They fake outrage to keep the vitriol of the people firmly pointed at the evil Americans. Whatever as long as we get to kill them what do we care. It's just a case of a govt making deals with us that their people don't like. Just like they refuse to even ackowledge we have an air base in Pakistan.

[elsid13]

Pakistanis probably wanted those troops taken out because they were helping the Taliban. They fake outrage to keep the vitriol of the people firmly pointed at the evil Americans. Whatever as long as we get to kill them what do we care. It's just a case of a govt making deals with us that their people don't like. Just like they refuse to even ackowledge we have an air base in Pakistan.

Stop thinking this is Tom Clancy novel. The simple answer is the usually the correct one. Someone in HQ or at the field didn't update location and status of their troop movement or didn't check with correct command. Thus leading to blue on blue firing. It happen within US operations and Pakistanis are far behind us in C2 process that it not a surprise this happened.

[mhgaffney]

Why is it too much to think we could learn from the British experience. Which Galloway summarizes eloquently -- in his latest -- below.

But Americans are impervious to reality. Speak the truth and you are dismissed as a "conspiracy theorist.."

We are a nation of fools.

MHG



Nato May Reap What They Sow in Pakistan

By George Galloway

December02, 2011 "Daily Record"-----EVEN by the usual standards of American "friendly fire" incidents, the attack on Pakistani troops by US Apache helicopter gunships on Friday was potentially world changing.

This was no misguided drone attack, nor a missile misfiring.

It was the mass murder of 24 Pakistani soldiers.

That the deaths came so soon after the killings by Nato of five Afghan children in the city of Kandahar goes to show there are no blunders too great for our occupation force.

Our forces, we're told, were aiming at "terrorists" and the rest is just collateral damage. But what damage.

For the Pakistani community, this was a crime.

Think-tanks and working parties wonder why Muslims are being "radicalised".

All that's needed for such radicalisation is the ability to switch on the TV news.

Pakistan, a nuclear-armed power, is being abandoned to its fate - its government endlessly traduced, its institutions trashed.

And now it is being bombed although it is an ally of those doing the bombing.

I have been involved with Pakistan since the Seventies, when I joined the campaign to save the life of its greatest leader, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, eventually hanged by military dictator General Zia.

Zia turned the country into a base camp for the so-called Holy Warriors, then at war with Red Afghanistan and now at war with us.

Now, the radicalisation of Pakistan, its "Talibanisation" in think-tank speak, is being fuelled by every drop of blood spilled in incidents like this.

The slowly enraging populace are cut to the quick by every unauthorised military operation on their territory.

These operations won't, and can't, even work. There are millions of Pakistanis. For every "terrorist" sympathiser cut down, 100 will take his place. And we shall surely reap the whirlwind.

A lesson you'd think we, the British, would have learned from our own history trying to subjugate an empire so huge that the sun never set on it.

When I was a teenager Scottish regiments, under tabloid hero Colonel "Mad" Mitch Mitchell, were rampaging through the Crater District of Aden in the Yemen, shooting all that moved.

We were encouraged to believe murdering the natives was necessary to keep "our" possessions "East of Suez".

It failed, we failed. And the brave people of Yemen are showing every day, by overthrowing the dictatorship we helped to fashion, that no good can come of this endless killing.

As would have put it, the natives are merely nursing their wrath, to keep it warm.

[W*GS]

Speak the truth and you are dismissed as a "conspiracy theorist.."

Start speaking the truth, dork.

We are a nation of fools.

Speak for yourself.

[cutthemdown]

Stop thinking this is Tom Clancy novel. The simple answer is the usually the correct one. Someone in HQ or at the field didn't update location and status of their troop movement or didn't check with correct command. Thus leading to blue on blue firing. It happen within US operations and Pakistanis are far behind us in C2 process that it not a surprise this happened.

Very likely. but Pakistan lies to its own people to keep from pissing them off. So who knows. For sure though very good chance it was just a screw up and no coordinated black ops scenario. But I always question stuff because Pakistan has different elements working against each other inside the country. It could have been some element that said lets create a scenario we can turn whole country against USA, get them out once and for good. What better way then to lure them into killing some pakis, stoking nationalism among the people.

It is possible.

[elsid13]

Very likely. but Pakistan lies to its own people to keep from pissing them off. So who knows. For sure though very good chance it was just a screw up and no coordinated black ops scenario. But I always question stuff because Pakistan has different elements working against each other inside the country. It could have been some element that said lets create a scenario we can turn whole country against USA, get them out once and for good. What better way then to lure them into killing some pakis, stoking nationalism among the people.

It is possible.

So is Bobo the ass clown getting laid by live woman for free, doesn't mean that there is a strong possibility that it will/did occur. The more complex the operation the harder it is to occur without a lot of luck (and that only happen in the movies)