|
Pakistan order to kill US invaders
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LazFX |
| quote: |
KEY corps commanders of Pakistan's 600,000-strong army issued orders last night to retaliate against "invading" US forces that enter the country to attack militant targets.
The move has plunged relations between Islamabad and Washington into deep crisis over how to deal with al-Qa'ida and the Taliban
What amounts to a dramatic order to "kill the invaders", as one senior officer put it last night, was disclosed after the commanders - who control the army's deployments at divisional level - met at their headquarters in the garrison city of Rawalpindi under the chairmanship of army chief and former ISI spy agency boss Ashfaq Kayani.
Leading English-language newspaper The News warned in an editorial that the US determination to attack targets inside Pakistan was likely to be "the best recruiting sergeant that the extremists ever had", with even "moderates" outraged by it.
The "retaliate and kill" order came amid reports of unprecedentedly fierce fighting in the Bajaur Agency of Pakistan's tribal areas, an al-Qa'ida stronghold frequently mentioned as the most likely lair of Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri.
At the same time, a series of brutal killings by the militants were reported.
The beheaded bodies of two of nearly 40 police recruits abducted a week ago were found near the town of Hangu. Their discovery follows warnings that the recruits would be put to death, one by one, unless Pakistan stopped its big offensive in Bajaur.
The bodies of three local Bajaur men who had been shot in the neck were also found yesterday. Notes were attached declaring the men to have been spies.
In a day of what appears to have been unrelenting combat in Bajaur, helicopter gunships, heavy artillery and tanks were used to strike al-Qa'ida targets.
Officials said at least 100 militants had been killed, bringing the number who have died in the six weeks since the offensive was launched to well over 700. The figure is regarded as remarkable, given that NATO forces in Afghanistan seldom achieve a "kill" rate of more than about 30 in any single operation. Many of those killed are reported to have been "foreign fighters" - mostly Arabs and Central Asians, who have been flooding into Pakistan's tribal areas to join al-Qa'ida and the Taliban.
Ground troops are said to have moved into key areas formerly controlled by the militants, despite a promised ceasefire marking the holy month of Ramadan.
"We launched strikes against militant hideouts in Bajaur and destroyed several compounds they were using," an official was quoted as saying.
The order to retaliate against incursions by "foreign troops", directed specifically at the 120,000 Pakistani soldiers deployed along the border with Afghanistan, follows US President George W. Bush's authorisation of US attacks in Pakistan.
Washington's determination to launch such attacks has caused outrage across Pakistan, with Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani last night strongly backing a warning by General Kayani that Pakistan would not allow its territorial integrity to be violated.
The "kill" order against invading forces, and the sharp deterioration in relations with the US, has far-reaching implications for the war on terror.
Anger at all levels in Pakistani society was summed up last night in The News, not normally sympathetic to the militants.
"There is an escalating sense of furious impotence among the ordinary people of Pakistan," the newspaper said.
"Many - perhaps most - of them are strongly opposed to the spread of Talibanisation and extremist influence across the country: people who might be described as 'moderates'.
"Many of them have no sympathy for the mullahs and their burning of girls' schools and their medieval mindset.
"But if you bomb a moderate sensibility often enough, it has a tendency to lose its sense of objectivity and to feel driven in the direction of extremism.
"If America bombs moderate sensibilities often enough, you may find that its actions are the best recruiting sergeant that the extremists ever had."
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.a...5-26397,00.html
|
interesting |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| we should probably be more covert about the operations. Just another gaffe by the bush administration. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
we should probably be more covert about the operations. Just another gaffe by the bush administration. |
They are covert. But more importantly, covertness is not excuse to violate Pakistani sovereignty. The USA failed to capture bin Laden and that's one of gigantic failures of the Bush Administration. They failed to stop 9/11 even with warnings, and they failed to bring Osama bin Laden to justice. Occupying Afghanistan is not going to help. They will never be a liberal democracy. |
|
|
| atbell |
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
we should probably be more covert about the operations. Just another gaffe by the bush administration. |
Like developing quiet bombs ;) |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
Hmmm...things just got a little hotter...
Not really knowing much about Pakistani - US relations, why is it so hard to enlist Pakistan in hunting down extremists? :conf: |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
Hmmm...things just got a little hotter...
Not really knowing much about Pakistani - US relations, why is it so hard to enlist Pakistan in hunting down extremists? :conf: |
What makes you think America OR Pakistan for that matter are ever going to subjigate the tribal areas? The British couldn't do it with 50,000 soldiers. Additionally, it is Al-Qaeda which attacked us on 9/11, not the Taliban, so fighting the Taliban is a fight we should never have undertaken. They are a nationalist insurgency. Al-Qaeda is the terrorist group. You can not defeat a nationalist insurgency of this nature, and even more importantly, a liberal democracy in Afghanistan? Keep dreaming neocons, keep dreaming...:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
What makes you think America OR Pakistan for that matter are ever going to subjigate the tribal areas?
|
I'm not suggesting subjugation though. It's pretty much understood that these areas aren't going to change just because 'we' want them to.
The question is simpler than that - Why doesn't Pakistan seem to care that extremists, from their backyard, are wreaking havoc in the world? |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
I'm not suggesting subjugation though. It's pretty much understood that these areas aren't going to change just because 'we' want them to.
The question is simpler than that - Why doesn't Pakistan seem to care that extremists, from their backyard, are wreaking havoc in the world? |
Well, you have define who are the terrorists in the region. I'm assuming your naming all insurgents within the tribal zones as one in the same, when they are clearly not. This attitude really is endemic in Western thinking which either refuses or simply doesn't understand the local environment of the regions they are choosing to engage in combat. The Taliban never "wreaked havoc in the world" as you said. AL-QAEDA; they are the ones who have been wreaking havoc. This is a very VERY important thing which you and most especially, our Western leaders need to understand. The Taliban share the same fundamentalist Islam ideology as Al-Qaeda, but the nature of the group is NATIONALIST. Nationalist, not for Pakistan, but for the Pashtun/Afghan nation.
It is in Pakistan's interest that Afghanistan be an ally and stable, which is why they supported the Taliban to begin with.
I am very sorry to say, that Osama has gotten away. It's too late. He is a ghost. If the US government really wanted OBL, they wouldn't have given him ONE MONTH time to escape, like they did after 9/11. OBL has 1 month to prepare to disappear, and that's exactly what he did. It's too late. You can thank Don Rumsfeld for hampering the CIA's efforts in Afghanistan, and delaying the deployment of troops to block any and all escape routes. This should have started immediately after 9/11. Hell, America has entire divisions which can be deployed in 48 hours anywhere in the world. So I don't accept the argument that a deployment in Afghanistan couldn't be done. As for toppling the Taliban, I don't believe that should have ever been done. It was an Afghan issue, not any of our business. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Well, you have define who are the terrorists in the region. I'm assuming your naming all insurgents within the tribal zones as one in the same, when they are clearly not.
|
Clearly I am not since I have not once mentioned Taliban or Al-Qaeda.
I specifically used the word 'extremists' since the word has no political affiliation.
| quote: |
This attitude really is endemic in Western thinking which either refuses or simply doesn't understand the local environment of the regions they are choosing to engage in combat. The Taliban never "wreaked havoc in the world" as you said. AL-QAEDA; they are the ones who have been wreaking havoc. This is a very VERY important thing which you and most especially, our Western leaders need to understand. The Taliban share the same fundamentalist Islam ideology as Al-Qaeda, but the nature of the group is NATIONALIST. Nationalist, not for Pakistan, but for the Pashtun/Afghan nation.
|
Don't remember mentioning any of this in the question...
| quote: |
I am very sorry to say, that Osama has gotten away. It's too late. He is a ghost. If the US government really wanted OBL, they wouldn't have given him ONE MONTH time to escape, like they did after 9/11. OBL has 1 month to prepare to disappear, and that's exactly what he did. It's too late. You can thank Don Rumsfeld for hampering the CIA's efforts in Afghanistan, and delaying the deployment of troops to block any and all escape routes. This should have started immediately after 9/11. Hell, America has entire divisions which can be deployed in 48 hours anywhere in the world. So I don't accept the argument that a deployment in Afghanistan couldn't be done. As for toppling the Taliban, I don't believe that should have ever been done. It was an Afghan issue, not any of our business. |
So you support Sharia law and the subjugation of women?
Afghans were duped by Muhammad Omar and were far better off with the Mujahideen warlords that were replaced...
Never mind with my question, I did my own research and found my answer... |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
Clearly I am not since I have not once mentioned Taliban or Al-Qaeda.
I specifically used the word 'extremists' since the word has no political affiliation. |
Which explains absolutely nothing. "Extremist" could be anything, it's such a vague term. You might want to be more specific next time.
| quote: | | Don't remember mentioning any of this in the question... |
Well, when you are so completely vague in the use of your terms, one has to assume by "extremist", you mean Islamic fundamentalists in Pakistan/Afghanistan.
| quote: | So you support Sharia law and the subjugation of women?
Afghans were duped by Muhammad Omar and were far better off with the Mujahideen warlords that were replaced... |
Of course I don't support Sharia law...IN MY OWN COUNTRY. And these warlords you speak of...guess what? They run the country...as governors, mayors, etc. The idea that you can impose liberal democracy in a backwards country like Afghanistan is delusional. How about you let the Afghans self-determine for a bit, huh? If Sharia law becomes the law of the land, who the f*ck are you to tell them otherwise? SO you'de rather spend tens of billions of dollars a year to impose liberal democracy on Afghanistan, fighting a local insurgency, and without end. I tell right here, right now. There will never be democracy as we know it in the west in Afghanistan OR Iraq. Keep believing in the fairy tale..;) |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
Bombing another country... that's an act of open war.
We don't bomb China or Russia at our leisure, what gives us the right to get away with this? |
|
|
|
|
