What's new

American attack aftermath: Pakistan declares attack a 'plot'

http://www.dawn.com/2011/11/28/pakistan-fire-may-have-prompted-nato-strike-wsj.html

WASHINGTON: Fire from a Pakistani military outpost into Afghanistan prompted the Nato cross-border air strikes that left 24 Pakistani soldiers dead, a report said Sunday, citing Afghan and Western officials.

The Wall Street Journal, citing three unnamed Afghan officials and one Western official, said the attack —which has prompted fury in Islamabad —was called in to shield Nato and Afghan forces targeting Taliban fighters.

The fire came from remote outposts in the Mohmand region.

“There was firing coming from the position against Afghan army soldiers who requested support and this is what happened,” an Afghan official in Kabul said on condition of anonymity.

The official added that the government in Kabul believes the fire came from the Pakistani military base —and not from insurgents in the area.

That version was corroborated by two Afghan officials working in the border zone.

One border police official said Pakistani officials were informed of the Nato operation ahead of time.
================================================
hmm.. getting murkier by the minute ....

Specially the Red part.. Another possibility emerging is that Pakistan was informed of the operation and tried to disrupt the same by firing on the NATO/Afghan forces resulting in the incident in question.. I guess another 24 hours, as the US gets back to work after the long weekend, will make this a little clearer

I am sure that the ISAF/Afghan forces were not at the border, if indeed there was any operation, so if a Pakistani post fires from 2.5 km's inside Pakistan into say 1.5-2.5 km's inside Afghanistan then they must be using morters or some sort of shelling/artillery rounds right? I mean it just couldn't be guns. These must have caused some damage, however insignificant...right? Was there any damage at all on the other side? Any damage at all?
 
.
http://www.dawn.com/2011/11/28/pakistan-fire-may-have-prompted-nato-strike-wsj.html

WASHINGTON: Fire from a Pakistani military outpost into Afghanistan prompted the Nato cross-border air strikes that left 24 Pakistani soldiers dead, a report said Sunday, citing Afghan and Western officials.

The Wall Street Journal, citing three unnamed Afghan officials and one Western official, said the attack —which has prompted fury in Islamabad —was called in to shield Nato and Afghan forces targeting Taliban fighters.

The fire came from remote outposts in the Mohmand region.

“There was firing coming from the position against Afghan army soldiers who requested support and this is what happened,” an Afghan official in Kabul said on condition of anonymity.

The official added that the government in Kabul believes the fire came from the Pakistani military base —and not from insurgents in the area.

That version was corroborated by two Afghan officials working in the border zone.

One border police official said Pakistani officials were informed of the Nato operation ahead of time.
================================================
hmm.. getting murkier by the minute ....

Specially the Red part.. Another possibility emerging is that Pakistan was informed of the operation and tried to disrupt the same by firing on the NATO/Afghan forces resulting in the incident in question.. I guess another 24 hours, as the US gets back to work after the long weekend, will make this a little clearer

How could fire come into Afghanistan from Pakistani military forces 2.5kms inside Pakistan territory? In other words, this was an act of 'defense'. And if that was true, Pakistan would not be informed about it.

The part in red is in collusion with the theory that there was a hot pursuit of terrorists in Eastern Afghanistan, where Afghan forces called in coalition forces for air support.

The first theory is that the attack took place in 'defense', whereas the second theory is that the attack took place in 'hot pursuit' of terrorists in Eastern Afghanistan. Both of them contradictory.
 
.
LOLS lets just refrain from the arguements on Whos fault it is ..life lost is lost whatever the reason may be...at the age of modern techs and the Tech which will be in NATOs hands are not bound to misguide the path or where the boundary is...Its all now about how the Pakistani government acts beyond the words...RIP to thosee who lost lives
 
.
As I said he has left enough hints to suggest how the final report will look like. You are just not willing to accept it. It will closed as a grave and sad incident, but one which was caused by self-defence.

For the record 2.5 kms is not such a great distance.

I gave just one version of the events. Again let's wait for the investigation to complete and the report be submitted. We need not act the judge & jury.

EDIT:- Look up the previous post. Did I not say how this incident will shape up ? It;s just too early.

Are we arguing on what they would say to justify their terrorism or what really happened? Ofcourse no US/NATO/ISAF general would ever admit that they destroyed Pakistani posts and murdered Pakistani soldiers because of some 'not yet known' reasons!
 
.
Sir you are highly mistaken. Our general and politicians will remain the same corrupt slaves theyalways have been. What u r seeing is temporary to gain voter/ public sympathy. Chor gain sub

In support to you, This was published prior to the latest NATO strike on Pakistan:

November 27, 2011

Corruption and runaway economy


Squandering of Pakistan's resources by Zardari government to win votes will add to nation's woes

Pakistan's President Asif Ali Zardari may be keeping a brave face but he has clearly had a challenging week. It all began with the replacement of his chosen ambassador to Washington, caught in a controversy over the alleged use of the government's influence for inviting US pressure upon Pakistan's army. The week ended with yet another setback when Pakistan's Supreme Court rejected a plea by the ruling regime to review a major verdict that previously undid a blanket immunity given to politicians and key officials accused of corruption.

In the coming days and weeks, Zardari and his coterie of ruling politicians from the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) are bound to be focused squarely on how best to extricate themselves from the fallout of these recent setbacks. Will it be a court battle or a diplomatic success that will help Pakistan's rulers steer themselves out of their predicament?

Indeed, that may be the question that Zardari and other members of the ruling coterie are asking themselves as they work to stabilise their own positions. Yet, even a half convincing answer to these questions bears little relevance to the monumental set of challenges that Pakistan faces today.

The country is already beginning to be immersed in an election cycle. Across Pakistan, key opposition parties have now begun preparations for gaining support of their constituents ahead of the next elections. In some respects, Pakistan has entered a risk phase in its history, not least due to the country's overall adverse security conditions and the danger of prominent politicians being targeted. As significant for the future of Pakistan is indeed the danger of Zardari's government becoming even more reckless than before in managing what clearly appears to be a runaway economy. Going through a year-long election cycle will essentially mean that an already wasteful government will likely become even less responsible than before. A speedier squandering of Pakistan's resources through populist measures to win votes for an increasingly unpopular ruling structure will only add further to the economic ruin.

Meanwhile, on the street, the challenges that Zardari appears to consider important enough to address immediately, have little relevance to the future of the country's population. For ordinary Pakistanis, there may be little interest in who gets sent to the US capital as Pakistan's ambassador, given that such a diplomatic posting will make no difference to the quality of lives across the country.

Deeper implications

And while there is widespread and growing hope for the ruling class to depart from the scene, a battle in the Supreme Court will become significant only when it is clear that Pakistan is about to be gifted with a long overdue uplift in its quality of government. This mood across Pakistan flows from widespread stories of corruption in high places that have frequently made the rounds in the past three years since Zardari and his lot from the PPP came to power after elections in 2008. While the government loses out on popular sentiment, Pakistan's dangerous weakening has deep-rooted implications, both for its internal stability and external challenges.

Yesterday, the Pakistani government ordered an immediate suspension of a truck supply facility given via Pakistan to western troops stationed in Afghanistan, after a western helicopter flew in to Pakistan's territory from Afghanistan, attacked a border post and by some accounts killed at least 24 Pakistani soldiers. In the coming days and weeks, it is possible that Pakistan will come around to removing the restrictions on the trucks after a face-saving solution is found. Tragically, this will be a repeat of a previous episode when a similar ban following a similar attack, was eventually lifted.

To make matters worse, though, Pakistan is hardly in a position to defend itself even when the country's physical sovereignty is infringed. The country's deep rooted dependence on the outside world, given its many internal contradictions and a continued failure to reform, has simply eroded its ability to stand up even where it has the legitimate right to do so.

For rulers like Zardari, any argument that blames the government for its failure to reform Pakistan and enable it to defend its legitimate rights, may simply be stretching the limits of legitimate debate. But then, can anyone expect better from the head of state in Pakistan whose ability to grasp the true meaning of reforms has proven to be so inadequate?

Farhan Bokhari is a Pakistan-based commentator who writes on political and economic matters.



http://gulfnews.com/opinions/columnists/corruption-and-runaway-economy-1.937983
 
.
I am sure that the ISAF/Afghan forces were not at the border, if indeed there was any operation, so if a Pakistani post fires from 2.5 km's inside Pakistan into say 1.5-2.5 km's inside Afghanistan then they must be using morters or some sort of shelling/artillery rounds right? I mean it just couldn't be guns. These must have caused some damage, however insignificant...right? Was there any damage at all on the other side? Any damage at all?

As I said, let the story emerge.. Guess there is not too much action in the US due to the Thanksgiving weekend.. Today evening India/Pakistan time is when we should start seeing some formal responses coming out of US State dept and Pentagon

---------- Post added at 11:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:07 AM ----------

How could fire come into Afghanistan from Pakistani military forces 2.5kms inside Pakistan territory? In other words, this was an act of 'defense'. And if that was true, Pakistan would not be informed about it.

The part in red is in collusion with the theory that there was a hot pursuit of terrorists in Eastern Afghanistan, where Afghan forces called in coalition forces for air support.

The first theory is that the attack took place in 'defense', whereas the second theory is that the attack took place in 'hot pursuit' of terrorists in Eastern Afghanistan. Both of them contradictory.

THats why they are 2 theories.. Right.. Else they would be the same theory..
 
.
Are we arguing on what they would say to justify their terrorism or what really happened? Ofcourse no US/NATO/ISAF general would ever admit that they destroyed Pakistani posts and murdered Pakistani soldiers because of some 'not yet known' reasons!

No one knows till now what exactly took place on that fateful night in Mohmand. Let us wait for the investigations to be completed.
 
.
I gave just one version of the events. Again let's wait for the investigation to complete and the report be submitted. We need not act the judge & jury.

Your story did not happen, because it is not supported by any narrative, & goes against ground realities & facts on the ground. Have I made myself clear? Stop inventing stories & things that did not happen.
 
. .
Your story did not happen, because it is not supported by any narrative, & goes against ground realities & facts on the ground. Have I made myself clear? Stop inventing stories & things that did not happen.
Kiyani should give clear orders to Army to strike Back if any attack happens again and he should give it in public and write it Nato will never do it again they will not even come close to our Border
 
.
Your story did not happen, because it is not supported by any narrative, & goes against ground realities & facts on the ground. Have I made myself clear? Stop inventing stories & things that did not happen.

Stop getting emotional dude. I have as much knowledge as you as to what happened there..in other words both of us don't know what exactly happened there.

So you pronouncing the verdict that mine is not 'authoritative' looks plain silly.

Let us wait for the men who matter to finish the investigation and file the report. And already NATO has started saying that it was Pak fire that elicited the response. Let the story develop. I guess its Thanksgiving weekend over there in US.
 
.
Apart form being a Arch rival citizen of Pakistan as a normal citizen I would like to know onething...My dear Pakistani friends your sovereignty is tested time and time again by the Western countries why dont you guys just go and make a big protest in the streets that will make your government do something????A death caused by a foreign nation needs no regrets but immediate action...comeon guys do something make your government to do something its increasingly getting bad to see..
 
.
Stop getting emotional dude. I have as much knowledge as you as to what happened there..in other words both of us don't know what exactly happened there.

So you pronouncing the verdict looks plain silly.

I'm not pronouncing any verdicts, just the facts. NATO helicopters (not the Afghan troops) crossed 2.5kms into Pakistani territory & attacked 2 separate military posts, killing 24 people. Yet, you keep on insisting that Afghan troops crossed into Pakistani territory, when this was not the case.
 
.
I'm not pronouncing any verdicts, just the facts. NATO helicopters (not the Afghan troops) crossed 2.5kms into Pakistani territory & attacked 2 separate military posts, killing 24 people.

And why they (choppers) crossed and did Pak soldiers start any firing is still not known.

Look up post # 1735. Already they are starting to claim that they were provoked by Pak firing.

So again, lets wait.
 
.
And why they (choppers) crossed and did Pak soldiers start any firing is still not known.

So again, lets wait.

Why are you inventing stories that Afghan troops crossed into Pakistani territory as well, when this was not the case?
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom