American attack aftermath: Pakistan declares attack a 'plot'

[Imran Khan]

Why do you prefer to believe the NATO more than the DG ISPR and DGMO?

both are lairs what difference ? ISPR lose creditability many times in 10 years just leave it please

 

[Don Jaguar]

I posted this news before you admin bro.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/143856-unprovoked-dgmo-gives-details-aerial-assault.html

 

[VCheng]

Why do you prefer to believe the NATO more than the DG ISPR and DGMO?[............

I do not blindly believe anybody, NATO and DG ISPR and DGMO or not.

 

[soul hacker]

NATO is getting mad because of shortage of....

 

[Mercenary]

I think you just woke up and learned of the attack. There's a lot of detail that have come out and available in the thread. It's not as black and white as you just made it that hey, NATO made a mistake while conducting an opp.

The attack continued for more than two hours. On a marked and highly visible post high on top of a hill. Pak soldiers identified themselves during the course of the attack.

I suggest you go through the thread a little, and read at least few posts by professional members before coming to such a simplistic conclusion.

You are conflating two things.

The Afghan Commandos attacked the Pakistani outposts with small arms fire for over 1 hour. The Pak soliders might have identified themselves to those Commandos.

The Afghans then called in Air Support in which NATO sent in two Apache Gunships who fired the hell fire missiles at the outposts and the attack was over in a matter of minutes.

Can you please explain why it took Apache Gunships 2 hours to take out two outposts when these same Apaches knocked out Saddam's Radars in the opening phase of the Gulf War in less than 2 minutes. The answer is, it didn't.

As for Professional Members, buddy I am throughlly knowledgable in these matters. I have written the Military history of Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Special Serive Group, Special Service Group Navy, ISI, etc. articles on wikipedia.

 

[Jango]

both are lairs what difference ? ISPR lose creditability many times in 10 years just leave it please

But when the version of the story has been presented by the PA, then why repeatedly say 'wait for NATO'?

It is not like they are going to admit that it was a big blunder. They haven't even apologized openly from what I have heard.

---------- Post added at 11:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:09 PM ----------

I do not blindly believe anybody, NATO and DG ISPR and DGMO or not.

neither do most of us.

Blind patriotism is not a good thing to have.

But, why do you refuse to believe the Pakistani version of the story?

 

[Mercenary]

Yeah, the NATO goes scotch free eh?

There is always identification of the target by the WSO, and always the mission plan gets fed into the computer of the heli. Really strange that they could not identify friend( supposed friend) from foe.

Absolutley not scotch free. There needs to be a through investigation as to what exactly happened.

But how does it serves NATO interests to on purpose knock out Pakistani outposts and aggrivate the already strained relations with Pakistan?

Cool down and think with a rational mind. I know passions are running high.

 

[Don Jaguar]

I do not blindly believe anybody, NATO and DG ISPR and DGMO or not.

And U.S government also.

 

[wmdisinfo]

ISPR AND DGMO should be believed because its their own troops who got killed and injured and they will never lie on this one because if they lie about it they can hide it from us but they cant hide it from those who were injured and those who listened in to communications and relayed the messeges between and after the attack and lie here and risk ur army being divided into factions because the severity of the attack.FORGET ABOUT IT THAT ISPR OR DGMO WILL LIE ON THIS ONE

 

[somebozo]

If Pakistan has democracy then these NATO pigs will not survive a day!

 

[VCheng]

.......................
neither do most of us.

Blind patriotism is not a good thing to have.

But, why do you refuse to believe the Pakistani version of the story?

I agree that blindness in anything, including patriotism, is not good.

I am merely waiting for both sides of the story to be established before evaluating which is more believable. That's all.

---------- Post added at 01:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:14 PM ----------

And U.S government also.

Correct, I do not blindly believe them EITHER.

 

[Mercenary]

Dude, seriously?

This was a calculated attack by NATO to disloge Pakistani forces from the region. There is no excuse this time.

Are you saying that Pakistan cannot rebuild those outposts once they have been taken out?

I don't understand your rational thought here.

So what you are saying is this.

NATO launches a deliberate attack to take out 2 Pakistani outposts in which they hope TTP and other allies will easily gain access to Pakistan to continue to fight Pakistan and conduct terrorist activities.

So is NATO stupid in not knowing the kind of reaction that Pakistan will have to this? Or the fact that Pakistan cannot rebuild those two outposts again.

Your statement makes absolutley no sense.

 

[Jango]

Absolutley not scotch free. There needs to be a through investigation as to what exactly happened.

But how does it serves NATO interests to on purpose knock out Pakistani outposts and aggrivate the already strained relations with Pakistan?

Cool down and think with a rational mind. I know passions are running high.

Since the DGMO( a very high ranking official within the PA) and DG ISPR( the mouthpiece of the PA) have said that it was intentional, so it definitely means that they have some reason to say so.

Now, neither I nor you nor anybody else on this forum is privy to those details, so my bet is , that the US administration has made no secret of their liking to go across the border in the pursuit of militants.

So, to check the response , they might have gone across the border, not originally planned to shoot down this many soldiers. They went about for some time, had a little hover and all. But then, they might have started to shoot around a little bit, they saw the PA post, shot around it for sometime, and they got the response in terms of small arms fire and other munition being spent. That is when things might have got a little heated. Then a fire fight might have broken out, and the casualties took place.

This is just one of the possible reasons NATO might have done it on purpose.

 

[VCheng]

The individuals that might have reported the initial information to the media could have done it out of being misinformed. The official PA/ISPR version has remained consistent the entire time.

You on the other hand continue to push a lie, that the PA/ISPR have backtracked/changed their account, when they have clearly not done so. You cannot claim 'ignorance' or being 'misinformed'.

Oh the real backtracking is yet to come Sir. This is just the beginning.

Once supply routes and drone attacks resume, the reality will carry on. This is just a temporary phase, being carefully managed by both sides.

 

[junaid1]

All I said was it CAN be an error for a distance of only 200-300 meters and not 2.5 km; it may turn out that the posts were rightly or wrongly thought to be the source of unfriendly fire.

There is much to be established yet.

i guess u r NATO spokesman's R u Pakistani