American attack aftermath: Pakistan declares attack a 'plot'

[VCheng]

What if Pakistan orders NATO supply planes to stop flying over Pak airspace, but NATO continues anyway? Will we shoot down a NATO plane?

Such a scenario would represent a significant escalation in the hostile positions taken by both sides, and it would be best to avoid it.

 

[bdslph]

they the Russian must have a plan before they said that but still usa wont get what they use to get from Pakistan

 

[alimukhtar]

What if Pakistan orders NATO supply planes to stop flying over Pak airspace, but NATO continues anyway? Will we shoot down a NATO plane?

If justified neutrally NATO/ISAF planes should be shoot down..... in such case,
w/o any warning, info.....

 

[Developereo]

You missed that point bro. Any way Americans have third supply route Georgia-Azerbaijan-Kazakhstan-Uzbekistan without going through Russia.

Pakistan border closure will have little effect on Nato's Afghanistan campaign | World news | The Guardian

The route through Uzbekistan is currently in question, however, after a key bridge near the Afghan border was damaged by an explosion 10 days ago and has been closed since.

Neither the US nor the Uzbeks have commented on the cause of the explosion, although there are fears it could be the work of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, which is allied to the Taliban.

 

[POPS]

i find it quite amusing when pakistanies start jumping about russia or for that matter any country tries to wrestel with US/NATO but when it comes to sttoping nato supploes inside pakistan everything fizzels out after a breif spurt of immossions & nothing happens & to put cherry on the toping all pkistanies start celebrating as hell

 

[Pfpilot]

If justified neutrally NATO/ISAF planes should be shoot down..... in such case,
w/o any warning, info.....

What is justified? We keep asking for fairness, but the world has never been about fairness...as the pre WWII Germans will attest to. We are dealing with a coalition that is far stronger in ever way, than us. They dictate the terms of this relationship, if we don't like them, we should have never agreed to work with them. Pakistan, more than any nation on this planet, knew how short term American interests are...we still went running to them, because our leaders saw a get rich quick shortcut.
Now that we have entered in a deal with the devil, we have to stop acting shocked, every time we get burned. And if we shoot down a NATO aircraft with the greatest of justification, verifiable by countless neutral resources...I can guarantee, the Americans will not sit back and engage in rhetoric; they will strike back hard...they make the rules and as such, will never adhere to the same rules they expect the lesser nations to abide by.

 

[Al Bhatti]

If justified neutrally NATO/ISAF planes should be shoot down..... in such case,
w/o any warning, info.....

If there are radars in the first place to track them then locking on them and then wait for the orders.

 

[Riz]

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...fghanistan-switching-afghan-army-control.html

poor reporting , the heading should be like this, Hialf of kabil handovers to afghan army till the last day of usa withdrawal

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

More than on images of babies getting kissed and kids and widows mourning... Pakistan has a very long way to go before it can have independent section of media that is utterly critical of the soldiers and the military, and even goes on to lie about the soldiers & military without fearing any prosecution or persecution.

You have not been paying attention to the Pakistani media then - refresh your memory by recalling the commentary and coverage in both the print and vernacular television channels, about the military when the country was run by a military dictator.

The problem is that too many liberals/Indians/Westerners don't want to accept the fact that anti-American sentiment in Pakistan is not due to any 'ISI/PA conspiracy or media manipulation' but because US policies towards Pakistan have no potential of 'winning hearts and minds', and rather than accept the failure of US policy, the West/liberals choose to create a bogeyman of 'ISI/PA is manipulating the media to foment anti-American sentiment'.

Infallible deity - they are in Pakistan. In the States, well you live there AM, you should know better than that.

I do know how they are treated in the US media, and it is with far less criticizm than we see in the Pakistani media.

 

[Zarvan]

Pakistan Army should deploy its MRLS ARTIllery and latest Tanks and If Nato attacks again they should strike back as soon as possible

 

[tony singh]

Nato account for what happened differs with the Pakistani view (not suprising). Bottom line is that drone attacks will continue even if US pulls out of the airbase because it can use Afghan side in order to achieve it's goal.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

‘Unprovoked’: DGMO gives details of aerial assault​

By Quatrina Hosain
Published: November 30, 2011

The two helicopters had pulled back midway through giving the impression the attack had ended, but returned for another attack that night.

ISLAMABAD:
The Nato attack on two military check posts in the Mohmand Agency early Saturday morning was an “unprovoked act of blatant aggression,” said the Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) Major General Ishfaq Nadeem on Tuesday, adding that all options remained open to the government and the military. “The final decision rests with the prime minister. We are considering a range of options,” he told journalists at a briefing, adding that the military will have its input into the decisions taken. A review of the incident is under way at the GHQ, he said.

The DGMO said he was not authorised to comment on what specific counter measures were being considered to cope with such situations in the future and added these would be finalised after the completion of the continuing investigation into the incident.

He went into comprehensive detail about the sequence of events known so far, explaining that a check post code-named Volcano first came under attack at around 15 to 30 minutes after midnight. A nearby check post, code-named Boulder, responded with 12.7 mm anti-aircraft weapons and mortars after the Volcano check post came under attack from gunship helicopters.

Subsequently, check post Boulder also came under attack and all communication was lost with both check posts. But before communication was lost, company commander Major Mujahid headed for Volcano and Boulder to investigate and was killed as the helicopters re-engaged. Amongst the 24 men killed that night was also Captain Usman who leaves behind a widow and a 3-month-old baby daughter.

The DGMO said the two posts were located at a place from where there has been no cross-border infiltration, though militant attacks from the other side had been continuing. Settled villages were two-three kilometres away from the posts and the posts themselves were about 300-400 metres inside Pakistan borders.

The two check posts, he maintained, could not be mistaken for militant sanctuaries because the other side had been provided all available information about the number of Pakistani posts and their locations. The men at the posts were uniformed and the posts were well-defined. The DGMO further said the Pakistan Army believed that Nato was monitoring the transmissions that night and knew they had hit Volcano checkpost.

The posts were being manned by the experienced and battle-hardened 7-AK battalion which was equipped with both line and wireless communications equipment, but armed for dealing only with militant activity but not repelling an aerial assault. “The troops are geared for fighting terrorists and not border security,” he said.

The Pakistan Army maintains an 8,200 man presence in Mohmand Agency following military operations to clear the region of militants, with 29 border checkposts in along the border while there are only 14 on the Afghan side, manned predominantly by Afghan police. A total of 820 check posts are maintained in the tribal belt along the border.

By 1 a.m. all channels of communications with the other side were activated and the helicopters were pulled back. But as Pakistani troops moved from one post to the other to assess the damage and aid the injured, the helicopters reappeared and pinned them down. Some 26 artillery airbursts were fired by the Pakistani side and the engagement lasted until 0215.

Answering a question, he said the civil authorities including the president, the prime minister and the foreign and defence ministers were informed in the “morning” about the incident which began around midnight and lasted for two hours.

The reason for the implied delay in informing the civil authorities, he said, was because a complete picture had not emerged until daybreak.

It was clear from General Nadeem’s briefing that there was misleading information being provided to the Pakistan military from the start. Just before the attack, a Pakistani officer at the regional tactical center was informed by an American sergeant that their special forces had received indirect fire from Gora Pai, located some 15 kilometres away from Volcano post. And after 7 minutes, a woman officer informed him that the fire had, in fact, come from Volcano, which had been hit in retaliation.
The DGMO was dismissive of previous joint inquiries conducted into three earlier incidents. “There have been joint inquiries and they all came to naught. They give a version not based on facts as we know them,” he said, adding that Pakistan did not initiate firing at any point that night.

The DGMO listed the standard operating procedures that exists in the border coordination mechanism that entails sharing information on impending operations in advance, particularly if these operations come within two kilometers of the border; to immediately communicate if one side comes under fire with the responsibility to take action from the country from where the attack originated; and cessation of fire when communication established. “All SOPs were violated that night,” said General Nadeem.

He further elaborated that while the helicopters intruded into Pakistani airspace on an intermittent basis, supporting jets did not enter Pakistani airspace.

The central question remains why the Pakistan Air Force did not respond immediately to the attack. General Nadeem said there was “a haze” at the time, adding Pakistan Air Force interceptors did not scramble when the two helicopters from the other side violated the border, because initially it seemed the violation was only marginal.

Furthermore, according to him, the two helicopters had pulled back midway through giving the impression the attack had ended, but returned for another attack.

AVM (retd) Shahzad Chaudhry told Express Tribune that “the air force could have scrambled but you have to decide if you want a shooting war with America. With only 200-300 meters between the border, our jets would have entered Afghanistan. It is the consequences you have to live with.”
(Read: A grave crisis in Pakistan-US relations)

Published in The Express Tribune, November 30th, 2011.
‘Unprovoked’: DGMO gives details of aerial assault – The Express Tribune

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Nato account for what happened differs with the Pakistani view (not suprising). Bottom line is that drone attacks will continue even if US pulls out of the airbase because it can use Afghan side in order to achieve it's goal.

NATO has no account - and the 'anonymous sources' accounts have changed every other day.

Pakistan on the other hand has released an official and detailed account of what happened that night:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistans-war/143902-pakistan-releases-details-about-nato-attack.html

 

[tony singh]

NATO has no account - and the 'anonymous sources' accounts have changed every other day.

Pakistan on the other hand has released an official and detailed account of what happened that night:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistans-war/143902-pakistan-releases-details-about-nato-attack.html

There are claims and counter claims for what happened on that attack:


Nato operations in Afghanistan have been thrown into disarray following Saturday's deaths. The US and allied commanders say they are investigating how the tragedy occurred. Both sides are making claims and counter-claims.

Claim 1: US and Afghan commandos say they came under fire from inside Pakistan. The resulting air strikes killed 24 soldiers, and injured 13. Nato says they were a regrettable mistake.

Counter-claim: Pakistan says the attack was unprovoked. The air and helicopter strikes were a catastrophic blunder, both military and diplomatic.

Claim 2: Nato says the incident happened when a mainly Afghan force was conducting an operation in the southern Kunar province. Someone fired on them, it says.

Counter-claim: The Pakistani military says this is rubbish. The assault was premeditated, "irresponsible" and deliberate against two mountain outposts known to Nato and US forces. The soldiers were 300 metres inside Pakistan, in the Mohmand tribal areas, recently cleared of militants.

Claim 3: Nato regrets the deaths and says they were "tragic and unintended".

Counter-claim: Pakistan says the attacks went on for almost two hours and continued even after Pakistani commanders asked coalition forces to stop. A spokesman said that if the Afghan-US patrol came under attack, where are its casualties?

Claim 4: Underlying US policy is the assumption that Pakistani forces are complicit in allowing Taliban militants to use Pakistan's tribal areas as a base.




Counter-claim: Pakistan's soldiers are doing an impossible job. They patrol a huge, porous, mountainous border, and frequently come under attack from Taliban sympathisers and from trigger-happy Nato-Afghan forces

Claim 5: US officials believe elements inside Pakistan's army and intelligence services give clandestine support to a resurgent Taliban. This support – in the form of weapons, know-how, safe havens – facilitates lethal attacks inside Afghanistan on US troops, and perpetuates a war that has already dragged on for over a decade.

Counter-claim: Pakistan is fighting its own desperate internal battle against Islamist extremism. The US, meanwhile, isn't helping. It flagrantly violates Pakistan's sovereignty. The latest deadly air-strikes are simply the most recent example; the raid which killed Osama bin Laden in May the most egregious.



Not saying who is right or wrong but their version of events do not tie in with Pakistani's side.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

There are claims and counter claims for what happened on:

Show me one 'official NATO claim'.

The link in my earlier post goes to a post listing an OFFICIAL and DETAILED Pakistani account of what transpired during the attack.