End to US drone hits if military launches North Waziristan operation

[T-Faz]

Thanks to Elmo, found out the answer to my question:

US media in Pakistan | Media Monitor Times

Apparently the Express Tribune does censor anti-US content. It also pulled the story of the attack on the Pakistan security post, by militants from Afghanistan. Apparently they did not want that story to run right next to Mullen talking about safe havens in Pakistan.

That would also explain why the tone of most of their content and comments is the way it is.

Come on, you are seriously going to use a source like Media Monitor where they are using Ahmed Quraishi's 'investigation' into media control to 'expose' Express Tribune.

Perhaps you should read the kind of nauseating stuff this Mr Quraishi writes on a regular basis.

 

[Abu Basit]

The statement by Mullen is simple: Either Pakistan cleans its stables, or USA will do it. There no third choice.

middle finger to mullen and anyone who talks like mullen.

 

[Evil Flare]

No matter what someday we have to get rid of all armed groups if we want a bright future .

 

[53fd]

I don't know what Mullen wishes to achieve by killing innocent people in drone strikes. How many people from the Haqqani network have the drone strikes killed? The war on terror will be over sooner for America (& not in its favor) if Mullen keeps this up. The Pakistani establishment risks losing the support of a few million Pashtuns in the FATA if the drone strikes keep coming, & that would be disastrous for Pakistan.

The US needs to end the drone strikes, & Pakistan needs to root out those terrorist groups that are threatening it by empowering/arming the tribal people/lashkrs, & starting a ground operation there. There are about 20,000-30,000 terrorists in the region, the FATA people against them are in a few millions, & 150,000 troops are deployed in the region. I don't see the terrorists surviving if Pakistan uses this approach, as the tribal lashkrs will only be pleased to fight against this Taliban menace that is getting a free pass from Afghanistan to enter inside Pakistan.

 

[RazorMC]

With Taliban operating freely in NW, intermixing with the civvies, its impossible to ensure 0% civilian casualties specially if operating from air and firing missiles. The only way to avoid/reduce civilian deaths is a ground operation which USA is pressurizing Pakistan to do. But that has its own political and religious ramifications for the Pak govt and military..

The local population can easily identify who is local and who is not. Instead of increasing human intel to identify insurgents hiding in towns and villages, the US wants to just blow them all up.
Hence the reluctance. We know full well the results of attacking people indiscriminately. It creates more animosity against Pakistan, something we don't want at all.

 

[All-Green]

middle finger to mullen and anyone who talks like mullen.

No matter what someday we have to get rid of all armed groups if we want a bright future .

Salaams

You are both right, though Abu Basit has gestured strongly...but i dig it man.

No doubt anybody using our country to wage war on us is our enemy, however that does not mean we adopt a strategy which instead of weeding out these factions, gives them more room than what they already enjoy thanks to the prevalent conditions.

The point is that yes it may be in our interest to pursue and eliminate some groups but on the other it may not be in our interest to pursue and eliminate other groups.
Interest or lack can be attributed to how we Pakistanis perceive threats, who we consider a long term enemy, whom we can count on to submit when certain overriding parameters are altered, whom we can see switching sides through coercion or dialogue etc.
Some of the parties that we may be able to coerce and control may be enemy number one in the eye of some other country, but that is something that is always the case. Does not mean that we stir a hornets nest in our own backyard without ample protection just for the heck of it.
We need time and resources to create an environment which suits us instead of playing into a trap which shall result in more harm for us than in the current scenario.

To be oblivious to the fact that only we can best judge how to improve situation in our own country is a huge blunder.
No body cares about Pakistan as much as we can care about it.
Nobody will shed tears if we are destroyed.
We have to do whatever suits Pakistan in the long run.
We have to eliminate terrorists but we have to decide who is a terrorist.
We have to reduce militancy but at our own pace and certainly keeping in mind the sentiments of our countrymen, our history and our limitations.

The biggest thing in favor of terrorists factions is the anti US sentiments which they are using to recruit more and more volunteers.
The fact that they have been able to use this against Pakistan Army only highlights the gravity of situation since that means an unprecedented resentment has been created.
With such daily statements and actions, USA is actually ensuring that the terrorists are getting breathing space and militants are being vindicated in eyes of locals.
All the while we see that many militant/terrorist factions have also safe havens in Afghanistan, which are still intact and are also used to attack Pakistan.
This can only mean two things, either USA is deliberately pursuing indirect destruction/polarization of a normal Pakistan in light of some strategic interests, or it is desperately trying to mask its exodus from Afghanistan by shifting pressure towards Pakistan.
By virtue of their actions they are creating an environment where the common many will resent US-Pak affiliation so much that day by day we shall see more militant sympathy, eventually resulting in a Pakistan which we do not want to see.

We need to wisen up and realize that it is only upto us to save ourselves and we cannot do so by opening countless fronts...this is the single most criminal mistake any strategist worth his salt should never make...to increase your enemies, instead of dividing them and tackling them one by one.
The best of generals and mightiest of global powers have fallen to such arrogance that they are invincible and can take on everybody militarily.
US policy may suit US perfectly but can diverge with what is best for Pakistan in the long run, we need to realize this instead of letting the terrorism debate cloud our judgment, the current situation has now escalated into a very complex problem which needs a revision in our entire regional and foreign policy.
If we step deeper and deeper into the abyss, we have no hope for reaching a state where we can effectively eradicate militancy and remove the root causes which plague this region.
In order to achieve these sane goals, we need much more than a military solution.

 

[Tayyab1796]

so now what will the head of 5th largest standing army in world fed by poor taxpayers will do to prevent outright slaughter of his innocents( labelled 'collateral damage') by drones . Or will he care about his retirement and bunglows in the posh area .

 

[Jango]

a ISI retired general said in a radio newscast that pakistan had asked US to stop inflow of taliban into pak and pakistan will push them into afghanistan and they will crush them...on one side pak and US on the other.....and the US simply refused without giving any reason....Mr Mullen....drone attacks have never killed any high profile targets....at least of the value that a civilian life demands!!!...just wait until the arms given to libya get into the wrong hands then the US will repeat the same situation!!....pakistan is doing its level best in the south...and once it is completely finished then he can blabber about another op.....he should be commending the efforts of the soldiers who have pushed the taliban out of swat,buner,dir,malakand,and all such areas.....ignorant white!!

 

[All-Green]

so now what will the head of 5th largest standing army in world fed by poor taxpayers will do to prevent outright slaughter of his innocents( labelled 'collateral damage') by drones . Or will he care about his retirement and bunglows in the posh area .

My brother,

It is a win win situation for the enemies of Pakistan, if we take extremes.
Whether to act blindly or to not act at all is no more possible for Pakistan.

If we increase the scope of our operation on the terms and insistence of foreign countries alone, we run the risk of burning down our own house.
Our Army/ISI is already being bombarded with accusations of treachery with the surprising exclusion of our government which is the popular elected government and is supposed to be in sync with the people.
I do not mind the criticism but there is active funding in promoting a scenario where there is breakdown of our intelligentsia and the Army, a scenario where nuclear disarmament of Pakistan is justified by our enemies.
This is not a daydream i am having but a scenario worked out by many think tanks all over the world, better to stay alert as a nation and not play into the hands of forces which want nothing better than our nation to lose control across the board.

On the other hand, If we do not come up with an elaborate strategy to counter the terrorists, we shall also suffer.
Pakistan can take on terrorism but there are a lot of ungoverned parameters which have to drive our policy and not just what one country or another wants us to do.
The border with Afghanistan has not been sealed and guess who is opposed to it?
I shall give you a hint, it is not Pakistan.
The factions in Afghanistan are also not only active but also attack Pakistan, so why is it that only Pakistan is cited as not doing enough?
We need to ensure that the people believe than any military action is taken only by Pakistan Army in Pakistani territory as per our threat perception.
Sovereignty is a concept not alien to anyone, however can Pakistan create such an image?
When USA always mouths off regarding an operation which Pakistan needs to do, it loses the confidence of the people who see it as a troop deployment to support USA and nothing more....this is a huge problem in this partnership and i think cannot be resolved.
Militant factions have been in this area since the Afghan war, Al Qaeda was a new player but instead of isolating it, practically most of the factions were targeted and the result is there for us to see.
Do we follow a failed strategy with more and more cost to ourselves, when we know that unlike many economic and military giants we do not enjoy such unlimited supply of men and machines and more importantly we certainly do not have any cushion in our economy to sustain such a situation?
Can we emulate USA which can very well afford to fail here, knowing our geopolitical and economical realities?

If in trying to control something we run the risk of losing control of our entirety...it seems stupid to rush into such an action at the behest of others alone.
We cannot isolate the terrorists if we blindly move in the Army causing overwhelming difficulties to our own people in such testing economic times.
Only once we are 100% sure that a certain problematic group can only be made to submit militarily, should we exercise military might.

The anti war sentiment of people is not because people are stupid, it is because everyone knows war for what it is.
A war is costly in terms of resources and lives.
It traumatizes a whole land and should be a last resort for any country no matter how mighty it is.
We know the history and culture of this belt and also the fact that there is tremendous anti US sentiment due to the advent of USA in Afghanistan.

If our actions are seen as only to please USA then we can never win over the locals.
If our actions actually serve to unite all the terrorists with Afghan Taliban, militants, ex mujaheddin etc. then that is a strategy which is useless.
If our policy is rubbished by USA then we should take the bitter pill and exit from this strategic partnership since a sane strategy demands we do not jump into the fire, instead of trying to put it out.

 

[Abu Basit]

Salaams

You are both right, though Abu Basit has gestured strongly...but i dig it man.

No doubt anybody using our country to wage war on us is our enemy, however that does not mean we adopt a strategy which instead of weeding out these factions, gives them more room than what they already enjoy thanks to the prevalent conditions.

The point is that yes it may be in our interest to pursue and eliminate some groups but on the other it may not be in our interest to pursue and eliminate other groups.
Interest or lack can be attributed to how we Pakistanis perceive threats, who we consider a long term enemy, whom we can count on to submit when certain overriding parameters are altered, whom we can see switching sides through coercion or dialogue etc.
Some of the parties that we may be able to coerce and control may be enemy number one in the eye of some other country, but that is something that is always the case. Does not mean that we stir a hornets nest in our own backyard without ample protection just for the heck of it.
We need time and resources to create an environment which suits us instead of playing into a trap which shall result in more harm for us than in the current scenario.

To be oblivious to the fact that only we can best judge how to improve situation in our own country is a huge blunder.
No body cares about Pakistan as much as we can care about it.
Nobody will shed tears if we are destroyed.
We have to do whatever suits Pakistan in the long run.
We have to eliminate terrorists but we have to decide who is a terrorist.
We have to reduce militancy but at our own pace and certainly keeping in mind the sentiments of our countrymen, our history and our limitations.

The biggest thing in favor of terrorists factions is the anti US sentiments which they are using to recruit more and more volunteers.
The fact that they have been able to use this against Pakistan Army only highlights the gravity of situation since that means an unprecedented resentment has been created.
With such daily statements and actions, USA is actually ensuring that the terrorists are getting breathing space and militants are being vindicated in eyes of locals.
All the while we see that many militant/terrorist factions have also safe havens in Afghanistan, which are still intact and are also used to attack Pakistan.
This can only mean two things, either USA is deliberately pursuing indirect destruction/polarization of a normal Pakistan in light of some strategic interests, or it is desperately trying to mask its exodus from Afghanistan by shifting pressure towards Pakistan.
By virtue of their actions they are creating an environment where the common many will resent US-Pak affiliation so much that day by day we shall see more militant sympathy, eventually resulting in a Pakistan which we do not want to see.

We need to wise up and realize that it is only upto us to save ourselves and we cannot do so by opening countless fronts...this is the single most criminal mistake any strategist worth should never make...to increase your enemies, instead of dividing them and tackling them one by one.
The best of generals and mightiest of global powers have fallen to such arrogance that they are invincible and can take on everybody militarily.

Wa'alaiqum As'salaam,

Right from the day one, my stance has been very clear that involvement in America's war on terror will only bring destruction for Pakistan. Time has proven my stance to be correct and my friends who used to laugh at me then and got scared that america will send us back to stone age, time has forced them to change their stance.

The biggest weapon in the hands of terrorist groups is "anti Americanism" , our governments & army is quite happy in giving this weapon to terrorist groups.

Just take the weapon away by ending the cooperation in America's war on terror and see the results.

 

[RazorMC]

The border with Afghanistan has not been sealed and guess who is opposed to it?
I shall give you a hint, it is not Pakistan.

Precisely what I've been saying.

I honestly believe that we shouldn't jump into N.Waziristan or anywhere else yet. There is no assurance from the US that it intends to rebuild Afghanistan. Its primary focus is war, not reconstruction and rehabilitation. We don't have the resources to carry out such an operation and then face the backlash and hostility. Once the initial operation is done we can safely assume the US will exit the region, leaving us to deal with the mess alone.

I'm sorry to say this, but we've been stabbed in the back before by the self-proclaimed friend of Pakistan and we'd be stupid to let it happen again.

My only advice would be not to go the American way of indiscriminate bombardment, but rather address the main causes of extremism and focus on development (esp. educational facilities) of impoverished regions in Pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Your comments have been posted, I read them and thought that the comments sound familiar, AM gave it away.

So yes, your comments are there now.

Hmmm ... as of the time of my posts on this thread last night, the comments had not posted. In fact, it had been over three hours at that time since I had submitted them, and the comments by Babar, Bvindh and ba ha ha, Faraz, John and AJ Khan that now appear after my comments, had already been posted. I checked the time stamps on those comments and realized that my comments submitted hours before theirs, had been held back.

I then posted a scathing message addressed to the Tribune on the same comments page calling them an 'American Lackey', and then posted the comments here.

BTW, while they may have finally posted these comments (for whatever reason), they have held back others in the past. I have to wonder whether it was the 'scathing message' or the fact that I raised the issue on this forum that led to the comments getting through.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Come on, you are seriously going to use a source like Media Monitor where they are using Ahmed Quraishi's 'investigation' into media control to 'expose' Express Tribune.

Perhaps you should read the kind of nauseating stuff this Mr Quraishi writes on a regular basis.

I don't have to agree with everything Qureshi writes to see the censorship on ET. We also know that the NYT and other American papers held back on the truth behind Raymond Davis's identity on instructions from the US establishment, and the role they played in promoting US Establishment propaganda against Iraq, and the role they currently play in promoting US establishment propaganda against Pakistan, and specifically the ISI and Army.

As I said, this is not the first time my comments were censored when they were critical of US policy. In the past, any posts with references to Qari Ziaur Rehman sheltering in Afghanistan or US knowledge of Brahamdegh Bugti have been withheld. The story about B Bugti being whisked off to Switzerland was on their main site page for maybe a couple of hours before it was moved to an obscure section and the only way I found it was doing a google search on the title which I remembered.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Come on, you are seriously going to use a source like Media Monitor where they are using Ahmed Quraishi's 'investigation' into media control to 'expose' Express Tribune.

Perhaps you should read the kind of nauseating stuff this Mr Quraishi writes on a regular basis.

BTW, 14 Pakistani police and paramilitaries were martyred in a cross-border attack by militants from Afghanistan - one would think such a story would be part of the headlines - yet it is buried far down on ET's page, unlike the Dawn and The News.

And just read the anti-Pakistan nonsense posted on their comments pages - this paper is sold out and the media monitor report is, unfortunately, completely accurate.

 

[ramu]

BTW, 14 Pakistani police and paramilitaries were martyred in a cross-border attack by militants from Afghanistan - one would think such a story would be part of the headlines - yet it is buried far down on ET's page, unlike the Dawn and The News.

And just read the anti-Pakistan nonsense posted on their comments pages - this paper is sold out and the media monitor report is, unfortunately, completely accurate.

How can the media house take blame for the comments pages ? It can be moderated/administered but the comments are not the remit of the media house.