IAF plans to hit targets in 24 hours

[blain2]

The Pressler ammendment was a direct result of the covert nuclear program. I don't see that as blackmail.

The problem with Pressler amendment was that it was selective. For as long as Pakistan served the US interests, the White house signed a waiver overriding it. The moment the Russians left, USG gave Pakistan the index finger and allowed the amendment to get on with the business of choking Pakistan. Our nuclear program had been going on since the 70s, I wonder why the Pressler/Glen amendments were not enacted earlier if this was such a principled decision on the part of the USG?

 

[blain2]

Are we not already giving Pakistan Billions of Dollars in Military aid? What about the Harpoons ( we all know Taliban has a Navy right?), Tow missiles ( to help you knock out Taliban tanks), and of course AMRAAMs ( for those BVR engagements with the Taliban Air Force)?? That's not even taking into account the MLUs on Pakistan's ONLY functioning 5th generation fighter - those famous F-16s. Come now, we know what the end use is going to be...against India. That's why the safeguards on the shiny new planes you are going to get.

All sarcasm aside, the drone strikes are carried out by the Pakistan Army's approval. Of course, the right noises need to be made - again for domestic consumption.

Just wish you guys could at the very least guard the truck terminals better, or is the Army that overcome? Don't mean that as an affront, but surely they can do better against militants.

So Pakistan does not have a right to defend herself against the Indian military buildup? Your points above are akin to asking the Israelis what they plan on doing with billions in military aid comprising of F-15s/F-16Is, AH-64s, JDAMs while taking on a ragtag Hamas militia.

If you can answer the above then you can also figure out what Pakistan intends on doing with the systems that you have mentioned above.

Also lets not get carried away with "Billions". USG has given Pakistan $1.8 billion in military aid over the last 7 years. The rest is money owed to Pakistan. In return, Pakistan has incurred losses of over $24 billion to her economy as a result of the ongoing issues in Afghanistan since the US invasion of the country.

While I can appreciate your sarcasm, I would also like to point out that its not the job of the Pakistan Army to guard transportation of supplies and while I also understand your chagrin over the loss of some Humvees getting shot up, let me remind you that there are Pakistani soldiers and officers dying while taking on the same folks. So a little bit of appreciation and patience would go a long way here (but then if you are an American of Indian origin, that would be a bit too much to expect).

 

[TexasJohn]

The problem with Pressler amendment was that it was selective. For as long as Pakistan served the US interests, the White house signed a waiver overriding it. The moment the Russians left, USG gave Pakistan the index finger and allowed the amendment to get on with the business of choking Pakistan. Our nuclear program had been going on since the 70s, I wonder why the Pressler/Glen amendments were not enacted earlier if this was such a principled decision on the part of the USG?

Yes and no. Here is the actual text - interesting reading. Glenn's testimony is interesting.

THE PRESSLER AMENDMENT AND PAKISTAN'S NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM (Senate - July 31, 1992)

Reagan and Bush Sr. willfully ignored it with the strange hope of using it as a non-proliferation tool. It did not work. AQ Khan's work also slowly began to come to the surface and was noticed.

The new president Clinton was simply overwhelmed by the evidence and caved in. I don't think he had a choice. North Korea fired up their program, even as Brazil was giving theirs up. Concerns existed with Iraq's yet to be dismantled nuke program. Thankfully the UN Inspectors took care of that later( regardless of what Dubya said later).

The F-16s that were to be delivered were going to be nuclear configured. That's REALLY what stopped the planes from being sent to Pakistan.

The current F-16s will not be nuclear capable as you know.

Events spanning 1980 -1992 ( read section Myth to Reality) proved Pakistan was going to go nuclear. This included Zia running his mouth in 1988 to the Carnegie Endowment delegation in interview that Pakistan has attained a nuclear capability `that is good enough to create an impression of deterrence.'

US selectiveness? yes, but look at the circumstances. At the same time US did not really care what India's opinion was even though they had been screaming itself hoarse.

Btw Blain, I am appreciative of Pakistan's contribution to the Afghan war today.

 

[Jihad]

Very well said blain2!
Perhaps slightly offtopic..but..is there any chance Pakistan might use tactical nukes if the war escalates?

 

[SherdiL!]

i seriously doubt this report because who will say your are going to be attacked in 24hrs ? Indian has always been exicted to see Pakistan lose..because of how many wars we have fought against and the India losses are frighting and alarming wheter we divide India today or 2yrs later same thing.Pakistan is being munipulated in all sorts of things there are 3 easy stregedies to predict a war is coming upon us and we should be prepared

1 - Finanical crises in Pakistan

2 - Make them kill thier own people

3 - fund terrorist in thier country

4 - Make thier people against thier own country to speak.

i've to say India they have succeded in thier first 3 Objectives.Pakistan has always tryies to improve releationships with India yet India keep stabbing Pakistan in the back i think we should finish them once in for all.If the attack happened in by any chance there is bigger chance that we will break thier neck and send them stone age.


PAKISTAN ZINDABAD

 

[TexasJohn]

So Pakistan does not have a right to defend herself against the Indian military buildup? Your points above are akin to asking the Israelis what they plan on doing with billions in military aid comprising of F-15s/F-16Is, AH-64s, JDAMs while taking on a ragtag Hamas militia.

If you can answer the above then you can also figure out what Pakistan intends on doing with the systems that you have mentioned above.

Also lets not get carried away with "Billions". USG has given Pakistan $1.8 billion in military aid over the last 7 years. The rest is money owed to Pakistan. In return, Pakistan has incurred losses of over $24 billion to her economy as a result of the ongoing issues in Afghanistan since the US invasion of the country.

While I can appreciate your sarcasm, I would also like to point out that its not the job of the Pakistan Army to guard transportation of supplies and while also understand your chagrin over the loss of some Humvees getting shot up, let me remind you that there are Pakistani soldiers and officers dying while taking on the same folks. So a little bit of appreciation and patience would go a long way here (but then if you are an American of Indian origin, that would be a bit too much to expect).

The loss of any uniformed combat troops is regretted by me. Both my nephews did their tours in Afghanistan, and I see my neighbor's son on crutches ( known him since he was 6 years old). But such is war.The reality is not pretty - and I wish some of the gung-ho kids here realize that.

Yes Pakistan is doing a lot, however I never could figure out whay they don't use their battle hardened brigades, rather than the Frontier Corps. They are no match for Taleban militants anyway.

Now about them Humvees, I thought the deal was the GOP ( or Army, or whatever resources they bring to bear) were responsible for the safety of the convoys?

I hope I didn't hijack the thread!!

 

[rubyjackass]

India is really planning to make some strikes. No doubt about that, othervise the mullen wouldnt be asking Pakistan not retaliate.

Let the come.

That Baig was not present during the metting with Mullen. He is just speculating.
In more practical terms ... bluffing.

In India there is no air of build-up at all. There are only diplomatic stunts to appeal to public.

Same with GoP. They know India willl not strike. They want the build-up to gather support. I saw Zardari reading names of people who expressed support. That aircraft flying and all is to appeal to public not confidence building. This kind of media reports further support them.

One thing is for sure. India is not going to strike. There are no security measures taken only those tell tale radar and aircraft deployment. Pak knows it. That is why they did not move army before hand.

We the public are ultimately the targets of this drama.

 

[blain2]

Yes and no. Here is the actual text - interesting reading. Glenn's testimony is interesting.

THE PRESSLER AMENDMENT AND PAKISTAN'S NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM (Senate - July 31, 1992)

Reagan and Bush Sr. willfully ignored it with the strange hope of using it as a non-proliferation tool. It did not work. AQ Khan's work also slowly began to come to the surface and was noticed.

The new president Clinton was simply overwhelmed by the evidence and caved in. I don't think he had a choice. North Korea fired up their program, even as Brazil was giving theirs up. Concerns existed with Iraq's yet to be dismantled nuke program. Thankfully the UN Inspectors took care of that later( regardless of what Dubya said later).

The F-16s that were to be delivered were going to be nuclear configured. That's REALLY what stopped the planes from being sent to Pakistan.

The current F-16s will not be nuclear capable as you know.

Events spanning 1980 -1992 ( read section Myth to Reality) proved Pakistan was going to go nuclear. This included Zia running his mouth in 1988 to the Carnegie Endowment delegation in interview that Pakistan has attained a nuclear capability `that is good enough to create an impression of deterrence.'

US selectiveness? yes, but look at the circumstances. At the same time US did not really care what India's opinion was even though they had been screaming itself hoarse.

Btw Blain, I am appreciative of Pakistan's contribution to the Afghan war today.

TJ,

I wish things were by the book as you are explaining them to be. The Pressler amendment hit Pakistan during the Presidency of George Herbert Bush. He did not do the needful for Pakistan because it was no longer the needful for the United States. By the time Clinton came about, he actually did Pakistan a slight favor in letting through the Brown amendment which allowed some of the held-up equipment to be released as part of a one-off waiver. So as Pakistanis we are appreciative of the help that our friends in the US have provided us. However getting aid does not mean that everything that we have is at the disposal of the US. As in the words of Ayub Khan, Americans are our "Friends not masters".

Also the point about nuclear and non-nuclear is very misleading. Its a matter of weight and configuration of the station on the aircraft. The release mechanism is the same as it would be for a 2 lbs Laser Guided Bomb. Some internal wiring does need to happen to arm the nuclear weapons however Pakistani F-16s always came un-wired for this role, but there is enough technical competence in the PAF to do what me must. I am sure some additional safeguards are now in place than back in 83-84, however by the time the ban came around, Pakistan already had started off on a Ballistic Missile capability which ensured that over-reliance of aircraft as a means of delivery was lessened. So cutting of F-16s actually increased Pakistani reliance on the Ballistic Missiles and the nuclear arsenal instead of lessening it which in turn ran totally contrary to US goals of nuclear non-proliferation.

A country which has a capable conventional deterrence would go through multiple rungs before it considers using its nuclear capability. If you weaken Pakistan conventionally, then what option other than the nuclear one remains with us?

 

[Bilsher007]

Bilsher:

I'll be happy to answer your posts when you stop screaming and post rationally. OK! So you hate the WEST. So be it. What are you doing in UK among us lowly infidels?? curious...

I might have been screaming to some extent but definitely spoke with rationality. I hate the foreign imperialistic policies of americans where they want to control the world and impose their new world order but they will fail. I hate the policies not necessarily all western people.

Answer my questions from previous post;

DO YOU THINK YOU ARE ALLAH'S CHOOSEN PEOPLE TO ACT AS POLICEMAN IN THE WORLD ? IS IT YOUR BIRTH RIGHT ONLY TO SAFEGUARD YOUR NATION WITH NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY ? ..OTHERS DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT ?

WHICH NATION HAS BEHAVED IRRESPONSIBLY WITH REGARDS TO NUCLEAR BOMBS IN HISTORY ?..YES YOUR CRAZY GOVERNMENT OF THE TIME, YOU KILLED INNOCENT THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN JAPAN. DO YOU THINK YOU WILL BE LEFT ALONE BY ALMIGHTY ALLAH WITHOUT PAYING THE PRICE ?..

Answer them rationally yanky...

 

[blain2]

The loss of any uniformed combat troops is regretted by me. Both my nephews did their tours in Afghanistan, and I see my neighbor's son on crutches ( known him since he was 6 years old). But such is war.The reality is not pretty - and I wish some of the gung-ho kids here realize that.

Yes Pakistan is doing a lot, however I never could figure out whay they don't use their battle hardened brigades, rather than the Frontier Corps. They are no match for Taleban militants anyway.

Now about them Humvees, I thought the deal was the GOP ( or Army, or whatever resources they bring to bear) were responsible for the safety of the convoys?

I hope I didn't hijack the thread!!

TJ,

I appreciate the fact that you have had loved ones serve in Afghanistan. I am sure you would be very ticked off if someone questioned their sacrifices and I feel the same way about our officers and troops.

To you point about why not use battle hardened brigades, we are using our regular Army infantry brigades in fighting the Taliban. The FC is a para military force which works closely with the Army as the FC troops are recruited from the area they know the culture, traditions and terrain of the area. We cannot be effective using only regular troops there as most come from lower deltas (Punjab etc.) and are not aware of the terrain and culture which is of utmost importance when fighting an insurgency. The FC is commanded by regular Army officers but the men are all locally recruited. Sometimes due to local allegiances, they do not fight, however that is why the Army is there to provide the spearhead and make sure that the pressure remains on the militants.

Safety of the convoys would be given to the FC/Police. Army's job is not to guard stock on the trucks.

 

[SherdiL!]

i'm bored it beens pass 24hrs no hits

 

[TexasJohn]

Bilsher -I will answer your question after you:

1. Stop foaming at the mouth.
2. Answer MY original question " What are you doing in Wembly, UK since you hate the west sooo much"?

Any other response to your rant is pointless..

 

[blain2]

i'm bored is beens pass 24hrs no hits

Its good that nothing of this sort has transpired. Don't take this so lightly guys. The well being of our nation is on the line. The last thing we want to do is to let this thread degenerate into a thumb in your face contest. Please avoid that.

 

[TexasJohn]

TJ,

I appreciate the fact that you have had loved ones serve in Afghanistan. I am sure you would be very ticked off if someone questioned their sacrifices and I feel the same way about our officers and troops.

To you point about why not use battle hardened brigades, we are using our regular Army infantry brigades in fighting the Taliban. The FC is a para military force which works closely with the Army as the FC troops are recruited from the area they know the culture, traditions and terrain of the area. We cannot be effective using only regular troops there as most come from lower deltas (Punjab etc.) and are not aware of the terrain and culture which is of utmost importance when fighting an insurgency. The FC is commanded by regular Army officers but the men are all locally recruited. Sometimes due to local allegiances, they do not fight, however that is why the Army is there to provide the spearhead and make sure that the pressure remains on the militants.

Safety of the convoys would be given to the FC/Police. Army's job is not to guard stock on the trucks.

Thanks - I think I have a better understanding of why the FC are being used. I was always puzzled by this. What percentage of the PA is from Punjab? 40%? I remember my dad (WWII veteran ) used to talk highly of the Baluch regiments.

 

[Moscow]

hello i am waiting for the last 24 hours in front of my computer to see when the IAF is going to strike but i guess they will strike within the next 24 hours...

jokes apart the fact is they didnt and will not strike as of now.