Inside the OBL Raid

[Donatello]

There were complete plans to render the entire PAF inoperative.

I highly doubt that PAF or anyone else couldn't take down a chopper.

Anyway, like i said, we are worse off today....whether be friends with USA or not.

 

[indushek]

There were complete plans to render the entire PAF inoperative.

Well then it would be considered an outright act of war wouldn't it?? The whole country would have been up in arms against USA from then on!!!

Ironically the Americans would be blowing their own planes

 

[VCheng]

I highly doubt that PAF or anyone else couldn't take down a chopper.

Anyway, like i said, we are worse off today....whether be friends with USA or not.

Oh, sure they could have shot down one or more of the choppers. The problem would have been dealing with the US response directed at the PAF that was ready in case something like that happened.

Whether we are better or worse off, is another discussion altogether.

 

[VCheng]

Well then it would be considered an outright act of war wouldn't it?? The whole country would have been up in arms against USA from then on!!!

Ironically the Americans would be blowing their own planes

Some would argue that even the OBL raid itself qualifies as an act of aggression. A wider response against the PAF would have been regarded as self-defence by the US side, and clear aggression by the Pakistani side. Luckily, it was not needed.

What do you mean "from then on"?

 

[thegreensprite]

Does anyone here even believe that OBL was captured at the raid let alone that he has been alive for the past 5 years? This whole secrecy just smells of BS... and the silence and stupid answers from the PAK military sound like they have been bought out as-well, yes the PAF and Air-force will be embarrassed for a little while but they must have been compensated by the US. If anything the US needed to stage this stupid fake raid just to satisfy its low IQ nation, just so they believe that the "won", and Obama gets re-elected. Amreeeeeecaaaa Yeeeeha.

 

[Hulk]

I highly doubt that PAF or anyone else couldn't take down a chopper.

Anyway, like i said, we are worse off today....whether be friends with USA or not.

You have to think end to end, not just one small piece. I guess the AWACS would be deployed to monitor any movement of PAF and they had SH waiting in case PAF decided to stop them.

You might have ended of losing the latest F-16 you recently got or maybe few radars blown away.

Easy to say.

 

[Tshering22]

Disastrous Consequences? Please elaborate.

As if we are not having them already.

He means that the Chinooks were ready and armed with miniguns and other heavy firepower to let the SEALs shoot their way out of that was needed.

Will USA open another war front for a mere chopper shot down for something that was totally legal.....i.e. intruding the airspace of foreign country?

From the looks of it, YES. Obama clearly has been interested in this mission and deployed the backup Chinooks should the Black Hawk SEALs get into trouble. And this was a raid planned in a city known for its military personnel and military training academy. Do you think US would not have taken adequate measures to back up this raid?

If you are thinking that Pakistan with your current leaders (including Kayani) would have declared war against US in response to a mere gunfight, you're thoroughly mistaken. This is not a emotional tirade we're talking about; it is about worsening your own condition to fight against a superpower just for the sake of a single man most wanted by US. Needless to say that US has no interest in fighting Pakistan. But they were simply wanting to finish Bin Laden off. Which means had your military intervened in this fight, it would have clearly meant that PA supported Al Qaeda. That would have been disastrous for your reputation in the international community. Hence the decision by your military (if at all) to not retaliate was a wise one.

This is not a tiny European hamlet you're talking about. If US could consider an airstrike against OBL's house, you better understand what all plans they had as backups in case things went wrong, including the "shoot their way out of Pakistan" as mentioned here and in many other articles.

Even if US went to war, some of our officers might die. But then isn't that what they vowed in their hypothetical oath? To defend the country? I mean they are give up their lives fighting against India but not anyone else?

Now you understand how day in and day out, Pakistanis are fooled by these generals of yours to keep their power and creating an imaginary demon out of us? The oath that any country's military takes is to defend that country from any aggression off its borders, regardless of the opponent. But here the aggression only seems to be towards India while all other countries from hundreds of miles away walk in, complete their mission and leave.

Nice.

Remember we are being bombed daily...........friends of USA or no friends of USA......wouldn't have made a dime's difference.

They are not interested in bombing you. This is simply happening because AQ and Taliban are thriving in your country. I am not talking about TTP that is a personal enemy of your government but the main Taliban and Qaeda that are the enemies of US and their allies. Do you really think everyone is so jobless and deranged as to waste their time, money and intelligence and coming into others' countries and bomb civilians? If so then you think wrong.

The drones won't be circling your borders if Taliban and AQ were not having the time of their lives safe on your side of the border.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

There were complete plans to render the entire PAF inoperative.

I am not convinced that such a plan would have been carried out - to do so would also result in the destruction/significant damage of several air-bases, and possibly any 'strategic assets' based there along with PAF aircraft.

Such an attack would constitute a significant degradation of Pakistan's defensive capabilities, along with the uncertainty (on the part of Pakistani decision makers) over whether India was also involved and whether such an attack constituted the first phase of a US-India invasion of Pakistan, or at the very least a US-India destruction of Pakistan's military/deterrent capability.

In short, such an attack would more than likely cross Pakistan's 'nuclear threshold'.

I understand that the US media has been propagating the line (on behalf of the US establishment) of 'take out the PAF', but that is more likely to be 'bravado' for domestic public consumption, rather than actual policy. Especially since the SEAL team could have surrendered and quietly been returned back to the US, with no loss of life and major diplomatic/military incident taking place.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Now you understand how day in and day out, Pakistanis are fooled by these generals of yours to keep their power and creating an imaginary demon out of us? The oath that any country's military takes is to defend that country from any aggression off its borders, regardless of the opponent. But here the aggression only seems to be towards India while all other countries from hundreds of miles away walk in, complete their mission and leave.

The day India will be an 'imaginary demon' is the day when it moves the majority of its armored divisions and military away from the Indo-Pak border and LoC.

Till then Pakistan cannot merely take 'India's good word', especially after what India did in Junagadh, East Pakistan and Baluchistan, about 'India's good intentions'. Pakistan must address the capability it faces on the Indo-Pak border and LoC, not the rhetoric out of the mouths of politicians and commentators.

They are not interested in bombing you. This is simply happening because AQ and Taliban are thriving in your country. I am not talking about TTP that is a personal enemy of your government but the main Taliban and Qaeda that are the enemies of US and their allies. Do you really think everyone is so jobless and deranged as to waste their time, money and intelligence and coming into others' countries and bomb civilians? If so then you think wrong.

The Taliban part is nonsense - no insurgency can survive without internal support. The Haqqanis are merely one group involved in the Afghan insurgency. Please read the sticky thread in this section on how 'Eastern Afghanistan is Al Qaeda Central', and especially Ejaz Haider's article outlining the location of the majority of the insurgent engagements in Afghanistan, which are not across from NW, as the US would have us believe.

The drones won't be circling your borders if Taliban and AQ were not having the time of their lives safe on your side of the border.

The issue is not 'drones', the issue is unilateral operation of drones, and as Dennis Blair himself pointed out, there is no strategic effectiveness to the drones, and as I argued, the evidence shows there is limited tactical effectiveness to the drones as well.

 

[VCheng]

I am not convinced that such a plan would have been carried out - to do so would also result in the destruction/significant damage of several air-bases, and possibly any 'strategic assets' based there along with PAF aircraft.

Such an attack would constitute a significant degradation of Pakistan's defensive capabilities, along with the uncertainty (on the part of Pakistani decision makers) over whether India was also involved and whether such an attack constituted the first phase of a US-India invasion of Pakistan, or at the very least a US-India destruction of Pakistan's military/deterrent capability.

In short, such an attack would more than likely cross Pakistan's 'nuclear threshold'.

I understand that the US media has been propagating the line (on behalf of the US establishment) of 'take out the PAF', but that is more likely to be 'bravado' for domestic public consumption, rather than actual policy. Especially since the SEAL team could have surrendered and quietly been returned back to the US, with no loss of life and major diplomatic/military incident taking place.

It was a backup plan only, with destruction of certain assets, and only to be used as a last resort. The nuclear threshold aspect and all the ramifications were also included in the plan. There is no media coverage of all these backup plans.

BTW, the SEALS would not have surrendered.

 

[SQ8]

There were complete plans to render the entire PAF inoperative.

They could do it back in the 70's.. they could do it now.
its a whole different level of warfare..
However, its not like the PAF couldn't have given the attackers a bloody nose..
whether it would still be operative after that is something else.
The scrambling for J-10's.. some other stuff.. is a result of may 2.

 

[VCheng]

They could do it back in the 70's.. they could do it now.
its a whole different level of warfare..
However, its not like the PAF couldn't have given the attackers a bloody nose..
whether it would still be operative after that is something else.
The scrambling for J-10's.. some other stuff.. is a result of may 2.

That is a fair assessment, but I am very glad that the backup plan was never needed.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

BTW, the SEALS would not have surrendered.

That is their problem then.

Surrender or possibly cause nuclear war in region.

 

[Donatello]

Oh, sure they could have shot down one or more of the choppers. The problem would have been dealing with the US response directed at the PAF that was ready in case something like that happened.

Whether we are better or worse off, is another discussion altogether.

You are still misssing the point. No one is doubting the firepower USA has. Would USA want to deal with a complete war? Even if they destroyed some assets, Pakistan US relations wouldn't have been the same. People saying US could have done this that to PAF is useless. Parking two Carrier battle groups was to scare the Khaki pants. Nothing more. That worked out pretty well.

My post doesn't mean to debate whether USA went to war with Pakistan or not. I must say, again, whether we are their friends or not didn't make a difference.

Remember that Bush era ......Bomb to stone age ......rant? We are being bombed anyway.....with no electricity or gas......we are in stone age.

 

[Donatello]

They could do it back in the 70's.. they could do it now.
its a whole different level of warfare..
However, its not like the PAF couldn't have given the attackers a bloody nose..
whether it would still be operative after that is something else.
The scrambling for J-10's.. some other stuff.. is a result of may 2.

Sir remember,

A few years ago Amercian P3 Orion was landed in China. Plane was torn apart and crew members held. Americans wrote two letters of apology to the Chinese people. One for intruding their airspace and the other for the pilot who was lost while forcing the intruding P3 to land.

What i mean to say is that China was old then. USA could have given them a bloody nose. But there was at least a response by the Chinese to the intruding side. They weren't sleeping in their villas. The intercepting Aircraft were, i suppose J-8? (correct me if i am wrong) USA could have used it's carrier battle group and F-18s and B-2 and bla bla then. But they didn't.


I mean to highlight the shameless people sitting in the AHQ and GHQ. Who enjoy Golf, BMW, Land Cruisers at the expense of the tax payers.....while fail to do a job they are trusted with : DEFENDING THE NATION FROM INTRUDERS......whether Indian or Western.