What's new

ISAF (NATO) Killed 3 Pakistani Soldiers @ Pak-Afghan Check Post (Again)

@saad445566 What in the world are you going on about?
______________________
This is for the random people here who keep saying that Pakistan is the fall-back position for the Taliban to regroup and rearm. It's a news clip during the period of when Pakistan launched the South Waziristan operation.

The U.S. has tried to sneak into Pakistan several times before, and were usually turned back after warning shots from the FC. This time however, the U.S. decided to shoot at the out-post instead. Their GPS systems can navigate better than accuracy of 1 meter, so there is no question that they knew about their position. No matter who they were cahsing, their persue ended at the border. If they failed to catch them in Afghanistan, did they think they had a better chance to catch them in Pakistan?
I've been following the proceedings for some time now. They keep trying to connect North Warizistan to all global threats. The latest one being the alleged, "Mumbai style attacks in Eurpoe" warnings by the CIA. Britian, Germany, Spain etc did not buy this story and have not raised their national warning levels, saying their own intelligence did not indicate anything is imminent.
The U.S. starts making manned attacks inside Pakistan and in return Pakistan reduces intelligence sharing with them along with blocking the supply routes. What happens next, is most likely the post-cold war drama: The U.S. includes Pakistan in the so-called "axis of evil", leaves Afghanistan and slaps the sanctions back on Paksitan. In this way they wouldn't have to honour their "long-term" relationships' promises (again). The rest of the world is fully aware of the what the U.S. foreign policies are, but that is also the reason why they remain silent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
@saad445566 What in the world are you going on about?
______________________
This is for the random people here who keep saying that Pakistan is the fall-back position for the Taliban to regroup and rearm. It's a news clip during the period of when Pakistan launched the South Waziristan operation.
YouTube - Taliban fighters display 'US weapons' - 10 Nov 09

The U.S. has tried to sneak into Pakistan several times before, and were usually turned back after warning shots from the FC. This time however, the U.S. decided to shoot at the out-post instead. Their GPS systems can navigate better than accuracy of 1 meter, so there is no question that they knew about their position. No matter who they were cahsing, their persue ended at the border. If they failed to catch them in Afghanistan, did they think they had a better chance to catch them in Pakistan?
I've been following the proceedings for some time now. They keep trying to connect North Warizistan to all global threats. The latest one being the alleged, "Mumbai style attacks in Eurpoe" warnings by the CIA. Britian, Germany, Spain etc did not buy this story and have not raised their national warning levels, saying their own intelligence did not indicate anything is imminent.
The U.S. starts making manned attacks inside Pakistan and in return Pakistan reduces intelligence sharing with them along with blocking the supply routes. What happens next, is most likely the post-cold war drama: The U.S. includes Pakistan in the so-called "axis of evil", leaves Afghanistan and slaps the sanctions back on Paksitan. In this way they wouldn't have to honour their "long-term" relationships' promises (again). The rest of the world is fully aware of the what the U.S. foreign policies are, but that is also the reason why they remain silent.


Okay, so here are my words, take it for granted. As long as the 'manned mission' enters Pakistan with effective MEDIA COVERAGE, change the plates, hunt for India. You are missing one point here, after the U.S. gets too much exposure, how will India react...

Regardless of the U.S. interventions in the past, sometime sooner you will see a different media output. That is what I was talking about from over a year now!!

Key note: Indian hunt.
 
.
War ? They have nuclear weapons. No one is going to go to war here so don't get excited. This is how things work on the WOT. Only drone strikes are allowed in pakistan atm cross border incursions of other kind are not. Especially when the intruding force attacks members of that countries security. Remember Pakistan like every other country also looks out for their own interests.

I dont think any one is scared of Pakistans Nuclear weapons, but if Pakistan is going to provide Sanctuary to terrorist and the Taliban, then we need to get out or take on Pakistan. Personally I vote to get out. Consider Pakistan a nation that support the Taliban and Terrorism and deal with reality. I am agreeing with you fellows, you are 100 percent right.
 
.
we either need to get out of Afghanstan or see if Pakistan wants war with the USA and NATO too.

Let them know after you have won against ragtag bandits elsewhere.
USA would neither have the support or the resources. Even otherwise, not sure how you would fight 170 mil Pakistanis and then some.
 
.
War ? They have nuclear weapons. No one is going to go to war here so don't get excited.

This is what called illusion.Nuclear weapon is for extreme deterrent. When Pakistan will think that its better to bomb herself and destroy everything, than to get defeat, they will use that.In today's world "war" has changed a lot.Its fast and short and psychological. They loose it every time, they obey the unjustified(forceful) demands of US.They loose it every time when drones attacks deep inside their country etc.
 
.
They loose it every time when drones attacks deep inside their country etc.
They have been contained within the tribal regions, and have not been expanding as far as I know.
 
. .
I dont think any one is scared of Pakistans Nuclear weapons, but if Pakistan is going to provide Sanctuary to terrorist and the Taliban, then we need to get out or take on Pakistan. Personally I vote to get out. Consider Pakistan a nation that support the Taliban and Terrorism and deal with reality. I am agreeing with you fellows, you are 100 percent right.

Currently the U.S. is still on a stabilizing mission. Obviously you can't defeat terrorism as that is part of society like crime. So right now people are hoping the surge is going to pay off. If it doesn't and the Taliban still hold a sizable force in Afghanistan and have substantial influence then the U.S. will have no choice but to pull out. Leaving the ANA and the Afghan government with limited U.S. support to try to deal with the Taliban.
 
.
Let them know after you have won against ragtag bandits elsewhere.
USA would neither have the support or the resources. Even otherwise, not sure how you would fight 170 mil Pakistanis and then some.

Well I dont think any one wants a war with Pakistan, but considering there are 35 countries that spend more on their military then Pakistan, you might want to think about Pakistan getting in a war.
 
.
Well I dont think any one wants a war with Pakistan, but considering there are 35 countries that spend more on their military then Pakistan, you might want to think about Pakistan getting in a war.

Think, yes......scared no! hell no.....................
I am sure vietcong spent less that what the poorest 35 countries in the world spent yet they forced a retreat.
 
. .
Signaling Tensions, Pakistan Shuts NATO Route

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — American officials pressed their Pakistani counterparts on Thursday to reopen a vital supply route for American and NATO forces in Afghanistan, as relations deteriorated after the fourth strike by coalition helicopters in a week killed three members of Pakistan’s border force.

Pakistan angrily closed the crossing to protest the strikes on its side of the border, leaving American officials to use meetings and phone calls to try to soothe relations and get the route reopened. Both sides indicated that they might be able to resolve the dispute with a joint investigation.

But the border closing, and the exceptional series of strikes by piloted aircraft, as opposed to drones, signaled a general increase in tensions between Pakistan and the United States, already uncomfortable allies that are pursuing competing interests in the Afghan war.

The C.I.A. carried out a record number of drone attacks inside Pakistan last month, and new reports surfaced this week of unlawful executions by the Pakistani Army in areas where it has opened operations against Taliban forces threatening the government.

The Pakistani offensives have not extended to North Waziristan, the prime stronghold of the insurgents who infiltrate Afghanistan, a growing source of frustration for American officials who face a deadline this year to show progress in the Afghan war.

“We are clearly in the phase of our relationship where we’re trying to tell them we’re being diddled,” said Teresita C. Schaffer, director of the South Asia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

But, she added: “We have been trying for a couple of years to decrease our logistical dependence on Pakistan, and have only managed to get it to 80 percent from 90 percent. So, no, we clearly don’t have anyplace else to go.”

The border closing was a clear demonstration of the leverage Pakistan holds over the American war effort. It coincided with a previously scheduled visit by the C.I.A. director, Leon E. Panetta, who met Thursday with the Pakistani military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, part of a stream of American officials who have come to alternately cajole and coerce Pakistani cooperation.

On Friday, unidentified assailants in Pakistan attacked and set fire to tankers carrying supplies for NATO troops in Afghanistan, officials told Reuters, apparently in retaliation for the incursions into Pakistani territory. No one was wounded, an official said.

After the border closing on Thursday, Senator John Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, spoke with Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, trying to calm the tensions. That conversation followed a telephone call several days ago between Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and General Kayani, about the previous strikes.

The border closing signaled the limits of Pakistan’s tolerance for intrusions on its sovereignty and for the pressure it was willing to absorb from American officials on any range of issues, despite receiving nearly $2 billion a year in military aid from Washington.

The Pakistani government indicated Thursday that the cross-border strikes were more than it could bear without protest. “We will have to see whether we are allies or enemies,” said the Pakistani interior minister, Rehman Malik.

At the same time, Pakistani officials tried to contain the damage from a video that came to the attention of American officials in recent days showing the execution of six young men, bound and blindfolded, by Pakistani Army soldiers.

Responding to questions from American officials, Pakistani officials acknowledged Thursday that the video had not been faked, as they had first contended, an American official said, and that they had identified the soldiers and would take appropriate measures.

It is in both the American and the Pakistani interests to keep the relationship going, the official said. The Pakistanis, facing economic collapse after the devastating floods of the summer, need American military aid — some $10 billion since 2001 — which could be cut off from units committing atrocities, the official said.

American commanders are eager to continue C.I.A. drone attacks in Pakistan’s tribal areas that have focused on militants from the Taliban and Al Qaeda who cross the border to attack NATO and American troops. The Pakistani government has agreed to the drone campaign, but could always suspend its permission or shrink the area in which the strikes are allowed.

The country is also the prime supply route for the Afghan war, a fact Pakistani and American officials are both keenly aware of. The vast majority of nonlethal supplies — water, food, vehicles — for the coalition forces in landlocked Afghanistan must travel the length of Pakistan, from the southern port of Karachi to the Afghan border.

Along that route, trucks and fuel tankers have at times been hijacked and attacked by Taliban forces. Pakistani authorities have closed the border crossings only occasionally, however, usually citing security concerns.

But they have rarely appeared to hold up supplies in retaliation for NATO or American actions. In 2008, the Pakistanis closed the border crossing for several days after American aircraft bombed a Pakistani paramilitary post in Mohmand, another tribal area. Eleven Pakistanis were killed in the attack.

American commanders in Afghanistan, long fearful that Pakistan could choke off the supply route more permanently, have been seeking alternate paths through Central Asia, but with little success.

On Thursday, Pakistani officials gave them a glimpse of how much harder they could make the Afghan war. Trucks and oil tankers bound for coalition forces sat idle at the border post of Torkham, just north of Peshawar, with no word on when the post, one of two major land crossings to Afghanistan, would reopen, a Pakistani security official said.

But American officials noted that Pakistan had shut only one of several supply routes to Afghanistan, a sign that the Pakistani government wanted to minimize the episode’s fallout.

“We have many different capabilities, routes, ways to resupply, so there’s no immediate impact,” Col. Dave Lapan told reporters in Washington. The blocked route, the Khyber Pass, connects the frontier city of Peshawar to Jalalabad, in eastern Afghanistan.

Colonel Lapan said American military officials were also looking into whether all procedures had been followed properly in the cross-border incidents. The Pakistani government took no similar action and made no such public protest after the earlier coalition airstrikes, even though they killed an estimated 55 people inside Pakistan.

Those strikes, on Sept. 24 and Sept. 25, took place on the border separating Khost Province in Afghanistan from North Waziristan. Coalition helicopters fired into Pakistan three times, with one helicopter briefly breaching Pakistani airspace, according to Maj. Sunset Belinsky, a NATO spokeswoman.

In the airstrike on Thursday, a NATO helicopter attacked a border post at Mandati Kandaw, a town close to Parachinar, in the Kurram tribal area, the Pakistani security official said. Three soldiers of Pakistan’s Frontier Corps were killed and three were wounded, he said.

Another border post, at Kharlachi, also in Kurram, was struck a few hours later, the official added. The two posts are about 15 miles apart and border Paktia Province, in Afghanistan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/01/world/asia/01peshawar.html?ref=asia
 
.
I noticed after this airstrike and strong response from PK side that video of execution has just popped up and is being repeatedly shown by CNN.
 
.
Why only blocked them? Burn the trucks and then apologize for the "mistake".
There you go!
27 Nato fuel tankers torched in rocket attack
SHIKARPUR: More than 27 oil tankers, meant for Nato’s fuel supply and another three vehicles, have been torched after some unidentified assailants fired rockets, which resulted in eruption of raging blazes, meanwhile two men suffered injuries in the incident, Geo News reported.

Confirming the rocket attacks, Nato sources told media, the ambush took place near Shikarpur Super Highway where Nato and ISAF’s over 30 fuel tankers were parked at a fuel station.

Around 2am, unknown miscreants unleashed rocket assault, which raged fierce fire in consequence, while the blazes engulfed 27 tankers, laden with highly inflammable fuel, coupled with abutting areas, witnesses said.

Also, two unknown civilians were burnt in the onslaught and three vehicles, parked nearby, caught fire to be burned completely in the long run.

“Shikarpur police have placed stern cordon around district”, DCO Saeed Ahmed said, informing that nearly 15-20 men were behind the attack.

He said supply tankers, en-route to Afghanistan, were staying at a gas station for fuel filling purpose as the ambush occurred.

“Fire tenders have arrived on the site and rescue efforts have got underway”, he told media, fearing that given the strength of fire, rescue members have been facing hardships to bring raging blazes under control.

Shikarpur district has been cordoned off after attack, DCO added.
27 Nato fuel tankers torched in rocket attack - GEO.tv
:yahoo::yahoo:
 
.
This responce was needed !!!!
ALLAH karey thori deer tak apney faisle pay qaim rahin phir americans ko dekho kia hota hai...
pair pakar lay ga... InshaALLAH
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom