Pakistan Tipped Off US On OBL

[VCheng]

What would the other side say, exactly ?

Exactly what Hillary Clinton has said many times, plus others, very clearly.

 

[Armstrong]

Exactly what Hillary Clinton has said many times, plus others, very clearly.

Oh you mean about the 'Haqqanis' and some similar nonsense to explain their own ineptitude in Afghanistan !

 

[E Pencho]

Now you are making it sound as you only heard about it this morning..... ironically those from the West allegedly arrived in the wee hours using latest gadgets and ran helter skelter, unlike the dozen guys with very basic weaponry leisurely sailing past your defences and in the end kept you busy for three days and nights. When did you exactly find out. !!

My post was deleted because "I was repeating the same thing!" I'm just wondering when it will happen with you as you've not talked anything else other than this in our entire conversation. If you can get me the "OKAY" from the mods, I would love to reply on this.

Since you intentions are merely to troll, hence you are oblivious to the psyche of my detail. Now that is indeed pathetic since highlighting their failures in their respective duties certainly doesn't qualify as a blunt comparison. You need to work on that more. !!

You didn't get it. Let me ask you again. Using your logic (that the internet warriors can't decide which is the worst intelligence failure and bla bla) you should not attack or defend any intelligence agency. Now should you? I'm just using your own logic. But then you came up with something else. My original point was that there shouldn't be any comparison because they are two different things. i.e. 9/11 and OBL fiasco.

Well i be damned.....are we showing our soft side now.....we are touched....contrary to your grave concern, I can assure you baring the common political mess, the situation in earnest has improved considerably, but you will not understand this since it's against your interests and beliefs.!!

I would love to agree if its true but (for example) no cricket for a long time tells us a different story altogether.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

If they it was related to OBL why US raided without informing you, since you were working with them? Why you did not raid yourself?

It was not just that one piece of information that was used to determine the hideout ... the courier's telephone number was a critical part of the puzzle, but just one part.

Look where you stand today US accused you to be either incompetent or complicit, if the corporation was so clear cut why do they feel that way?

That is a good question to ask the US - perhaps the US (or certain individuals in the US Defence and Military Establishment) does have an agenda to try and malign Pakistan and its security and intelligence forces as much as possible in order to weaken it. I see no other reason why the US would have acted in the manner that it did.

Surely the list is not one-sided, is it?

In terms of the significant drop in cooperation with the US post Raymond Davis, the list is in fact one-sided, and correct, though not comprehensive.

 

[E Pencho]

Pakistan is a very large country with a population of 180 million. Merely saying that 'he might be in Pakistan' does not mean much.

Good logic. Now we all should have dinner and sleep tight without having to worry about the new AQ leader present in Pakistan. The reason we should not care about it because Pakistan is a 180 million population country. Good.

It is a failure, but not by any means a 'baap of all failures'. Let me remind you that Pakistan, despite plenty of reports that OBL was dead or was in the Tribal areas of Pakistan/Afghanistan somewhere, continued to find intelligence on him, and that it was Pakistani provided intelligence from KSM and the phone# related to the courier that allowed the US to determine his location. Without the support of the ISI, the US would not have been able to locate OBL.

Please read the Guardian article posted in this thread earlier by me to understand the extensive cooperation between the ISI and CIA and how Pakistan would have in fact found OBL's location eventually, and perhaps quicker than the US did, had the US not lied about the intelligence provided by Pakistan and back-stabbed Pakistan.

Okay. Pakistan helped CIA to find OBL. But was that an act of back stabbing or was that a "MAKE SURE WE KILL OBL" act? Why USA would "lie about intelligence provided by Pakistan" has to have a reason. And I guess we both know what it is, don't we?

I wanted to say more but you're gonna delete it anyways so never mind.

 

[Hulk]

It was not just that one piece of information that was used to determine the hideout ... the courier's telephone number was a critical part of the puzzle, but just one part.

That is a good question to ask the US - perhaps the US (or certain individuals in the US Defence and Military Establishment) does have an agenda to try and malign Pakistan and its security and intelligence forces as much as possible in order to weaken it. I see no other reason why the US would have acted in the manner that it did.

In terms of the significant drop in cooperation with the US post Raymond Davis, the list is in fact one-sided, and correct, though not comprehensive.

I know there are two different stories but I buy the US version.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Good logic. Now we all should have dinner and sleep tight without having to worry about the new AQ leader present in Pakistan. The reason we should not care about it because Pakistan is a 180 million population country. Good.

No need to resort to trolling through inane comments - the reference to the huge population and large geographic size of the country, especially a developing country with significant corruption and institutional challenges, is meant to point out the difficulties in finding one single individual bent on avoiding the authorities and hiding with extreme care.

I am not sure why you find it so difficult to understand the above ...

Okay. Pakistan helped CIA to find OBL. But was that an act of back stabbing or was that a "MAKE SURE WE KILL OBL" act? Why USA would "lie about intelligence provided by Pakistan" has to have a reason. And I guess we both know what it is, don't we?

The US herself has admitted that Pakistan has neutralized more AQ members than any other country in the world, and Pakistan helped in the capture of senior AQ leaders such as KSM and Libbi, so the argument of 'did not trust the ISI' by the US is an invalid one - the only feasible explanation for the US to backstab Pakistan is that the intention was to malign Pakistan and pressure it.

 

[Edevelop]

The OBL raid was a deal with Pakistan. There is too much evidence on this...

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I know there are two different stories but I buy the US version.

Which US version, since we have Western reports quoting US officials as both denying and accepting that Pakistan provided them key intelligence that led to OBL's hideout?

Your appear to be 'buying into the version' the simply suits your anti-Pakistan bias.

 

[Hulk]

Which US version, since we have Western reports quoting US officials as both denying and accepting that Pakistan provided them key intelligence that led to OBL's hideout?

Your appear to be 'buying into the version' the simply suits your anti-Pakistan bias.

They raid Pakistan without informing you is an indicator you were not in the loop and they did not trusted you. (Details known to them)

I ignore some of statements which are made for diplomacy and they timing will tell you why they were made.

 

[VCheng]

Which US version, since we have Western reports quoting US officials as both denying and accepting that Pakistan provided them key intelligence that led to OBL's hideout?.........

Like mentioned before:

It is clear that ISI provided much needed co-operation and intelligence during the whole war.

Could it be that all that mutual co-operation went down the drain, figuratively speaking of course, due to "other" activities that ran counter to this sharing?

ISI did provide the co-operation, but both sides diverged from mutual co-operation due to subsequent events. Without criticizing anyone for bias, the US side does clearly seem to be more robust in its narrative, and its consistent presentation and effective publicity.

 

[E Pencho]

That is a good question to ask the US - perhaps the US (or certain individuals in the US Defence and Military Establishment) does have an agenda to try and malign Pakistan and its security and intelligence forces as much as possible in order to weaken it. I see no other reason why the US would have acted in the manner that it did.

If Amreeka wanna weaken someone, it would be China or Russia. But definitely not Pakistan. You're not a threat to them.

They acted the way they did because they must have found out (there was a report about this) that some officials were tipping off the terrorists. They must have lost faith in you. They must thinking that Pakistan wanna save the people who wanna kill Americans. That's just my guess. But I'm sure they are not interested to "WEAKEN" Pakistan. "

 

[Edevelop]

Its like saying the Drone attacks are not known by Pakistani government and military that can easily shoot it down.
Pakistan tipped off at U.S on OBL is exactly the same thing. Its just diplomacy to cool local citizens down.

 

[Hulk]

Its like saying the Drone attacks are not known by Pakistani government and military that can easily shoot it down.
Pakistan tipped off at U.S on OBL is exactly the same thing. Its just diplomacy to cool local citizens down.

Exactly, so when you are doing it for public why blame US? It clearly seems like you approved drone strikes, you not only provided them will base to launch droke strikes, you also provided them intelligence and now you want to whine about it as well.

You cannot have everything.

 

[E Pencho]

No need to resort to trolling through inane comments - the reference to the huge population and large geographic size of the country, especially a developing country with significant corruption and institutional challenges, is meant to point out the difficulties in finding one single individual bent on avoiding the authorities and hiding with extreme care.

I am not sure why you find it so difficult to understand the above ...

Lol that was on a lighter note. What I meant was that irrespective of the population, some operations have to be completed. Anyways, I'm already on the same page with you on ISI helped CIA to locate OBL.

The US herself has admitted that Pakistan has neutralized more AQ members than any other country in the world, and Pakistan helped in the capture of senior AQ leaders such as KSM and Libbi, so the argument of 'did not trust the ISI' by the US is an invalid one - the only feasible explanation for the US to backstab Pakistan is that the intention was to malign Pakistan and pressure it.

Pressure to do what Agnostic Muslim? What is it that you couldn't have done for Amreeka? It was purely a case of trust. That's the only possible explanation.