Pak's deal 'No drone attack on camps training terrorists against India':NYT

[Solomon2]

In secret negotiations, the terms of the bargain were set. Pakistani intelligence officials insisted that they be allowed to approve each drone strike, giving them tight control over the list of targets. And they insisted that drones fly only in narrow parts of the tribal areas — ensuring that they would not venture where Islamabad did not want the Americans going: Pakistan’s nuclear facilities, and the mountain camps where Kashmiri militants were trained for attacks in India.

We finally have the answer as to why this Administration won't discuss UNSCR 1373: because while it authorizes third party nations or alliances to attack terror bases in areas demonstrably not under Pakistani sovereign control it doesn't say you're allowed to pick and choose - the U.S. might have felt obligated to attack the Kashmiri bases as well.

Strictly speaking, the U.S. didn't and does not need Pakistani permission for the drone strikes - but diplomatically it's a lot less stressful this way; we just had to agree to let the Pakistanis train a new generation of terrorists, this one (presumably) exclusively aimed at India.

Yet another example of Pakistanis twisting Americans into making shocking moral compromises. How many Pakistanis are willing to boast that they are ashamed of this behavior by their government?

 

[dbc]

No we don't (though the story headline seems skewed to suggest that was a deliberate agreement between the US and Pakistan) but it will make things harder for your leaders when the next flare up between India & Pakistan happens & they come rushing down suggesting that they will apply pressure on Pakistan and ask India to trust them. Except for a few, there are not many who are naive enough to believe that the U.S. (or indeed any other state) will concern themselves beyond a point about a third country's(in this case, India's) interest. Just that this serves as a timely reminder when U.S. is wont to suggest that India is not playing ball with it's concerns on various matters, including on Iran.

You haven't answered my question. Drones continue to be based in Pakistan, why will the US jeopardize its arrangement with Pakistan by targeting Pakistani assets hostile to India?

 

[SamantK]

Sure, the US has interfered and will continue to do so as long as such interference serves US interests.

Understandable, but as I said US gives statements that it wants to do this and do that with India..

I'm sure this generates a lot of favor in my country for your requests and demands

 

[jayron]

Sure, the US has interfered and will continue to do so as long as such interference serves US interests.

Thanks for making that clear. Now India or any other nation does not have to listen to US.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

We finally have the answer as to why this Administration won't discuss UNSCR 1373: because while it authorizes third party nations or alliances to attack terror bases in areas demonstrably not under Pakistani sovereign control it doesn't say you're allowed to pick and choose - the U.S. might have felt obligated to attack the Kashmiri bases as well.

Strictly speaking, the U.S. didn't and does not need Pakistani permission for the drone strikes - but diplomatically it's a lot less stressful this way; we just had to agree to let the Pakistanis train a new generation of terrorists, this one (presumably) exclusively aimed at India.

Yet another example of Pakistanis twisting Americans into making shocking moral compromises. How many Pakistanis are willing to boast that they are ashamed of this behavior by their government?

What a naive statement!

This drone deal is a simple example of both Pakistani and US governments trying to follow their respective national interests as best as each side can. Shame and morality are for the religious brigade, not for governments, no matter which country.

 

[Bang Galore]

You haven't answered my question. Drones continue to be based in Pakistan, why will the US jeopardize its arrangement with Pakistan by targeting Pakistani assets hostile to India?

Thought I did answer with my "No, we don't". As I have consistently said the U.S. did look out for its interests(can't & don't fault them for that) but in the process made it clear that a country they expect to do much with, can only expect so much from them. That is a good point to remember for Indian leaders going into the future. (Disclaimer: I'm only going with what is in the public domain, there might be more to this story than we are aware of)

 

[Pandora]

We finally have the answer as to why this Administration won't discuss UNSCR 1373: because while it authorizes third party nations or alliances to attack terror bases in areas demonstrably not under Pakistani sovereign control it doesn't say you're allowed to pick and choose - the U.S. might have felt obligated to attack the Kashmiri bases as well.

Strictly speaking, the U.S. didn't and does not need Pakistani permission for the drone strikes - but diplomatically it's a lot less stressful this way; we just had to agree to let the Pakistanis train a new generation of terrorists, this one (presumably) exclusively aimed at India.

Yet another example of Pakistanis twisting Americans into making shocking moral compromises. How many Pakistanis are willing to boast that they are ashamed of this behavior by their government?

Well i guess they still got some morality left after killing thousands of innocent civilians and branding them as collateral damage. Dont talk about morality as Americans demolished that bridge with their own hands long time ago.

Don't need to tell you what happened last time you people tried to do thing without our permission.

Nato troops get ‘nappy rash’Face the pain of blocked diapers

 

[PlanetWarrior]

I would say that a multi billion dollar funded armed forces and intelligence agency would be quite capable of taking care of its own people instead of asking Uncle Sam to look after their interests. In the game of political poker, India is faring quite well in South Asia. No need to owe any favors to a western supapoowa

 

[Pandora]

I would say that a multi billion dollar funded armed forces and intelligence agency would be quite capable of taking care of its own people instead of asking Uncle Sam to look after their interests. In the game of political poker, India is faring quite well in South Asia. No need to owe any favors to a western supapoowa

Poker is for jokers. One needs to be chess master to play this game.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

If you can fund,arm and morally support proxies in our country why cant we? "Tali dou hathoun say bajti hai".

 

[Pboy]

If India can train militants for their goals in Balochistan and Pak-Afg border then this shouldnt suprise anyone.

In an ideal world, both countries would have lived in peace, but our leaders of both countries are so effed.

 

[Killswitch]

This is old news. Read "Pakistan on the brink" By Ahmed Rashid. He exposes all the dirty secrets around Pakistans support for terrorists. Hes tougher than Tariq Ali when it comes to airing the dirty laundry of his own country.

Pakistanis can continue supporting terrorism in India, and be protected by their nukes. However, because of their countries lack of resources this allocation towards India is hurting them very badly. Allot of good could have been done with the funds, time, and energy they have put towards hurting India. If they want to continue, in the end it will be their country that suffers the most, not India.

 

[Ayush]

what a deal!!

 

[Ki[[er1]

what else can you expect from them

If this is case then we do not need any other of kind stuff for Enjoyment.
PS: Do not be hippocratic. Whole world know what you people are?

 

[PlanetWarrior]

Poker is for jokers. One needs to be chess master to play this game.

True. And you need to keep a tighter control of your bishops in taliban controlled territory if you wanna play this game. Last I heard from some Pakistani posters here...it seems that India is moving them for you