The Year of the Drone

[Mav3rick]

Gone for a few days due to the Jewish New Year.

PDF members might want to post something like this on Pakistani English-language news sites as the drones issue crops up - or better yet, translate it for the Urdu ones:

"Under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1373 (Chapter VII) Pakistan has the binding sovereign obligation in international law. to eliminate terrorists, terror-training camps, terror havens, and terror financing from its territory. No action to do so - as in North Wazirstan - reduces the affected area of Pakistan from sovereign territory to open battlefield, at least as far as attacks against terrorists are concerned. That's why drone strikes, etc., are neither violations of Pakistan's sovereignty nor in violation of international law (since these strikes occur in self-defense of the U.S. or coalition forces in Afghanistan.)

"Discussing alternatives to the drones is great but there is every statistical indication that the strikes are doing their job, just as Pakistani anger at such strikes directed against the U.S. is misplaced."

But don't these Talibaan and other extremists attack American interests under the same cause? I mean when these strikes do kill innocent civilians, are their family members justified in retaliating against Americans?

The militant:non combatant ratio is highly debatable but as per my understanding, the US can only target militants where:

1) They are authorised by the local Government.
2) Local Government is not combating the militants itself.

However, as PakMil is engaged in this WoT wholeheartedly, there exists no moral or reasonable justification for the drone strikes. Had the US Government been a sincere ally, they would have provided PakMil with combat Drones/attack helicopters and would have encouraged PakMil to go after free lance assets under terrorist umbrellas.

The US should have built trust before demanding it as the US Govt. had abandoned Pak Govt. time and again. Had there been enough trust this side of the border, the fight would have been a lot more efficient and results in Afghanistan most likely different as then, Pakistan would have used all her influence in bringing atleast the Talibaan to the negotiations (if Pakistan still has any PR with talibaan left).

 

[Najam Khan]

So Gen. Musharraf was not allowing drone attacks in his time, it is true & what he had claimed was all true & now it is time for the haters to shut their mouth.

Look at your favorite Zardari & democracy, he had agreed to all the conditions of US which were laid in front of him, made many secret deals with US & it is because of his corrupt & evil deals with them Pakistan today is in hell lot of problems.

Gen. Kayani open your eyes & don’t be deaf but you already know that.

Were you sleeping since 2004, and got up today? It was Mushsharf's time when these strikes started. I clearly recall their statements, at first his Govt claimed that PAF is conducting air strikes. By late 2006/early 2007, drones were operating from Shamsi.

And the secret deals you are talking about, were first introduced by Musharaf, he was the fire starter now all we have left in our Govt is his followers working under good labels of "Democracy".