Trial of Kayani for not defending Pakistan

[Pak47]

Yaar, but.. if he shot american choppers out of the sky where would that leave Pakistan today?

I personally think he didn't do to bad, not the greatest obviously.

Our government (Kayani, Gilani) has to go first.

 

[Awesome]

This thread shows your immaturity and total lack of awareness.

It is the President and Prime Minister of Pakistan who have given a secret go ahead to the Americans to conduct Drone attacks. If they want General Kiyani and the Pakistan Air Force to bring those Drones down , they need to state so Publicly. Let them issue orders to shoot down the Drones.

Also explain to me why have the Politicians not taken this issue up in United Nations as these Drone attacks's violate Pakistan's sovereignty ? Because these politicians have given American government a green light ot go ahead and bomb Waziristan. If anybody should be hauled to the court it is the politicians.

First of all, I've already given you guys the only right counter argument you should have in post 64.

I mean just listen to yourself - "Secret Go ahead". First of all this Go ahead is non-democratic as the entire nation opposes it, then it becomes incumbent upon our people to declare what is secret and what is not. Answers have to be given or else make these traitors pay.

 

[Zarvan]

Has the parliament made any accord with America?

The biggest authority in Pakistan is Pakistani nation, we have given authority to Parliament. If shady business has occurred between Pak Government and US, then Parliament should uproot them and do as we tell them to do.



Yes, in November, 2011 US choppers dropped rose petals on our people.

What the heck has India got to do with it? Miranshah pe bomb khaatay ho Amreekans se, Muridke pe Indians se kha lo.



I don't know I don't really feel so good right now, I'm placing an argument that my life is important to me, and I don't want to surrender the right to kill me to a foreign country like the United States. I wan't my government to adhere to my wishes.



Google Code 663 Email.

Yes sir you proved my point still your Parliament have done nothing they haven't given any orders to Army so why are you blaming Kiyani first grab your corrupt elected politicians than talk against Army If Kiyani would have been the president to than you can blame him but not now

 

[a. hussain]

This thread shows your immaturity and total lack of awareness.

It is the President and Prime Minister of Pakistan who have given a secret go ahead to the Americans to conduct Drone attacks. If they want General Kiyani and the Pakistan Air Force to bring those Drones down , they need to state so Publicly. Let them issue orders to shoot down the Drones.

Also explain to me why have the Politicians not taken this issue up in United Nations as these Drone attacks's violate Pakistan's sovereignty ? Because these politicians have given American government a green light ot go ahead and bomb Waziristan. If anybody should be hauled to the court it is the politicians.

I wonder why so many guys are taking side with our corrupt generals. Have we any shame left as a nation? Have we forgotten debacle of East Pakistan? Have we forgotten Siachen Glacier? Have we forgotten Kargil? Have we forgotten Abbottabad? ................. The list is so long that can't keep a count. Sadly if any one raises even an eyebrow is denounced as a traitor? Brothers until the time we accept our mistakes and does not bring all responsible in front of the nation & stand-up on our feet rather than on fake crutches we as a nation won't survive. May Allah guide us all (Ameen).

 

[Awesome]

Yes sir you proved my point still your Parliament have done nothing they haven't given any orders to Army so why are you blaming Kiyani first grab your corrupt elected politicians than talk against Army If Kiyani would have been the president to than you can blame him but not now

Parliament gives orders to the federal government. Federal government will give the order to the Army.

Its going to happen within a few days the debate is ongoing in the Parliament.

Then if Kayani refuses - there SHOULD be a trial.

If Gilani refuses there SHOULD be a vote of no confidence.

Let's see who is a patriot and who a traitor.

 

[VelocuR]

I have no time to argue but let me short and simple. Our top authority Kiyani and his responsible is to protect every duty of citizens and Pakistan Soldiers. The stone age things of old chapter from Musharraf-Bush era regarding Osama/Afghanistan is now closed and we are moving forward to the new difficult relationship with US. COAS Kiyani know how many times we protested angrily against the drones attacks, salala incidents, raids, Mehran attacks, falling hands, death costs, so on, what did he do? What was the single things he ever done anything for Pakistan except North Waziristan ? Why would he decide to choose US demands over the massive public support? Next COAS would be stronger than Kiyani? I don't think so.

Since we got rid of Musharraf but we don't know how to get rid of Kiyani, Gilani, and Zardari, hilarious. We admittedly had many dark sides in the deep heart of Pakistan generals, policy failures, and same bloods next generations of habits without punishments. The solution? It would be possible hundred years of our country to become more matures from the bad upside down experiments period.

 

[Jango]

They came and bombed your country, go and bomb their bases in Afghanistan at least. Or has Kayani now officially also ruled that our lives are expendable and theirs is not? They didn't give a flying rats *** about your soldiers, protocol said to fire upon your soldiers, they fired. Our protocol apparently says defend, except against our mai baap, Amreekans!

We did defend to the most we could.

And the decision to go and bomb the Amreeki fauj in Afghanistan is not Kayani's decision, it is of the Commander in CHief ala Zardari and PM.

Or else, what is the difference between Kargil and this supposed plan? Mush goes without the consent of his PM, and there was furore, but now their won't be once US ruins the country even more?

 

[Awesome]

We did defend to the most we could.

And the decision to go and bomb the Amreeki fauj in Afghanistan is not Kayani's decision, it is of the Commander in CHief ala Zardari and PM.

Or else, what is the difference between Kargil and this supposed plan? Mush goes without the consent of his PM, and there was furore, but now their won't be once US ruins the country even more?

Why do their rules of engagement say that if fired upon from Pakistan they will go into Pakistan destroy whatever is firing at them, but our ROE says when fired from Afghanistan we will first need to ask the PM for permission?

 

[Jango]

Sorry for interfering....

But why there is a dilemma on who should take the call. They must be on the same page -- govt and PA. do you think when PA forced the indian chopper down they had called the zardari for permission. army generally have the mandate to take the appropriate action during contingency. suppose US repeats the same thing what would be the response of army ?

The Indian heli was not shot down, it was forcedto land.

And this should have happened to the American heli as well, but due to it's capabilities, by the time we came to know of it, it was too late.

 

[Jango]

Why do their rules of engagement say that if fired upon from Pakistan they will go into Pakistan destroy whatever is firing at them, but our ROE says when fired from Afghanistan we will first need to ask the PM for permission?

Not everything goes to the PM, a mere misconception.

The attack takes place, the retaliation occurs, a gunfight occurs, the local major or company commander phones the formation commander or his CO, and it is then relayed to the higher authorities, and then it goes to the COAS,(who gets a daily report), all while the fighting ensues.

Now, simply put, we are in no position to launch ten warheads in Bagram, and the US not either, but US is in a position to murder some Pakistanis, while we don't.

In nutshell, this is a result of ten years of ambiguity.

You constantly bring up the case of Parliament, this Parliament of just as useless as anything else in Pakistan. Kayani should stand trial, but not the PM and President?

IMO< you are mixing up two things here, retaliation, and attack.

You retaliate when the other guy attacks, and with the same force as the other guy.

You attack with large force in the aftermath of a previous attack.

Pakistan did retaliate at Salala, but we are in no position at all to attack BAgram.

 

[SEAL]

Kayani is in power from 2004-Present, he was DG ISI and now COAS, look at the duration and his actions i would say after mush the most incompetent chief ever.

 

[Jango]

When in Email code 663, there are some awkward things here.

The F-16's are said to have taken off from Peshawar and another airbase, but AFAIK, there are no F-16's stationed at Peshawar.

Point 2 is that there is no PMA ATC, and it is not like this. The ATC is of a whole area, not like SWAT ATC, ABC ATC etc. It is of a whole region. So no PMA ATC. The communications would have not taken place in Civilian frequencies, so I doubt that there is any Swat PAF station.

Kayani is in power from 2004-Present, he was DG ISI and now COAS, look at the duration and his actions i would say after mush the most incompetent chief ever.

He was chief since 2004, nice one Sherlock.

 

[Awesome]

Not everything goes to the PM, a mere misconception

Imagine I'm a soldier, defending the Pak-Afghan border. Now what is the flowchart I have to follow before I can defend myself?

 

[SEAL]

Not everything goes to the PM, a mere misconception.

The attack takes place, the retaliation occurs, a gunfight occurs, the local major or company commander phones the formation commander or his CO, and it is then relayed to the higher authorities, and then it goes to the COAS,(who gets a daily report), all while the fighting ensues.

Now, simply put, we are in no position to launch ten warheads in Bagram, and the US not either, but US is in a position to murder some Pakistanis, while we don't.

In nutshell, this is a result of ten years of ambiguity.

You constantly bring up the case of Parliament, this Parliament of just as useless as anything else in Pakistan. Kayani should stand trial, but not the PM and President?

IMO< you are mixing up two things here, retaliation, and attack.

You retaliate when the other guy attacks, and with the same force as the other guy.

You attack with large force in the aftermath of a previous attack.

Pakistan did retaliate at Salala, but we are in no position at all to attack BAgram.

Com'on man we have so many genius minds in our military and we can rectify the mistakes made in past we deserve better there is no point in defending every keera makora, this is wrong perception that every man in khaki is an angel and every politician is bad.

 

[Jango]

Imagine I'm a soldier, defending the Pak-Afghan border. Now what is the flowchart I have to follow before I can defend myself?

Depends on the region.

Case I: Standing in a outpost in the Indo-Pak border, only you and your mate sitting their in an uncomfortable silence. Suddenly you are being fired at. First thing you do, shoot back, and simultaneously call your Company HQ. And it goes on.

Case II: You are standing at Salala post. The company commander is at your side. 30 odd men there. Helis fly past you, over you. A routine in those areas. You have no clue that what is their purpose, suddenly you get fired at. Fire some small arms, and then try to contact the helis by relaying the events to a higher authority, who then contacts the AF officer present nearby, to clear the air with the Yanks. If firing still happens, you have to retaliate. Meanwhile, the Station commander ( most probably a Lt Col) calls the STation HQ, it gets to the brigadier level, passing through all sorts of relevant people in between. and it goes on.


So , if you are India border, fire first, ask later.

If at Afghan border, fire, but also ask. (because helis passing by are a everyday occurrence there)

this is wrong perception that every man in khaki is an angel and every politician is bad.

Yes, yes it is wrong.

But what did you want across with the indication to my post.