U.S. to intensify drone strikes in Pakistan

[lem34]

Get your Indian self out of here, no Pakistani cares for what you have to say and nobody is paying attention to you, you're a pest. This is an internal matter of security for Pakistan, and you just keep posting, give your Pakistan obsession a rest.

if there was an all out attack by Americans we are likely to nuke India as they will be complicit. But you are right this is not an Indian matter we should stay on topic.

 

[53fd]

I doubt this will happen, there has been a sharp decline in the number of strikes from the time Obama became president, & as long as it keeps getting exposed internationally, it will decline further.

 

[lem34]

Of course. I have never said anything to the contrary.

The only mistake Taleban made was to allow their territory to be used as a sanctuary to those who attacked USA on 9/11. Otherwise they would have been left alone. (The same holds true for the FATA regions too.)



Ermmm HELLO?! Have the drone strike stopped? Oh wait, this thread is titled "U.S. to intensify drone strikes in Pakistan". So I guess what you are saying about Pakistan above follows too.

I have in the past quoted this source and you have debunked it. Lets wait and see if it happens mate

 

[ziaulislam]

Good.

The only alternative to drones is a ground assault which would result in far more casualties.

In the absence of Pakistani willingness to clean up their mess, it was only natural that the US stepped up.

it was precisely because of this logic that UN made laws to rpevent such attacks in itts chater..becuase if this is true than every country will be attacking every other country..
e.g
afgh produces 95% of opium under USA and kills 1000s pakistanis through this opium, does this give us right to bomb or spray deadly posion over them?
e.g in noristan according to BBC world and other agenciesall taliban leaders of swat are sitting, can we bomb then
e.g colombia and mexico produces all of drugs to be marketetd in USA does USA has right to bomb them?

the list is inexhaustible and answer is help them through relevant agencies if you cant just try to seal the boarder .....

 

[PakiRambo]

I doubt this will happen, there has been a sharp decline in the number of strikes from the time Obama became president, & as long as it keeps getting exposed internationally, it will decline further.

267 strikes under Obama Administration and counting..and 52 under Bush Administration.

2008 33
2009 53
2010 118
2011 70
2012 Currently 13

 

[TaimiKhan]

More hatred?

The level of hatred in Pakistan for USA is so high that cannot get any higher but Pakistani hatred is quite fickle.

Pakistanis hate India too but love watching its movies. Pakistanis hate America but love to get a Visa to immigrate there or send their kids there to get a higher education.

And what does USA gain from taking out a ramshackle border post? What strategic value is there in that?

As for NATO supply route, so far an Air Bridge has kept the supply routes open and with US to draw down its forces even further, the strategic importance of having a supply route through Pakistan will diminish. With only 20,000-25,000 troops in Afghanistan after 2014 in a support role, USA could supply them totally by Air.

The supply route has been closed since November and so far it has not effected their operational tempo and besides USA has a six month supply stock build up.

If the supply route is not that important as per what u are saying, then kindly ask US not to waste your tax dollars in sending delegations and generals asking for opening of the route, till these delegations and generals keep coming and ask for reopening the route, it negates what you just said above. They may have stocks for 6 months, other routes and aerial route might be open, but the economic value of the land route through pakistan is something which you are not getting. Do the math, may be you get the point of why the are sending delegations requesting to open the route.

And its not about a border post, when you need to take out your desperation and frustration, you kill to satisfy or reduce the desperation and frustration. We saw that in Iraq with US soldiers killing and raping, we saw recently the US soldier killing dozens of Afghans in their homes. many more examples, saw such actions in Vietnam also. Thus cold blooded murder of sleeping soldiers was to take out that frustration and desperation.

 

[A1Kaid]

Of course. I have never said anything to the contrary.

The only mistake Taleban made was to allow their territory to be used as a sanctuary to those who attacked USA on 9/11. Otherwise they would have been left alone. (The same holds true for the FATA regions too.)



Ermmm HELLO?! Have the drone strike stopped? Oh wait, this thread is titled "U.S. to intensify drone strikes in Pakistan". So I guess what you are saying about Pakistan above follows too.

The drone strikes haven't stopped because Pakistan is co-op the drone strikes at the highest level. Don't you get it? This entire time you have been portraying this drone episode as US is unilaterally conducting these drone strikes against Pakistan's will and there is nothing Pakistan can do about it because US is a super power...That's not the reality at all here, your entire narrative has been false, disingenuous, and rubbish.

US may well be intensifying drone strikes but it done is collaboration with PA and GoP, that is the point. It's not super power US bullying Pakistan. That narrative is false. It all depends whether Pakistan wants to increase drone strikes on TTP when and where as per the collaboration effort. Only naive people think US just flies over FATA and conducts drone strikes without any intel or co-op.

I didn't say the drone strikes have stopped and that's not what we're arguing.

Get this through your head Cheng, you've been wrong all this time, the arguments you use with AM simply won't work with me.

 

[Ignited Mind]

Yeah they are safe and sound in USA, but their troops aren't in Afghanistan and due to them hundred of thousands of Afghans, Iraqis, Pakistanis have been killed and more would in the future, while US remains safe. Heck of a way to be safe by killing thousands of Muslims instead of eliminating the root cause of this hatred or conflict.

Their troops have seen the worst the talibs have had to offer. They have not been sunbathing in Afghanistan for the last decade. At the very most, the talibunnies can blow up a few more bazaars. Yeah right, tell me how that affects the Americans.

This hatred that i am talking about has nothing to with generals or their cause, come out of your Indian mentality.

...and I have already stated that this hatred cannot touch the Americans. They are safe and sound and, well, enjoying the latest issue of Playboy. Only ones that this hatred business is not working too well for is Pakistan, its society and its economy.

Kiyani would agree to the effectiveness of the drone strike, provided it kills who is intended for, but if it takes lives of children, women and other innocents, it looses its effectiveness.

You're making that part up by yourself. Are you telling me that your Army Chief favours drone strikes without doing a thorough cost-benefot analysis? Is he that incompetent to have allowed a foreign power to drone his country, in fact demanding for even more drone attacks not knowing how many innocents it is going to kill? Is he that incompetent?

Chances are that Kayani did his math and found out that there were two options available:

1. Lose a few innocent civilians in a drone strike.

2. Lose a lot many innocent civilians in a ground op.

Kayani made the sensible choice.

 

[LeGenD]

It's not a fact, and now your twisting things up because you can't admit you were wrong. You portrayed it as Pakistan is too impotent and helpless to stop the drone strikes against super power US, that is not the case at all. You have been wrong all this time.

It is not about shooting down drones but making another enemy. We already have unresolved issues with India and many internal problems to deal with. We do not need another enemy, which also happens to be the most powerful nation. So get over it.

---------------------------------------------

For the accusations of Pakistani army being complicit in the drone strikes since the Salalah incident ; does any member has concrete evidence of this? Or do these accusers believe that CIA has learned nothing in a decade about Taliban? Get realistic.

Have these accusers forgotten this: CIA offers ISI advance notice of drone strikes - geo.tv

Their is a limit to publicity stunts. US - Pakistan relationship is in deep mess in current times. This is the fact. I doubt that Kayani will be willing to play a 'double game' after so much has happened.

Remember a drone strike after Raymond Davis fiasco? The CIA deliberately targeted an important Jirga in North Waziristan, killing many individuals in the process in a sign of revenge for not releasing him early.

I believe that their are many CIA collaborators working in Pakistan. Here is a very interesting article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ies-Thousands-killed-U-S-unmanned-drones.html

 

[Jango]

As for NATO supply route, so far an Air Bridge has kept the supply routes open and with US to draw down its forces even further, the strategic importance of having a supply route through Pakistan will diminish. With only 20,000-25,000 troops in Afghanistan after 2014 in a support role, USA could supply them totally by Air.

From where did you get that?

Weaponry has not been going through the air for quite sometime. And the military flights are much more scarce now. Although the civilian aircraft are still the routine.

 

[53fd]

267 strikes under Obama Administration and counting..and 52 under Bush Administration.

2008 33
2009 53
2010 118
2011 70
2012 Currently 13

I'm talking about the trend in the Obama administration's reign. If we iterate the results till May for the complete 2012 year, the number of strikes will be a lot less than 70. That will show that drone strikes have decreased dramatically in the last three years. As the US is packing up its bags from Afghanistan, it will also result in the decline of drone strikes. If drone strikes are increased after most of the US troops, the "residual" troops might not be able to handle the blowback from the Taliban & its affiliates. If you notice when the number of drone strikes spiked up, it was during the time when Obama increased the troops by 30K, & wanted to "win". Now, he doesn't want to win, he wants to act tough & show he hasn't 'lost', he wants to draw down the troops. Drone strikes will decline sharply as well, & the situation in Afghanistan will slowly reach 'equilibrium'.

 

[lem34]

I think the problem is Americans are not very good at geography. ground realities are that they are very weak. Afghanistan is surrounded by Iran Russia and Pakistan. These three countries do not like the vision that America or even India has for Afghanistan. Oh btw Putin is coming to Islamabad soon isn't he? A bit of coordination between these three and American troops will be stranded in Afghanistan. These drones and anti Pakistani propaganda and threats are just American frustrations,

American Geography - YouTube

 

[TaimiKhan]

267 strikes under Obama Administration and counting..and 52 under Bush Administration.

2008 33
2009 53
2010 118
2011 70
2012 Currently 13

Well you are keeping a count by sitting in Canada.

Good for you.

 

[Jango]

1. Lose a few innocent civilians in a drone strike.

2. Lose a lot many innocent civilians in a ground op.

Kayani made the sensible choice.

How do ground ops get more civilian casualties than drones?

IDP's does not count.

 

[LeGenD]

I think the problem is Americans are not very good at geography. ground realities are that they are very weak. Afghanistan is surrounded by Iran Russia and Pakistan. These three countries do not like the vision that America or even India has for Afghanistan. Oh btw Putin is coming to Islamabad soon isn't he? A bit of coordination between these three and American troops will be stranded in Afghanistan. These drones and anti Pakistani propaganda and threats are just American frustrations,

American Geography - YouTube

Actually Russia and even China do not want a radicalized Afghanistan in their backyard. Both of these nations support ISAF mission in Afghanistan - rather indirectly.