US plans to bomb Miranshah and kill 200 civilians in revenge?

[Oldman1]

Why kill 200 civilians when they can kill 200 terrorists in revenge? No point in wasting ammo for this.

 

[MastanKhan]

Your defence is flawed... I think a man in your position would also know immunization involves injecting something more than taking blood samples. The blood samples were retrieved from the used needles but overall they (not just a Pakistani physician but an agent of the CIA under orders coming down from no less than Obama) did inject something into Pakistani children.

If the President of the US wants to waive his immunity I'm ready to fight this on my dime in the US courts too. Let the evidence speak for itself who is slanderous and who is downright a war criminal.

Hi,


Sorry---I missed this thread---otherwise i could have made these clarifications---.

Actually they were taking blood samples to match for the known DNA of OBL-----they were trying to find kids---offsprings of OBL and his sons----.

I thought it was simple to understand----.

 

[Battle Axe]

American are trying to be clever & that's about it. They have been overwhelmed by Afghan resistance & are looking for scapegoats now. Taliban, Hekmatyar or Haqqani, the US has lost the will to fight these war hardened blokes. All Obama aims is to manipulate the public perception in home by playing these dirty cards.

And an attack on Miranshah would be a disaster for US. PA would be pushed to wall, so, will have to react, even against their will.

Grim days ahead, for our Uncle.

 

[Oldman1]

American are trying to be clever & that's about it. They have been overwhelmed by Afghan resistance & are looking for scapegoats now. Taliban, Hekmatyar or Haqqani, the US has lost the will to fight these war hardened blokes. All Obama aims is to manipulate the public perception in home by playing these dirty cards.

And an attack on Miranshah would be a disaster for US. PA would be pushed to wall, so, will have to react, even against their will.

Grim days ahead, for our Uncle.

Okay I'll play. Stop blaming the attacks in Pakistan on the Afghan Taliban. This shows that Pakistan has lost the will to fight the Taliban and will fall to their rule.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Also when you are done crying for the kids who wont get vaccinations as now their parents and the govt of Pakistan has a ready excuse of this instance, do save some tears for all the future victims of terror killings in and out side of Pakistan which wont get stopped now since no one in their right mind in Pakistan (at least) will come forward to help the folks fighting against terrorism fearing the same fate as this doctor..

no need to be snide, lets keep the discussion civil and meaningful. do allow yourself some time and go through my posts to check where I haven’t condemned the terrorist atrocity be it India, Pakistan or Afghanistan in particular and rest of the world in general. my commdemnation for violence against people is always unqualified.

You pretty much took the substance out of your last paragraph from the moral stand point with the ends justify the means quote in the beginning.
Just consider what differentiates a civil society and its protectors from thugs & savages? Its upholding principles of humanity & rules of law.. Otherwise a “SMART bomb” is as bad as a “dirty” bomb when it explodes without any regard for the collateral damage from its impact all in the name of “ends justifying the means”.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Firstly, for the umpteenth time, please let go of these quaint concepts like morality and ethics, since these are not applicable to international geopolitics.

For the 'umpteenth time', the point is not that morality and ethics are applicable to international politics - those are two different issues. Analyzing whether certain positions and policies pursued by nations are 'fair, moral and ethical' is as important as analyzing how nations can prevail in implementing their policies.

You choose to merely focus on the latter, and essentially argue that 'might is right, the US is a superpower, and Pakistan should just bow down to its every whim' - what exactly is left to discuss with you, given that position?

And regardless of whether the US prevails in forcing through its policies or not, that should not stop a discussion about whether those policies are 'fair, moral and/or ethical'.

Secondly, once you get over this mental block, my argument, and its supporting evidence will become clear enough to read the writing on the wall.

There is no mental block on my side, as I pointed out above - the 'block', in terms of ending the argument before it even starts by casting it as a 'might is right and the weak should merely capitulate to the strong' choice, is one that you are putting up.

Again, whether the US can prevail in forcing through its policies (right or wrong) is separate from whether those policies are 'fair, moral and/or ethical', and both sets of discussions are important. In fact, given the influence of the US globally, pointing out the flaws, unfairness and moral bankruptcy of US policies and positions is part of the process of preventing US policies from prevailing.

Or is the above a little too much nuance for you?

 

[VCheng]

For the 'umpteenth time', the point is not that morality and ethics are applicable to international politics - those are two different issues. Analyzing whether certain positions and policies pursued by nations are 'fair, moral and ethical' is as important as analyzing how nations can prevail in implementing their policies.

You choose to merely focus on the latter, and essentially argue that 'might is right, the US is a superpower, and Pakistan should just bow down to its every whim' - what exactly is left to discuss with you, given that position?

And regardless of whether the US prevails in forcing through its policies or not, that should not stop a discussion about whether those policies are 'fair, moral and/or ethical'.

There is no mental block on my side, as I pointed out above - the 'block', in terms of ending the argument before it even starts by casting it as a 'might is right and the weak should merely capitulate to the strong' choice, is one that you are putting up.

Again, whether the US can prevail in forcing through its policies (right or wrong) is separate from whether those policies are 'fair, moral and/or ethical', and both sets of discussions are important. In fact, given the influence of the US globally, pointing out the flaws, unfairness and moral bankruptcy of US policies and positions is part of the process of preventing US policies from prevailing.

Or is the above a little too much nuance for you?

Discuss the fairness, morality and ethics, or lack thereof all you want, in the best traditions of the "chattering classes".

Results count.

Is that summary direct enough for you?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Discuss the fairness, morality and ethics, or lack thereof all you want, in the best traditions of the "chattering classes".

It is also part of influencing opinion regarding policies, and therefore a necessary part of discourse.

Results count.

And results can be influenced by influencing opinion about certain policies.

Is that summary direct enough for you?

Yes, but it remains a flawed and uni-dimensional argument that essentially boils down to 'the weak must capitulate in front of the strong, and never fight back'.

 

[Awesome]

Hi,


Sorry---I missed this thread---otherwise i could have made these clarifications---.

Actually they were taking blood samples to match for the known DNA of OBL-----they were trying to find kids---offsprings of OBL and his sons----.

I thought it was simple to understand----.

Of course thats what they were doing - but do you know for a fact they didn't inject anything back in? Vaccines are done by injecting something in, not just taking blood out.

---------- Post added at 06:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:08 PM ----------

Okay I'll play. Stop blaming the attacks in Pakistan on the Afghan Taliban. This shows that Pakistan has lost the will to fight the Taliban and will fall to their rule.

Afghan T are in Afghanistan. About 50,000 to 100,000 of them. The HN are in a border city, of 600,000 people in Pakistan. They number about 3000.

That is the issue at contention here. We have them under our control. You have only one Kabul under control.

 

[koolio]

Okay I'll play. Stop blaming the attacks in Pakistan on the Afghan Taliban. This shows that Pakistan has lost the will to fight the Taliban and will fall to their rule.

America the super duper army cant even stop the TTP from crossing over from Afghanistan into Pakistan, The TTP are launching attacks from the provinces of Nuristan and Kunar in Afghanistan where they have strong bases and yet the Americans have the audacity to lecture us on how to launch operations, when even your government is doing nothing to ease Pakistani concerns, This useless WOT was never Pakistans war in the first place.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

America the super duper army cant even stop the TTP from crossing over from Afghanistan into Pakistan, The TTP are launching attacks from the provinces of Nuristan and Kunar in Afghanistan where they have strong bases and yet the Americans have the audacity to lecture us on how to launch operations, when even your government is doing nothing to ease Pakistani concerns, This useless WOT was never Pakistans war in the first place.

dont forget Fazlullah who made fresh video from Afghanistan showing his training camp and lecturing his followers to kill Pakistnani civilains

 

[nescafe]

The thing about burning bridges is that Pakistan and US are at an impasse. The US needs to attack Haqqanis, be successful or not is secondary. PA needs to get Haqqanis removed, it can't do that on its own since then the Afghanis would start attacking Pakistan.

So would that thinking make the PA go like, sure why not? Bomb away. Then when the US bombs them the commotion in the country overthrows the government the new government comes and forges better relations with the US.

All's well that end's well and 200 dead.

you are among the few on defence.pk with the reasoning. thumbs up bro. no wonder you deserve all those thanks statistics.

 

[Nitin Goyal]

Pakistan has two options left

Either fight against Haqqanis or against US invasion

The choice is easy.

Haqqanis and talibans are scums to world as much as to Pakistan.

standing against the US will lead to international isolation

 

[VCheng]

It is also part of influencing opinion regarding policies, and therefore a necessary part of discourse.


And results can be influenced by influencing opinion about certain policies.

Yes, but it remains a flawed and uni-dimensional argument that essentially boils down to 'the weak must capitulate in front of the strong, and never fight back'.

Okay, I accept your point, and will try to incorporate a measure of the moral/ethical considerations for suitable discussion. Fair enough?

Of course thats what they were doing - but do you know for a fact they didn't inject anything back in? Vaccines are done by injecting something in, not just taking blood out.

.......................

Blood is obtained from a vein. Vaccines are never given intravenously, but rather intramuscularly or by other routes. How do YOU know something was injected while taking the blood samples? I have already told you how the appropriateness of the vaccination can be checked by antibody titers, but you have not responded to that.

To use your own previously expressed position: you make the accusation, so the onus is on you to provide the proof. Where is it?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan has two options left

Either fight against Haqqanis or against US invasion

The choice is easy.

Haqqanis and talibans are scums to world as much as to Pakistan.

standing against the US will lead to international isolation

IMO Pakistan should fight against the Haqqanis when ISAF can demonstrate complete control over insurgents and terrorists on its side in Afghanistan, especially those that have launched dozens of attacks into Pakistan from Eastern Afghanistan in groups numbering in the hundreds.

Pakistan should also wait till it has complete control over the various other FATA and Swat areas where it has conducted operations, and that control will be tied into the ability of ISAF to control the territory in Afghanistan where the Taliban are launching attacks into Pakistan from.

---------- Post added at 12:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:17 PM ----------

Okay, I accept your point, and will try to incorporate a measure of the moral/ethical considerations for suitable discussion.

That is all I ask, that the 'fairness, morality and/or ethical' aspect of policies pursued by the US or any other nation not be ignored. We all know that the 'US is a superpower' with far more influence politically and economically around the globe than Pakistan can even dream of today, but that does not mean that we simply 'lie down, roll over and die' in front of the US.