US responsible for the Murder of Pakistani Troops - Pak Rejects NATO Probe

[arcane]

Please read the article by Brian Cloughley posted earlier - he indicated that the US proposal for Pakistani participation would have relegated Pakistanis to 'observers'. Pakistani investigators would not have had any authority to summon and question individuals they deemed complicit, nor would they have been able to request access to records etc. on their own.

In essence, a Pakistani presence would have made no difference to the outcome of the investigation, but it would have allowed the US to claim that its investigation was 'impartial' since Pakistanis were 'involved'. I believe Pakistan denied the US that propaganda opportunity by not participating in the investigation.

if thats so, then why didn't pakistan carry out its own investigation into the issue?? anyways i am not supporting US on this but i think that any discussion on this topic just speculation...

---------- Post added at 10:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:06 PM ----------

As they say; 'The two most common elements in the world are hydrogen and stupidity.'

Did you even read the news link? Here, allow me to help you:

....Pakistani officials say that the military refused to cooperate on last month’s probe because the probe’s findings in the presence of General John Allen, the NATO Commander in Afghanistan, and Brigadier General Clark were “pretty obvious”.

Military circles believe that an impartial inquiry was not possible without putting into probe General Allen, Clark and Afghan National Army’s Head General Sher Muhammad Karimi...... Army finds fault with US probe head - The Nation​

P.S. The "time to raise this issue" is absolutely ripe now.

well thats a belief of pakistani military circles......

 

[Tshering22]

Has there been any update on the next course of action to be taken by GOP? How long is the blockade going to continue for NATO?

NATO isn't going to accept what they did as a mistake as that will show them down. That is for sure.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Merged CENTCOM Visit cancelled thread with the main thread.

 

[Xeric]

well thats a belief of pakistani military circles......

My reply was in response to your comment that said:

this is a stupid reply.......if pakistan didn't trust NATO then why didn't they join the investigation themselves???

So i just gave you the reason as to why did Pakistan NOT join the investigation.

For the love of God, make use of the brain of yours!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

if thats so, then why didn't pakistan carry out its own investigation into the issue?? anyways i am not supporting US on this but i think that any discussion on this topic just speculation....

Pakistan did carry out its own investigation - if you had been following the events you would know that the DGMO and other high level officials have presented the findings of the Pakistani investigation at multiple high level forums

1. DGMO briefing to Pakistani journalists
2. DGMO briefing to parliamentary committee
3. DGMO and DG ISI briefing to Conference of Pakistani Ambassadors
4. Pakistani Military and diplomatic briefing to Western journalists in the US at the Pakistani diplomatic mission

All of the above were covered in the media, so I am not sure why you asked the question that you did.

 

[arcane]

Hey thickhead, my reply was in response to your yap that said:
So i just gave you the reason as to why did Pakistan NOT join the investigation.

For the love of God, make use of the brain of yours!

ok so look at it this way, some soldiers of pakistan are killed by the US and they get angry and block supplies, US orders investigation and asks pakistan to join it, pakistan rejects the invitation and then rejects the results of investigation too.....essentially it means that pakistan doesn't want to solve the problem at all, now wat happens?? nothing, US finds a way to transport its cargo out of pakistan and people who killed pakistani soldiers go unpunished, isn't it???

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

And what is more disturbing is Pakistani citizens proclaiming that with Glee..

The 'glee' is a reflection of the degree of disgust Pakistanis have towards the current incompetent and perhaps even disastrous civilian government and its shenanigans to stay in power.

But lets leave that for an existing thread elsewhere ...

 

[regular]

Please read the article by Brian Cloughley posted earlier - he indicated that the US proposal for Pakistani participation would have relegated Pakistanis to 'observers'. Pakistani investigators would not have had any authority to summon and question individuals they deemed complicit, nor would they have been able to request access to records etc. on their own.

In essence, a Pakistani presence would have made no difference to the outcome of the investigation, but it would have allowed the US to claim that its investigation was 'impartial' since Pakistanis were 'involved'. I believe Pakistan denied the US that propaganda opportunity by not participating in the investigation.

Yes! Pakistan realli did a smart move by not participating within the biased investigation of the incident by the US war criminals........

 

[arcane]

Yes! Pakistan realli did a smart move by not participating within the biased investigation of the incident by the US war criminals........

i don't see wat did pakistan managed to achieve by not co-operating

 

[Xeric]

ok so look at it this way, some soldiers of pakistan are killed by the US and they get angry and block supplies, US orders investigation and asks pakistan to join it, pakistan rejects the invitation and then rejects the results of investigation too.....essentially it means that pakistan doesn't want to solve the problem at all, now wat happens?? nothing, US finds a way to transport its cargo out of pakistan and people who killed pakistani soldiers go unpunished, isn't it???

If even after this reply of mine you fail to get what we are trying so say here, then we can safely conclude that you need to stop smoking that whatever shyt's in your hand, right now!

Ok.

So look at it this way, india was so 'happy' when Pakistan;

- was investigating Mumbai Attacks inside Pakistan,

- suggested to try the culprits inside Pakistan

and

- refused india to hand over those responsible for the attacks (so called wanted by india)

And this was even though when a 'joint' (kinda) investigation was being conducted by the two countries.

 

[ziaulislam]

after an hour of pleading to USA to stop attack they didnt..simple as that..now i dont think so we need any investigation in that..apart from why they didnt stopped the attack!

 

[Chogy]

Two quick thoughts... the "blow by blow" account of the action is very telling. It shows to a slight degree the chaos and lack of information that combat almost always entails. Things get very confusing, very quickly. There were undoubtedly some communications failures. And to me, at least, it appears obvious that the whole thing was started by a nearby encounter with legitimate enemy soldiers, but the firefight spread to involve PAKMIL, if I may use that abbreviated term without disrespect, as I don't think disrespect is intended... it's handy shorthand.

Secondly, it is obvious to me that there will be a significant percentage of people here that will forever assume the ISAF forces "wanted to kick some Pakistani rear end" and were out for illegal blood; totally violating ROE, putting their hard-earned careers at extreme risk, and also flirting with courts-martial and jail, because that is where they'd end up if they decided to go rogue and intentionally create a catastrophic international incident.

Again, it would be like me lobbing a Sparrow missile into East Germany and knocking down an Ilyushin airliner because "I hate commie East Germans." I may have hated them, but I also respected them, honored the orders my superiors gave me, had no desire to start a war, and I also highly valued my career and livelihood.

Let's be honest - there's no love lost between the average Pakistani and ISAF trooper, but at the same time, they are professionals. The Western Allies in WW2 weren't pals with the Soviets, but they had a common enemy and did not kill each other.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Two quick thoughts... the "blow by blow" account of the action is very telling. It shows to a slight degree the chaos and lack of information that combat almost always entails. Things get very confusing, very quickly. There were undoubtedly some communications failures. And to me, at least, it appears obvious that the whole thing was started by a nearby encounter with legitimate enemy soldiers, but the firefight spread to involve PAKMIL, if I may use that abbreviated term without disrespect, as I don't think disrespect is intended... it's handy shorthand.

Secondly, it is obvious to me that there will be a significant percentage of people here that will forever assume the ISAF forces "wanted to kick some Pakistani rear end" and were out for illegal blood; totally violating ROE, putting their hard-earned careers at extreme risk, and also flirting with courts-martial and jail, because that is where they'd end up if they decided to go rogue and intentionally create a catastrophic international incident.

Again, it would be like me lobbing a Sparrow missile into East Germany and knocking down an Ilyushin airliner because "I hate commie East Germans." I may have hated them, but I also respected them, honored the orders my superiors gave me, had no desire to start a war, and I also highly valued my career and livelihood.

Let's be honest - there's no love lost between the average Pakistani and ISAF trooper, but at the same time, they are professionals. The Western Allies in WW2 weren't pals with the Soviets, but they had a common enemy and did not kill each other.

I know you have stated that the US should have apoligized, but allow me to reiterate something I have been arguing for years now - the US government, either deliberately or inadvertently, appears to have no clue on how to deal with Pakistan, and appears to either not care or not understand how simple things like 'showing respect, unconditional apologies etc.' go a very, very long way in Pakistani culture. And I am not even getting into the US dismissal of Pakistani regional national security concerns.

Looking back at US policies and statements towards Pakistan, it would almost appear that the US went out of its way to do the opposite ... I find it hard to believe that there was not a single voice in the US government that understood Pakistani culture and argued against the policies and rhetoric towards Pakistan we have seen so far.

 

[VCheng]

Pakistan did carry out its own investigation - if you had been following the events you would know that the DGMO and other high level officials have presented the findings of the Pakistani investigation at multiple high level forums

1. DGMO briefing to Pakistani journalists
2. DGMO briefing to parliamentary committee
3. DGMO and DG ISI briefing to Conference of Pakistani Ambassadors
4. Pakistani Military and diplomatic briefing to Western journalists in the US at the Pakistani diplomatic mission

All of the above were covered in the media, so I am not sure why you asked the question that you did.

I think it would be important for Pakistan to release a declassified version IN FULL just like the NATO report to aid credibility.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

i don't see wat did pakistan managed to achieve by not co-operating

What would Pakistan have achieved by cooperating, given the constraints on its role in the investigation, as proposed by the US?

Would Pakistan been allowed to change the US officer leading the investigation? No.

Would Pakistan been allowed to independently summon individuals and records and data to question and analyze? No.

So what would Pakistan's participation in the investigation accomplish?