US want to kill more Pakistan people

[lem34]

It was confirmed almost immediately by the Guardian that Pakistani officials were involved in a cover-up.

What are you smoking mate? We are to take unsubstantiated claims in a press as fact now are we?? Was it a court of law-no, UN agency- no.

I also note you have gone silent on the earlier silly and untrue claim you made that ISI was complicit in hiding Osama and or incompetent

You haven't found me telling lies, you've only accused me of telling them. Such charges against me dissolve the closer one looks at them, yes? If I make a factual error and someone catches it I bring that fact up, right? It's in accordance with the principle that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.

Yes you did you claimed that Pakistan had been found guilty when the evidence in the way of your govt statements contradicts what you are stating. You have been made aware of this before but you continue when it suits you to make these false allegations-that sir to me is a lie on your part

While I find our exchanges profitable - I wouldn't have discovered the 1373 gag rule without your prodding, thanks - you're getting very personal and wound up, AM. I suspect that's because these matters hit very close to you and accepting the logic of my writing would mean you'd have to think badly about someone you've looked up to - perhaps an affable uncle, influential neighbor, or some other role model.

Life isn't black and white, AM. Yet it is still up to us to discern, as best as we can, right from wrong, good from evil, and decide which path to pursue.

I think you are exposed to be a liar and dishonest in your assertions. I think in your and Chengs case your education and intellectual prowess or the lack of these two ingredients are hampering your desires to debate. Not just that in your desire to act as the passionate cheer leaders of an unjust American the first thing you two do is treat facts as an optional extra. But you do serve a useful purpose and that is to openly have American policy trashed on the forum for all to see and make their minds up.

May I suggest something?

Both of you, Solomon2 and Agnostic Muslim, should either admit that neither is an expert in international law, or present evidence of this qualification, if you have it, before proceeding any further.

Otherwise, just admit to adhering to one side or the other as a personal opinion only: USA claims the drone strikes are legal; Pakistan says they are illegal.

The final determination is yet to be made, and I, for one, am quite content in waiting for it to be revealed as events unfold.

Not at all this is your defense of an American position that both you and Solomon hold. You are trying to pretend to be fair and telling them to not go here that is Agno and Solo. Your statement is self serving. Putting this post you are trying to save solomon embarrassment and trying to stop the exposing of American policies. I think Agno has simply put in the bin Sols justifications for the American and your position

 

[ksgokul]

Well, Can someone answer my question? I don't want to get into the argument of whether US is right or wrong. Let's keep that aside. Pakistan can take possible measures and one such measure is making an assurance to international community that terrorists won't be created from its soil and make that happen.

Or does Pakistani members feel, that it will be tougher than asking US to stop drone attacks?

My question is whether someone is thinking in those lines in Pakistan...

 

[Masterio92]

Well, Can someone answer my question? I don't want to get into the argument of whether US is right or wrong. Let's keep that aside. Pakistan can take possible measures and one such measure is making an assurance to international community that terrorists won't be created from its soil and make that happen.

Or does Pakistani members feel, that it will be tougher than asking US to stop drone attacks?

My question is whether someone is thinking in those lines in Pakistan...

What thinking?? dont you see the stretch of our armed forces around the western border and their ultimate sacrifices..?
US must decide sincerely about the talks with these terrorists... after all they are Ronald Reagen's freedom fighters...

Regarding drones.. Pakistan citing publicly about the counter productive aspect of these attacks ... and drones have not defeated insurgency till now nor it seems in future..

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Can't see how you managed to stretch to reach that conclusion, AM.

I reached that conclusion in the absence of any UN determination that Pakistan is not fulfilling its obligations under UNSCR 1373. Please let us know if you are aware of any such determination by the UN, and in case you are unable to do so, your argument stands debunked.

I don't agree with your legal assessment here. I've pointed out the legal reasoning showing that, as the U.S. claims to operate in self-defense, as Pakistani sovereignty doesn't apply to N. Wazirstan with regards to the terrorists operating there, that U.S. military operations against them are legal. You haven't been able to destroy that argument. Your claim about notification is mere guesswork on your part - and if not, would be rectified the instant the Pakistani rep in the Security Council asked for it - though we might not know since the SC doesn't have to publicly disclose such matters.

Article 51 of the UN Charter, which is referred to in UNSCR 1373 and prior resolutions, is very clear that any State acting in 'self defence' must report such actions to the UNSC IMMEDIATELY. The US has not done that, and therefore its military actions in Pakistan, ostensibly under the pretext of 'Self Defence', are in violation of the UN Charter and therefore in violation of international law, not to mention that the US justification for unilateral military action in Pakistan, alleged 'unwillingness to act by Pakistan', is easily debunked by the fact that Pakistan has offered multiple feasible alternatives to the US (mentioned earlier in the thread), which the US has rejected.

We could only reach that conclusion if several nations on the SC said the U.S. wasn't providing such info.

If the US is providing such information, where is it? The 'classified information' you keep harping on relates to 'compliance with UNSCR 1373', Article 51, calling for an immediate declaration to the UNSC of any acts taken under the guise of self defence' is not 'classified'.

Because the UNSC keeps that information locked up. But too much has happened for Pakistan to enjoy the benefit of doubt.

Even if the UNSC kept that information 'locked up', UNSCR 1373 does not authorize military action by the US/NATO on Pakistani territory, and any such military action would therefore have to be authorized through another UNSC Resolution, which quite obviously has not occurred, and which obviously means that US military operations in Pakistani territory are illegal under the UN Charter and international law.

The U.S. and Pakistan are not mirror images.

They are not, but that does not change the fact that your unsubstantiated allegations (and Aryan has already established your dishonest argument about State Complicity in hiding OBL) are 'mirror images' of the smear campaign and propaganda launched by the US 'Deep State' (US Government, Military and Intelligence Establishment).

And I showed you that's not necessary and you haven't been able to contest that.

You have 'shown me', through your refusal to quote the relevant sections of UNSCR 1373, that there is in fact no language authorizing US/NATO (or any other nation) carrying out military operations on Pakistani soil, under the guise of fighting terrorism

While I find our exchanges profitable - I wouldn't have discovered the 1373 gag rule without your prodding, thanks - you're getting very personal and wound up, AM. I suspect that's because these matters hit very close to you and accepting the logic of my writing would mean you'd have to think badly about someone you've looked up to - perhaps an affable uncle, influential neighbor, or some other role model.

I must say that your outright lies and dishonesty is perturbing, since it points to an intellectual malaise of sorts, driven perhaps by an irrational hatred/prejudice towards Pakistan that you harbor. But the facts remain the same - there is no language authorizing the use of force against Pakistan, even under the guise of terrorism and/or self defence, and Article 51 of the UN Charter governing Self Defence has not been followed by the US, in terms of 'immediately declaring any actions taken under the pretext of self defence', which makes US military operations on Pakistani soil illegal under the UN Charter and international law.

Life isn't black and white, AM. Yet it is still up to us to discern, as best as we can, right from wrong, good from evil, and decide which path to pursue.

That is what 'constitutional amendments, amendments to the UN Charter, subsequent UNSC Resolutions authorizing the use of force against another entity' are for.

The law is the law, and the US is clearly in violation of it with its military strikes in Pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

May I suggest something?

Both of you, Solomon2 and Agnostic Muslim, should either admit that neither is an expert in international law, or present evidence of this qualification, if you have it, before proceeding any further.

We have no need to do any such thing - my argument is clear enough:

1. Article 51 of the UN Charter clearly places conditions on the use of force in 'Self Defence' by requiring the entity claiming Self Defene to immediately report any actions taken to the UNSC, which the US has not done so far.

2. UNSCR 1373 does not contain any language that overrides the 'immediate declaration of any actions taken under Self Defence to the UNSC', and it does not contain any language that provides another State the authority to carry out military strikes in Pakistan for any period of time, nor does it contain any language that supersedes the 'immediate declaration' language of Article 51.

3. The US justification of its military operations in Pakistan, self defence/unwillingness, are invalid given the various feasible alternatives Pakistan has offered.

Solomon on the other hand is concocting things out of thin air - 'classified information means Pakistan has been found guilty and NATO authorized to carry out military operations in Pakistan'

'UNSCR 1373 authorizes military operations by NATO inside Pakistan because ..' well, because Solomon thinks so, since there is no actual language in UNSCR 1373 even remotely suggesting that.

One does not have to be a lawyer to understand simple English and that the UN Charter and UNSCR 1373 do not contain any language giving the US authority to carry out military operations on Pakistani soil, especially not for the period of time the US has been carrying out such strikes, and especially not given that Pakistan has offered viable alternatives to the unilateral US Military Strikes.

 

[VCheng]

We have no need to do any such thing - my argument is clear enough:.............

That is all fine as you and Solomon2 have presented multiple times before.

Speaking only for myself, although I can understand simple English, and since I am not an expert in international law, I will wait for a final determination by wiser counsel, as developments proceed, which they surely will in due course.

Obviously, that does not preclude others from using their superior skills and intellect to discuss this important matter further, from which I may benefit, I hope.

 

[ksgokul]

What thinking?? dont you see the stretch of our armed forces around the western border and their ultimate sacrifices..?
US must decide sincerely about the talks with these terrorists... after all they are Ronald Reagen's freedom fighters...

Regarding drones.. Pakistan citing publicly about the counter productive aspect of these attacks ... and drones have not defeated insurgency till now nor it seems in future..

So basically i understand that eliminating terrorists in the western border is not possible, as the armed forces are already streteched out. Correct me, if i am wrong. I just wanted a genuine understanding of the situation.

I don't understand how US talking with terrorists can be successful, if Pakistan cannot talk with them and ask them to leave weapons?

My understanding is that US knows that it will not be able to eliminate the terrorists, but drone attacks have been successful in a way. We can say that no more 9/11 kind of attacks have been repeated. People in US might be happy with that.

People in the border areas are unfortunately the victims, because of this.

 

[Masterio92]

So basically i understand that eliminating terrorists in the western border is not possible, as the armed forces are already streteched out. Correct me, if i am wrong. I just wanted a genuine understanding of the situation.

A battle in such terrain against the people who are well versed in weaponry and land navigation is unwinnible. The military engagement with Brits twice and with Russians once have shown it already. They almost worship their dignity and freedom. They must be defeated if one can or simply exit from their land is the only option. We have seen the top military of NATO and US struggling against them. Here the opposite of winning would not be losing, in fact its their land so should be their rules.


[/QUOTE]I don't understand how US talking with terrorists can be successful, if Pakistan cannot talk with them and ask them to leave weapons?[/QUOTE]

This all instability seem in vicious cycle. All the trouble in Pakistan started after the occupation of Afghanistan. So US talking with terrorists is of prime importance than Pakistani talks. Its the Pakistani cooperation with US/NATO which brought the havoc into our side.


[/QUOTE]My understanding is that US knows that it will not be able to eliminate the terrorists, but drone attacks have been successful in a way. We can say that no more 9/11 kind of attacks have been repeated. People in US might be happy with that.

People in the border areas are unfortunately the victims, because of this.[/QUOTE]

Do you consider the Taliban had staged 9/11? Those who were involve in 9/11 were Afghans. No! Drones can kill some terrorists with large number of civilians but the mantra of counter productive will hold true, compelling non combatants to turn terrorists. In fact it will grow the monster incredibly large. Personally i dont see it successful. People in US would be fool to send their boyz to slaughter house.
But still there is time for some to send their army to Afghanistan to secure the Kabul.

 

[ksgokul]

A battle in such terrain against the people who are well versed in weaponry and land navigation is unwinnible. The military engagement with Brits twice and with Russians once have shown it already. They almost worship their dignity and freedom. They must be defeated if one can or simply exit from their land is the only option. We have seen the top military of NATO and US struggling against them. Here the opposite of winning would not be losing, in fact its their land so should be their rules.

I kind of understand your point. This can be a view of a pakistani, who views Taliban inside Pakistan as different than pakistani in Sindh and Punjab. But for super powers, they may group everyone as Pakistani people and hold Pakistan government responsible for their actions.

This all instability seem in vicious cycle. All the trouble in Pakistan started after the occupation of Afghanistan. So US talking with terrorists is of prime importance than Pakistani talks. Its the Pakistani cooperation with US/NATO which brought the havoc into our side.

My point was if they are made to leave the weapons/attacks against US, then the problem is resolved. Since they are pakistani people, Pakistan Government will be able to better convince them(as US is viewed as a enemy)

Do you consider the Taliban had staged 9/11? Those who were involve in 9/11 were Afghans. No! Drones can kill some terrorists with large number of civilians but the mantra of counter productive will hold true, compelling non combatants to turn terrorists. In fact it will grow the monster incredibly large. Personally i dont see it successful. People in US would be fool to send their boyz to slaughter house.
But still there is time for some to send their army to Afghanistan to secure the Kabul.

Yeah! i know it was Al-Qaida and Taliban supported Al-Qaida. I definitely agree with your points on drone attacks. But you seem to be worried about the problem in Pakistan. The issue has an other part - US/NATO should feel safe about the region. Any solution that a good Pakistani leader proposes should address that concern.

 

[lem34]

That is all fine as you and Solomon2 have presented multiple times before.

Speaking only for myself, although I can understand simple English, and since I am not an expert in international law, I will wait for a final determination by wiser counsel, as developments proceed, which they surely will in due course.

Obviously, that does not preclude others from using their superior skills and intellect to discuss this important matter further, from which I may benefit, I hope.

We do not need to be experts to understand that Solomon is floundering in a position that you support. Your position is ridiculous in that in the face of overwhelming evidence to show American position to be illegal you now want an expert to come and tell you this.

If an American smacked you in the teeth you would probably need a dentist to come and tell you that you had a broken tooth

 

[IndianTiger]

Pakistani lifes are cheaper for America they kill many pakistani in drone attack. But if any one killing their civilean then they will destroy the killer. I don't know when Government of Pakistan will get this attitude.

 

[VCheng]

We do not need to be experts ..................

Exactly the problem, or may be not, since some are content to wallow in ignorance more comfortably than others who strive to learn more and expand their horizons. Obviously, that is not my problem in either case.

 

[Masterio92]

I kind of understand your point. This can be a view of a pakistani, who views Taliban inside Pakistan as different than pakistani in Sindh and Punjab. But for super powers, they may group everyone as Pakistani people and hold Pakistan government responsible for their actions.

I think a view of a Pakistani should respected as they are more involve in the misery of this war. But i am sure you would also know the demographic of the border region, which has caused spill over effect in our side too. And its again the same repetition that Pakistan is engaged militarily since a decade against those people and the retaliation is massive too with killing more than 30000 Pakistanis, the arguments again go in circle.

Pakistan and US are in deadly embrace, both watch over each other with suspicious with a lack of trust too. Either there going a total break down or coming out of it trusting each other and working together. But in last both need each other.

My point was if they are made to leave the weapons/attacks against US, then the problem is resolved. Since they are pakistani people, Pakistan Government will be able to better convince them(as US is viewed as a enemy)

You are confuse about my previous post. Militancy in Pakistan will melt away once US and Afghan Taliban reach a settlement and bring an end to occupation. The basic step should be taken in Afghanistan, the Pakistani spill over effect will diminish once they lose the moral ground and false justification.

Yeah! i know it was Al-Qaida and Taliban supported Al-Qaida. I definitely agree with your points on drone attacks. But you seem to be worried about the problem in Pakistan. The issue has an other part - US/NATO should feel safe about the region. Any solution that a good Pakistani leader proposes should address that concern.

General Kiyani had handed over some 40 pages letter to obama years ago. His stress was on stable Afghanistan. But still seems divergence of interests which have messed the region. If NATO/US have security concerns so has Pakistan from Afghan side.
I hope sanity prevail and all step forward with good faith to rebuild Afghanistan and rehabilitate afghans, after all they had helped in breaking of communism and Berlin wall.

 

[ksgokul]

You are confuse about my previous post. Militancy in Pakistan will melt away once US and Afghan Taliban reach a settlement and bring an end to occupation. The basic step should be taken in Afghanistan, the Pakistani spill over effect will diminish once they lose the moral ground and false justification.

Oh! Yeah. Now i get it. US should talk to Afghan Taliban and i hope they are doing it now. But i am quite perplexed at the confidence with which you are saying that the problems in Pakistan will go away, once we have a stable Afghanistan. I am not questioning your reasoning, but just curious to understand the reasoning.

My argument is that the armed people on the Pakistani side may still have grudges against US/NATO and might make an attack against them in US/Europe and the problem will return back to the region.

 

[junaid1]

Oh! Yeah. Now i get it. US should talk to Afghan Taliban and i hope they are doing it now. But i am quite perplexed at the confidence with which you are saying that the problems in Pakistan will go away, once we have a stable Afghanistan. I am not questioning your reasoning, but just curious to understand the reasoning.

My argument is that the armed people on the Pakistani side may still have grudges against US/NATO and might make an attack against them in US/Europe and the problem will return back to the region.

No they wouldn't . as long as americans will stay the region will stay in fire .As U.S armed forces will pull out , we are going to have discussions and some peace agreements with them including Taliban / Tahrik-e-taliban .i hope amercians understand that the war is over for them , they lost it badly and should leave Afghanistan for the sake of peace .

Pakistani lifes are cheaper for America they kill many pakistani in drone attack. But if any one killing their civilean then they will destroy the killer. I don't know when Government of Pakistan will get this attitude.

they don't kill only the killer but 100-1000 people to satisfy its public and say look they killed one ,we killed 1000 in excahange .

Our Govt is most begarat Govt of the century . people should wake up and should stand behind imran-khan .