Pakistan blocks NATO supply trucks

[BLS_1919v2.0]

People, lets keep it civil, no need for this...stick to the topic. Manana

[Talal]

Thats fine BLS, i am rather found of their 'insightful' comments

Airspace violation: Pakistan warns Nato

ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani Friday said that Nato has violated Pakistan's sovereignty and we would respond to it if Isaf followed the course, Geo News reported Friday.

He said that the government was working to eliminate terrorism and has asked Senator Kerry and US admin to share credible intelligence.

PM Gilani said the government believes in meaningful consultation and also desires passage of Accountability Bill with consensus.

"There is slight difference between accountability and victimization. We do not want to victimize anyone and the accountability bill shall be unanimous," he told National Assembly in response to a point of order by MNA Sardar Mahtab Abbasi.

"This is the first ever government where there is no political prisoner and I assure you, there will be no victimization or vendetta," he added.

Abbasi had objected the promulgation of the ordinance designating the powers of Chairman NAB to Law Ministry and had raised serious concerns on it pointing out it was not fair to promulgate ordinance in such a manner after the 18th Amendment.

The prime minister said, "it is extremely important. When we came to power, NAB was working under the Chief Executive and Farooq H Naek was the Law Minister and my cases were being heard by the courts."

"As I did not want an impression of influencing NAB on my part, I better decided had to give NAB under the Law Ministry for the sake of justice," he stated.

He said no ordinance is promulgated without the permission of the prime minister and if any wrong is smelled out of promulgation of this recent ordinance, I shall rectify it.

Gilani said, the government does not want to bulldoze the legislation process that is why the accountability bill is still pending.

"We want it as a unanimous bill," he said and elaborated that Chairman NAB shall also be appointed after consensus between the government and the opposition. "We sent two names to Leader of the Opposition in National Assembly, who did not agree with it and I sought more time from the Apex Court to reach a consensus."

[Talal]

Gen Beg demands right for Pak Air Force to shoot down ISAF copters, drones


2010-09-29 18:40:00
Former Pakistani army chief, General Mirza Aslam Beg, has criticised the government for involving Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani in the conflict between the executive and the judiciary, and also demanded that the Pakistan Air Force should be given the task to shoot down ISAF helicopters and drones involved in attacks in the county's territories.
The Nation quoted Gen Beg as saying that the army chief was not supposed to be part of the statement issued after the meeting.
"This was a prohibited area for him. The president and the prime minister had involved the army chief in a matter from which he was supposed to keep away," he added.
Referring to the implementation of the Supreme Court's verdict on the National Reconciliation Ordinance as a matter between the judiciary and the government, he added: "The government has set a very bad precedent - in fact done a disservice by sucking in the army chief in a field which was not his domain".
He said it appeared that the government was trying to make the army a party to the dispute.
Gen Beg further said that the meeting that took place on Monday had quite different implications as it took place on a day when the Supreme Court was hearing a case of the government's failure in an attempt to urge the Swiss authorities to re-open President Asif Ali Zardari's money laundering case.
The case was earlier closed on the basis of an unauthorised communication sent by the previous government. (ANI)

[Talal]

i really hope this whole thing blows out of proportion

[ComradePashtun]

LOL Talal, you know it wont, you are just full of gass like your generals. Pakistan will not be able to take this through even for arguement's sake. This is just to fool the guillable Paki public. What sovereignty? What is the differnece in alowing drones, but not copters? Do you must have differnt concepts of sovereignty for each? NATO has clearly made it clrear - they took the action in self-defence. There is already a deal between the Paki army and NATO for 5 miles hot pursuit on both sides of the border. Militants from Pakistan flagarantly violated Afghanistan's border soveriegnty with agression and NATO only retaliated in self defence which is legitimate. This should, however, not be controvercial historically and legally, and such actions have been invoked with long precendence in the international community, I would say it is a norm.

You Mr Talal, instead of here straining PF bandwith (with trash Paki articles of Talal Hussien, Raja Hussein, Daal Malik etc. lol), you should rather present your case with any criteria of soveriegnty (there are many and you choose that best suites you, including the U.N. one) and I will happily take it on with you. Let others be found with your insight.

[ComradePashtun]

You are a rogue state, Talal.

[KhyberKhan]

it wont happen. convoys will be up an running as soon as the US gets onto the phone with Islamabad.

pakistan is playing to a domestic audience which is pi$$sed at the fact that their country has spineless leaders that kiss the US feet.

[Shayesta]

But I am of the opinion that usually it takes one to know one

And then you talk about class?

[amna.]

Pakistan wants to calm down its public. Everything is in American control. They have a puppet regime installed.

[Talal]

LOL Talal, you know it wont, you are just full of gass like your generals.

Maybe they let you in on their secrets but im perfectly healthy, thanks for asking

Pakistan will not be able to take this through even for arguement's sake. This is just to fool the guillable Paki public. What sovereignty? What is the differnece in alowing drones, but not copters? Do you must have differnt concepts of sovereignty for each? NATO has clearly made it clrear - they took the action in self-defence. There is already a deal between the Paki army and NATO for 5 miles hot pursuit on both sides of the border. Militants from Pakistan flagarantly violated Afghanistan's border soveriegnty with agression and NATO only retaliated in self defence which is legitimate. This should, however, not be controvercial historically and legally, and such actions have been invoked with long precendence in the international community, I would say it is a norm.

You Mr Talal, instead of here straining PF bandwith (with trash Paki articles of Talal Hussien, Raja Hussein, Daal Malik etc. lol), you should rather present your case with any criteria of soveriegnty (there are many and you choose that best suites you, including the U.N. one) and I will happily take it on with you. Let others be found with your insight.

Now with your obscenities out of the way, I never once said that this entire quagmire was going to last long..Of course the NATO trucks will start moving once again, but here is something that will change

1. You said these statements were to calm down the public, indeed they were and that really does matter a lot as far as pakistan's political stability is concerned. Right now Pakistani population has lost complete faith in the current government, condemning these strikes and playing to the pakistani audience atleast somewhat calmed down the anxiety and considering how unstable the pakistani government is it was essential that the current government 'do' something.. In addition to these statements in the coming few days we will see some major reshuffling in the government. The NRO beneficiaries and ministers who have been convicted of corruption are to be removed. This somewhat 'bold' stance along with these changes in the government will give some breathing room to the current and maybe it may yet complete its term

2. I completely agree with your analysis that drones violate Pakistan's territorial sovereignty and therefore are similar to helicopter strikes. But there is something there, drones are unmanned and therefore dont appear to be as infringing as manned helos crossing into Pakistan. These strikes and Pakistan's reaction as a result will help bring this issue to further light and by forcefully denouncing these strikes we are setting a very good precedent and i hope that in future drones will be banned too

3. I apologize to the PF administration and you for misuse of their bandwidth, but i would like to mention that i have never posted anything here that goes beyond the context of this forum..maybe i might have made one or two threads that were irrelevant and i did tell admin later on to delete those

Talal why do you hope for it to blow out of proportion? What is your reason for that brother?

The main reason for this is that I want US and Pakistan relations to be finished, we dont want their aid cuz we dont get their aid..I dont Pakistan to have anything to do with the US, i want my country to stand up on its own feet. We are so much more Jasmin but just cuz US keeps filling the pockets of our corrupt politicians we have to live with the image of Pakistan "running on Aid" even when none of that aid is used for Pakistan..Second reason i want this to blow out of proportion is that if relations between two countries do get worse it will put an end to the drones as well.

And then you talk about class?

I talk about mutual respect and decency, and that was in response to her comment where if i recall she called me and countrymen "kuttay"..with all due respect please let me know what kind of classy response you would come up with if someone called you that..but even after those comments i didnt disrespect her in anyway

You might wanna look at what kinda comments people direct towards me just because I am a Pakistani and still I have never provoked or cursed anyone back.

manana all

[ComradePashtun]

Talal,

Appologies for the obscenities, and the strain on the badnwith was a bad joke too.

So all in all you agree with me then. Seriously, can you explain to me what is the differnce if a maned or unmaned predator violates your space for similar purpose? And "for that purpose" why is one alowed to infringe on your soveriegnty than the other? Just why are drones alowed to bomb Pakistan and even kill civilians? Why can't Pakistan keep its soverignty intact when militants are attacking from its territory in to Afghanistan? Do you get the drift? Now once you figure out the answer then you would know why your amy cannot retaliate militarily, other reasons aside. Although for other reasons some forces will seek to discredit the civilian government, but if your army really wanted to react then it will do so and it at the end it really boild down to them. Wouldn't you agree?

[Talal]

Talal,

Appologies for the obscenities, and the strain on the badnwith was a bad joke too.

So all in all you agree with me then. Seriously, can you explain to me what is the differnce if a maned or unmaned predator violates your space for similar purpose? And "for that purpose" why is one alowed to infringe on your soveriegnty than the other? Just why are drones alowed to bomb Pakistan and even kill civilians? Why can't Pakistan keep its soverignty intact when militants are attacking from its territory in to Afghanistan? Do you get the drift? Now once you figure out the answer then you would know why your amy cannot retaliate militarily, other reasons aside. Although for other reasons some forces will seek to discredit the civilian government, but if your army really wanted to react then it will do so and it at the end it really boild down to them. Wouldn't you agree?

There is absolutely no difference to me but having manned pilots was perceived as a "major" escalation and therefore a signal had to be sent that we draw the line at drones..talibs or no talibs we aren't having any americans cross into our territory..And of-course these strikes killed armed soldiers of Pakistan Army, thats like declaring an open war against the army

And of-course Pakistan Army can retaliate, think for a second would the US have tolerated Pakistan to the extent it has when Pakistan is providing safe havens to the very people they are waging the war against ? US has more reasons to attack Pakistan than it had to attack Iraq, Afghanistan combined and still NATO chief apologized for the strike, still US provides 2 billion dollars annually to the same country .. why is that ?

As to why our army wont retaliate, they dont wanna shoot themselves in the foot by plunging the country into an even bigger mess..they went after the talibs that were threatening Pakistan and left the haqqanis alone to the misguided hell-fires..making sure enough of them survive for Pakistan to negate India's influence in Pakistan..So the reason why they wont retaliate is cuz they are just waiting for US to wear themselves out and you can see that with every country putting up billboards for their withdrawals

In my opinion Afghans had a chance when the talibs were ousted to come out and form a proper government..with morons like Karzai incharge people just had to admit that they were better off with talibs and thus you see their resurgence

[Talal]

Pakistan won't act against the Taliban


Pakistan has highlighted the hold it has over the US and Nato forces in Afghanistan by stopping their supply trucks from crossing the Afghan frontier. The ban is in retaliation for US helicopters making an attack on the Pakistani side of the border and killing three Pakistani soldiers.

The US is making a somewhat desperate attempt to close down the Afghan Taliban's bases on the Pakistani side of its 2,500km-long border with Afghanistan. The US military's hope of a year ago that a surge in troop numbers inside Afghanistan would turn the tide in the guerrilla war is fading fast. The Taliban have extended their grip in the north and west of the country. The one option left to America and its allies is to try to force the Pakistan army to act decisively against the Taliban in Pakistan

It is not going to happen. The Pakistan military has become adept over the past decade at outmanoeuvring Washington on this issue. The Taliban were very much Pakistan's creation in the 1990s, though the relationship has been more distant since 9/11. The army has no interest in putting the Taliban permanently out of business and thereby lose Pakistan's main lever over America.

It is reasonable enough for Pakistan to claim that it could not close the Afghan-Pakistan frontier that runs through some of the toughest terrain on earth and is the same distance as between London and Moscow. If the US, with its massive airpower, cannot shut its side of the border, how come the Pakistani army is expected to be more effective on the Pakistani side? Whatever the direct role of Pakistan in sustaining the insurgency in Afghanistan, the bottom line is the same for the US and its allies now as it was for the Soviet Union in the 1980s. So long as the border with Pakistan remains at least partly open, the insurgents cannot be defeated.

One comic aspect of Pakistan shutting down Nato's supply line through the Khyber pass is that the Taliban themselves may not be too pleased to see the ban go on too long. A senior Pakistan officer told me last week in Islamabad that he reckoned that the Taliban received a large part of the $1,500 protection money paid by trucking companies for every one of the 1,000 or so trucks entering Afghanistan each day with supplies for US and Nato forces. This type of extortion may be as important to the Taliban's revenues as the heroin trade.

Local bandits have also been happy beneficiaries of the 80 per cent of supplies for foreign forces in Afghanistan which come through Pakistani ports and are then driven north to the border. These are supposedly non-lethal goods such as fuel, spare parts and clothing. But raids on warehouses in Peshawar by Pakistani security a few days ago discovered two Nato helicopters waiting for a buyer. Locals tell with some merriment of another looted container that turned out to be entirely filled with whisky bottles. Religiously inclined bandits briefly thought of destroying the cargo, but were swiftly convinced by fellow villagers that it would all be sold to non-Muslims.

David Cameron accused Pakistan of aiding the Taliban during his trip to India several months ago and was criticised for his lack of diplomacy. In this minor row the point was lost that the Pakistan and the Afghan insurgency are effectively joined at the hip. The Pakistani army may squeeze the Taliban but it will never squeeze them to death as the Americans want.

It will not do so because the Afghan Taliban are popular in Pakistan. Most Pakistani soldiers I spoke to were happy to fight the Pakistan Taliban, whom they denounced as parasitic on the reputation of their Afghan equivalents. They see the latter as Pashtun freedom fighters combating a foreign occupation and battling for a share in power against their non-Pashtun rivals such as the Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazara. A Pakistani colonel commanding Pashtun troops on the border wondered how American and British troops could conciliate Pashtun villagers since "xenophobia is at the heart of Pashtun culture".

A second reason why the Pakistan military is unlikely to attack the Taliban is that we may be seeing the opening moves in the endgame in Afghanistan. The four main players are the US, the Afghan government, the Taliban and Pakistan. If the Pakistani army plays its cards right, then the outcome of any successful peace negotiations would be a power-sharing government in Kabul in which the Taliban would play an important role. Pashtun provinces would come under substantial Taliban control. Pakistan, with its strong influence over the Taliban, would be established as a regional power.

The American drone attacks on North Waziristan are at a level higher than at any time since they started in 2004. The killing of senior members of al-Qa'ida is triumphantly announced. But the border areas of Pakistan-Afghanistan are an unlikely area from which to mastermind a plot to bomb targets in Europe. There are checkpoints on all the roads in and out of the area. Strangers are closely watched. Jihadi fighters are much more likely to make their way overland to Somalia.

The mess which is American and British strategy in Afghanistan is exemplified by the ease with which the supplies of their forces can be choked off by Pakistan. The Pakistani army, which controls foreign and security policy in the country, is not going to kill off the Taliban at the request of the US. The Hamid Karzai government has less support than the communists at the time of the Soviet military withdrawal in 1988. The US and Britain are politically weak because they have such a feeble Afghan partner in Kabul and militarily weak because they cannot shut the Pakistan border. They have no choice but to negotiate.

[drona]

Pakistan is to reopen a crucial overland supply route for Nato forces in Afghanistan with immediate effect, the country's foreign ministry says.

The main north-western crossing at Torkham was closed 10 days ago after a cross-border air strike by Nato forces which left two Pakistani soldiers dead.

Since then, the Pakistani Taliban have attacked a number of convoys with Nato supplies bound for Afghanistan.

The latest, on Saturday, saw gunmen torch nearly 30 tankers carrying fuel.
BBC News - Pakistan 'to reopen key Nato Afghanistan supply route'

[Jinnah's Army]

Talal,

Appologies for the obscenities, and the strain on the badnwith was a bad joke too.

So all in all you agree with me then. Seriously, can you explain to me what is the differnce if a maned or unmaned predator violates your space for similar purpose? And "for that purpose" why is one alowed to infringe on your soveriegnty than the other? Just why are drones alowed to bomb Pakistan and even kill civilians? Why can't Pakistan keep its soverignty intact when militants are attacking from its territory in to Afghanistan? Do you get the drift? Now once you figure out the answer then you would know why your amy cannot retaliate militarily, other reasons aside. Although for other reasons some forces will seek to discredit the civilian government, but if your army really wanted to react then it will do so and it at the end it really boild down to them. Wouldn't you agree?

The predator drones are launched from Balochistan in coordination with ISI/Pak Army. Get up to date with your facts buddy.

Bumping up against the ISI is a way of life for the CIA in Pakistan, the agency's command center for recruiting spies in the country's lawless tribal regions. Officers there also coordinate Predator drone airstrikes, the CIA's most successful and lethal counterterrorism program. The armed, unmanned planes take off from a base inside Pakistani Baluchistan known as "Rhine."

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/...i-spywar-qs-01


Pakistan isn't Afghanistan that goes bombed and invaded by every country on this planet. We have a powerful military with Surface to Air Missiles (SAMs). We would have shot them down if they weren't killing the terrorist Talibans.