Pakistan Orders Troops to Open Fire on U.S. Forces to Stop Raids

[Maytime]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423104,00.html

Did a search, couldn't find anyone posting this story.

Also, WTF is Pakistan thinking??

[Red Flag 1]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423104,00.html

Did a search, couldn't find anyone posting this story.

Also, WTF is Pakistan thinking??


Pakistan; ally or enemy?

RF 1

[Moving Target]

I'd be interested to hear a QP's opinion on this situation, especially in light of all the recent upheaval in Pakistan, and the apparent corrupt nature of its military and intelligence services.

[SF_BHT]

1st thing you have to think of is They are a Sovereign Country. If any other country sends its military into another they have a right to defend against this incursion.

2nd Politics - Pakistan is in a Hurt locker right now. They are fighting internal problems in the secured areas and in the country side they are fighting to keep the fanatics in their zone.

Parts of the military do what they want and pass Intel and support even when the central government does not want them to.

So is this a Political play so they save face? Is this a attempt to defend their sovereign borders? Is this an attempt to placate the extremist so they stick to agreements that have been made behind the scenes?

We do not know yet but time will tell.:munchin

Who know's they (Pakistan) may have agreed to the opns and this is just to make everyone believe they are mad.

[abc_123]

Who know they may have agreed to the opns and this is just to make everyone believe they are mad.

Now who exactly that "they" is....

[Box]

ha...
the only change is they have admitted to it
those pricks have been shooting at Americans for years
Pakistan is just "Taliban" spelled backwards

[Dozer523]

1st thing you have to think of is They are a Sovereign Country. If any other country sends its military into another they have a right to defend against this incursion.

2nd Politics - Pakistan is in a Hurt locker right now. They are fighting internal problems in the secured areas and in the country side they are fighting to keep the fanatics in their zone.

Parts of the military do what they want and pass Intel and support even when the central government does not want them to.

So is this a Political play so they save face? Is this a attempt to defend their sovereign borders? Is this an attempt to placate the extremist so they stick to agreements that have been made behind the scenes?

We do not know yet but time will tell.:munchin

Who know they may have agreed to the opns and this is just to make everyone believe they are mad.


That would be historically true to form for Pakistan. During the Russian occupation of Afghanistan all logistics were going in through Pakistan and the Pakistani were running intell and even sending their SF in for operations with the Muj. Everytime the soviets confronted the Pakistani leadership they looked Ivan in the face and said "We are not involved." Read Charlie Wilson's War for more details (skip the movie).

Pass the popcorn, looks like it might be a good show. (Besides aren't most of thier weapons ours?)

[Richard]

Also, WTF is Pakistan thinking??

Read this article--it's a bit long but will give you an excellent idea of what exactly has been going on in the FATA/NW Frontier area, in the Pakistani government, between Pakistan-India-Afghanistan, etc. It's a caprine orgy of the nth degree.

Richard's $.02 :munchin

Right at the Edge
Dexter Filkins

Late in the afternoon of June 10, during a firefight with Taliban militants along the Afghan-Pakistani border, American soldiers called in airstrikes to beat back the attack. The firefight was taking place right on the border itself, known in military jargon as the “zero line.” Afghanistan was on one side, and the remote Pakistani region known as the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, or FATA, was on the other. The stretch of border was guarded by three Pakistani military posts.

The American bombers did the job, and then some. By the time the fighting ended, the Taliban militants had slipped away, the American unit was safe and 11 Pakistani border guards lay dead. The airstrikes on the Pakistani positions sparked a diplomatic row between the two allies: Pakistan called the incident “unprovoked and cowardly”; American officials regretted what they called a tragic mistake. But even after a joint inquiry by the United States, Pakistan and Afghanistan, it remained unclear why American soldiers had reached the point of calling in airstrikes on soldiers from Pakistan, a critical ally in the war in Afghanistan and the campaign against terrorism.

The mystery, at least part of it, was solved in July by four residents of Suran Dara, a Pakistani village a few hundred yards from the site of the fight. According to two of these villagers, whom I interviewed together with a local reporter, the Americans started calling in airstrikes on the Pakistanis after the latter started shooting at the Americans.

“When the Americans started bombing the Taliban, the Frontier Corps started shooting at the Americans,” we were told by one of Suran Dara’s villagers, who, like the others, spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of being persecuted or killed by the Pakistani government or the Taliban. “They were trying to help the Taliban. And then the American planes bombed the Pakistani post.”

For years, the villagers said, Suran Dara served as a safe haven for jihadist fighters — whether from Afghanistan or Pakistan or other countries — giving them aid and shelter and a place to stash their weapons. With the firefight under way, one of Suran Dara’s villagers dashed across the border into Afghanistan carrying a field radio with a long antenna (the villager called it “a Motorola”) to deliver to the Taliban fighters. He never made it. The man with the Motorola was hit by an American bomb. After the fight, wounded Taliban members were carried into Suran Dara for treatment. “Everyone supports the Taliban on both sides of the border,” one of the villagers we spoke with said.

Later, an American analyst briefed by officials in Washington confirmed the villagers’ account. “There have been dozens of incidents where there have been exchanges of fire,” he said.

That American and Pakistani soldiers are fighting one another along what was meant to be a border between allies highlights the extraordinarily chaotic situation unfolding inside the Pakistani tribal areas, where hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Taliban, along with Al Qaeda and other foreign fighters, enjoy freedom from American attacks.

But the incident also raises one of the more fundamental questions of the long war against Islamic militancy, and one that looms larger as the American position inside Afghanistan deteriorates: Whose side is Pakistan really on?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/magazine/07pakistan-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&oref=slogin

[Team Sergeant]

ha...
the only change is they have admitted to it
those pricks have been shooting at Americans for years
Pakistan is just "Taliban" spelled backwards

LOLOL

I agree.

It might not be a good idea to shoot at the American Troops, not unless you desire to meet allah and moohammad that much sooner.;)

[Penn]

Appeasement never works. ROE should benefit the soldiers on the ground regardless of political fallout and liability.

[GreenSalsa]

Appeasement never works. ROE should benefit the soldiers on the ground regardless of political fallout and liability.

GreenSalsa puts on the "redhat"

So we should ignore international boundaries? Go it alone?

How would you feel if Mexico decided to crack down on some of their problems and attacked gangs, drug suppliers, and selected individuals across the US border WITHOUT our help..."regardless of the political fallout"...do you think we would be so understanding?

I think we will accomplish more "by, with, and through"

[sg1987]

The search is underway for those who are behind these evil acts. I've directed the full resources of our intelligence and law enforcement communities to find those responsible and to bring them to justice. We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them. G.W. Bush

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010911-16.html


I believe in a post 9-11 world......either you deliver their heads or we'll go get em'! Plain and simple!

[The Reaper]

I am with GreenSalsa.

There are a number of reasons we could be doing this, with, or without the Pakistani's approval.

Assuming that all is as it seems, we are putting the elected government of Pakistan at significant risk of losing their legitimacy, and they have a substantial arsenal of nukes and delivery systems that we have to worry about more than a few bad guys crossing the border to shoot it out with us. This ain't Laos or Cambodia.

We could very easily create an Islamic republic like Iran, but already possessing a nuclear arsenal and the means to use it.

Not saying that there might not be issues beyond what we are reading, but this bears considerable review before overtly crossing the border and zapping people on the other side of the line.

We might want to drag out those SOF imperatives again and review them. The kinetic solution is not always the best solution. By, with, and through is the SF way.


Understand the Operational Environment

Recognize Political Implications

Facilitate Interagency Activities

Engage the Threat Discriminately

Consider Long-term Effects

Ensure Legitimacy and Credibility of Special Operations

Anticipate and Control Psychological Effects

Apply Capabilities Indirectly

Develop Multiple Options

Ensure Long-term Sustainment

Provide Sufficient lntelligence

Balance Security and Synchronization


Just my .02, YMMV.

TR

[Penn]

I was implying that once engaged; the ROE should benefit the soldiers on the Ground. I was not inferring that regardless of political consideration we execute across boarder unilaterally. I should have been more specific.

[greenberetTFS]

ha...
the only change is they have admitted to it
those pricks have been shooting at Americans for years
Pakistan is just "Taliban" spelled backwards

Billy L- bath,

He's right on target,I agree with him completely......:D

GB TFS :munchin