Pakistan army fires on US forces

#1
News CENTRAL/S. ASIA
Pakistan army 'fires on US forces'
Pakistan has said the sovereignty of Pakistan would be defended at all costs [EPA]

Pakistani troops fired at US military helicopters forcing them to turn back to Afghanistan after they crossed into Pakistani territory, according to Pakistani security officials.

The incident took place near Angoorada, a village in the tribal region of South Waziristan, on Monday amid growing anger in Pakistan over US strikes on Pakistani soil.

Web Page Name

opinions anyone ?
 
#2
Sovereignty's a bitch, ain't it? Hot pursuit or no, you still need to get the agreement of the host government to infringing their borders if you're to maintain respect for the whole nation-state principle. Which is, after all, what we're trying to do in AFG. Isn't it? Anyone?
 
#3
Hang on...are we not fighting a common enemy? The Pakistanis should just let the septics get on with it; after all, it's American troops killing and being killed, not Pakistanis, and where US troops go, the mountains of surplus goodies go too.
 
#4
"Georgia's territorial integrity and borders must command the same respect as every other nation's, including Russia's,"

Touche!
 
#5
labrat said:
"Georgia's territorial integrity and borders must command the same respect as every other nation's, including Russia's,"

Touche!
Don't be ridiculous, the rules don't apply to the USA, obviously. :roll:
 
#6
smartascarrots said:
Sovereignty's a bitch, ain't it? Hot pursuit or no, you still need to get the agreement of the host government to infringing their borders if you're to maintain respect for the whole nation-state principle. Which is, after all, what we're trying to do in AFG. Isn't it? Anyone?
Damned if I know anymore. This is probably way more legally technical than a single person can answer.

Assuming the story is true. When in pursuit of somebody that has attacked your forces, how much attention should be paid to the target and how much to borders? Is Pakistan's "side" pro or "anti" Taliban? If "anti" how much so? etc.

AFAICT this is a weird war with the pro-Taliban side frequently trying to use border laws to help their cause/tactics. Similar (in a way) to the IRA during the 80's and before.

The yanks are capable of shooting friendly forces by mistake. I am damned near certain that such people are capable of crossing borders by mistake. Maybe warning flairs would be appropriate.
 
#7
Pakistan is going through a bit of turmoil at present, the last president was ousted due to his links with the west, and the border territory is under a lot of dispute and Pakistan troops won't fight them, instead most of the Pakistan troops back them. I think they already had one incident where the US fired missiles into a certain area and it was reported that women and children were killed, now nobody knows if this is true but that is what is getting reported around Pakistan by the officials, so anymore problems will have the Pakistan public swaying towards the taleban even more.
 

TheIronDuke

ADC
Book Reviewer
#9
Oh dear. And the Paks are nuked up.

South Waziristan. Heh. The Tribal Regions. I wonder why they got called that? When everywhere else is a country?

Pakistan, Afghanistan, Russia and India. All countries. Watching and grinning. Iran, just south a bit. Also a country. As are most places.

And the Septics have decided to invade somewhere that is not a country. South Waziristan. And North Waziristan. And that horrible dry-gulch NWF land that stretches North and East, until it gets a bit more lush. Towards lovely Kashmir?

Hang about... Kashmir... isnt there a bit of a fuss there? With the Paks and India? And doesnt India have nukes too?

Well, it sounds like a right fucking mess, in a region where even Alexander The Great cooled his jets.

But I'm sure George W Bush and his advisers know best. I'm sure it will be a victory for Democracy and the rule of law and God. God.

We should get behind it. We really fucking should.
 
#10
Bravo_Zulu said:
Hang on...are we not fighting a common enemy? The Pakistanis should just let the septics get on with it; after all, it's American troops killing and being killed, not Pakistanis, and where US troops go, the mountains of surplus goodies go too.
Would you see it the same way if the Americans decided to bomb Bradford? (I know its a shithole but it isn't the Americans to bomb)

And when the Pakistani's happen to kill off a few of those Americans for doing this? What do you propose then, we tag along and invade Pakistan aswell?
At least Pakistan actually does have WMD I suppose
 
#11
Yanks should have called an airstrike - coming under fire and in hot pursuit - who else would be firing our way but Taliban.
 

TheIronDuke

ADC
Book Reviewer
#12
jagman said:
Bravo_Zulu said:
Hang on...are we not fighting a common enemy? The Pakistanis should just let the septics get on with it; after all, it's American troops killing and being killed, not Pakistanis, and where US troops go, the mountains of surplus goodies go too.
Would you see it the same if Stormont allowed...

sorry. A deja vu moment there. Common enemy, foriegn troops, implaccable local opposition, bad strategy paid for miles away...

If the Septics want to do this, they need the resources to push right up north and east to the Kashmir border. Then settle in. Then sort the Kashmir issue.

And I'm not sure they can do that. So, the alternative is to seal the border as best they can and chill the fuck out. But with the George W Bush 'Lets Go Out With A Bang' exit strategy in place, I'm not sure they will.

But hey, I'm not worried. George W Bush has always been big on exit strategies, eh?
 
#13
jagman said:
Would you see it the same way if the Americans decided to bomb Bradford? (I know its a shithole but it isn't the Americans to bomb)
Do they need any grids, I could pop down with my gps and give them a 10 figure if they want....
 
#14
My concern is if the Taliban decide to turn tail and instead of attacking troops in AFG, they about turn and start tearing up Pakistan. The Pakistani Army seem quite incapable of policing a rather large part of their own country and we already know its being used as a staging area for insurgents going into AFG.

A big WHAT IF, is if Terry managed to get some kind of foothold in Pakistan, exploit it and perhaps somehow get control of a tin of instant sunshine. What options would the coalition have then??

There are a lot of sympathisers in the population and it only takes a few jihadi jihad durka jihad idiots to weevil their way into the necessary places to consider it a possibility. Terrys mate (a sleeper) gets on the inside of a nuclear firework site as a guard, lets a few mates in the side gate and shit could indeed happen.

I think if this scenario was to unfold the US would undoubtedly go NUCLEAR!
 
#15
Afghanistan and Pakistan are not viable countries if you believe the work of fiction that is the border between them. Read that first sentence again, or none of this will make sense. Then, look at the map more closely, see the bit of Pakistan labelled "Tribal Autonomous Zone". Bit of a clue in the name, there. Then find an ethnic map and look at the bloody big lump loosely labelled Pushtun that straddles the Durand Line. Look again to the North and note the city-state of Kabul and the king-maker tribes around it.

Then you realise that:
What we think of as the AFG Govt is the Mayor of Kabul and his mates;
What we think of as PAK is the coastal strips;
No-one rules the Pushtun;
If AFG or PAK ever does they will rip the heart out of the other.

Therefore we see:
Why Karzai will do anything, anything at all to get the West to extend his rule into areas where traditionally it has not (easy one, just mouth the words "democracy" and make up some sh!t about little kiddies, the US will fall over itself to help);
Why PAK sees defending the Durand Line and its relations with various parties in the central region (including Rerry and his mates) as vital to their national survival.

Oh, and one last thing; if this sort of crap causes the current PAK Govt to fall then there's a sporting chance the US has given some Islamic nutters some fully functional WMD. Well played.
 
#16
Its hardly the first time the yanks have imposed themselves militarly on someone is it.

Remember the US marines in Grenada (think thats how its spelt). I'm sure they did not even bother chatting to Maggie before they blew there way in there without as much as a by your leave.

Then there was Iran, cost em a few choppers but again they waltzed in.

Yank policy is "We go where we godamn like".
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top