Pak Army Ordered To Strike Back At US Forces
Fri, 12 Sep 2008
Pak Tribune
RAWALPINDI: The Pakistan Army has been ordered to retaliate against any action by foreign troops inside the country, Geo News quoted ISPR spokesman Maj Gen Athar Abbas as saying on Thursday night.
Shakil Shaikh adds from Islamabad: Pakistan`s military commanders resolved to defend the country`s borders without allowing any external forces to conduct operations inside Pakistan.
The military commanders expressed this resolve on the first day of the two-day Corps Commanders conference, which began here on Thursday at the General Headquarters. Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani chaired the all-important conference against the backdrop of the new strategic developments taking place in the region.
General Kayani has already rebuffed the American policy of including Pakistani territory in their operations against terrorists and those hiding in the areas bordering Afghanistan. Reports say that the US President Bush has allowed air raids from drones and ground operations in Pakistani areas including FATA.
Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani has termed General Kayani`s response to the Americans as a true reflection of the government`s policy. The military commanders are understood to have discussed the implications of the American attacks inside Pakistan and took stock of the public feeling.
“In his statement, Genral Kayani has represented the feeling of the entire nation, as random attacks inside Pakistan have angered each and every Pakistani,” said a senior official. As the corps commanders continue their discussion on Friday, the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has supported the Bush administration`s policy of conducting attacks inside Pakistan.
President Zardari is expected to talk to Mr. Brown on this issue during his first visit to Britain next week. Pakistan`s Ambassador to the US, Hussain Haqqani, is also learnt to have already talked to senior security officials in Washington. The latest spate of attacks from drones in Fata has killed many innocent people recently, which has only added to the gravity and complexity of the situation.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
They don’t know it maybe, but they don’t want to do that… Oh no they don’t…
September 12th, 2008 at 7:05 amGet out of the way or we’ll push you out of the way
September 12th, 2008 at 7:08 amIf they’re basically providing security, keeping away coalition forces from killing terrorists, couldn’t that be considered aiding and abetting? Moreover, Pakistan is a nuclear power, in other words a country we can’t let fall into the hands of islamic radicals.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:09 amLet me get this straight! The Pakies can’t or won’t control the “lawless” tribal regions that are the sanctuary for al qaeda and taliban who are attacking our forces and we’re supposed to do nothing! Yet the Pakies are willing to defend their borders. I think this paki govt. statement is all P.R. for domestic consumption.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:19 amIf they want to stay friends with us, then they better clean their own house, or we will.
We need to change our ROE so that we can shoot these insurgent fucks in the back of the head as they are runnung back over the paki border, otherwise, the pakis will protect them once they ARE over their border.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:20 amoh so they can fight against our forces but not the taliban and al qaeda. screw you Pakistan, you are not a friend. looks like the war against jihadis has just expanded
September 12th, 2008 at 7:21 amGood, they want to resist? Kill them too.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:23 amThis coming from a country that cannot purge Al-Q within its own so called “lawless” tribal regions?
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:24 amWe have a job to do, and unfortunately any collateral damage is the cold hard fact of warfare.
“The military commanders are understood to have discussed the implications of the American attacks inside Pakistan and took stock of the public feeling.”
September 12th, 2008 at 7:38 amI think the Paki’s are intimidated by retaliation from the jihadi region. This order to engage U.S. troops sounds like it’s originating more from the military leaders then Zardari.
The Pak army runs with the taliban and AQ. Now woh would have thought that. Admiral McMullen wants to know whose side the Pak army is really won. I guess all the money we gave Musharrf is gone. Fucking crooked bastards…
September 12th, 2008 at 7:42 amOh come one what would the “Messiah” say about this. Change. We need to CHANGE so that the terrorists will love us. And then everyone can go skipping through the flowers under the rainbow.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:42 amPakistan has turned rancid.
Pockéstaun is not our friend.
Pock-é-staun; that’s the way Barry says it; like they are special to him.
Pōk-é-mon
Pōkémon - Barry looks like a Pokémon.
Husseinachew
Sorry, got carried away with word association.
September 12th, 2008 at 8:00 amThis is how it all stacks up…
September 12th, 2008 at 8:04 amMcCain: “Blow up terrorists!”
Obama: “Blow terrorists!”
I think the “bravado” will play well in the Paki press. But in reality they know what we are doing and are, if not supporting it, winking and turning a blind eye. If those cub scouts really wanna tangle, God help ‘em.
September 12th, 2008 at 8:34 amHE does not discriminate between the terror organizers hiding in their country and their military. Their military would do well not to protect the violent radicals we are targeting.
September 12th, 2008 at 8:36 amEssentially we had a leak inside the fucking Pentagon who squealed to the New York Times and the New York Times betrayed the United States by reporting covert operations to the world.
The NYT has startced a war! When is treason called treason?
September 12th, 2008 at 8:37 amThanks NY Times.
September 12th, 2008 at 8:37 amAll talk, the Pakistan military is a joke. They can’t control that region themselves. How does any one think they are going to retaliate aginst our SOF when they can’t get into the region with out getting their clock cleaned by the locals!
September 12th, 2008 at 8:47 amIndia+USA = Pakiglass
September 12th, 2008 at 9:06 amOne small problem. They have tactical nukes and a predominately Islamic fundamentalist culture.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:06 amThis sounds like a Colombo plot. We announce we are going into Pakistan to hunt Bin Laden. Pakistan deploys troops to hunt us down. We watch where they go from space.
LOL.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:07 amDon’t be so sure that India is our ally also. They have become very cozy with China in the last few decades. Very cozy indeed.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:07 amIt is time to take those nukes to a safe place and continue the hunt. They will understand or maybe not.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:27 amA tactical nuclear war is winnable, a war fought while trying to limit collateral damage is really a exercise in futility. Took two big fucking bombs to make Tito see the light, (hahahaha, see the light, get it ?)
September 12th, 2008 at 9:30 amTen little piggies setting on the edge, one bright flash and now nine are dead.
Hard to communicate with your fellow terrorist when you are no longer sucking air.
Time to clear the air in regions known to harbor the bad guys.
Like I been saying…now we know who are enemies are. The target rich environment that is Waziristan, just got expanded and richer. Let the bombs…er chips…fall where they may.
Just remember the old Western addadage from way back in the days that Westerners threw out the Islamniacs: Anyone who hides a jihadi…is also a jihadi. There’s no such thing as collateral damage in Waziristan. Think Berlin or Tokyo in WWII.
You could drop an A-bomb in Waziristan and maybe kill two innocents in the process.
Drop the bombs, attack on foot. Take the attitude of the jihadis on collateral damage. Inshallah bitches.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:38 amAre we really surprised that it has come to this? The jihadi pigs will keep scurrying away to whatever safe haven they can find, until there are none left. Pakistan is one of the few places left that they can intimidate and control by threat of violence - plus the fact that most of them are radicals anyway, and welcome the jihadi presence and the opportunity to fight infidels.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:38 amBut don’t worry, it’s OK, we have the support of Barak Hussein Obama, who has already stated his intentions to go into Pakistan and kick ass
I think many of you are missing a great big giant glaring point here: We have been operating in Pakistan secretly in the “lawless tribal” are for some time with great effectiveness sending many little AQ sheetheads to their 72 virgin reward. We would still be doing this to great effectiveness had not a traitor in our midst betrayed our actions at the worst possible time. The time was so bad because there has just been a shake up in the Pakistan government from a pro-American president Musharrif to an unknown. The traitors did this in order to hurt a standing president of the US which they have forsworn to annihilate. This traitor is none other than the New York Times head editor who chose to run this story. This isn’t the first time they have done this either. If the President decides to arrest the editorial board and place them in jail until the end of the war, it wouldn’t be the first time for that either. Lincoln did that during the civil war for the exact same reason. The NYT has sided with the enemy. Treat them accordingly!
September 12th, 2008 at 9:45 amI think many of you are missing a great big giant glaring point here: We have been operating in Pakistan secretly in the “lawless tribal” are for some time with great effectiveness sending many little AQ sheetheads to their 72 virgin reward. We would still be doing this to great effectiveness had not a traitor in our midst betrayed our actions at the worst possible time. The time was so bad because there has just been a shake up in the Pakistan government from a pro-American president Musharraf to an unknown. The traitors did this in order to hurt a standing president of the US which they have forsworn to annihilate. This traitor is none other than the New York Times head editor who chose to run this story. This isn’t the first time they have done this either. If the President decides to arrest the editorial board and place them in jail until the end of the war, it wouldn’t be the first time for that either. Lincoln did that during the civil war for the exact same reason. The NYT has sided with the enemy. Treat them accordingly!
September 12th, 2008 at 9:47 amIf Pakistan had shown half as much resolve in fighting Al Qaeda and its supporters, we wouldn’t have had to go in.
And I’m pretty sure our troops already knew that the Pak Army wasn’t going to give them map directions if they ran into them while in-country.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:58 amThe New York Times management should be in chains.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:14 amNice of them to make it official! What’s that saying? Your either with us or your against us!
September 12th, 2008 at 11:20 amDon’t forget the fact that Bhutto’s widow won the election. The Pakistanis may be annoyed by the incursions. I also believe many understand and are glad to see the Taliban under attack.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:21 amConrad:
September 12th, 2008 at 11:32 amI agree completely. When will this country get serious about sniping from within our own shores. Either take treason off the books or start enforcing it!!!!
it’s unfortunate that “any action by foreign troops” doesn’t include the foreign taliban, AQ, et all
September 12th, 2008 at 1:19 pmWulf, Bhutto isn’t exactly a saint, unfortunately his wife became a martyr. she was corrupt, not like musharraf is/was any better.
unfortunately they’re all wolves in sheep’s clothing.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:21 pmHello again,
Here is a link describing what happened during the Civil War. Its long, but well done and quite eye opening. If you do a word find and type in “arrests”, it will bring you to a paragraph with a quotation from the period’s version of MoveOn.org called “the Knights of the Circle” For all of you history buffs out there, try to prove me wrong on that comparison! I dare ya! By the way, this is NOT a Wikipedia link, but an actual scholarly paper. Hooray for real research! Here’s the link: http://www.csulb.edu/~crsmith/lincoln.html
Here’s a short quote from an opening of a Knights of the Circle communique:
“Whereas, the repeated violations of the Constitution of the United States by the present party in power, do most seriously threaten the liberties of the people and tend to the destruction of constitutional liberty, the great anchor of a democratic republic, we, who are hereby united in order to check these outrages upon the rights of loyal citizens, and to prevent this Government from degenerating to a military despotism, to be controlled by unscrupulous fanatics”
Sound familiar? These people are traitors! Treat them accordingly
September 12th, 2008 at 3:18 pmIf I had to guess, this is a lot of sound and fury signifying…very little. Pakistan does NOT want a fight with us. What they want is to look big and bad for the electorate and the more radicalized peasants. Their army has turned a more or less blind eye to our actions and will likely continue to do so. Hey, if they don’t see it, it didn’t happen and they didn’t have to fight!
Kind of how they treat some of the rot in their country now…
Look at it this way. If they get “serious” and end up in a fire fight with our guys, it will be about 30 seconds before India opens up a second front in Kashmir. They hate them SO much, they’ll instantly sue for peace with us to concentrate on India. India uses our tech and advisors to smack the Pakis around for a while, never going so far as to provoke a full scale war that Pakistan does not really want and could not win (especially now) and then we broker an agreement returning to status quo ante bellum. Not saying that’s exactly what will happen, but it’s enough of a possibility to give the Pakistani army and pols pause.
Very little will change with this announcement. In fact, I’m guessing there will likely be no real change as to how things are actually run on the ground.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:39 pm