America's murderous drone campaign is fuelling terror: The Guardian

[Awesome]

---

---

Same topic again and again... WHy don't u shoot it, rather than propagating propaganda...

What the hell? Aren't you reading anything? There are 4 entities to this dispute.

Americans, Pakistani government, the Pakistani people and the people of the world.

The Pakistani people have been opposing the American and Pakistani governments but it is only recently that the people of the world - as evidenced by reputable papers like The Guardian step up and rip the American arguments to pieces and here we are people like you very intelligently parrot the same raam kahani - Propaganda, propaganda... Boohoo, you're freakin supporting murder of innocent kids.

If I guarantee you that all the terrorism of the world would go away in a snap if you go and sacrifice one of your kids right now... Would you? Then don't trivialize the killing of our children!

Same topic again and again? Same missiles again and again! We won't let go till your ear drums don't start writhing in pain by our War against the Drones!

[tarrar]

US has completely failed in this war now they are taking out their frustration on Pakistan by killing civilians. No matter what US says we know that US wants to transfer this flop war to Pakistan, US’s real aim has always been to destroy Muslim states & kill Muslims in the name of ‘War on Terror’.

There is massive hate for US around the world, US should be charged with War Crimes they have killed Millions of Muslims around the world in the name of War on Terror which is till date a flop war. INSHAALLAH US will pay for their crime against Humanity specially for their crimes against Muslims.

[tarrar]

All you Hindis are worthless jabronis, you should go & take care of your shinning India. You people have killed thousands of Muslims in your country & in illegally Occupied Kashmir. You & people like you are all supporters of US flop imaginary war on terror. So it’s better for you all Hindis to shut up & sit down. Soon you all will be paying for your crimes against Muslims.

[Aslan]

drone strikes are proof of you guy's doing very well


CRPF is already doing what they should do , we dont get drone entering in india because of Naxals , so dont say things which are not related .

Goes on to show the age level of you retards, cant even write 2 words with out throwing in a smiley, and even those 2 words suck. Seriously grow up, and start using the thing called brain, it is between ur ears.

US has completely failed in this war now they are taking out their frustration on Pakistan by killing civilians. No matter what US says we know that US wants to transfer this flop war to Pakistan, US’s real aim has always been to destroy Muslim states & kill Muslims in the name of ‘War on Terror’.

There is massive hate for US around the world, US should be charged with War Crimes they have killed Millions of Muslims around the world in the name of War on Terror which is till date a flop war. INSHAALLAH US will pay for their crime against Humanity specially for their crimes against Muslims.

There is nothing new to it. All one has to do is flip over some pages of history, and look a bit to the east. And ask the Cambodians abt what happened to them, when the americans were fighting in Vietnam.

[Developereo]

They describe a paradoxical leader who shunned the legislative deal-making required to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, but approves lethal action without hand-wringing.
[...]
Obama's evolution since taking on the role, without precedent in presidential history, of personally overseeing the chase.

The Nobel Peace Prize winner is willing to abandon his word, his principles and his morals in a desperate bid to divert attention from his domestic failures.

The clown even tried to divert attention from the US economy by talking about gay marriage.

[fd24]

The latest drone attacks have increased in intensity.
Is it due to the fact the US have suddenly acquired new "hot of the press" information telling them the exact position of potential targets or is it down to "not having their way" in other matters?
Perhaps the negotiations of the closed routes? Perhaps the non result of last weeks gathering? Perhaps the irritation of the Afridi affair (tbh i doubt they would care less about him)?
I think the underlining factor is the drone program is clearly an instrument to put pressure on the Pakistan government.
The trouble is they are killing innocent civilians. Obama and his advisers should be more wary of killing civilians in fighting terrorism. As their continuation are clearly showing the hypocrisy and double standards when it comes to their global policy.

[Stealth]

Well, it depends on how you view it.

How many people could a terrorist killed in a drone attack kill? Compare that with the number of innocents killed in the drone attacks.

Although, since both sides are presenting their own data, the authenticity of their respective figures is hard to estimate.

I, personally, am in favour of the drone strikes. Pakistan has done little to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure on its soil and it has also time and again refused to act against the terrorists.

Drones are the only option left.

It's actually a classic case worth a full fledged analysis.

1. An atomic power with a large and self-respecting population.

2. Harbours terrorists and gives them a safe haven.

3. Those terrorists come outside that country and kill your people.

4. The atomic power country warns you against taking any direct military action and obviously since it's armed with nukes, you cannot launch a full-fledged invasion of the country. With the kind of people, who incite hate against other countries just to keep their grip strong, at the helm of affairs in Pakistan, it would be suicidal to invade that country.

5. Collecting evidence against hundreds of militants and getting them punished in a court of law will take decades. In fact, Pakistani courts have failed to punish most of the terrorists. Hence, a proper trial in a court is also not feasible.

In the light off the above, what can a country whose people/soldiers are dying because of this state-sponsored terrorism, do apart from resorting to drones?

Where are you in 1980s ??? what about Russia War of US-Taliban ?????? that time FRIENDS now TERRORISTs ?

[Mav3rick]

Where are you in 1980s ??? what about Russia War of US-Taliban ?????? that time FRIENDS now TERRORISTs ?

Don't you think they already know all that? What do you expect from an Indian troll?

[cyphercide]

The disproportionate degree of the US-Pakistan military nexus taking the forefront over the ties between the two countries respectively also must shoulder part of the blame.When generals solely decide on the discourse of the level of engagement,they obviously treat the problem as strategic and come up with largely strategic solutions thereof.

To illustrate this further,An American military junta will see the context of the drone program as essentially;

''Well,the Pakistani security establishment isn't ''doing enough" so we are justified sending in our assets to take care of the problem''

An American diplomat,rather than an Army man,should and mostly is finely attuned to the sensitivities on what such a drastic decision will deal to the collective ego of Pakistan.Take the aftermath of action taken by the American diplomatic establishment over the good doctor being convicted of treason by Pakistan.The context of cutting aid,while sticking out as an open sore,still is acceptable to Pakistan as long as no nutter is advocating covert strikes to free and extradite the imprisoned ''hero''(What probably would constitute as an American Army solution over the given case).

Perhaps it's time to admit that too many khaki browns(and too few diplomats in the mix of things)are quintessentially ruining the already on life support ties between Pakistan and the United States...and yes,both parties are to be blamed for the mess.

[Oldman1]

"If slapping your child motivates you into kicking my ***, you'd ask for more people to slap you child".

Who the heck is talking about what the Taliban want or don't want. It creating more terrorists is a problem for us and us being in problem is a problem for you. The Taliban are sitting pretty and bound to take over Afghanistan the day you leave. You are killing our children, I don't know a parent in the world that won't make it his mission to kill you in response to you killing their child.

That is the most basic common sense argument, if you can't understand that I don't know what you will.

I'm the heck is the one talking about the Taliban wants and don't want. Where have you been? The Taliban goes around killing "spies" and attacking Pakistan civilians and military personnel intent to stop drone attacks. Do I need to start quoting them to open your eyes? And to quote you about the mission to kill you in response to killing their child look at 9/11 and think about the consequences of allowing another future 9/11 when allowing terrorists operating in your country. Thank you for allowing me to use your quote as a reference.

[TruthSeeker]

The slow and inevitable isolation of Pakistan

Seema Sirohi, May 30, 2012

Washington: When the game has changed, it is pointless to play by old rules. Pakistan’s impossible demands and exaggerated expectations, which may have been met once upon a time, have a strange dissonance today.

Pakistani leaders – whether prisoner of politics of their own making or compelled by domestic demands – want the United States to respect their country’s sovereignty. They angrily denounce US drone attacks and feel insulted by Washington’s refusal to reveal the targets. The chasm deepens, the distance between Pakistan and the world grows, and the once enviable leverage shrinks.

Here’s the deal: the more Pakistan paints itself into a corner by dissing its largest benefactor, the more it is isolated and the more it undermines its own sovereignty. After all, at its barest, sovereignty is preserved and enhanced by a country’s ability to build relationships, maneuver greater space for itself and create more latitude to make its own decisions. To break those links – especially with a bad economy and power shortages – would amount to a continuous self-goal.

Besides, in a world torn by terrorism, the concept of sovereignty can be even more elusive, especially for a country indulging as lavishly as Pakistan does in using terrorists as a tool. Yes, thousands of Pakistanis have also died as a result of terrorism and the world is sympathetic but only up to a point. Countries aren’t lining up in the United Nations to condemn violations of Pakistani sovereignty.

Pakistani leaders – whether prisoner of politics of their own making or compelled by domestic demands – want the United States to respect their country’s sovereignty.
President Obama has made a cold, calculated judgment on Pakistan. He stopped buying some of the logic that determined decades of US policy where the worse Pakistan behaved, the more rewards it got. The gravy train was thick and luscious. Unlike his predecessors, Democrats and Republicans alike, Obama seems willing to detach, decide and execute a pretty ruthless policy on Pakistan of drone strikes and public snubs. He is unwilling to reward perfidy and he won’t stop drone strikes.

The fact remains that drones have killed many top al-Qaeda, Taliban and other terrorists, which in turn has had an impact on the capacities and reach of the “enemy.” In their more honest moments, Pakistani leaders agree that absent their own capacity to take on the extremists, drones are the next best option. Afghanistan’s former intelligence chief, Amrullah Saleh, who was removed at Pakistan’s insistence always told the Americans they were fighting the war in the wrong country.

Notice that even Pakistan’s most important friend, China, has done nothing more than make a perfunctory call to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty. In the intricate games countries play, China won’t spend its political capital vis-à-vis America for Pakistan. Heck, China made a quick deal with the US on letting the blind dissident Chen Guangcheng leave rather than stand on ceremony. Far more important issues were at stake.

Surely, Pakistan’s civilian leaders realize that the real violation of their country’s sovereignty was planned and performed by their own military and intelligence services — by breeding terrorists. The slow burn is a full-fledged fire today. And drones are one way to limit oxygen for the blaze. Sovereignty or not.

----------------------------
Seema Sirohi is a foreign policy analyst currently based in Washington. She has worked for The Telegraph (Calcutta), Outlook and Ananda Bazar Patrika in the past, reporting from Geneva, Rome, Bratislava, Belgrade, Paris, Islamabad and Washington on a range of issues. Author of Sita’s Curse: Stories of Dowry Victims, she has been a commentator on BBC, CNN and NPR.

[Thor]

Well lets see some of the casualties of this genocide hey

http://childvictimsofwar.org.uk/wp-c...lledrones2.jpg

Tell me, what crime was committed by these three souls and why anyone, ANYONE should show any mercy in killing the children in the US.............. Beslan massacre is becoming more and more clear now.........

[Ulysses]

More Terrorist attacks is fueling the campaign.

"Double Standards" as what PressTV always says

[AbhimanyuShrivastav]

Instead of making smart Alec remarks, ask your self who knows Naxals better in your surroundings, the CRPF or the security forces across the border.

Used to your off topic nonsense that doesnt deserve a reply

[Awesome]

---

---

The slow and inevitable isolation of Pakistan

Seema Sirohi, May 30, 2012

Washington: When the game has changed, it is pointless to play by old rules. Pakistan’s impossible demands and exaggerated expectations, which may have been met once upon a time, have a strange dissonance today.

Pakistani leaders – whether prisoner of politics of their own making or compelled by domestic demands – want the United States to respect their country’s sovereignty. They angrily denounce US drone attacks and feel insulted by Washington’s refusal to reveal the targets. The chasm deepens, the distance between Pakistan and the world grows, and the once enviable leverage shrinks.

Here’s the deal: the more Pakistan paints itself into a corner by dissing its largest benefactor, the more it is isolated and the more it undermines its own sovereignty. After all, at its barest, sovereignty is preserved and enhanced by a country’s ability to build relationships, maneuver greater space for itself and create more latitude to make its own decisions. To break those links – especially with a bad economy and power shortages – would amount to a continuous self-goal.

Besides, in a world torn by terrorism, the concept of sovereignty can be even more elusive, especially for a country indulging as lavishly as Pakistan does in using terrorists as a tool. Yes, thousands of Pakistanis have also died as a result of terrorism and the world is sympathetic but only up to a point. Countries aren’t lining up in the United Nations to condemn violations of Pakistani sovereignty.

Pakistani leaders – whether prisoner of politics of their own making or compelled by domestic demands – want the United States to respect their country’s sovereignty.
President Obama has made a cold, calculated judgment on Pakistan. He stopped buying some of the logic that determined decades of US policy where the worse Pakistan behaved, the more rewards it got. The gravy train was thick and luscious. Unlike his predecessors, Democrats and Republicans alike, Obama seems willing to detach, decide and execute a pretty ruthless policy on Pakistan of drone strikes and public snubs. He is unwilling to reward perfidy and he won’t stop drone strikes.

The fact remains that drones have killed many top al-Qaeda, Taliban and other terrorists, which in turn has had an impact on the capacities and reach of the “enemy.” In their more honest moments, Pakistani leaders agree that absent their own capacity to take on the extremists, drones are the next best option. Afghanistan’s former intelligence chief, Amrullah Saleh, who was removed at Pakistan’s insistence always told the Americans they were fighting the war in the wrong country.

Notice that even Pakistan’s most important friend, China, has done nothing more than make a perfunctory call to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty. In the intricate games countries play, China won’t spend its political capital vis-à-vis America for Pakistan. Heck, China made a quick deal with the US on letting the blind dissident Chen Guangcheng leave rather than stand on ceremony. Far more important issues were at stake.

Surely, Pakistan’s civilian leaders realize that the real violation of their country’s sovereignty was planned and performed by their own military and intelligence services — by breeding terrorists. The slow burn is a full-fledged fire today. And drones are one way to limit oxygen for the blaze. Sovereignty or not.

----------------------------
Seema Sirohi is a foreign policy analyst currently based in Washington. She has worked for The Telegraph (Calcutta), Outlook and Ananda Bazar Patrika in the past, reporting from Geneva, Rome, Bratislava, Belgrade, Paris, Islamabad and Washington on a range of issues. Author of Sita’s Curse: Stories of Dowry Victims, she has been a commentator on BBC, CNN and NPR.

Have you ever wondered why does the US need to be on the offensive to isolate Pakistan? Why are more and more commentators now questioning Obama's mentality and the overall drones policy of the United States?

Oh yes, American answer - try what it does best. Like it did with the disappearing WMDs. Create a scare about Pakistan so that, the American rhetoric is believed over common sense arguments.

Don't take this the wrong way, I know where you are coming from. But we are not Iraq. We are not Afghanistan. Even if its a media war your President wants, its a fight he will get. In just a week's campaign our collective efforts have gotten all free media centers riled up against your policies and we are just getting started. Isolation? Still think so?