Afghans flee shelling from Pakistan: official, witnesses

[mjnaushad]

See,U.S is going to stay here for next 10 years.I have been saying that U.S will use afgan army under U.S generals to go inside pakistan with backing of U.S airforce.The War will be labelled as the border disputes b/w the two nations and Afgans will be the front face while U.S will control through remote control.
So after withdrawal of soldiers and opening of bases through russia,this game will start.U.S cant afford to do this with 150000 army in A-stan since supply routes are costly but with lowering down of the soldiers will balance the cost.

Those who says that Russia will make strong alliance (like Aryan B) etc is BS,Even they will provide their bases and U.S will deal with them with combined missile shield.

So let the game start and those believe that every thing will get settled after 2014 are living in delusions.Even many nato countries wont withdraw including U.S.So next 10 years are important for stability of paksitan or if pakistan manages to escape from these next 10 years then it will be big achievement.

So you are saying US, Afghanistan, Russia all will join just to take control of Pakistan's tribal belt..........

 

[Areesh]

Trust me, I knew he wont get that founding father part

Americans in general have problem about father part.

 

[mjnaushad]

I dont. And I dont get angry on these strikes either.. Just pointing out the Pakistani hypocrisy between their reaction to drone strikes and the action of their own army

I didn't see one msg which is saying this is good,PA should do this while when its a strike in Pakistan all thumps are up.......

Hypocrisy is what we are talking about ..... We all know who is hypocrite here....




Anyway any story from Pakistan side yet.....

 

[Caine]

You created the problem by leaving behind your "allies".

Were you expecting us to transport all the Afghani and Pakistani fighters to North America ??

Oh and about my intellectual bankruptcy:

There is a concept of context buddy. 25 years have gone past since the Reagan made the comment. Till 5 years back, Pakistan was a trusted Non NATO ally. Today its probably the biggest headache for NATO. So stop quoting things out of context and come up with a valid discussion point

 

[mjnaushad]

Were you expecting us to transport all the Afghani and Pakistani fighters to North America ??

Nope.... But you didn't help at all... The money you are spending now after loosing 3000 of your own citizen and thousands of soldiers... It was due in 1980....But what you did was ran away and not only ran away slapped sanctions as well.....So what Pakistan later did is what a developing country with sanction on it is suppose to do.....

Sometime I feel like you guys are brainwashed to the same level of a suicide bomber......If you realize your mistakes in the past all this will be easy....but No...You guys are bent on doing it again.

There is a concept of context buddy. 25 years have gone past since the Reagan made the comment. Till 5 years back, Pakistan was a trusted Non NATO ally. Today its probably the biggest headache for NATO. So stop quoting things out of context and come up with a valid discussion point

Is that what they call scapegoat nowadays????

 

[Icarus]

Most people here do not understand the dynamics of doing politics in the Afg-Pak border region. Power is the lingua franca here, if you want to be heard, speak through your fists. The Taliban showed their power, now it's Pakistan's turn. The colluding village (such a brazen attack without local help is impossible) is singled out. Remember that the border is porous with blood relations on both sides, news spreads quickly and informants/sympathetic/elders mark out the colluding village, the village's pastures and other barren areas, like fields are shelled. The object is not to harm anyone but rather to bring the guilty party to call a Jirga through a show of force, the guilty party can also choose to retaliate. The Jirga then negotiates the hand over of the criminals, the Jirga's decision is binding.

We fired over 500 shells two years ago, when the Afghans shot down our Mi-17 in Bajaur, not a single person was killed but the villagers were at the Jirga the very next morning. Then, when 30 kids were picked up by the Taliban last Eid, a 20,000 strong Lashkar was mobilized with Artillery support and the opposing village that had refused to budge for 3 months was suddenly prepared to free the kids unconditionally.

A small lesson in getting shyte done over the Durand Line.

There is a concept of context buddy. 25 years have gone past since the Reagan made the comment. Till 5 years back, Pakistan was a trusted Non NATO ally. Today its probably the biggest headache for NATO. So stop quoting things out of context and come up with a valid discussion point

In those five years, NATO and America have made it a mission to humiliate Pakistan, thus the headache. You get your act together and we'll follow suite. This is coming from a guy who worked in close co-ord with ******* Forward Strategic Command CENTCOM for two years.

 

[Paan Singh]

So you are saying US, Afghanistan, Russia all will join just to take control of Pakistan's tribal belt..........

No..


1)U.S came here to control the CAR resources and to manage israel for future.
2)I too believe that 9/11 was fake attack and objective was to get the bases in A-stan.
3)U.S n russia have been the major powers and they have been dealing since decades.They give n take and compromise..thats
it.
4)Same here,U.S needs access to A-stan and russia can provide military bases to them .In return,there may be dealing on missile shield or other issues.
5)Russia have bad exp with taliban or these kinda grps.So they will try to finish them by using U.S forces with afgans.

Now come to paksitan,see it neutrally

6)With American interest in region,what russia can gain.If U.S decides to strike paksitan then russia will support it..why??..U.S will never go with full war,it will be separation of baluchistan upto maximum and this operation can provide link to russia with warm waters.

7)its upto U.S or paksitan to convince russia that how and in which condition they can provide better access to russia .
8)Obviously U.S provides better deal.it will help russia to make better relation with Nato or west and on missile shield and solving mess on the taliban etc.

9)Another factor is india,russia toowants to use the india like U.S wants to use india against china.BOth powers will try to make sure that india remain on their side since china is getting strong and obviously they need country who can control indian ocean.
and fix their interst..india is important for them economically too..so u like it or not,india is factor.

So paksitan dont have much cards left,they cant provide any thing important to russia which U.S can provide internationally.

 

[Uchiha]

Are civilians acceptable Collateral damage ?

HYPOCRITICAL INDIAN. Nice joke, when the drones do it, what do you indians say?

 

[Caine]

Nope.... But you didn't help at all... The money you are spending now after loosing 3000 of your own citizen and thousands of soldiers... It was due in 1980....But what you did was ran away and not only ran away slapped sanctions as well.....So what Pakistan later did is what a developing country with sanction on it is suppose to do.....

And what was that? Cultivate terrorists ? How does that help with sanctions?

Sometime I feel like you guys are brainwashed to the same level of a suicide bomber......If you realize your mistakes in the past all this will be easy....but No...You guys are bent on doing it again.

Mate, there have been multiple admissions by our administration about the mistakes of 1980's, but that certainly does not give Pakistan a blank check to indulge in activities that result in American deaths in Afghanistan. Its tough to admit, but our capacity to hurt Pakistan is significantly higher than yours to hurt us. Thankfully most of your leaders know this, and public bluster aside, they have more or less traveled the right path.

Is that what they call scapegoat nowadays????

No.. Its a definition of an errant ally that is like a child who at times puts ego above well being. Who sometimes needs to be pampered and sometimes scolded into doing the right thing.

In those five years, NATO and America have made it a mission to humiliate Pakistan, thus the headache. You get your act together and we'll follow suite. This is coming from a guy who worked in close co-ord with ******* Forward Strategic Command CENTCOM for two years.

Its a chicken and an egg story mate. Humiliation followed discovery of Pakistan sleeping with the enemy.

 

[pakdefender]

Its possible that after the shelling there will be some ground based ingress to take out TTP pockets inside afghanistan, that’s typically how it’s done; anybody getting in the way ( ANA or US or combined ANA and US .. lol what a combination ) will get it up their rump

There is a price to pay for harbouring Pakistan's enemies

 

[mjnaushad]

And what was that? Cultivate terrorists ? How does that help with sanctions?

That was to do anything to bring stabilization..... Taliban was a movement which brought some stabalization....And it was an Afghan movement.....I know many of you think we created taliban but Taliban is creation of a warlord raping 12 year old girl.....And when taliban put that warlord to justice people started supporting them and In a long time afghanistan was largely under one groups control....I remember before taliban the afghans here use to say that they need 5 visas to travel in Afghanistan......So we accepted what ever was bringing stabalization and a form of govt in Afghanistan.....even for a short term...

Sanction didn't help at all..... First even the hate today for USA is mostly based on that backstabbing and automatically pushing us on the other side.. 2ndly Poor economic conditions lead to extreme actions and accepting taliban regard less of world pressure was one of them

Mate, there have been multiple admissions by our administration about the mistakes of 1980's, but that certainly does not give Pakistan a blank check to indulge in activities that result in American deaths in Afghanistan. Its tough to admit, but our capacity to hurt Pakistan is significantly higher than yours to hurt us. Thankfully most of your leaders know this, and public bluster aside, they have more or less traveled the right path.

Of course you have much more capability of hurting us.... Even sanction in 80s hurt us way much more and we wasn't able to give you any damage at all...... But my point is not that..... Even with so much "HURTING" us you are again here in Afghanistan fighting.... All this could have been avoided if you guys accept your mistakes and learn from them...But for a fake ego sake you guys are not doing it...Just like apology for killing soldiers....

No.. Its a definition of an errant ally that is like a child who at times puts ego above well being. Who sometimes needs to be pampered and sometimes scolded into doing the right thing.

Really...... All the mistakes and problems is Pakistan???? Just what i am talking about.

 

[Mercenary]

I dont. And I dont get angry on these strikes either.. Just pointing out the Pakistani hypocrisy between their reaction to drone strikes and the action of their own army

You will get no hypocrisy from me.

I have said from Day 1, I fully and totally support drone strikes.

 

[Luffy 500]

Why doesn't PAK build a large fence over the durand line. The whole world recognizes that as International boundary, doesn't matter if mayor of Kabul cries over it. I think PAK shoud make some urgent diplomatic effort with KSA, china as well as the yankis to get over with this fencing.

 

[mjnaushad]

You will get no hypocrisy from me.

I have said from Day 1, I fully and totally support drone strikes.

I supported drones to some extent and still do......I just don't support killing 40 pro govt elders (Thats why i wrote to some extent)


2ndly my point is Hypocrites calling us Hypocrites.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

I say they are.. Whether they are in Afghan border areas or in Pakistan's tribal belt. Hence I support these attacks by Pakistan in Afghanistan as well as the drone attacks/special op hits by NATO in Pakistan.

my question back to you was your view about collateral damage I take it you accept it and justify it
at least you are consistant.

and so am I
the difference is... I oppose the collateral damage from both sides
whatever sugar coated name we give it... its plain murder.

reminds me the time of the conclusion of 2nd word war when Allied forces started fire bombing the civilians in Germany and Japan to bring them to submission. sadly for Japan it included not one but 2 atomic bombs. they called it morale bombing... to break the will of the people of Germany and Japan but in plain terms it was civilian murder.

the difference is premeditated or accidental. refer to the Afghan villagers fleeing the village in Kunduz fearing the NATO attacks and alas they were marked by the Americans and hunted down in the hills although they could clearly see women and children accompanying the fleeing villagers who wanted to be out of the way of the fight between the Americans and Taliban, the other one was the day time murder of the tribesmen in FATA the open gathering, a reprisal from Panetta for keeping his blackops murderer (aka diplomat Raymond).

the civilian deaths always play in the hands of the terrorists. even if they dont.. there is simply no justification. yes its a reality of war but its a fine line that differentiates soldiers from terrorists.

I dont support this shelling which has the potential to bring civilian life in danger. but I am loss for alternatives to be honest with you.

-we cant send our troops there because that will be used as an argument of us supporting Haqqanis. I can imagine few dead or captured Pakistani soldiers being paraded in front of the cameras with claims that they were supporting Haqqanis

-we might be able to do air strikes but they have same risk for civilian loss of life like artillery & secondly this option can cause a possible confrontation with NATO forces.

-which leaves us with artillery. which still needs forward observers or markers who would identity TTP concentration and request fire. depending on the range, an artillery projectile can t from field artillery aka about 30 to 40 seconds to reach the target and then there is the consideration of population & ever mobile enemy.

the dream solution is forces on either side actually coordinating their attacks and encircling the taliban.. like it was done in the past operations named in hammer and anvil. but that cooperation is good as dead.