Inside the OBL Raid

[SQ8]

That goes both ways, Sir.




Of course it is not, there are multiple inputs, the State Dept. being only one of them.

Who calls the shots then??
if there is a policy conflict within the US foreign services.. then clearly they would achieve better by flushing money down the toilet.. instead of wasting it on embassies and consulates.

 

[fd24]

Of course, Pakistanis are respected the world over for always telling the truth, right?

We are specifically talking about this situation. Yet again the Americans are clearly caught out lying. I feel when they blatantly lie its a "misquote or not reported correctly"etc. Its almost like "all humans are equal but American humans are MORE equal than others!"

 

[VCheng]

Who calls the shots then??
if there is a policy conflict within the US foreign services.. then clearly they would achieve better by flushing money down the toilet.. instead of wasting it on embassies and consulates.

The White House, in conjunction with several agencies, calls the shots.

 

[fd24]

The White House, in conjunction with several agencies, calls the shots.

Thank you VCheng. You've really cleared that up...

 

[SQ8]

The White House, in conjunction with several agencies, calls the shots.

Who gets the upper hand?? wen multiple agencies are involved there will be clashes.
Who watches over on how individual orders are construed...

 

[Jango]

Am not 'shocked' in the least. Local authorities will always be the quickest responders. The problem here is that the institutional delays I mentioned works both ways. The local authority will report a military force of unknown origins is conducting some operations within his sight. At the higher level, someone, for good or bad, is too incredulous of that news, after all, no one above his pay grade told him of any military exercises, so is it possible that this could have been one of those 'surprise' job intended to weed out some incompetents? Confirmations must be available. At higher still, someone demands more confirmations from other people who may have overlapping authority to do 'something'...And so on...and on.

The trespass of a country's territorial sovereignty is not something that occurs daily and when it does, it is usually accidental and can be resolved at the lowest diplomatic levels. But if we are talking about armed men in various aircrafts, that is a different story and it will demand everyone to confirm his suspicion to his satisfaction. The confusion works up and down the chain of commands and this institutional problem have been exploited in past military operations, so good that it is quite popular for movie plot devices as well.

The helis passed close to Peshawar AFB, they could have detected them then, they didnt??,,fair enough, the helis were stealth.

Now second situation:
The sentry sepoy at the gate of the PMA see's what is happening a short distance away. He reports to the duty officer. The duty officer reports to his senior Lt Col. The colonel then phones to the PMA commander and tells him what is happening. The commander wakes up at night, phones the dispatcher for the aviation most probably. He gets a negative reply. Send out a squad for checking the situation. The squad reports back. The Base commander calls the Sta HQ most probably and informs. They inform the GOC and going successively up the ladder effectively taking for the response.

 

[VCheng]

Who gets the upper hand?? wen multiple agencies are involved there will be clashes.
Who watches over on how individual orders are construed...

Of course there are clashes, and multiple raucous meetings, and much table bashing and hand wringing and arm twisting and deal making, but once a decision is made, most of the time people stand behind it together. There are internal checks and monitoring too for implementation and feedback.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Of course there are clashes, and multiple raucous meetings, and much table bashing and hand wringing and arm twisting and deal making, but once a decision is made, most of the time people stand behind it together. There are internal checks and monitoring too for implementation and feedback.

It would appear the baboons and war-mongers have been winning the policy debate in the US Administration so far - Dennis Blair ended up being kicked out (read between the lines - for trying to take on the CIA). The State Department, or more specifically the US Ambassadors/CG's, with perhaps the best understanding of Pakistan's military and civilian government constraints and pressures, appears to be marginalized.

And we can see the result of the 'baboons and war-mongers' winning the policy debate in the status of US-Pak relations today.

Also, if you have not read it yet, the State Department spokesperons (IIRC) said that 'the US underestimated the humiliation and anger felt by Pakistani government and military leadership over the secret Abbottabad raid'.

Underestimated? I would imagine that people who would have argued in favor of involving Pakistan have more than likely been marginalized in the administration, given the treatment of Blair and Munter.

The drone attack after the release of Davis, that Munter opposed, ended up in fact killing over 30 Khasadar's and tribal leaders that were not part of the Haqqani network and were part of a 'mediation process'. The CIA not only acted in spite, it ended up deliberately killing innocent people in that drone attack to 'send a message to the ISI'.

And people call the ISI 'evil and out of control'?

 

[VCheng]

It would appear the baboons and war-mongers have been winning the policy debate in the US Administration so far - Dennis Blair ended up being kicked out (read between the lines - for trying to take on the CIA). The State Department, or more specifically the US Ambassadors/CG's, with perhaps the best understanding of Pakistan's military and civilian government constraints and pressures, appears to be marginalized.

And we can see the result of the 'baboons and war-mongers' winning the policy debate in the status of US-Pak relations today.

Also, if you have not read it yet, the State Department spokesperons (IIRC) said that 'the US underestimated the humiliation and anger felt by Pakistani government and military leadership over the secret Abbottabad raid'.

Underestimated? I would imagine that people who would have argued in favor of involving Pakistan have more than likely been marginalized in the administration, given the treatment of Blair and Munter.

The drone attack after the release of Davis, that Munter opposed, ended up in fact killing over 30 Khasadar's and tribal leaders that were not part of the Haqqani network and were part of a 'mediation process'. The CIA not only acted in spite, it ended up deliberately killing innocent people in that drone attack to 'send a message to the ISI'.

And people call the ISI 'evil and out of control'?

All good and fair points, except for the name-calling.

Yes, that is the way the US system works, just like a bunch of ants transporting an insect back to the den, all pushing and pulling in different directions, but somehow they do achieve what they set out to do!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

but somehow they do achieve what they set out to do!

Which, given the current state of US-Pak relations, is what exactly?

 

[VCheng]

Which, given the current state of US-Pak relations, is what exactly?

Well, now that is a million dollar question, isn't it?

 

[JayAtl]

Who gets the upper hand?? wen multiple agencies are involved there will be clashes.
Who watches over on how individual orders are construed...

DNI does... dir of national security. He/she reports to the president ( commander-in- chief)

 

[Donatello]

Funny thing is Pentagon barely has enough money to keep paychecks rolling for it's troops......and Congress just forced upon them budget cuts, unseen in recent history.

Decaying empire......?

 

[JayAtl]

They either got him and he is alive, or they killed him a long time ago and carried out the op to pile up pressure on Pakistan.
Why bury him at sea so quickly? US justifications make no sense. A couple of days to fly in international journalists/officials to confirm the death would not have changed anything.

But you have no justification for such an allegation, given my past or current actions - I do have justification for my allegations given past and current US Establishment actions.

They buried him at sea so as to avoid a shrine... its really as simple as that.. no bogeyman theories. they don't need journalist , many lawmakers, some who are sworn anti Obama politicians got to see all the proof. Over 100 people saw the proof, certainly you don't think everyone is one the take.. which would include Pakistan's govt , OBL kin too as being all on the take, if we believe your stance.

If they had caught him previously as you claimed they would announce it in a heart beat because its a huge PR victory for the adminstration...Bush failed and was called out for his failure and taunted for it for years.

finally, re: you last sentence- sure I can conjure up some theory based on your stance against the US here... thats the beauty of being of a conspiratorial mind - it works to promote absurdity most of the times.

 

[JayAtl]

Oh the moral high horse, yet again.

i wonder if the same high moral pedestal was available to Bush Sire when he lied and lied and then went into Iraq.

P.S. i can see that your brain is unable to comprehend minor details, and also that you lack the basic ability to google out certain things, so there's no use for me to hammer a simple understandable fact into your soft tissue.

wait a minute why is it my obligation to prove a negative? you made the claim insurgents and terrorist are seperate... and can't prove it.