US military not welcome in Pakistan: army

[maddezmom]

Source: AFP

ISLAMABAD (AFP) - The Pakistani military reacted angrily to reports that US President George W. Bush is considering covert military operations in the country's volatile tribal areas bordering Afghanistan.

"It is not up to the US administration, it is Pakistan's government who is responsible for this country," chief military spokesman Major General Waheed Arshad told AFP.

"There are no overt or covert US operations inside Pakistan. Such reports are baseless and we reject them."

The New York Times reported on its website late Saturday that under a proposal being discussed in Washington, CIA operatives based in Afghanistan would be able to call on direct military support for counter-terrorism operations in neighbouring Pakistan.

Citing unnamed senior administration officials, the newspaper said the proposal called for giving Central Intelligence Agency agents broader powers to strike targets in Pakistan.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080106/wl_sthasia_afp/usattacksintelligencepakistan

[Benhurst]

1. I so surprised. How can they react that way ? I'm sure we wouldn't

object if they wanted to do a few covert operations over here.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. I actually imagine that their objections are for domestic consumption.

Their own people are not nearly as friendly to the US as our installed military dictator, Pervert Musharraf, is.

[gratuitous]

5. I think you're right

It's the same as the puppet insulting the ventrilouquist, played for a laugh and not at all serious.

[EFerrari]

9. Yes. It's likely we are already in country. n/t

[Jackpine Radical]

14. I would have assumed that.

The link in the post below confirms it.

[EFerrari]

13. Hayden: US Miliatry Escalation in Pakistan. Link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2610912&mesg_id=2610912

[varun]

3. but the billions that America gives to Pakistan

is welcome

:eyes:

[Pavulon]

4. A brief look at recent public acked. ops

shows joint operations and overflight access. The pakis. can not come right out and support this but we are killing people they do not like. The same ones who tried to kill musharraf, 9 times.

[pasto76]

6. republicans and conservatives screamed for blood

when the secret CIA prisons were leaked, when torture was leaked. But when BushCo says it is considering "covert" - Not covert anymore are they? - operations......no big deal. More bullshit from Bush. Instead of GETTING THE GUY WHO ORCHESTRATED THE ATTACKS on Sept 11, more talk, no action.

[ohio2007]

7. Pakistan army already working with the US in the badlands

dunno why they wish to deny it now.

[tabasco]

10. The Pakistan army ain't doing jack shit in the "badlands."

You have no idea what you're talking about.

[lovuian]

8. I was waiting for this Pakistan's military isn't stupid

they know Bush wants a regime change

[bluesmail]

15. You got that right.

Musharaff is blowback

[FarCenter]

11. The border is non-functional

It runs down the center of a low mountain range which is populated on both slopes by the same Pashtun ethnic group, about 20 million strong.

It only makes sense if you are a British diplomat sitting in London drawing lines on a map. Which is how it came to be where it is.

A more rational border would be between the Pashtuns and the Punjabis. Both Pakistan and Afghanistan are unstable combinations of multiple ethnic groups.

[donkeyotay]

12. The whole world is holding itself hostage, blackmailing the Chimp

Gotta keep paying all sides. The worse things get the more money it costs. Fearless Leader is traveling now. Be very afraid for your wallet. Everybody wants more money. What a war.

[ohio2007]

16. heres to the new boss, same as the old boss

?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wb711Dnwf5c&feature=related

[Igel]

17. As you would expect.

And as any sane person would expect.

There are a few ways to slice it.

On the Pakistani side:
--They really don't want us there.
--We're already there, and this "leak" is simply foolishly behind the times
--They don't care or want us there, and this is for public consumption.

However there have been previous strikes across the border, and the response is always the same: Stop it. No reason to assume it's not sincere; very few army people are going to want having another country's troops on their territory, acting independently. In the case of the US military, 'honor' is a shadow of what it is in many societies; still, the American military, with its watered down code of honor wouldn't like it.

On the US side:
--We just want to frighten people "over there".
--We're already there, and this "leak" is simply foolishly behind the times.
--We really are planning on starting covert actions, even as we send in troops to help
train the frontier guard, and this is just a bona fide leak.
--It doesn't matter, the leak's there for PR, to show * is 'tough'; only a valid option if we're actually not there and have no intentions of sending in covert forces.

The first is silly. The populace in the NWFP and FATA already hates us and already kill anybody they don't like, claiming that they're spies or covert agents. Much of the populace elsewhere also pretty much hates us. "Frightened" is not the word that comes to mind. "Stirred up" is an understatement. It's an insult directed very much at cultures upholding a trafitional view of honor, The second is also foolish--if you're there, and they suspect it, you don't confirm it and justify their killing of other Pashtuns. And the third would be foolish, warning the locals to be on the lookout. The fourth is also silly, just less so; however it shows a degree of foolishness on the part of planners.

Whether or not you like the idea, one thing is fairly sure: It's a foolish leak. Under two scenarios, it's also letting the enemy know to be on the lookout--if we're there, it's treason or something akin to it, aiding those that would kill American soldiers and allies. Under another, it's an attempt to leak classified info in order to shape foreign policy--for that, I'd look either to CIA or State 'officials', since they seem to think they don't need to be elected at all in order to manage the technocracy. In either event, it'll provoke additional attempts to kill the soldiers there to train the frontier guards, and serve as justification.