US, Pakistan threaten each other with military action

[cosmicone]

Source: Times of India

WASHINGTON: Barely disguising mutual antagonism, the United States and Pakistan on Thursday threatened each other with military action in the aftermath of the American raid on the Abbottabad compound to kill Osama bin Laden, even as sober elements on both sides scrambled to save the relationship from total breakdown.

The White House led the way in publicly reiterating that it would not hesitate to carry out more such special operations in Pakistan if it did not act against terrorists holed up in the country. A lengthy Pakistani foreign office statement that the US incursion could not become the standard operating procedure or precedent for US or other countries did nothing to dissuade Washington from re-asserting the tough Obama policy: if there are terrorists inside Pakistan and it does not act, then the US will.

In fact, the White House itself surprisingly framed Sunday's raid a war context. "The operation was conducted in a manner fully consistent with the laws of war," Obama's spokesman Jay Carney said while discussing the Osama kill. "There is simply no question that this operation was lawful... We acted in the nation's self-defense." The remarks appeared to address Pakistan questioning the legality of the US action.

A rattled Pakistan fired back on Thursday through both its civilian front and military cabal which had been silent for more than three days after the US raid widely seen there as humiliating. The provocation for the angry Pakistan reaction was as much concern about more US incursions (and humiliation) as fears that New Delhi would take the American raid as a precedent, an apprehension that was heightened after Indian military commanders said they had the wherewithal to conduct similar special operations.


Read more: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/US-Pakistan-threaten-each-other-with-military-action/articleshow/8172679.cms

---

The most hilarious part is, "The irony of Pakistan scrambling US supplied F-16s to shoot at Americans hasn't sunk in in Washington, where some lawmakers are asking for a re-evaluation of the relationship."


Why do we keep supplying Pakistan with such military hardware again? The rag-tag bunch of terrorists don't have planes, helicopters or tanks -- why does Pakistan need them to fight in the war against the terrorists?

[dipsydoodle]

1. I dread to think what the outcome would be

if that bunch of tossers in Libya got their hands on such hardware.

[Amonester]

2. The problem with such hardware is *someone* has to fly them....

And that *someone* has to be able to *manoeuvre* its *buttons* so s/he can not only fly them, but land them safely as well.

I doubt these revolutionaries know how, but it may be only me.

[dipsydoodle]

4. They couldn't fly a kite

.

[Amonester]

6. LOL

Probably untrue (for a kite, that is).

[Ikonoklast]

3. Same reason Pakistan takes some of our aid money to train terrorists in

the Kashmir...they still see India as their principal enemy.

Why do we keep supplying Pakistan with such military hardware again? The rag-tag bunch of terrorists don't have planes, helicopters or tanks -- why does Pakistan need them to fight in the war against the terrorists?

[Amonester]

5. Because they're not *really* fighting the war against the terrarists?

I mean, *Officially*, they want to make believe they do, but under the radar, their *own* terrarists live south(-east) of the border?

[CJCRANE]

7. This article is overblown. SoS Clinton downplayed the tensions

and so did the Pakistani foreign minister (go and watch their press conferences for a more accurate version of both sides' position).

[dotymed]

8. Doesn't Pakistan also have nuclear capability

just like India? I believe they do. American supplied I believe.

[dotymed]

9. Yes, according to Wikipedia, Pakistan, India

and North Korea all have nuclear weapons.
They are not signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty either......... Damn, I hope they can fly a jet..

[RC]

10. Why are we supplying anyone with military hardware?

How often does that come back to bite us?

[robinlynne]

12. I anoslutely agree. . Cuba sends doctors to other countries. We send weapons and money..

[robinlynne]

11. Why not just cut off the 20 billion dollars? We dont need another war.

but we could use the 20 billion in bribe money we keep giving to Pakistan here at home.

[rhett o rick]

14. The neocons and apparently the Obama administration do not want the minerals in Afghanistan to fall

in the hands of China. We are scrambling to retain our empire. We are going to cut social programs so we can continue to have an empire.

[robinlynne]

15. forgot about that part. oops.

[Muskypundit]

19. repeat sry

[Muskypundit]

20. Its... umm.... too late for that.

China already owns most of the minerals in Afghanistan.

[ronnie624]

35. Succinct.

:thumbsup:

[thelordofhell]

21. It's all about the money

Now that Bin Laden is dead, less bribe money will go to Pakistan.

[Arrowhead2k1]

13. Times of India is a sensationalist rag. nt

[jberryhill]

16. SOURCE: TIMES OF INDIA

This is pot stirring.

The circumstances of Bin Laden's residence in Pakistan speak for themselves. The White House and State are not grandstanding on this issue because the clear unspoken message to Pakistan is "clean up your house".

If Pakistan wants to avoid further "humiliation" then those factions in Pakistan which are on our side need to win the internal dispute there.

We are not telling Pakistan what to do. We are showing them what we will do if they don't.

No words needed.

[closeupready]

27. There we go, on all points.

+1000.

[OhioChick]

17. "Times of India?"

No bias there....:rofl:

[closeupready]

28. Yup.

:D

[emulatorloo]

18. Times of India has an agenda. as jberryhill noted, this is pot-stirring

So take what you read with a VERY VERY LARGE BOULDER of salt.

[Vehl]

23. Sure

I agree that it's motives might be questioned but one has to keep in mind that the TOI did maintain over the years that osama was in Pakistan and that the ISI is helping him hide, They were proven correct a few days ago.

[Arrowhead2k1]

29. Where's the proof that the ISI was helping OBL to hide?

That's still conjecture if I'm not mistaken.

And it was obvious to almost everyone that Osama had to be somewhere in Pakistan.

[jberryhill]

32. It's not so much a question of "proof"

But is it realistic to assume that, at least at some level, there were enough palms greased to keep his presence there on the DL?

[Vehl]

33. I would say this falls under the "reasonable doubt" category but there is good evidence

"The level of certainty a juror must have to find a defendant guilty of a crime. A real doubt, based upon reason and common sense after careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, or lack of evidence, in a case."

Lets wait for more info from the captured intel (already there is information that Obama was very much active during his stay in Abaottabad)


However notwithstanding the highly unlikely event that the ISI/Army did not know he was there ( One has to realize that Pakistani military installations, police stations have been targeted by the Taliban/AQ in the recent years, thus it beggars belief that somehow the ISI/Pakistani security did not check a very suspicious house supposedly inhabited by "afghans" (according to the neighbors) less than a mile away from its Premier Military College...and surrounded by the residences of high ranking military officials.) there is yet more tantalizing (and damning) evidence coming to light

30 March 2011 Last updated at 06:08 ET

One of Indonesia's top terror suspects, wanted in connection with the 2002 Bali bombing, has been captured in Pakistan(Abottabad!), reports say.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12900555

more here
Militant’s road ends in Pakistan
http://www.dawn.com/2011/04/15/how-umar-patek-was-captured.html

^^ very interesting read!

^^ This Indonesian terrorist was arrested in Abottobad..only a few months ago. Does anyone want to make a guess why he came to that town? especially a supposedly highly secure military town? rather than go to other "terrorist hot spots" in Pakistan?

Questions also remain over his fate, and there are signs he may be caught up in tensions between ISI and the CIA, which have previously cooperated during terror arrests and would like access to him.

Islamabad has said it will not hand Patek over to the CIA and that he will be sent to Indonesia. But officials in Jakarta don’t appear that keen to have him, and have expressed doubts whether they could make charges stick against him for his alleged role in the Bali attacks.

Officials did not say how or why Patek ended up in Abbottabad, but his arrest followed the detention of an alleged Al Qaeda facilitator in the town called Tahir Shehzad, who worked as a clerk at the post office.

^^ Lol ISI officials did not say why or how! Cos they could not say that this guy came to meet Osama!!



Its pretty evident, from the information at hand, that the ISI clearly knew that Osama was living there.

[Arrowhead2k1]

36. That's still just conjecture.

Real evidence/proof would be like someone in the ISI or a document indicating that someone in the Pakistani institution actually knew that Osama himself was in that house and that there was a general coverup by them to keep his location a secret from the public in order to secure his well being. You said TOI had been "proven" correct with their suspicion that the Pak government was actively trying to hide OBL. Well, so far they have not. Atleast not yet. But I don't deny that there are some very interesting questions still to be asked.

[jberryhill]

30. Referring to the ISI as a monolith is likely an error

There are, no doubt, within Pakistani leadership actors with different agendae.

What matters is that the US was able to accomplish its objective without being conned, as a previous president who believed he could see Putin's soul was prone to do.

Congress and the administration will good-cop bad-cop the lingering issues with Pakistan.

Ultimately, an acceptable final solution to Kashmir would go a long way toward getting Pakistan out of perpetually seeking to hedge its bets.

[Javaman]

47. I would say mountain of salt...

Until I hear India massing troops along it's border with Pakistan, this is just more tit for tat rhetoric.

Pakistan fucked up, they know it and are trying to save face.

[Turborama]

22. This is an Op-Ed/anti-Pakistan propaganda piece, not Latest Breaking News. n/t

[freshwest]

37. Yes, they'll never get over it. That and Kashmir.

[Trajan]

24. I dont think it's a big secret ...

Every piece of hardware sold there has a kill switch, I believe ....

[tabasco]

25. India would kick the shit out of Pakistan if they went to war.

Pakistan isn't ready for the big leagues.

[closeupready]

26. Working overtime, huh? Hey, yay, yay, yay!

:rofl:

[plumbob]

31. Oh goodie! Another war for the militarists to profit from!!

Ponies all around!

[Turborama]

34. This headline does look like it was written by someone who wants a US Vs Pakistan war, doesn't it

As does the article.

Ain't gunna happen, though.

[cosmicone]

38. Pakistan's army warns US not to stage more raids

Source: AP/Yahoo

ISLAMABAD – Pakistan's army broke its silence Thursday over the U.S. commando raid that killed Osama bin Laden, acknowledging its own "shortcomings" in efforts to find the al-Qaida leader but threatening to review cooperation with Washington if there is another similar violation of Pakistani sovereignty.

The tough-sounding statement was a sign of the anger in the army. It also appeared aimed at appeasing politicians, the public and the media in the country over what's viewed by many here as a national humiliation delivered by a deeply unpopular America.

While international concerns are centered on suspicions that elements of the security forces sheltered bin Laden, most Pakistanis seem more upset that uninvited American soldiers flew into the country, landed on the ground and launched an attack on a house — and that the army was unaware and unable to stop them. That it happened in an army town, next door to a military academy and close to the capital has added to the embarrassment.

Ties between the two countries were already strained before the raid because of American allegations that Islamabad was failing to crack down on Afghan Taliban factions sheltering on Pakistani soil. Pakistan was angered over stepped-up U.S. drone strikes and the case of Raymond Davis, a CIA contractor who killed two Pakistanis in January.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110505/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan_bin_laden

---

Times of India had a similar article, however, despite being the largest circulation English newspaper in the world, some people chose to claim there was bias. This story will develop more and more.

[Skip_In_Boulder]

39. O.K. and so if we do conduct any more raids in Pakistan

They are going to do exactly what?

[robinlynne]

42. give back the 20 billion dollars maybe?

[WatsonT]

49. They might provide safe harbor for known terrorists who have attacked the US!

And th . . . hey wait a second!

[Skip_In_Boulder]

52. LOL, Yeah, done already gone down that road. n/t

[tabatha]

40. I think this is just posturing to avoid embarrassment.

They receive a LOT of money from the US.

But, that is just my opinion.

[TheDebbieDee]

41. Pakistan is just talkin' the talk...........cuz they can do nothing else!

They have nukes but can't deliver them anywhere..........Pakistan is just like an impotent man!

[cloudbase]

43. We should announce that we're

selling some of those stealth helicopters to India.

[iandhr]

44. As the President said

If we have actionable intelligence of the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden or one of his lieutenants and Pakistan is unwilling or unable to act we will.

[iandhr]

45. As the President said

If we have actionable intelligence of the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden or one of his lieutenants and Pakistan is unwilling or unable to act we will.

[Odin2005]

46. Me to Pakistan: FUCK OFF.

[WatsonT]

48. Don't harbor any more terrorists and we'll call it a deal

[sabrina 1]

51. They've been doing that for a long time. So, what's the

point again? The US will NOT start a war with Pakistan, unless of course India wants to join in and start a Nuclear War, which is what would happen.

This government is a war-mongering, war-profiteering criminal enterprise, but they are not stupid enough to start a Nuclear in that region of the world. No one, except for apparently a few radical extremists, and I'm not talking about Al Queda which is irrelevant, wants to start WW111 and that is what would happen in the US started a war with Pakistan.

So, you can forget about it. It's sad to see people HOPING for another war, very sad.

[sabrina 1]

50. Times of India. Well, unfortunately their hopes of

a split between Pakistan and the US have already been dashed. US officials confirm that the relationship will continue. The US needs Pakistan more than Pakistan needs them, unless we leave Afghanistan. Which we will not.

US cannot risk a China/Pakistan alliance in the region. So, despite the hopes of India, the aid to Pakistan will continue, maybe even increase.