Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 2011

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 01 Dec 2011 15:55

Parsuram,
would US vacate the Astan and hand it over to pak?

It seems to me that US is using Astan as a launching pad into pakistan.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 01 Dec 2011 15:57

This is the Pak version of the story according to Time magazine, kinda explains what happened.

NATO informed pakis that they are carrying out an op near the border area according to the SOP.

US SF carrying out the op came under fire.

A sergeant called a paki major and asked him about the fire coming from his post.

Matter was escalated and pak commander managing the border denied (lessons from kiya-nahin) that the firing was coming from their posts.

Pakis suddenly felt 2-3 apaches had come. Apaches engaged probably killing some pakis.

Pakis pleaded that now NATO is firing at Paki posts (same posts which they denied were firing on US SFs).

Apaches disengaged. Reinforcements were sent and some warning shots were fired by Major Mustafa of the Jihadi army (to reinforce the troop morale?).

Apaches reappeared and destroyed the check post and the post from where reinforcements had come.

Pakis stopped supply lines, asked US to vacate the Shamsi airbase and threatened to boycott Bonn conference because of "unprovoked" killing of their soldiers.

On asked, how far is Paki nation willing to go - Given the technology, we can't fight them - General Ishfaq Nadeem, Pakistan's Director General of Military Operations

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... z1fHF271kO

sum · Post by **sum** » 01 Dec 2011 16:04

Pakis suddenly felt 2-3 apaches had come. Apaches engaged probably killing some pakis.

Pakis pleaded that now NATO is firing at Paki posts (same posts which they denied were firing on US SFs).

Apaches disengaged. Reinforcements were sent and some warning shots were fired by Major Mustafa of the Jihadi army (to reinforce the troop morale?).

Apaches reappeared and destroyed the check post and the post from where reinforcements had come.

Repeated GUBO even before the effect of first penetration had worn out!!

Major Mujahid and co sure seem to have had a glimpse of Jahannam on Earth before they met their 72.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 01 Dec 2011 16:18

sum wrote: Repeated GUBO even before the effect of first penetration had worn out!!

Major Mujahid and co sure seem to have had a glimpse of Jahannam on Earth before they met their 72.

NATO must release the video of violating Paki sovirginity.

Here is an old Apache night attack video

Major Mujahid probably did see hell before meeting his 72!

Abhijit · Post by **Abhijit** » 01 Dec 2011 16:21

Apaches disengaged. Reinforcements were sent and some warning shots were fired by Major Mustafa of the Jihadi army (to reinforce the troop morale?).

this is classic paki piskology - derived from the arab rapist forefathers. these warning shots were ordered by mustafa as a local H & D saving exercise for his troops. they got their h&d up their musharrafs alright!

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 01 Dec 2011 16:31

Rangudu wrote:A very interesting discussion on TSP.

Chris Fair is quite funny. She let's loose 4-letter words, calls TSP a condom, blasts US military men for homo-erotic fantasies about TFTA Jernails etc.

What has gotten into her of late? It's as if watching a doppelganger, or was it the previous one.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 01 Dec 2011 16:33

Rangudu wrote:A very interesting discussion on TSP.
Chris Fair is quite funny. She let's loose 4-letter words, calls TSP a condom, blasts US military men for homo-erotic fantasies about TFTA Jernails etc.

Boss, I must admit, I did not listen through the whole thing, which I intend to tonight my distaste for Uncle Tommish SD not withstanding, but as KLN mentions, there is a fundamental flaw in all this TSP bashing. Its devoid of substance and seems opportunistic to me. In other words, TSP is loosing its TFTA gloss with people like Fair and other DC elites is because of the jilted lover syndrome. And we all know the reasons for this, TSP wants India on a silver platter not satisfied with the billions and just equal equal with India; TSP wants India castrated. US is not prepared to go that far, nor can it, there is some semblance of nationalism and b@lls in Delhi in spite of MMS. USA on the hand thinks as a super power, we gave you all these goodies, isn't that enough for you to do as we say?

But here is the flaw, and thats why as much as I am enjoying the morphing of Fair etc into BRites, she & others still can't take off their colonial, overt/covert racist consciousness. Even in the midst of TSP bashing, Fair still alludes to Indian "activities" in Afghanistan legitimately irritating TSP. Unless, USA changes its thinking and recognizes India's superior moral status (despite its flaws), and see TSP for what it really is, a terrorist abomination hell-bent on destroying India, all this anal-yses are shallow. Of course, every country has strategic objectives, India included, but the means adopted ought to be the judgement factor. So TSP going about achieving its strategic objective by advancing the Jurassic Taliban goons (Fair's description) is not at the same moral equivalence as India's objective of advancing its, by supporting Afghan reconciliation, helping Afghans with its infrastructure etc. Any drawing of such an equivalence is reflective of shallow colonial, racist outlook.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 01 Dec 2011 16:49

Ah, STRATFOR claims that the attack on Pakistani ouposts was "almost certainly" that of AH-64 Apache attack helicopters and an AC-130 gunship.

A Deadly U.S. Attack on Pakistani Soil

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 01 Dec 2011 16:59

It seems pakis are trying to back out of conflict without losing face.

Earlier there were reports that the pakis were asleep. Now, they say that there was communication before the attack from the khan.

To me, it seems like, pakis are taking up the wriggle room offered by khan. The wriggle room being the theory that there was some attack on nato and they mistook it for the antics of paki and retaliated.

Paki is now toeing this line. They have also said that their representative will attend the meet.

In short, the paki's bluff was called. It signals the change of khan's attitude.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 01 Dec 2011 17:23

Pakis must learn there is a price for their Jihadist activities. They dare not really take the Americans head on, because otherwise the Americans may just decide to demolish the whole PakMil infrastructure.

After the last attack, Pakis stopped NATO supply lines. Okay, what if USA/NATO hits them again?! What will the Pakis do beside whining a lot more? Some terror attack? They have been doing these attacks in Afghanistan already! So what is Pakistan really going to do! Either the Paki Generals have to show some balls and retaliate against the Americans or Kiyani loses all respect! That is Pakistan's Achilles Heel.

What Kiyani needs is for America not to precipitate hostility to such a level that he is forced to do something against the Americans openly in order to placate his constituency of Jihadists! That is exactly where America ought to squeeze him! The more the Americans attack Pakistani posts, the more pressure would come onto him. The Americans can say, either the Pakis ensure unhindered supply lines to Afghanistan, or the US/NATO would start hitting out at Pakis.

Obama can easily blackmail Kiyani, but the Americans have allowed themselves to be blackmailed by the Pakis. It is time to increase the number of sticks and to forget the carrots.

Kiyani would be forced to back down and give the Americans what they want in Afghanistan. Problem is nobody has really put this irresistible offer at the table for the Pakis.

USA can tell the Pakis

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 01 Dec 2011 17:36

johneeG wrote:It seems pakis are trying to back out of conflict without losing face.

Earlier there were reports that the pakis were asleep. Now, they say that there was communication before the attack.

To me, it seems like, pakis are taking up the wriggle room offered by khan. The wriggle room being the theory that there was some attack on nato and they mistook it for the antics of paki retaliated.

Paki is now toeing this line. They have also said that their representative will attend the meet.

In short, the paki's bluff was called. It signals that change of khan's attitude.

Absolutely. The paki bit off more than it could chew n swallow, and chocked on it. Now it has to spit out the truth. Ho hum. Situation normal, but strangely though, the tube light in Ms Fair's head has gone off, dazzling her with the truth. She certainly is on a bender against the paki, to hear her tell - and I did. It doesn't sound like some thing that will heal. But it is entirely likely that she could turn around and blame India for it all. The US has every intention of staying in Afghanistan for a long time. For that they need an Afghanistan that is secure, peaceful, and one that signs agreements and abides by those agreements. Doesn't matter who. Is in charge in Kabul, as long these basic requirements are met. Of course, that excludes the paki running Afghanistan. That is the rub for the paki. No prize for guessing how that will work out. On balance, right now, I would give even odds for a pro India afghanistan when the dust settles. And if the paki continues to run interference with unkil's plans, there will be a link from Afghanistan's Badakhshan panhandle (the panjshir valley) across gilgit to India, so US plans move forward. The paki had better take note and reform. NOT. The paki is, after all, a time released explosive devise ticking down to 0.00:00:00.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 01 Dec 2011 18:02

The (in)famous paki downhill skiing season has started again. (Apologies to Frost) The snowy slippery slopes of paki jehadism and perfidy are dark and deep, and the pakis have miles to before they (are put to) sleep. At the end of this ski jump awaits a 72-year old virgin where all hope lies eternal.

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 01 Dec 2011 19:18

I hope the rumor of paki hiding its nukes in tunnels is true. Nothing easier to find and identify by remote sensing. I'm sure even ISRO has gravity sensors which will locate all those tunnels. All it will take is to permanantly block both ends of those tunnels with low yeild nukes and the paki will be nuke nude. On the other hand, if the paki starts moving its nukes in a shell game, that will also expose their location by remote monitoring. Screwed is screwed. Heads or tails. It all adds up to one paranoid paki, fun to behold.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 01 Dec 2011 19:19

sum wrote:^^ There seems to be a definite good cop, bad cop game ( with MMS being good cop) going on here....

Why this sudden warning? Have some signals been picked up by US/Indian intel about a possible mega attack?

They are trying to threaten the Paks.

Fact is that post 26/11, US-UK were encouraging India to retaliate. Somewhat like April Glaspie encouraging Saddam to attack Kuwait.

The fake threatening phone call from Pranab Mukherjee to Zardari was part of the scenario.

India did not, and it is not MMS' fault. Fact is that it is difficult to calibrate the escalation cycle once shooting starts. We have to assume that Paks have working nukes and delivery vehicles provided by the Cheenis.

Anyway, the easiest way for US-UK to take care of Pak nukes is for India to attack the Paks. Any damage suffered by India is always welcome.

So what can be done? There are ways, but you have to go deeper.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 01 Dec 2011 19:25

the "chankyan" "peaceful" mode can't work always. eventually, force and violence on India's part will be necessary to wipe out the roots that gave birth to Pakistan...

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Dec 2011 19:36

parsuram wrote:I hope the rumor of paki hiding its nukes in tunnels is true. Nothing easier to find and identify by remote sensing. I'm sure even ISRO has gravity sensors which will locate all those tunnels. All it will take is to permanantly block both ends of those tunnels with low yeild nukes and the paki will be nuke nude. On the other hand, if the paki starts moving its nukes in a shell game, that will also expose their location by remote monitoring. Screwed is screwed. Heads or tails. It all adds up to one paranoid paki, fun to behold.

Parsuram the US is very ve-ry clearly heading towards the capability of damaging underground tunnels credibly with conventional munitions. No excuse will be given to anyone to break the current nuclear "order". the one who does that would be in for a spot of trouble. The problem as I see it is that if anyone uses a nuke and that user is not punished severely the signal that goes out is that "It is OK to use a nuke". I don't see that happening.

As an aside I see the actions and statements of the Jamaat ud dawa as laughable - even pitiable. They say "We will make Pakistan into a Taliban nation". Heck isn't that good? Isn't Islam good? or do the Jamaat ud dawa think it is bad and are saying that as a "threat"? How silly. Piskologically a self goal. IMO

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 Dec 2011 19:47

Rangudu wrote:A very interesting discussion on TSP.

At last, I saw the video clip. Ms. C.Fair is indeed very angry. She even went to the extent of equating Pakistan with the Cold War enemy, the USSR

I was simply amazed to hear (from Tom Donnolley) that these guys (CENTCOM commanders) are still talking about 'how great looking these Pakistani officers are in their uniforms' and 'Kiyani being the epitome of that' , a throwback to the 'straight out of a Hollywood movie' times of the Eisenhower era. So, nothing has changed.

I was also pleasantly surprised by the statement of Ms. Fair that when it comes to supporting terrorism there is no difference between the Deep State and the society. This is a knowledge that most in India do not display. She concluded by saying that the US was at a proxy war with Pakistan in Afghanistan !

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 01 Dec 2011 19:49

Pranav, it does seem Unkil/poodle and GOI are playing the classic Lucknow pehle-aap cross talk for a long time now. Only it is about who is gonna bash up Pakbarics. Both want the other to wash their backsides and clear this s.it. Unkil has his hands full, Iran is much higher priority and India is scared of nooks and also the Cheeni connection.

India has to agree with Unkil that it will more than watch with sympathy should a conflict occur regardless of if GOI initiates it out of pre-emptive attack or retaliation for terror strike. It should be the same as 71 - despatch of 7th fleet, sale of arms, UN support, demand and stern warning that the Chinese lay off, only this time IN OUR FAVOR. Armed with such guarantees and perhaps a few years of preparation, India can and should clear up this Pakbaric sh.it on behalf of humanity once for all.

Not otherwise, unless we manage to get the Chinese to keep quiet for other strategic reasons and sell Pakbarics at a discount, which as I have pointed out earlier, is very much within the realm of possibilities in near future. The cost for Chinese is mounting and they are good in reading the writing on the wall.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 01 Dec 2011 19:52

The thing about C.Fair is that she is a maverick. That is why she refused an offer to be Holbrooke's TSP advisor in the early days of the Obama admin (she's a Democrat).

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 01 Dec 2011 19:52

shiv wrote:As an aside I see the actions and statements of the Jamaat ud dawa as laughable - even pitiable. They say "We will make Pakistan into a Taliban nation". Heck isn't that good? Isn't Islam good? or do the Jamaat ud dawa think it is bad and are saying that as a "threat"? How silly. Piskologically a self goal. IMO

Reminds me of work-to-rule which is actually a really damaging form of strike that gets better results than real one. Here it is work-to-pure standards..

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 01 Dec 2011 19:55

SSridhar wrote: I was also pleasantly surprised by the statement of Ms. Fair that when it comes to supporting terrorism there is no difference between the Deep State and the society. This is a knowledge that most in India do not display. She concluded by saying that the US was at a proxy war with Pakistan in Afghanistan !

Very good to know. Yet, I feel these people change their tunes with the needs of their sponsor(Massa), and have no particular stand in true sense.

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 01 Dec 2011 19:58

Shiv ji: I understand what you mean about the use of nukes in combat, but if you recall Kargil, the paki threatened using nukes, and if that happens again - which is a given, no one is going to second guess India in bottling up the paki nukes. Sure , it would be far more desirable to do so with non nuclear munitions, but the important task is to bottle them up.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 01 Dec 2011 20:03

Pranav,
I think US wouldnt want India to be wasted in a conflict with pakis, and allow China much larger geopolitical space in the region. Instead, their wet dream would be China and India wasting each other. Pakis are small fry...

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 01 Dec 2011 20:09

A really hard hitting one..

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/canad ... story.html

with the possible exception of a pocket of Kurdish civility in Northern Iraq, Afghanistan is the democratic bright spot in the 4,000 kilometres of police-state mayhem and lunacy between the Syrian port city of Latakia on the Mediterranean Sea and the Pakistani mega-slum of Lahore

..

In Pakistan, that corrupt military-industrial complex that masquerades as a UN member state, the political elites are getting their jollies this week by whipping mobs into paroxysms of paranoid chauvinism and effigy-burning.

....

"Pakistan thinks it can win this war. They are always supporting the Taliban, and now they don't even need to pretend that they're not."

....

the longrunning American pantomime that requires such suspension of disbelief as to cast Pakistan in the role of "ally" has now been perhaps fully and finally exposed for the fiction that it always was.

...

[Canadians should] get a straight answer from the Americans, once and for all: Whose side are you on, anyway?

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 01 Dec 2011 20:10

johneeG wrote:Pranav,
I think US wouldnt want India to be wasted in a conflict with pakis, and allow China much larger geopolitical space in the region. Instead, their wet dream would be China and India wasting each other. Pakis are small fry...

That is a valid point ... but Pak nukes can become a threat to Israel and the West via proliferation to West Asia. That is one of their nightmare scenarios. They may feel it is worth getting India wasted to forestall that possibility, even if it means China gaining a temporary advantage.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 01 Dec 2011 20:25

Pranav wrote:
johneeG wrote:Pranav,
I think US wouldnt want India to be wasted in a conflict with pakis, and allow China much larger geopolitical space in the region. Instead, their wet dream would be China and India wasting each other. Pakis are small fry...
That is a valid point ... but Pak nukes can become a threat to Israel and the West via proliferation to West Asia. That is one of their nightmare scenarios. They may feel it is worth getting India wasted to forestall that possibility, even if it means China gaining a temporary advantage.

Just speculating: I think paki nukes are no threat to west or Israel. They have a handle on it. They are perhaps afraid of dirty bombs by 'non-state' actors. It is this fear that makes them continue to muddle in Af-Pak or Pak-Af.

Also, China is not a temporary threat. If China, sans India, gets powerful then this region is effectively out of US' reach. That would soon end its global dominion. I am inclined to think that US would rather have Israel nuked than allow China to have a walkover.

A single China can create many pakis. A paki, by itself, cant do much.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 01 Dec 2011 20:34

johneeG wrote:
Pranav wrote: That is a valid point ... but Pak nukes can become a threat to Israel and the West via proliferation to West Asia. That is one of their nightmare scenarios. They may feel it is worth getting India wasted to forestall that possibility, even if it means China gaining a temporary advantage.
Just speculating: I think paki nukes are no threat to west or Israel. They have a handle on it.

That is not so obvious. Paks have had a collaboration with China, and may actually be in possession of Chinese-manufactured assets.

Also, China is not a temporary threat. If China, sans India, gets powerful then this region is effectively out of US' reach. That would soon end its global dominion. I am inclined to think that US would rather have Israel nuked than allow China to have a walkover.

A single China can create many pakis. A paki, by itself, cant do much.

If India is wasted Asia is that much weaker. A China by itself can be managed, imho. India and China together would be difficult to handle.

Anyway, these calculations are liable to go out of the window when it comes to nukes. A North Korea by itself can hold the US hostage if they the requisite assistance from the Chinese.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 01 Dec 2011 20:36

parsuram wrote:I hope the rumor of paki hiding its nukes in tunnels is true. Nothing easier to find and identify by remote sensing. I'm sure even ISRO has gravity sensors which will locate all those tunnels. All it will take is to permanantly block both ends of those tunnels with low yeild nukes and the paki will be nuke nude. On the other hand, if the paki starts moving its nukes in a shell game, that will also expose their location by remote monitoring. Screwed is screwed. Heads or tails. It all adds up to one paranoid paki, fun to behold.

Speaking of nukes in tunnels. I thought the Brahmos' capabilities was exactly that: To be manouvred and attack from any angle? Wouldn't a CL20 warhead suffice? And would the energy blast, some of which will be directed along the confines of the tunnel have the heat and the kinetic energy to roast the rest?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 01 Dec 2011 20:50

all you have to do is seal the tunnel entrances...

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 01 Dec 2011 20:54

Pranav wrote:
johneeG wrote: Just speculating: I think paki nukes are no threat to west or Israel. They have a handle on it.
That is not so obvious. Paks have had a collaboration with China, and may actually be in possession of Chinese-manufactured assets.

Yes, its not obvious.

Pranav wrote:
Also, China is not a temporary threat. If China, sans India, gets powerful then this region is effectively out of US' reach. That would soon end its global dominion. I am inclined to think that US would rather have Israel nuked than allow China to have a walkover.

A single China can create many pakis. A paki, by itself, cant do much.
If India is wasted Asia is that much weaker. A China by itself can be managed, imho. India and China together would be difficult to handle.

India and China together are indeed very difficult(if not impossible) to handle. But India and China can be handled when they are trying to fight each other out. If one of them is eliminated, the other would be free. The same theory applies to Indo-Pak scenario and perhaps has allowed the pakis to survive despite tactical brilliance. The pakis understand that and frequently over play their hand hoping the massa would cover it for the 'balance of power in the region'.

Pranav wrote: Anyway, these calculations are liable to go out of the window when it comes to nukes. A North Korea by itself can hold the US hostage if they the requisite assistance from the Chinese.

Exactly, such entities(pak or NoKo) need assistance. China can create many such entities to create takleef for the Khan.

PS: All the above IMHO, of course...

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 01 Dec 2011 21:05

Kashi wrote:
Rangudu wrote:A very interesting discussion on TSP.

Chris Fair is quite funny. She let's loose 4-letter words, calls TSP a condom, blasts US military men for homo-erotic fantasies about TFTA Jernails etc.
What has gotten into her of late? It's as if watching a doppelganger, or was it the previous one.

She now is also a fellow at West Point, and must support the Pentagon viewpoint, which was first explicitly voiced by Mullen, and is repeated by every American soldier in Afghanistan when he/she gets attacked by Paki artillery, mortar and machine gun fire. This seems to be a very common occurrence these days on the border.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 01 Dec 2011 21:17

CFair is a chameleon. Let us not get carried away. All it means is that right now the mood in Pentagon is to bomb the crap out of Pakistan and exact some revenge.
India must Make hay while the sun shines.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 01 Dec 2011 21:21

Lalmohan wrote:all you have to do is seal the tunnel entrances...

Why just seal them? Have them go off in the tunnels. Chini justice

Brad Goodman · Post by **Brad Goodman** » 01 Dec 2011 21:42

Just a thought as I was browsing the thread was. Current crop of bosses at pentagon have love for pakis because they were the ones who had boots on ground during the bear trap. So they keep thinking pakis can be worked with. The ones before were from the cold war love fest. 10 years from now the officers at top will be Dakota Meyer clones who have done several tours of Af-Pak (not just sitting in command center of baghram) and fought TSPA jihadis in plain clothes. It will be interesting how samosa's and medal decorated uniforms of jernails can impress these officers.

Sushupti · Post by **Sushupti** » 01 Dec 2011 22:22

Some Maria sultan, looks like a she male, from pak on timesnow. Giving two american buffoons the taste of plain face lying, which we hear all the time.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 01 Dec 2011 22:43

Apparently the Supreme Court of Pakistan has ordered ex-amby Hussain Haqqani (good Haqqani) to not leave Pakistan and has ordered his house arrest. Discussions going on whether he can be tried for treason.

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 01 Dec 2011 23:03

johneeG wrote:My take on strategic depth, do correct me where I am wrong:
A strong and formidable Astan is a huge threat to pakistan. The stability and integrity of pakistan is challenged by Astan. Astan could easily lay claims to representing the pashtuns and thereby laying claims to the lands that they are in settled within pak.

This could open a can of worms for the idea of pakistan.

Also, the generals of pak may want to keep the exit door open, so that they can save their skin when things get too hot.

Strategic depth in Astan is not an offensive strategy.

WRT 'Strategic depth' of TSP.
Its aim it is to gain an advantage in terms of space in a war with India.
The Durrand line issue is secondary in this.

The framework for this has existed in the Taliban regime 1.0 which was recognised by Pakistan and KSA and UAE (on the persuasion of Pakistan).

Examples of it in action:
1. In proxy war in Kashmir in 90s as foreign fighters.
2. The hijacking of the IA flight 814 which landed in Kandahar in Dec 1999. The behaviour the Taliban regime 1.0, in the negotiations between GOI and the hijackers, acting on the instructions from Pakistan.

Today I would say it, has three components:
1. Afghanistan to be a sanctuary to which the TSP forces would retreat to after it losses in the conventional war India.
2. The Afghans thrown as cannon fodder against India.
3. A certain part of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal moved to Afghanistan as second strike capability.

Afghans do not get a say in all this. In return, they are to be eternally dependent on TSP with a in a bear hug of 'Islamic brotherhood'.

TSP current objective in Afghanistan to ensure this: A Taliban Regime 2.0.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 01 Dec 2011 23:28

Poak Instantkeema( Iwojima) moment

[youtube]-BSoEeLgnm0#t=45s[/youtube]

Brad Goodman · Post by **Brad Goodman** » 01 Dec 2011 23:40

Two more Pakistan nationals shot dead by NATO forces in Afghanistan

Two Pakistani nationals from Balochistan were allegedly shot dead by NATO forces in Afghanistan on Thursday, days after ties between Islamabad and Washington plunged to a new low after a cross-border air strike killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

The two Pakistani men from Chagai district of Balochistan were visiting their relatives in Bibijan area of Afghanistan, their relatives told the media. The relatives alleged NATO forces opened fire at the men and killed them instantly

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 01 Dec 2011 23:43

Give me Money, Give me money

Time for Saudi or even Karzai to step in and pay the blood money
Relatives of Killed Pakistani Soldiers Want Justice

"I want to tell our soldiers that they should avenge the killing of Usman and other soldiers like him," Bashir said in an interview in her home in Punjab province. As she spoke, she kissed a framed photo of her son, who also left behind a wife and 2-month-old daughter.Bashir's call for revenge has been echoed in daily protests held in Pakistan's major cities, many of them organized by Islamist and right-wing parties who have long said that America and NATO -- not the Taliban -- are the prime enemies of Pakistan.The border incident has greatly strengthened that narrative, reducing the political space for those who argue that cooperation with Washington is in the country's interest. The army, which has received billions of dollars in U.S. aid since 2001 in exchange for its cooperation, however limited, against militants, has fueled the hard line by accusing NATO of a "deliberate act of aggression."The 24 deaths by apparent American friendly fire come on top of the 3,000 Pakistani security force members who have been killed over the last 10 years fighting insurgents, mainly in the northwest close to the Afghan border.Many in the country, including leading politicians, say the war has been foisted upon them by America. They say the violence would end if Islamabad severed its ties with Washington.