Clinton regrets for Salala attack, Pakistan to Open NATO Supply Line
- Thread starter ajtr
- Start date
sayareakd
Mod
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2009
- Messages
- 17,734
- Likes
- 18,952
for few more billions they will kill half of their own country and US dont have to say sorry.
- Joined
- May 31, 2012
- Messages
- 2,370
- Likes
- 1,028
So did I . . . this i have to save for my private collection . . . :cool2:
I had a spasm in my ribs while laughing.
This is an absolute beauty of satire
Last edited:
sayareakd
Mod
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2009
- Messages
- 17,734
- Likes
- 18,952
i posted this on my FB page.................
I had a spasm in my ribs while laughing.
What will be a loss from the Indian pov is Pakistan being anointed as State sponsor of terror.
What surprises me is LeT still not regarded as a terrorist organization by the US like the AQ has been. India should and the Indian lobby in the US in particular should keep working on this in the US Congress. Even if takes creating a proganda to join AQ with LeT. Also the Saudis are mortal enemies with the AQ and linking LeT with AQ should play a good role in the GCC states as well. And its not really fabricating as thee have been indications were Hafiz Saeed has supported AQ at different points in time.
thakur_ritesh
Ambassador
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2009
- Messages
- 4,435
- Likes
- 1,733
I am not so certain that India is keen to have Pakistan branded as a state sponsor of terror, our PM is too keen on improved relations, there is a very strong pro "aman ki asha" lobby in the circles that matter in the government and other institutions that matter and have a hand in directly/indirectly running the affairs of the country, and unfortunately we also look to use Pakistan's sponsor of terrorism the same way as the US does, which is to negotiate a better deal and no more.
Most important, don't forget the bonhomie that is doing rounds, still exists post the arrest of Abu Jundal and the confessions, and before the PM hangs up his shoes, he is bound to make a visit to Pakistan, and the MFN is still not a done deal. At least I have no such hopes of India even trying to pursue it's case on this one.
If I am not mistaken the only time we came close to getting Pakistan branded as one was during the NDA days when the Clinton administration was in the office in the US, and when they couldn't pull it off, ABV was back to the negotiation table.
Ejaz,
From what I have been reading, even the recent handover of the two terrorists involves a US hand. What I do want to see is what happens after this. There are many more terrorists holed up in the KSA, now post these 4 terrorists, will there be more terrorists extradited. If yes, I will come around to believe that indeed India has developed a strong CI relationship with the KSA, if not, then well, there is not much to thank the Americans either, because it seems they were using these extraditions to make their ends meet, which is not a very healthy sign. It is looking the exact the same way the David Headley thing was done.
Most important, don't forget the bonhomie that is doing rounds, still exists post the arrest of Abu Jundal and the confessions, and before the PM hangs up his shoes, he is bound to make a visit to Pakistan, and the MFN is still not a done deal. At least I have no such hopes of India even trying to pursue it's case on this one.
If I am not mistaken the only time we came close to getting Pakistan branded as one was during the NDA days when the Clinton administration was in the office in the US, and when they couldn't pull it off, ABV was back to the negotiation table.
Ejaz,
From what I have been reading, even the recent handover of the two terrorists involves a US hand. What I do want to see is what happens after this. There are many more terrorists holed up in the KSA, now post these 4 terrorists, will there be more terrorists extradited. If yes, I will come around to believe that indeed India has developed a strong CI relationship with the KSA, if not, then well, there is not much to thank the Americans either, because it seems they were using these extraditions to make their ends meet, which is not a very healthy sign. It is looking the exact the same way the David Headley thing was done.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2011
- Messages
- 14,139
- Likes
- 8,594
ajtr doesn't get satire. :-(
@thakur_ritesh
There is one more reported possible deportation of Fasih Mehmod which seems to be independent of the Abu Jindal case.
But the CT and Intelligence co-operation with the Saudis that I was referring really is beyond this specific case. I was basing my point on a 2011 interview with the Saudi ambassador who basically indicated that there is a lot of CT co-operation with India on the cards but they will remain secret until it is required.
If the Saudis just wanted to hand over a terror suspect based on US prodding, there really would be no need to sign an extradition treaty, MoU on CT and allowing stationing of intelligence operatives in official capacity in Riyadh. Abu Jindal for example was arrested last year and from media reports Indian officials were allowed to question him during the entire period. Not to mention the extradition treaties with almost other GCC countries.
Most intelligence operations would be kept in secret mainly because most of these terror suspects are probably just being monitored rather than arrested. Sometimes you get more info from this rather than just arresting people and alerting the entire group. It will probably be a couple of years if we ever get the details of intelligence co-operation declassified or leaked to the press.
At the end of the day, we shouldn't really expect US or the Saudis to help us out from some goodwill or other such things. It will always be a give and take and strategic interests. For the US, it was the NATO supply lines+squeeze Pakistan PA and ISI with state sponsor tag
For the Saudis, I would guess it was a combination of mostly superpower ally pressure+the realisation of LeT links with AQ + goodwill from India to counter Iran.
From Indian perspective, we should try to align our interests with interests of other countries to get our objectives. One pathway would be to keep linking LeT with AQ particularly to get Saudis to go after LeT operatives there. And apply the same strategy of possibly linking LeT with the Haqqani network along with AQ in the US congress.
On whether UPAII would want to pursue the state sponsor of terror tag, you are most likely correct. Although, I think this is the best chance to really take this issue - if Abu Jindal spills the beans - to at least the UNSC and raise the issue of state sponsor of terrorism. The US and definitely China will veto the issue but raising it should be done to keep that pressure point on Pakistan.
In our private interactions with the US, we should always raise the issue of getting LeT being declared as a terrorist organization and any state supporting it to be declared a state sponsor of terror and announce it publicly in media briefings. The carrot of good relations and the stick of state sponsor of terror IF you support LeT should go hand in hand.
The MFN status is pretty much a done deal, but that is no compromise to India. That is something that will benefit Pakistan as well. A real compromise would be something like accepting demarcation of Siachen or agreeing to have LoC as IB. I don't see any of those happening in the near future.
There is one more reported possible deportation of Fasih Mehmod which seems to be independent of the Abu Jindal case.
But the CT and Intelligence co-operation with the Saudis that I was referring really is beyond this specific case. I was basing my point on a 2011 interview with the Saudi ambassador who basically indicated that there is a lot of CT co-operation with India on the cards but they will remain secret until it is required.
If the Saudis just wanted to hand over a terror suspect based on US prodding, there really would be no need to sign an extradition treaty, MoU on CT and allowing stationing of intelligence operatives in official capacity in Riyadh. Abu Jindal for example was arrested last year and from media reports Indian officials were allowed to question him during the entire period. Not to mention the extradition treaties with almost other GCC countries.
Most intelligence operations would be kept in secret mainly because most of these terror suspects are probably just being monitored rather than arrested. Sometimes you get more info from this rather than just arresting people and alerting the entire group. It will probably be a couple of years if we ever get the details of intelligence co-operation declassified or leaked to the press.
At the end of the day, we shouldn't really expect US or the Saudis to help us out from some goodwill or other such things. It will always be a give and take and strategic interests. For the US, it was the NATO supply lines+squeeze Pakistan PA and ISI with state sponsor tag
For the Saudis, I would guess it was a combination of mostly superpower ally pressure+the realisation of LeT links with AQ + goodwill from India to counter Iran.
From Indian perspective, we should try to align our interests with interests of other countries to get our objectives. One pathway would be to keep linking LeT with AQ particularly to get Saudis to go after LeT operatives there. And apply the same strategy of possibly linking LeT with the Haqqani network along with AQ in the US congress.
On whether UPAII would want to pursue the state sponsor of terror tag, you are most likely correct. Although, I think this is the best chance to really take this issue - if Abu Jindal spills the beans - to at least the UNSC and raise the issue of state sponsor of terrorism. The US and definitely China will veto the issue but raising it should be done to keep that pressure point on Pakistan.
In our private interactions with the US, we should always raise the issue of getting LeT being declared as a terrorist organization and any state supporting it to be declared a state sponsor of terror and announce it publicly in media briefings. The carrot of good relations and the stick of state sponsor of terror IF you support LeT should go hand in hand.
The MFN status is pretty much a done deal, but that is no compromise to India. That is something that will benefit Pakistan as well. A real compromise would be something like accepting demarcation of Siachen or agreeing to have LoC as IB. I don't see any of those happening in the near future.
The press release from Hillary Clinton
This morning, I spoke by telephone with Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar.
I once again reiterated our deepest regrets for the tragic incident in Salala last November. I offered our sincere condolences to the families of the Pakistani soldiers who lost their lives. Foreign Minister Khar and I acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives. We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military. We are committed to working closely with Pakistan and Afghanistan to prevent this from ever happening again.
As I told the former Prime Minister of Pakistan days after the Salala incident, America respects Pakistan's sovereignty and is committed to working together in pursuit of shared objectives on the basis of mutual interests and mutual respect.
In today's phone call, Foreign Minister Khar and I talked about the importance of taking coordinated action against terrorists who threaten Pakistan, the United States, and the region; of supporting Afghanistan's security, stability, and efforts towards reconciliation; and of continuing to work together to advance the many other shared interests we have, from increasing trade and investment to strengthening our people-to-people ties. Our countries should have a relationship that is enduring, strategic, and carefully defined, and that enhances the security and prosperity of both our nations and the region.
The Foreign Minister and I were reminded that our troops – Pakistani and American – are in a fight against a common enemy. We are both sorry for losses suffered by both our countries in this fight against terrorists. We have enhanced our counter-terrorism cooperation against terrorists that threaten Pakistan and the United States, with the goal of defeating Al-Qaida in the region.
In addition, I am pleased that Foreign Minister Khar has informed me that the ground supply lines (GLOC) into Afghanistan are opening. Pakistan will continue not to charge any transit fee in the larger interest of peace and security in Afghanistan and the region. This is a tangible demonstration of Pakistan's support for a secure, peaceful, and prosperous Afghanistan and our shared objectives in the region. This will also help the United States and ISAF conduct the planned drawdown at a much lower cost. This is critically important to the men and women who are fighting terrorism and extremism in Afghanistan. Foreign Minister Khar has informed me that, consistent with current practice, no lethal equipment will transit the GLOC into Afghanistan except for equipping the ANSF. In concluding the call, I reiterated our deep appreciation to the Government and the people of Pakistan for their many sacrifices and their critical contribution to the ongoing fight against terrorism and extremism.
Statement by Secretary Clinton on her Call With Pakistani Foreign Minister Khar
This morning, I spoke by telephone with Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar.
I once again reiterated our deepest regrets for the tragic incident in Salala last November. I offered our sincere condolences to the families of the Pakistani soldiers who lost their lives. Foreign Minister Khar and I acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives. We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military. We are committed to working closely with Pakistan and Afghanistan to prevent this from ever happening again.
As I told the former Prime Minister of Pakistan days after the Salala incident, America respects Pakistan's sovereignty and is committed to working together in pursuit of shared objectives on the basis of mutual interests and mutual respect.
In today's phone call, Foreign Minister Khar and I talked about the importance of taking coordinated action against terrorists who threaten Pakistan, the United States, and the region; of supporting Afghanistan's security, stability, and efforts towards reconciliation; and of continuing to work together to advance the many other shared interests we have, from increasing trade and investment to strengthening our people-to-people ties. Our countries should have a relationship that is enduring, strategic, and carefully defined, and that enhances the security and prosperity of both our nations and the region.
The Foreign Minister and I were reminded that our troops – Pakistani and American – are in a fight against a common enemy. We are both sorry for losses suffered by both our countries in this fight against terrorists. We have enhanced our counter-terrorism cooperation against terrorists that threaten Pakistan and the United States, with the goal of defeating Al-Qaida in the region.
In addition, I am pleased that Foreign Minister Khar has informed me that the ground supply lines (GLOC) into Afghanistan are opening. Pakistan will continue not to charge any transit fee in the larger interest of peace and security in Afghanistan and the region. This is a tangible demonstration of Pakistan's support for a secure, peaceful, and prosperous Afghanistan and our shared objectives in the region. This will also help the United States and ISAF conduct the planned drawdown at a much lower cost. This is critically important to the men and women who are fighting terrorism and extremism in Afghanistan. Foreign Minister Khar has informed me that, consistent with current practice, no lethal equipment will transit the GLOC into Afghanistan except for equipping the ANSF. In concluding the call, I reiterated our deep appreciation to the Government and the people of Pakistan for their many sacrifices and their critical contribution to the ongoing fight against terrorism and extremism.
Statement by Secretary Clinton on her Call With Pakistani Foreign Minister Khar
LETHALFORCE
Mod
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 29,885
- Likes
- 48,599
Secretary Clinton's apology to Pakistan is a slap in the face
Read more: Secretary Clinton's apology to Pakistan is a slap in the face | Fox News
The day before we celebrate our country's independence, most of us here in the United States are thinking about what it means to enjoy the exceptional status of being American citizens. Many of us are thinking about the sacrifices made by our forebears and loved ones whose service in uniform has made ours the most revered nation on earth — a beacon for liberty, and justice for all mankind.
But on the day before we celebrate an event that fundamentally changed world history in ways few events in the history of mankind have, America's chief envoy to the world beyond our borders was thinking about other things during a telephone call with Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar. The purpose of Secretary Clinton's call: To issue an apology to the government of a country which has not only become a critical incubator for terrorist groups that target U.S. and allied interest globally, but a government whose agents have also persistently meddled in our mission to deliver peace and stability to its neighborhood.
"I once again reiterated our deepest regrets for the tragic incident in Salala last November. I offered our sincere condolences to the families of the Pakistani soldiers who lost their lives. Foreign Minister Khar and I acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives. We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military," Secretary Clinton later shared with reporters.
The government of Pakistan responded to this apology by agreeing to reopen NATO supply routes to Afghanistan that cross Pakistani territory. According to The New York Times, "The agreement ends a bitter seven-month stalemate between the two countries that has threatened to jeopardize counter-terrorism cooperation and complicated the American troop withdrawal from Afghanistan."
Yet this agreement also signifies an end to something far more important. That is, America's position of strength in our dealings with a nuclear-armed foreign power whose government has quite troubling ties to terrorist elements that pose the most immediate threats to the safety and security of Americans and our allies.
Issuing apologies to a government whose intelligence apparatus has been a top supporter of militants who today target Americans in Afghanistan and beyond will only be perceived as one thing in countries where movements like Al Qaeda are thriving: A display of American weakness. Particularly, of course, within Pakistan itself.
Indeed, the State Department has once again assumed it is appropriate to apply Western standards for diplomatic engagement to a situation in which those standards do not apply.
Whereas we in the West might perceive such gestures to be driven by a spirit of cooperative interest, and to be reconciliatory in nature, the Pakistanis and other foreign observers in Southwest Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa will most likely interpret them quite differently.
While the tenuous relations with the government of Pakistan following America's accidental killings of 24 Pakistani military personnel certainly jeopardized our capabilities to execute the mission in Afghanistan, it is conceivable that this latest development could do far greater damage.
In his book "Diplomacy," Dr. Henry Kissinger posited nuance is the essence of statesmanship. Perhaps the Obama administration could benefit from purchasing a few copies of this work. For — and to put it bluntly — many of us who are concerned about the safety of our friends or family members serving in Afghanistan today found Secretary Clinton's actions to be anything but nuanced. For many of us, they were a slap in the face.
Read more: Secretary Clinton's apology to Pakistan is a slap in the face | Fox News
Read more: Secretary Clinton's apology to Pakistan is a slap in the face | Fox News
The day before we celebrate our country's independence, most of us here in the United States are thinking about what it means to enjoy the exceptional status of being American citizens. Many of us are thinking about the sacrifices made by our forebears and loved ones whose service in uniform has made ours the most revered nation on earth — a beacon for liberty, and justice for all mankind.
But on the day before we celebrate an event that fundamentally changed world history in ways few events in the history of mankind have, America's chief envoy to the world beyond our borders was thinking about other things during a telephone call with Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar. The purpose of Secretary Clinton's call: To issue an apology to the government of a country which has not only become a critical incubator for terrorist groups that target U.S. and allied interest globally, but a government whose agents have also persistently meddled in our mission to deliver peace and stability to its neighborhood.
"I once again reiterated our deepest regrets for the tragic incident in Salala last November. I offered our sincere condolences to the families of the Pakistani soldiers who lost their lives. Foreign Minister Khar and I acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives. We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military," Secretary Clinton later shared with reporters.
The government of Pakistan responded to this apology by agreeing to reopen NATO supply routes to Afghanistan that cross Pakistani territory. According to The New York Times, "The agreement ends a bitter seven-month stalemate between the two countries that has threatened to jeopardize counter-terrorism cooperation and complicated the American troop withdrawal from Afghanistan."
Yet this agreement also signifies an end to something far more important. That is, America's position of strength in our dealings with a nuclear-armed foreign power whose government has quite troubling ties to terrorist elements that pose the most immediate threats to the safety and security of Americans and our allies.
Issuing apologies to a government whose intelligence apparatus has been a top supporter of militants who today target Americans in Afghanistan and beyond will only be perceived as one thing in countries where movements like Al Qaeda are thriving: A display of American weakness. Particularly, of course, within Pakistan itself.
Indeed, the State Department has once again assumed it is appropriate to apply Western standards for diplomatic engagement to a situation in which those standards do not apply.
Whereas we in the West might perceive such gestures to be driven by a spirit of cooperative interest, and to be reconciliatory in nature, the Pakistanis and other foreign observers in Southwest Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa will most likely interpret them quite differently.
While the tenuous relations with the government of Pakistan following America's accidental killings of 24 Pakistani military personnel certainly jeopardized our capabilities to execute the mission in Afghanistan, it is conceivable that this latest development could do far greater damage.
In his book "Diplomacy," Dr. Henry Kissinger posited nuance is the essence of statesmanship. Perhaps the Obama administration could benefit from purchasing a few copies of this work. For — and to put it bluntly — many of us who are concerned about the safety of our friends or family members serving in Afghanistan today found Secretary Clinton's actions to be anything but nuanced. For many of us, they were a slap in the face.
Read more: Secretary Clinton's apology to Pakistan is a slap in the face | Fox News
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 12,835
- Likes
- 7,762
^^^ can any one explain how it is a slap in the face?
It looks more like Americans gave what Pakis wanted-.ie an apology for the incident. Why is it a slap on the face of the Pakis?
It looks more like Americans gave what Pakis wanted-.ie an apology for the incident. Why is it a slap on the face of the Pakis?
Virendra
Ambassador
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2010
- Messages
- 4,697
- Likes
- 3,041
Apology and Regret are two different things. Regret has actually been expresseed before and can again be expressed many times over. Its the apology that criminalizes the American action.^^^ can any one explain how it is a slap in the face?
It looks more like Americans gave what Pakis wanted-.ie an apology for the incident. Why is it a slap on the face of the Pakis?
Truly Pakistanis are habitual self deludersajtr said:
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2010
- Messages
- 5,033
- Likes
- 8,354
This is the same USA=United States of Apology whom you beg for AID and BHIK!BTW biggest achievement of this apology to pakistan is that Pakistan bought Americans on its knees on the eve of their independence day.
Truly, USA=United States of Apology.
This same USA Drones you, killing pakis day in day out! Who killed 25 solders and still showed no apologetic behavior, gets in and out of pakistan at will. kills anyone inside, NATO lines are fully operations with arms being send to Kill muslim Ummah; truly a Slap on your face and now laugh!
Bhadra
Professional
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2011
- Messages
- 11,991
- Likes
- 23,758
Like Vietnam !! Really. what a loser ?BTW biggest achievement of this apology to pakistan is that Pakistan bought Americans on its knees on the eve of their independence day.
Truly, USA=United States of Apology.
How much Pakies would pay for this apology?
Pakistan returns the favour to United States of Apology uncle by slapping them hard in Aghanistan through their proxies taliban and sending uncle's soldiers back home in body bags.This is the same USA=United States of Apology whom you beg for AID and BHIK!
This same USA Drones you, killing pakis day in day out! Who killed 25 solders and still showed no apologetic behavior, gets in and out of pakistan at will. kills anyone inside, NATO lines are fully operations with arms being send to Kill muslim Ummah; truly a Slap on your face and now laugh!
Virendra
Ambassador
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2010
- Messages
- 4,697
- Likes
- 3,041
Although the Americans kill many of us by drones and choppers day in day out.
Although the Americans aid us like they're giving charity to a whore.
Although the Americans get in and out without bothering to ask like we're a railway platform.
Although the Americans make us give blood money to our own victims whose men they killed.
Yet we made them say "we feel sorry for your loss" ... YaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaY ...... Yippppppeeeeeeeeeeee !! Isn't it great !!
Although the Americans aid us like they're giving charity to a whore.
Although the Americans get in and out without bothering to ask like we're a railway platform.
Although the Americans make us give blood money to our own victims whose men they killed.
Yet we made them say "we feel sorry for your loss" ... YaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaY ...... Yippppppeeeeeeeeeeee !! Isn't it great !!
Last edited:
United States of Apology Uncle don't have guts to esclate beyond salala type incidents and drones.Infact drone attacks shows uncles frustration
.Pakistan has shown the world the real guts of uncle by bring it on knees and beg for apology.| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | ‘ISI sheltered Mullah Omar’ - Hilary Clinton | Pakistan | 0 | |
|
Chelsea isn’t Bill Clinton’s Daughter? | Americas | 1 | |
|
Hillary Clinton to Announce Presidential Run..... | Americas | 6 | |
|
Hillary Clinton visited Delhi to convince India on Iran | International Politics | 6 |
