Pakistan carried out drone strikes in Feb: NYT

[rock127]

There needs to be a Plebiscite in Pakistan.

 

[Bhadra]

Next reply by Farhan I can anticipate -

Drone attacks unclaimed by CIA were conducted by India and RAW !!

 

[farhan_9909]

Who is this" we" and who comprises of "our" ? Ha Ha Ha....

You mean to say the people on whom drone strikes are conducted are not part of that Punjabi "We" ??? The ultimate Pakistan ?

And how do you say "No one can object" ? You mean to say certain population of your country is halal to be killed ?

What about UN Charter ?? Human rights ? War crimes ? remember, they were part of India and India still have rights to voice over their issues.

Nahin to referendum karwa lo ...

I said us.we have right to conduct drone strikes.and i am sure it wont kill innocent citizen while the american one don't kill militants but only innocent citizen

where i said the people in miranshah are halal to be killed?even though i belong to the same city

 

[Daredevil]

mentioned dates only.

Burraq UCAV being operational is no more a secret..was reported in jang news as well

Why read between the lines?. Why not direct proof that this UCAV is operational and has done strikes on terrorists?. Pakistan Army/ISI should come clean on this. The more ambiguity they show, the more people disbelieve it than they already do.

 

[Agnostic Muslim]

I haven't seen a single GoP move to brought USA in front of ICJ on drone issue or any independent body. You guys have been quite active against India at UNO could have dropped few lines against USA too.

India does not have the military or economic clout to threaten Pakistan in any significant manner - the US does. Taking the issue in front of the ICJ or UN would resolve little given the lack of enforcement mechanisms.

The reality is that the issue has to be resolved through negotiations with the US, given Pakistan's current weak economic state.

 

[rock127]

Again - irrelevant to my comment. Perhaps you should go back and read the posts a few more times to understand the context.

I know all of your contexts thats why I can say that you got serious issues in understanding.

 

[Agnostic Muslim]

Pakistan says something to US in private and says something else to public. If Pakistan thinks that US is violating the sovereignty and UN charter then why is it not taking US to UN forum or taking action against the drones. It won't do it because even now Pakistan is complicit in drone attacks by US.

In secret deal, ISI allows U.S. drone war to resume

'Anonymous sources' have become a very convenient means of disinformation - there is no official corroboration of these claims.

 

[Agnostic Muslim]

I know all of your contexts thats why I can say that you got serious issues in understanding.

Your country is a proven terrorist country which is now after Shias after reducing minorities to almost nil.

Right, I have issues with 'comprehension' - so perhaps you could explain to me how exactly this post and the ones preceding it have any relevance to my comment about 'supporting Pakistani controlled and/or jointly controlled drone strikes in Pakistan'?

 

[farhan_9909]

Why read between the lines?. Why not direct proof that this UCAV is operational and has done strikes on terrorists?. Pakistan Army/ISI should come clean on this. The more ambiguity they show, the more people disbelieve it than they already do.

Has been mentioned again and again this project is kept secret

Nescom Burraq UCAV is officially funded by MOD
While Army has selected AWC for developing a UCAV for army

While GIDS as well expressed interest to arm the shahpar UAV.

so we have three UCAV project.but the burraq project being the oldest

Pakistan racing to develop armed drones but lacks key technology; China offers help - Worldnews.com

 

[Agnostic Muslim]

They fire in self defense. Understand the difference. Self defense is a legal act .

If Pakistani intelligence had identified the targets as terrorists, tracked them and then attacked them, the action would in fact be 'self defense'.

 

[Agnostic Muslim]

So, you agree that Pakistan is complicit with US and given permission for drone strikes in Pakistan. You confirmed my doubts.

Are you really taking the comments of an internet poster as 'confirmation' of your suspicions?

 

[Bhadra]

If Pakistani intelligence had identified the targets as terrorists, tracked them and then attacked them, the action would in fact be 'self defense'.

No and No ... that intelligence and evidence must be admissible in law and law itself must permit SF carrying out execution on such intelligence as a legally valid act...

But Pakistani elites specially the Army are a law unto themselves... they are far away from being "civilised"...

 

[Daredevil]

Are you really taking the comments of an internet poster as 'confirmation' of your suspicions?

A simple minded Pakistani is always better than two-timing ISI/PA. There is precedent about ISI/PA two timing on drone attacks.

 

[Daredevil]

'Anonymous sources' have become a very convenient means of disinformation - there is no official corroboration of these claims.

You are right. I will remind you about this when you post a NY article here.

 

[Bhadra]

Has been mentioned again and again this project is kept secret

Nescom Burraq UCAV is officially funded by MOD
While Army has selected AWC for developing a UCAV for army

While GIDS as well expressed interest to arm the shahpar UAV.

so we have three UCAV project.but the burraq project being the oldest

Pakistan racing to develop armed drones but lacks key technology; China offers help - Worldnews.com

What is the meaning of "Burraqaa"? As I understand it means a veil that covers ??

 

[Agnostic Muslim]

You are right. I will remind you about this when you post a NY article here.

Which is why you won't find me taking 'anonymous claims' in NYT articles at face value - please see my post on the first page of this thread where I addressed the fact that the claims in this NYT article could be deliberate disinformation, and if they were disinformation, what this set of claims suggested.

 

[Agnostic Muslim]

What is the meaning of "Burraqaa"? As I understand it means a veil that covers ??

You are confusing 'Burqa' with 'Burraq'

The former refers to a kind of veil whereas the latter refers to a 'Winged Horse' I believe.

 

[farhan_9909]

What is the meaning of "Burraqaa"? As I understand it means a veil that covers ??

Burraq Not burqa...

White animal resembling a mule but slightly smaller that could travel with a speed of light

 

[Bhadra]

You are confusing 'Burqa' with 'Burraq'

The former refers to a kind of veil whereas the latter refers to a 'Winged Horse' I believe.

Burraq Not burqa...

White animal resembling a mule but slightly smaller that could travel with a speed of light

thank you both of you.

 

[Agnostic Muslim]

No and No ... that intelligence and evidence must be admissible in law and law itself must permit SF carrying out execution on such intelligence as a legally valid act...

Given that FATA does not fall under the Pakistan Penal Code nor under the legal system in mainstream Pakistan, what rules do you believe govern potential Pakistani Military strikes in FATA?

I believe the Pakistan Government has authorized military operations in FATA, which would also cover Pakistani Military led drone strikes.