Pentagon Chief Admits U.S. Is at War in Pakistan

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
Pentagon Chief Admits U.S. Is at War in Pakistan

"We are fighting a war in the FATA, we are fighting a war against terrorism," said Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Wednesday, referring to the tribal areas of Pakistan that the U.S. has spent three years bombing heavily. Was that so hard to admit?

For years, it has been. Neither the Bush nor Obama administration has been forthright about the starkest fact of the recent war on terrorism: most of it takes place in western Pakistan. As CIA director and now Pentagon chief, Panetta has been one of the key architects of the accelerated drone-and-commando war the U.S. wages there in what amounts to an open secret. In 2009, the critical year in that acceleration, Danger Room boss Noah Shachtman started pressing the Obama administration for disclosure about a war the U.S. waged in all but name.

It may be late, but at least now it's happened. The day after the U.S. claimed that its latest drone strike in tribal Pakistan killed al-Qaida's second in command, Abu Yahya al-Libi, Panetta used the W-word to angrily dismiss the Pakistani government's complaints about the U.S. infringing on its sovereignty. "We have made very clear that we are going to continue to defend ourselves," Panetta said in New Dehli.


The war has remained undeclared for two reasons. First, it's awkward and potentially destabilizing to say Pakistan is a U.S. ally but the U.S. has to fight a war against terrorists on its soil. Second, it's politically perilous to ask a war-weary public to get used to fighting what's effectively a third war in a decade, even if this one relies far more on remote controlled robots than ground troops. That's suited the Pakistani government: it's given the U.S. tacit support for the drone strikes and enough cynical public denunciation of them to ward off popular upheaval. It's unknown how many civilians die in the drone strikes, but it's undeniable — except, sometimes, by the White House — that some do.

But that's gone out the window as U.S.-Pakistani relations have deteriorated over the past year. Pakistan kicked the U.S. out of an airbase used for the drone strikes and shut down a critical overland resupply route for the Afghanistan war. Panetta appears to be at his wits' end. His stark admission that the U.S. is at war in Pakistan followed a Tuesday tongue bath for Pakistan's arch-rival, India.

In case you're wondering, there aren't many legal implications or obligations prompted by Panetta's admission. The 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force, the legal wellspring of the war on terrorism, clearly authorizes attacking the perpetrator organization of 9/11 unbounded by geographic limits. Besides that, the short document is vague enough to fly a Predator through. There is little upside and much risk for any politician arguing it's time to end the 9/11 Era. To paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes, the life of the war has not been law; it has been politics.

It's hard to imagine the reverberations Panetta's comment will have amongst Pakistanis: polls indicate most don't realize there's a drone war going on at all. Americans are understandably preoccupied with domestic economic anxiety. The U.S. government, in other words, might have obscured its shadow war for nothing.
now that glove is off Pakistan can reply in kind both on and off the battlefield
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
Pakistan critics laud Panetta's remarks on US drone attacks


Pakistan's harshest critics in Congress are applauding Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta for finally acknowledging that America is at war within the boundaries of the nominal U.S. ally.

"I think it's helpful for us to understand and develop policies based on reality," said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), a critic of both the Afghan and Pakistani governments, "rather than walking on eggs trying not to get some corrupt, repressive regime in Pakistan mad at us."

Panetta made the remarks Wednesday while visiting India on the last leg of a three-nation tour of Asia. "We are fighting a war in the FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas at the border with Afghanistan]," he said. "We are fighting a war against terrorism."

Panetta was referring to a U.S. campaign of drone strikes against Islamist militants who are based in Pakistan and launch attacks on NATO and Afghan troops in Afghanistan. The drone strikes — as well as the Osama bin Laden raid — have been one source of the rising tensions between the U.S. and Pakistan, as Islamabad has expressed anger that its sovereignty is being violated.

The U.S. has expressed its own frustrations that Pakistan is not doing more to stop the Haqqani network from launching attacks in Afghanistan.

"I think it's part of the theater of war," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said of the FATA. "It's a place where the enemy seeks sanctuary."

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, for his part didn't go as far but called the situation "unacceptable."

"The realism of the situation is that there are the elements of the Pakistani military, specifically the ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence], that are supporting the Haqqani network that is killing Americans," he said. "Whether you call that being at war or not, that's up to you. I don't view it as being at war, but I certainly view it as a situation which is not acceptable."

The frustration over Pakistan has been keenly felt in Congress, where lawmakers have voted to slash the White House proposed aid budget for Pakistan by more than two thirds, and have placed harsh restrictions on the rest. Senate appropriators last week slashed funding by a symbolic extra $33 million in retaliation for a lengthy prison sentence against a Pakistani doctor who helped the CIA track down bin Laden.

U.S.-Pakistan relations boiled over last November when 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed by NATO troops on the Afghan-Pakistan border, which Pakistan responded by shutting down NATO supply lines to Afghanistan. Negotiations are ongoing to re-open them but have so far been unsuccessful.

Rohrabacher, who has been among the most vocal Pakistan critics in Congress, said it would be more accurate to say the U.S. is at war with, not in, Pakistan, based on what he said was evidence of continued support for radical Islamists who target American troops.

He added that instead of further burdening a U.S. public already weary from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the acknowledgment of a third war would in fact make it easier for the U.S. to extricate itself from the area.

"We are now engaged in mission impossible in Afghanistan," he said. "As long as we don't recognize the Pakistanis as actually being engaged in that war against us, we cannot successfully terminate that conflict."

Instead, he said, "we should continue hitting the leadership of the terrorist networks until the minute that we get out of Afghanistan and Pakistan and then wave to them goodbye."

Others played down Panetta's comments.

Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said that the remarks were merely stating that the U.S. is at war with the Haqqani network.

"They're at war with us and that makes us at war with them," Levin said. "That doesn't make us at war with Pakistan — it makes us at war with a group that's at war with us."

Panetta defended U.S. drone strikes in his remarks in India, which he gave two days after a drone attack killed in Pakistan territory killed the al Qaeda's No. 2.

"This is about our sovereignty as well," Panetta said, according to the Wall Street Journal. "We have made very clear that we are going to continue to defend ourselves."
Graham suggested that Panetta may have in fact been signaling that the U.S. will continue its campaign of drone strikes against targets in Pakistan after U.S. troops withdraw from Afghanistan in 2014.

"In the enduring strategic partnership agreement, when you talk about not being able to use Afghanistan to launch attacks against third countries without permission from the Afghan government, everyone understands that the attacks in the tribal region are not an attack against Pakistan, but against terrorist organizations that are killing American soldiers and Afghans," Graham said.

"I think he's planting a flag that we will continue operations in the tribal regions because it's part of the war in Afghanistan."
 

trackwhack

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2011
Messages
3,757
Likes
2,590
In terms of bodybags returning to usa from afghanistan.
muhahahaha ... funny guy. Why then does the Land of the pure not try it? India's problems will be solved overnight.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
What's new? He just said they are fighting a war in Pakistan against terrorism. Music to the ears would have been we are fighting a war WITH Pakistan. That would actually be the beginning of the end to many of the worlds evil.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
Whats the tradeoff, 10 millitants and 100 collaterol damage for each NATO soldier. Seems like your strategy is working.
you cant win this war of artrition with pakistan.Pakistan has more mujahids then 4 times ur standing army.even soviets found out to bt costly war as u r finding it now.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
you cant win this war of artrition with pakistan.Pakistan has more mujahids then 4 times ur standing army.even soviets found out to bt costly war as u r finding it now.
Let me correct you, far more terrorists.

And please don't take credit for what the afghans did. You were just a conduit for supplying arms.
 

trackwhack

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2011
Messages
3,757
Likes
2,590
you cant win this war of artrition with pakistan.Pakistan has more mujahids then 4 times ur standing army.even soviets found out to bt costly war as u r finding it now.
Yes, you cant win a war of attrition. So the US should pull out all its forces and nuke you to kingdom come.
 

Tronic

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,915
Likes
1,282
you cant win this war of artrition with pakistan.Pakistan has more mujahids then 4 times ur standing army.even soviets found out to bt costly war as u r finding it now.
When America can send a team of 40 soldiers to kill a rat in the heart of Pakistan, it shows that no matter if you have 4 times more rats or 40 times, they still get pawned.
 

Blackwater

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
21,156
Likes
12,211
Let me correct you, far more terrorists.

And please don't take credit for what the afghans did. You were just a conduit for supplying arms.
true pakis supplied only tattu(pony) to carry arms:laugh::laugh:
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
When America can send a team of 40 soldiers to kill a rat in the heart of Pakistan, it shows that no matter if you have 4 times more rats or 40 times, they still get pawned.
U.S. helicopter believed shot down in Afghanistan; 2 killed




U.S. helicopter believed shot down in Afghanistan; 2 killed

Source: http://www.-----------/forums/afgha...icopter-shot-down-2-killed.html#ixzz1xA70Cdt5
(CNN) -- The United States believes one of its armed helicopters was shot down over Afghanistan on Wednesday, killing both crew members on board, a U.S. military official said.

NATO's International Security Assistance Force issued a statement saying that two ISAF members died "following a helicopter crash in eastern Afghanistan today."

"The cause of the crash is currently under investigation," ISAF said. "... At this time it is too early to speculate on the cause of the incident."

Operational reporting indicates there were no civilian casualties or damage to civilian property, ISAF said.

"It is likely that the helo today was brought down due to enemy small arms and RPG fire," the U.S. military official said. The chopper was a U.S. Army OH-58 Kiowa Warrior reconnaissance helicopter. It went down over Ghazni province.

In an e-mail, the Taliban claimed responsibility for downing the helicopter, saying a rocket was used.

"After the rocket hit it, the helicopter came down and took fire," said the e-mail, sent by Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid.
 

Tronic

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,915
Likes
1,282
U.S. helicopter believed shot down in Afghanistan; 2 killed
Rest in Peace, brave warriors.

2 unfortunate US casualties since start of June.

Compared with;
June 2, 2012: Drone strikes in South Waziristan kill four - geo.tv (4 Talibunnies dead)
June 3, 2012: US drone strike kills 10 in SWA (10 Talibunnies dead)
June 4, 2012: Abu Yahya al Libi killed in latest drone strike, US officials say - The Long War Journal (16 Talibunnies dead)

That's 30 dead militants in 3 days, and we're not even counting the Talibunnies killed by the soldiers on the ground!
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
Rest in Peace, brave warriors.

2 unfortunate US casualties since start of June.

Compared with;
June 2, 2012: Drone strikes in South Waziristan kill four - geo.tv (4 Talibunnies dead)
June 3, 2012: US drone strike kills 10 in SWA (10 Talibunnies dead)
June 4, 2012: Abu Yahya al Libi killed in latest drone strike, US officials say - The Long War Journal (16 Talibunnies dead)

That's 30 dead militants in 3 days, and we're not even counting the Talibunnies killed by the soldiers on the ground!
Even then usa running from afghanistan pointing to the fact that it cant sustain this war of attrition in terms and live and cost. :rolleyes:
 

amitkriit

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
2,463
Likes
1,927
Even then usa running from afghanistan pointing to the fact that it cant sustain this war of attrition in terms and live and cost. :rolleyes:
What is left in Afghanistan? Wars aren't fought to kill people, wars are fought to achieve certain objectives. USA has already scalped Osama, and it has droned the "Pure ones" to such an extent that they have become completely "Shameless".
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top