US Confirms Raid Inside Pakistan

[CogNative]

"...disengaged from the area COMPLETELY..."

Need a mind altering, cognitive transformation of the highest order for this to materialize. Any Bets?

re: "long term ramifications", check out TIME article, "The Central Front", 9/22/09 Aryan Baker. Short but clear.

Try to explain to fellow (USA) citizens why they should care about a corrupt government in Paki-Land with 2.45 million people unemployed (70% of the population) ... 2/3 live in poverty, and only 6% can read, but they have nukes and all the ingredients for revolution and nuclear power grab that will happen. It is a hard sell especially when your own Country is asking for a 700+ billion dollar loan to delay the inevitable economic cluster flux.

Did this recently at Criminal Court as we observed our wheels of Justice grind through a simple "aggravated battery" aka ... attempting to shoot 3 people while reloading your 15 round clip, YMMV in your hood .... but I digress.

My fellow (USA) citizens could care less about Pack-It-Land or their issues. Most folks have other pressing needs.

IMO: We (USA) should care because our people (US Military+) are being dragged into a shadow war in some of the least neighborly hoods on the planet with an almost impossible mission as a daily ... watts dat goal again? :confused:

"a few decades to really matter.."

Al-Qaeda in FATA is currently ... right now ... in a excellent position to watch (maybe push) Asif Ali Zarddari into default. The nuclear power grab ensues.

"Or we just nuke the whole place. See Japan 1945 for precedent"

When WE have a 'clear and present danger' ... "Great Satan" drops the atomic hammer... IMO.

See: Annihilation from Within: "The Ultimate Threat to Nations" by Fred Charles Iklé

Peace,

Cogs*Natively ... what the hell do i know?

PS: I suspect our own unruly internal issues will be much more challenging in the shorter term than 'Pack-It-Land' so... rearrange the brain.... mind altering, cognitive transformation of the highest order... Off to work on this issue.

[LongLeftFlank]

Does anybody on this board actually know any Pakistanis?

While the tribal areas and the Pashto (and Baluchis for that matter) have been a law unto themselves from time immemorial, the vast majority of the Pakistani population are Urdu-speaking Muslims; basically Indians who converted to Islam under Mughal rule. There are major families (e.g. the Siddiqs) who dominate political life and the officer class, but this is not "tribal" or "clan" loyalty in the Pushto or Arab sense.

The country faces a number of enormous ongoing problems, of which ornery tribesmen and AQ loondamentalists are not even in the top Three (IMHO these are urban poverty, farmland shortage and poor infrastructure).

However, for all this the Urdu population seems highly energetic, entrepreneurial and forward-looking, much like their Indian cousins. Even the urban poor evince little interest in strict Sharia law, while most of the educated class practices a moderate Islam and is tied to the West through family members in the UK, US and Commonwealth.

In short, IMHO this country is not a suitable candidate for Al Qaeda domination. An Iran-style Islamic national revolution is possible I suppose, but there are no oil revenues to grease the skids. Plus, unlike the Shah's retinue, the government and generals are at least as observant Muslims as are the population at large, and Islam is the state religion.

[Bigduke6]

I've known a few Pakistan citizens and emigres as acquaintances, none as friends. I'm not sure they're representative of the country as a whole as they or their families are from the educated professionals class; they or their relatives are (as I recall) doctors, lawyers, engineers, bankers, securities traders, and computer geeks.

Still, for what it's worth, they tell me without exception say the first, last, and pretty much every inbetween Pakistan problem comes down to official corruption. Everything is for sale, the government is rotten from top to bottom, and there is no limit to the state workers' ability to absorb bribes. The only loyalty is to the extended family, i.e., your direct relatives. You can't trust any one else, and if you are in an official position, your job is to benefit as many of your extended family as you can. Nothing else matters. Responsibility to the public is neither expected nor rewarded, indeed, if you are an honest public servant you are disloyal to your relatives, whose financial well-being may well depend on your ability to extort bribes from the general public.

To me, that's scarier even than the NW Provinces and the Pathan/Pashto warlords. The government of Pakistan has the bomb, and the government of Pakistan is totally - and I do mean totally - discredited with the entire population. As far as Pakistanis are concerned, the only function of government is to enrich members of government, personally. Pakistani Democracy is by most standards pretty much corrupt - in strong contrast to India, where votes seem to count and governments have to keep voters happy or get punted. So if enough average Pakistanis get mad, Wahabbist Islam is a very rational solution to the problem of endemic corruption. True the average Pakistani is no religious nut, but if he gets sick enough of the thieving government bureaucrats he might start listening to a cleric preaching application of the shariah law to all, equally.

After all, the Taliban came to power not particularly as religious crusaders, but as an honest government alternative to a corrupt secular Afghan government.

I personally am not so sure of how dangerous Pakistan would be in the Global War on Terrorism were its present pseudo-Western government to get thrown out in favor of some kind of theocracy, but the very process is frightening: Pakistan has the bomb, it is Islamic, and a violent revolution in Pakistan would not enhance security over Pakistani nuclear devices.

In my opinion, the potential threat of a loose Pakistani nuke sometime in the future, isn't worth trying in the present to convince a useless Pakistani government to "go after" Pathan/Pashto tribes it has no intention of going after. Such a policy undermines the Pakistan government for no useful effect, and undermining the Pakistan government is not a wise move, unless you like the idea of some kind of extreme Pakistan regime subesquently gaining control over nuclear weapons.

As to the Pathan/Pashto heartland on both sides of the Afghan/Pakistan border, I think it will remain as it has for centuries: warlike, lawless, and ungovernable. It may even be that some day some semblance of a national Afghan government will take form, and from Kabul northwards there will be a multi-national state of Uzbeks, Tadjiks, Hazara allied against the Pathans/Pashto.

But even were that brave new Afghan state to take shape, I doubt seriously that it would have a better chance of controlling the Pathan/Pashto heartland than any of the previous efforts. Alexander the Great failed, the Moguls failed, the British failed, the Soviets failed, and now we have the US and its NATO buddies asking us to believe they can buck the trend. Pakistan cannot control its share of the Pathans/Pashto right now. I rate the chances of the Afghan government of controlling its share, at nil.

To my mind, there are only two solutions to the Pathans/Pashto if one is forced to live adjacent to them or suffer the results of their lawlessness. There is the Mongol option, which Steve updated to 1945, which is simply to kill them all and rule their mountains and sheep in peace.

There is also the British colonial option, which is to stay the heck out, use money to pit the tribes against one another, and limit one's military efforts to short invasions aimed at collective punishment of whatever Pathan/Pashto tribe happens to be the most irritating at the moment. This is very different from the present US/NATO mission, which is an unending commitment towards nation-building among a people whose so far successful ight against foreign influence may well predate recorded history.

[Huntarr]

A suspected U.S. pilotless drone has crashed in the northwestern Pakistani region of South Waziristan after a spate of missile attacks by unmanned U.S. aircraft in Pakistan strained ties between the allies.

Pakistan has said U.S. missile attacks and one U.S. ground assault are a violation of its sovereignty and the army has vowed to defend Pakistani territory.

President Asif Ali Zardari met U.S. President George W. Bush in New York on Tuesday and spoke strongly about protecting Pakistani sovereignty, Bush said.

Pakistani news channels said early on Wednesday a U.S.-operated drone had come down near the border village of Angor Adda, where U.S. commandos launched a raid on September 3.

The Pakistani military confirmed that a pilotless aircraft had come down but did not identify it as American. Other countries with forces in Afghanistan have not been known to operate drones over Pakistani territory.

"A surveillance unmanned aerial vehicle while flying over Pak-Afghan border yesterday night crash landed, on this side of the border ... apparently due to malfunctioning," the army said in a statement.

"The wreckage ... has been recovered."

American officials earlier denied that the United States had lost any drones: "No such thing occurred," said one.

Bush did not speak about the recent U.S. attacks into Pakistan but he said Zardari had made a strong point about Pakistan's sovereignty.

"Your words have been very strong about Pakistan's sovereign right and sovereign duty to protect your country, and the United States wants to help," Bush said before their talks.

Pakistan's support is regarded as crucial both to the success of Western forces trying to stabilize Afghanistan and in the fight against al Qaeda.

But U.S. impatience has grown over what it sees as Pakistan's failure to eliminate the militant threat on its side of the Afghan border.

"NO BULLET HOLES"

Zardari is close to the United States and has stressed the need to root out terrorism, but many Pakistanis oppose the U.S.-led campaign against militancy.

Zardari said this week that cross-border U.S. attacks reinforced the belief that the campaign was a U.S. war and complicated his effort to appease critics.

Pakistan's stance was set out clearly by Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani at a news conference in Islamabad.

"We will not tolerate the violation of our sovereignty and territorial integrity by anyone in the name of combating terrorism," Gilani said. Residents and Pakistani security officials have reported troops firing on U.S. helicopters in recent days, forcing them to turn back to Afghanistan. U.S. officials have dismissed the reports and said no helicopters had taken fire.

Militants and ethnic Pashtun tribesmen regularly fire at drones with rifles, residents on the border say, but they have not been known to have brought one down.

According to earlier news reports, some tribesmen had claimed to have shot down the drone late on Tuesday but a security force officer said the aircraft had not been hit by ground fire.

"The body of the plane is intact and there are no bullet holes," said the officer, who declined to be identified.

He said it was a small U.S. drone.

"It's American. It's theirs, no one else flies drones there," the security force officer said.

An intelligence official said aircraft was about three feet (1 meter) long with a wingspan of about 5 feet.

Residents of North Waziristan said people opened fire on a drone flying over the town of Mir Ali, a known militant sanctuary, on Wednesday but missed. The drone flew off.

[CogNative]

US Confirms Raid Inside Pakistan Reply 09/24/08

Let me be clear. "...disengaged from the area COMPLETELY..." IMO, Will not happen.

IMO, In a perfect world, snatch, catch or otherwise neutralize BL (+) quickly then or yesterday get the Hell-Fire outta there. Our hard working and dedicated Military(+) should not be required to endure insincere, impossible 'orders' just to mark time for party/political policies of 'Great Satan' on their doorstep in the Global War on Terrorism.

USA citizens should care about the corrupt government in Pakistan primarily because the ingredients for Pakistan's own 9/11 equivalent with a follow on... revolution/coup, ensuing anarchy and the "Let me step in to provide ORDER!" by current, 'sub-prime' but legit, governmental members, is very unhealthy for the world and eventually the USA. These "officials" affiliated with AQ agenda don't even need a vote... emergency powers and all.

"So if enough average Pakistanis get mad, Wahabbist Islam is a very rational solution to the problem of endemic corruption. True the average Pakistani is no religious nut, but if he gets sick enough of the thieving government bureaucrats he might start listening to a cleric preaching application of the shariah law to all, equally."

BD's nailed it, IMO. Extend this to an emergency, Islamic theocracy applying their order in Pakistan and their "security" over Pakistani nuclear devices. Let you develop that scenario(s). Makes the CMSF game look pretty tame... well maybe w/o Marines

The only Pakistanis I know (not friends) are MDs and Taxi drivers. Energetic, entrepreneurial but all lament official corruption.

The updated Mongol option, "... kill them all and rule their mountains and sheep in peace" will only occur if we all use "mind altering" products from the brave new Afghan state... NUKES are not a deterrence nor an answer but a holocaust end game. Please let us all die in peace w/o this chaser.

LLF, I respectfully disagree. IMO, Pakistan is prime candidate for Al Qaeda domination via the 'sub-prime' but presently legit governmental "officials" ready to step in that emergency powers vacuum. The USA can not stop it. The best we can do is nail the 9/11 nasty(s) and ....

Please, I hope I am proven wrong. USA has many more internal challenges ahead and the $700B is only a sign of things to come. Look at how masterfully we are mangling this! No Bullet Holes... yet.

Peace, CogNative

Gunny Huntarr, Is their a unmanned U.S. aircraft target practice? We need some 10 rings and get the hell-fire outta there.

[LongLeftFlank]

I've known a few Pakistan citizens and emigres as acquaintances, none as friends. I'm not sure they're representative of the country as a whole as they or their families are from the educated professionals class; they or their relatives are (as I recall) doctors, lawyers, engineers, bankers, securities traders, and computer geeks.

I have known Pakistanis as friends, and while they come from the Western-connected educated class, it seems to me that they do in fact represent the aspirations of the general population, tribals aside. Education is widely admired and sought. Small business owners are respected, much like in India. No disrespect, but unlike your Russian and Ukrainian pals, say, they aren't sitting around feeling in their heart of hearts that commerce = theft and that Govamint should come along and set everything right like in the old days. There's no history of that there... you rely mainly on family, but not quite like in the Arab or Pashto sense where there is no other grouping of significance (besides the umma, although Muslim solidarity has its limits too). Pakistanis are quite nationalistic -- even fervently so... maybe that's a legacy of the rift with India, I don't know. But this impulse can drive moderation as well as extremism (more on this below).

Still, for what it's worth, they tell me without exception say the first, last, and pretty much every inbetween Pakistan problem comes down to official corruption. Everything is for sale, the government is rotten from top to bottom, and there is no limit to the state workers' ability to absorb bribes. The only loyalty is to the extended family....

To me, that's scarier even than the NW Provinces and the Pathan/Pashto warlords.

I think my friends would largely agree with the above, except for the last sentence. NOT scarier at all. Ordinary Pakistanis pursue their self-interest with the only support network they have. Very energetically and creatively too.

True the average Pakistani is no religious nut, but if he gets sick enough of the thieving government bureaucrats he might start listening to a cleric preaching application of the shariah law to all, equally.

After all, the Taliban came to power not particularly as religious crusaders, but as an honest government alternative to a corrupt secular Afghan government.

Possible, but again this is more likely to take the form of an Iran-style Islamic nationalism: rhetorically anti Western (egged on variously by Russians or Chinese depending on their mood) but broadly similar (unless you're a woman or non-Muslim). There's no oil for social programs and the Russians/Chinese won't give out cash for nothing. In the end they hate Muslims too.

The Iranian model only worked because they sustained their oil exports and could paper over the huge economic disruptions caused by wholesale flight of their educated and mercantile class. And fight a war with Iraq.

Letting some foreign loons provoke the Indian idolators or the Great Satan into turning their country into radioactive glass, or walling it off from the 21st century in pursuit of some autarkic fantasy Caliphate is NOT self-interest. That rubbish might play with the hillbillies who have nothing to trade but wide-assed goats but not in Karachi.

In fact AQ zealots and their Pashto brethren might well find an Islamic nationalist regime getting more "Mongol" on their ass, not less, at least within their boundaries.

But even were that brave new Afghan state to take shape, I doubt seriously that it would have a better chance of controlling the Pathan/Pashto heartland than any of the previous efforts. Alexander the Great failed, the Moguls failed, the British failed, the Soviets failed, and now we have the US and its NATO buddies asking us to believe they can buck the trend. Pakistan cannot control its share of the Pathans/Pashto right now. I rate the chances of the Afghan government of controlling its share, at nil.

Yup.

[Battlefront.com]

Disengagement will never happen, voluntarily, by the US for a variety of reasons. The two primary long term ones are Iran and Russia. Until Iran gets on the US State Department's "Happy Tourist and Investment Land" list *and* Russia starts doing what the West wants, the US will not leave. Obviously neither of these are very likely events, so I see the US staying in the area no matter what. Keeping AQ under siege is definitely a short term goal, but it's not where the main fight lies because it's expected to be eclipsed in importance one way or another.

While what LLF and BD6 say may be true about what Pakistan, as a country, it is obvious that parts of Pakistan's territory is very much a base for destabilization of Afghanistan. So from the West's perspective it doesn't matter much what the domestic politics are in Pakistan provided the status quo remains largely in place. From what LLF and BD6 seem to think, it's likely to stay that way for a while. But so too is the cross border problems with Afghanistan. It's kinda like being friends with someone that has an idiot brother that taunts you every time you see him. You want to stay on good terms with your friend, but man... smashing the nose of the little wanker is VERY tempting even if your friend will get pissed off.

Steve

[John Kettler]

Things are now much warmer there on the border, with both sides shooting at each other, deniably, of course. Supposedly, no one was hit on either side.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/09/25/pakistan.helicopters/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

Regards,

John Kettler

[Rob Ross]

Pakistan is a small country so obsessed with India that they want a weak and divided nation on their other flank. It is, and maybe always will be, in their Government's interest to keep Afghanistan broken.

[FAI]

Now they officialy confirmes an exchange fire with Pakistani troops. I wonder how long until they bring SAMs, arty and armor to the skirmishes...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080925/wl_nm/us_pakistan_usaint;_ylt=AjMGf63QA3tzKJjJNTk7WR39xg8F

[CogNative]

"...Western-connected educated class, it seems to me that they do in fact represent the aspirations of the general population, tribals aside."

Average Joe in Pakistan (much of the @ 2.45 million unemployed) should not be considered part of the "Western-connected educated class". This average Pakistani will suffer more than the usual lot in life with Asif Ali Zardari, our current most trusted president driving the bus.

http://www.smh.com.au/

"Carnage: Pakistan's reality check", Mr Zardari gave a televised address after the blast in which he appealed for "all democratic forces" to help to save Pakistan. "Terrorism is a cancer in Pakistan. We are determined, God willing, we will rid the country of this cancer," he said.

Now...

"Zardari warns US after border skirmish"... at the United Nations yesterday, Mr Zardari said Pakistan's military was firing "flares" to warn NATO helicopters about the location of the border. "You mean the flares," he replied when asked about the NATO accounts. "Sometimes the border is so mixed that they don't realise they have crossed the border."

"The border is very, very unclear, I know," Dr Rice told Mr Zardari.:confused:

"NATO is conducting its biggest and most complex operation in Afghanistan, where there are about 70,000 international troops, most of them deployed under the military alliance's banner."

When your trusted friends fire "flares" at you, and you have to duck and cover from your 'allies' as well as the Al-Qaeda and Taliban 'rebels' who are actively undermining the questionably legitimate government in a country that has "nuclear power" with dramatic internal turmoil....

I guess if Condi says it is OK we should be OK?

Maybe a great place to test the UCAV prototypes with such dramatic internal turmoil and all?

"Keeping AQ under siege is definitely a short term goal, but it's not where the main fight lies because it's expected to be eclipsed in importance one way or another."

Smart money is on "eclipsed in importance one way or another."

CogNative What the Hell does he know?

[Yair Iny]

Looks like Pakistan is replacing the chief of the ISI: http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/pakistan-cleans-up-protaliban-spy-agency/2008/09/30/1222651084443.html

[CogNative]

Why would Pakistan need to replace the chief of the ISI?

Or the 'shift' of the 14 Generals Pakistan as well?

CogNative

[Bigduke6]

Because Musharraf is out and a new government is in, and they want their own people running the ISI, main goal being redirecting the gravy train.

[Michael Emrys]

...main goal being redirecting the gravy train.

LOL

:D:D

Michael

[CogNative]

Why just last week Mr Zardari affirmed ISI & the Pakistani military 'may' have been suspect in the past but now that Mr Zardari is 'in charge' of the gravy spoon.. everyone was to be trusted. Sounds like a flare firing to me.Maybe Asif Ali Zardari can debate the Tribals & A.Q. or is that an ongoing discussion?

CogNative ... UCAV technology is a good thing.

[Huntarr]

Suspected US strike kills up to 20 in Pakistan

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081027/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan

[costard]

Steve's post 9-25-08 and the assertion that the US won't disengage is looking shaky: it is looking quite possible that the only viable supply route will be from the north - Russia. And I can't see Putin making this easy, though I doubt he'd refuse passage. Outwards, that is.

[Bigduke6]

Hope springs eternal.

It is true that just maybe the new Pakistan government has decided to play ball in the War on Terror and they have decided Islamabad will exert control throughout the Tribal Regions. It is just possible, that for the first time in Pakistan's history the ISI no longer can act however it pleases, but must subordinate itself to the democratically-elected Pakistan government which, magically, has rejected venality and corruption, and is now dedicated to bettering the lot of all Pakistanis no matter their ethnicity or creed.

History would however indicate, that a settling of old scores and removal of thugs loyal to the old regime, are pretty much the standard routine when a new but similarly corrupt regime takes power. Were that new Pakistani regime interested in pretending it was legitimate when in fact it was just taking its place at the feeding trough, a declaration of a crack-down on Islamic "terrorism" would be just the ticket - not only do you get rid of the people you can't trust, but their dead bodies can be used to show Washington you really take the War on Terror seriously, and right this second Washington's support is pretty important, as without it the IMF is unlikely to float cash to the Pakistan economy, which is amazingly getting worse and worse what with the world financial crisis.

They say a cynic is nothing more than a well-informed optimist.

It will take a year at least to determine whether the Pakistanis are changing their game. But I wouldn't bet on it.