You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
India-Pakistan
Pak Army Ordered To Attack American Army
2008-09-12
The Pakistani Army has been given orders to retaliate against any unilateral strike by the Afghanistan-based US troops inside the country. Army Spokesman Maj Gen Athar Abbas confirmed the orders in a brief interview with Geo News on late Thursday night.

The decision was made on the first day of the two-day meeting of Pakistan's top military commanders to discuss the US coalition's ground and air assault in Waziristan region which killed dozens of civilians.

Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani chaired the meeting which began in Rawalpindi on Thursday at the Army General Headquarters. Pakistan's military commanders expressed their determination to defend the country's borders without allowing any external forces to conduct operations inside the tribal belt bordering Afghanistan, sources said.

A senior official said the military commanders also discussed the implications of the American attacks inside Pakistan and took stock of the public feeling. "In his statement, Genral Kayani has represented the feeling of the entire nation, as random attacks inside Pakistan have angered each and every Pakistani," he said.

Earlier on Wednesday, Kayani rebuffed the American policy of including Pakistani territory in their operations against the al-Qaeda and Taliban linked militants hiding in the areas near Afghan border.

Also, Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani noted that Kayani's remarks on country's defense were true reflection of the government policy.

The army decision followed bloody incursions by the US ground troops into tribal belt as well as a string of missile strikes by CIA-operated drone aircraft. The reaction also comes after US President George W. Bush approved US military raids on militants inside Pakistan without Islamabad's agreement.

The development also brought into the open the increasing mistrust between the Americans and the Pakistanis over how to handle the Taliban and al-Qaeda linked militants in Pakistan's tribal areas. Some political expert predict the break out of an all-out war between the United States troops and Pakistani army following the Bush administration's approval of ground and air assaults inside the country.
Wonder if anyone in the Pak leadership knows the concept of the 'kill switch' ...
Posted by:Anonymoose

#27  Unless they're going for overland pipeline/transport through the stans, it seems their interests are more global and oceanic, than local and military.

Pakistan gives them a port in the Indian Ocean, and a straight shot to the Persian Gulf without having to deal with the South China Sea or the Straits of Malacca.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2008-09-12 21:47  

#26  Kashmir. Opportunity to kill the problem for a couple generations.

If the Indians want Kashmir, they'll invade Kashmir. Doesn't solve our problem, which is access to Afghanistan.

And how are the Chinese going to 'project' to intervene?

The Silk Road (aka the Korakoram Highway), which runs through Xinjiang.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2008-09-12 21:44  

#25  DRUDGEREPORT > RUSSIA must Must MUST M-U-S-T STAKE A FORMAL CLAIM TO ARTIC RESOURCES.

VARIOUS NET POSTERS > broadly argue that iff Russ needs to make war agz anyone, it'll likely be agz CANADA + DENMARK over the ARCTIC RESOURCES, and agz CHINA + IRAN oer SPREADING NUCLEAR ISLAMISM, CENTRAL ASIA, + RUSS FAR EAST, NOT AGZ THE US-NATO/EU over US GMD = US-NATO EXPANSION INTO ASIA.

SAME > RUSSIA FEARS ASIA-WIDE CHINESE, JAPANESE, + INDIAN MIL REACTION, espec CHINESE, agz the spread of ISLAMIST DESTABILIZ, MILITANCY, + NUCLEARIZATION.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2008-09-12 20:54  

#24  The Pakistani Army has been given orders to retaliate against any unilateral strike by the Afghanistan-based US troops

Let me know how that works out for you.
Posted by: JohnQC   2008-09-12 20:27  

#23  It's not clear to me why India would invade Pakistan

Kashmir. Opportunity to kill the problem for a couple generations. And how are the Chinese going to 'project' to intervene?
Posted by: Procopius2k   2008-09-12 20:14  

#22  I second the Here Here JFM!
Posted by: Red Dawg    2008-09-12 17:30  

#21  Hear, hear JFM.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2008-09-12 17:18  

#20  But ZF - maybe here's another angle to my point - China seems to finally have figured out the peace and prosperity thing, even though they need to work on the government transparency and rule of law aspects.

Given their past 100 years, and relations with neighbors, I wonder if they're all that interested in the buffer state concept anymore. Japan doesn't seem to be a threat, nor Korea, and given the skirmish/campaigns into Vietnam and India, what do they gain there?

The strategic resources are in Siberia, and the cultural interests don't seem anywhere near Pakistan.

Perhaps they have naval interests in south asian sea lanes, for oil and commerce, but again, Pakistan doesn't figure in that.

Unless they're going for overland pipeline/transport through the stans, it seems their interests are more global and oceanic, than local and military.
Posted by: Halliburton - Asymmetrical Reply Division   2008-09-12 16:51  

#19  I stand firm in my belief that Pakistan is at the gates of hell.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2008-09-12 15:49  

#18  Thanks NY Times for spilling these beans.

You'd better hope that our boys don't get ambushed or run into any trouble from your loose lips.

Dickwads!
Posted by: DK70 the Scantily Clad7177   2008-09-12 15:46  

#17  But ZF - on who's side would China intervene? They want to upset the applecart they've built around Nepal, Burma, the Stans? They want to drive Vietnam and India into a strategic partnership?

I don't think they have to worry about India or Vietnam allying with anyone. The last time *any* Asian alliance has seen action was when the Chinese sent 100,000 troops to North Vietnam during the Vietnam War to deter an American invasion. In recent history, India and Vietnam have not been known for getting involved in anyone else's wars - India's philosophy, in particular, seems to be to let other countries duke it out while criticizing whichever country leans West. In fact, China's relationship with Burma, Nepal and so on would be bolstered by a Chinese intervention against India over Pakistan - it would reinforce the idea that China takes care of its allies. Note that this would be the third time in the last 100 years that China has sent troops in defense of an ally/buffer state (the first two times were in North Korea and North Vietnam).
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2008-09-12 14:26  

#16  Everyone cools down and looks at the source: aan Iranian agency.

Gee, JFM, why would Iran want to foment trouble between Pakistan and the U.S.?

/you're right again. And I agree, your comments yesterday were solid about how opinions should be collected. I was just teasing.
Posted by: trailing wife    2008-09-12 14:07  

#15  But ZF - on who's side would China intervene? They want to upset the applecart they've built around Nepal, Burma, the Stans? They want to drive Vietnam and India into a strategic partnership?

Besides, how would they even achieve force projection? How do they get any troops anywhere, over any distance?

They'll be busy enough, soon enough on the Korean peninsula, that they won't even be bothered with any action to their west.

Their future lies north.
Posted by: Halliburton - Asymmetrical Reply Division   2008-09-12 13:43  

#14  P: Or the Indian Army.

It's not clear to me why India would invade Pakistan and risk Chinese intervention, when it can just sit back and wait for Uncle Sam to act. Remember - if it had been up to Gandhi, India would have sat out WWII.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2008-09-12 13:33  

#13  I'm soooo glad Little Georgie allowed the transfer of 'sniper pods' for F-16's to Pakistan earlier this year. Dumbass.

Actually, that's the best thing he could have done. If there's one thing we can do with few losses, it's knock enemy planes out of the sky. The money they spent on an F-16 would have bought 100,000 AK's or millions of mines.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2008-09-12 13:29  

#12  Reminds me of the old Cheech & Chong bit about Kamikazi's:

"You will fly HIGH up in the sky. You find American carrier and dive down, killing yourself and all aboard!"
"Honorable Captain!"
"Yes, you in the back."
"ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FUCKING MIND?"
Posted by: mojo   2008-09-12 12:18  

#11   I sure hope we don't end up invading and occupying Pakistan; that would require a draft.

Or the Indian Army.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2008-09-12 12:08  

#10  This won't end well... for YOU.
Posted by: Chris W.   2008-09-12 12:08  

#9  Everyone cools down and looks at the source: aan Iranian agency.
Posted by: JFM   2008-09-12 11:51  

#8  You want us to do what, Boss? Smeggin' Hell! We might as well join the Taliban. At least there, we can run away and hide with honor.
Posted by: SteveS   2008-09-12 11:44  

#7  The Mighty Pak Army? Or the real one?
Posted by: tu3031   2008-09-12 11:34  

#6  I'm soooo glad Little Georgie allowed the transfer of 'sniper pods' for F-16's to Pakistan earlier this year. Dumbass.

I hope to god we can wait til Jan when McCain can clean up Little W's mess.
Posted by: Yosemite Sam   2008-09-12 11:32  

#5  I sure hope we don't end up invading and occupying Pakistan; that would require a draft. The right strategy would be to destroy Pakistan's military, carve out a supply route to Afghanistan, and designated the rest of Pakistan a free-fire zone.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2008-09-12 11:13  

#4  First they have to find us inside Pakistan. Then they have to be willing to actually attack us. Then they have to survive the return fire to be able to tell about it.

My view: if they would fire on us, they're essentially Taliban too.

And I agree, it's time to turn off the $$$ pipeline.
Posted by: Darrell   2008-09-12 10:51  

#3  Time to turn off the $$$ pipeline.
Posted by: DoDo   2008-09-12 10:46  

#2  This is a full-blown propaganda war being waged inside Pakistan. They already toppled Musharraf.

While we are not ignorant of the fact that the propaganda is fake, Pakistanis absorb it as truth. Turning the tables on Pak/US relations is AQ strategy.

The prize? Guess.
Posted by: logi_cal   2008-09-12 10:35  

#1  If the Paki's put enough army in the tribal areas to be noticeable by US forces they can stop the incursions into Afghanistan them selves.

In fact, they'll have to because they've just lost plausible deniability of Taliban/al Queda activity in that area.

So now Pakistan's true colors will be shown.
Posted by: DLR   2008-09-12 09:11  

00:00