Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rage grips Pakistan over NATO attack

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 12:41 PM
Original message
Rage grips Pakistan over NATO attack
Source: Reuters

By Michael Georgy and Emma Graham-Harrison
ISLAMABAD/KABUL | Sun Nov 27, 2011 11:55am EST
(Reuters) - Fury spread in Pakistan on Sunday over a NATO cross-border air attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers and could undermine the U.S. effort to wind up the war in Afghanistan.

On Sunday night in Pakistan, more than 40 hours after the incident, many questions remained.

NATO described the killings as a "tragic unintended incident" and said an investigation was underway. A Western official and an Afghan security official who requested anonymity said NATO troops were responding to fire from across the border.

. . .


Thousands gathered outside the American consulate in the city of Karachi to protest against the NATO attack.

A Reuters reporter at the scene said the angry crowd shouted "Down with America". One young man climbed on the wall surrounding the heavily fortified compound and attached a Pakistani flag to barbed wire.

"America is attacking our borders. The government should immediately break ties with it," said Naseema Baluch, a housewife attending the demonstration. "America wants to occupy our country but we will not let it do that."


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/27/us-pakistan-n...
Refresh | +14 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. NATO has screwed up royally in Pakistan.
I don't know who is in charge - but they have failed miserably.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The US is in charge
And you are right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
13. NATO = US Military
Absolutely NOTHING happens in NATO without the active approval and assistance of the Pentagon.

NOTHING.

It sometimes suits the US Military to hide behind "NATO" to obscure our involvement,
but that only fools the fools, and aids the propagandists.

SEE: "NATO" involvement in the Libyan Civil War



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. NATO military in Libya was under the command
of Canadian Charles Bouchard, and he did an excellent job.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. OMG! The Canadians went rogue,
...and did not clear every little detail with the Pentagon!!!
Those cheeky Canucks!
Didn't they know they have to ask first? :shrug:

Your post is exactly what I meant when I said,

"It sometimes suits the US Military to hide behind "NATO" to obscure our involvement..."

Taking sides in an ongoing Civil War in Libya is all on the Canadians!!! :rofl:




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. You certainly know how to either obfuscate or misunderstand.
Edited on Sun Nov-27-11 08:04 PM by tabatha
My very first post on this topic was

"I don't know who is in charge - but they have failed miserably."

I never stated that the US was not involved - of course they were involved. There is no question about that.

The success or failure of the undertaking depends on the leader.

And ONE man, a Canadian was in charge of all of NATO forces, no matter what country, US, UK, Italy, France, Norway, Denmark, etc.

I think you need to reread what I said, otherwise your comprehension is a big fat fucking zero.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Canadian at helm of Libyan mission goes out in style


OTTAWAA short, portly Canadian general with a chest full of medals was welcomed home with pomp and ceremony Thursday, a reward for his work commanding NATO forces to a victorious end in Libya.

It was a show the likes of which is rarely seen in this country for an honour that normally garners more understated arrangements and less public glare.

The Conservative government and the Canadian Forces borrowed the regal Senate chamber in the Parliament Buildings to present Lt.-Gen. Charles Bouchard with the Meritorious Service Cross one month after Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi was captured and killed by rebel forces.

The affair featured the firing of cannons and an overflight of CF-18 fighter jets, along with other aircraft that flew the skies over the North African country from March to October.

Hundreds of military personnel also showed up, including an honour guard of sailors, pilots and soldiers who participated in the mission.

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1092068
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
3. Recommend
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
4. O boy...... We really need to start a peaceful delegation...
It should get half of the Pentagon budget...I'm sure-this would make us a bit safer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
5. Uffda, we really stepped in deep shit this time!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Plucketeer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
6. And to think..........
we VOTE to put the folks in office that insist on perpetuating these Imperialistic lunacies! Can you IMAGINE what our founding fathers would think about the idiots we've now got holding the reins???
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Wasn't it George Washington that warned of
Imperialistic wars? The Founding Fathers knew how expensive all the European military adventures were to the average person in the street.

And Eisenhower said something to the effect that some day the people of the world would unite to force their governments to stand aside and let the earth live in peace.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Plucketeer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Eisenhower had seen war up close
While we've had war veteran presidents since Ike's reign, they'd only been bit players in combat - enough of a taste to where they could see a worth to conflict. Ike, on the other hand - he had seen the vast, overall carnage and knew that NO ONE truly "wins" in those stupid conflicts.
The rethugs worship their icon Reagan, but I'd vote in a heartbeat for Eisenhower over Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. I share your sentiments.
Eisenhower had the huge task of seeing to it that all the GI's returning home from the fray (In both WWII and Korea) had jobs.

So he saw to it that almost every community built community colleges, community hospitals, and of course,t he entire highway system that sprang up.

And he wasn't afraid to explain to the rich why they needed to be taxed at rates far exceeding what the rich pay today.

All these construction projects mean that the economy was stimulated full tilt. People had jobs and had money in their pockets. And that money created more jobs.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-28-11 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #16
25. Not only THAT,
...but America had something useful and beautiful to show for all the money that was spent,
unlike Tax Breaks and Military Spending which are Dead Ends.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
7. "A year ago, a U.S. helicopter attack killed two Pakistani soldiers posted on the border..."
...and a joint investigation by the two nations found that Pakistani troops had fired first at the U.S. helicopters.

The investigation found that the shots were probably meant as warnings after the choppers passed into Pakistani airspace.

Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gbbkD...


There's probably a lesson somewhere in all this about firing "warning shots."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
saras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Probably a lesson about invading soveriegn air space too. We apparently haven't learned it yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Touch. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
apocalypsehow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-28-11 04:51 AM
Response to Reply #10
21. "soveriegn (Sic) air space"? Is that, like, private property?
I can't say I agree: someone was just lecturing us all here on DU on how such concepts simply are not valid. The name of the poster slips my mind, but the content of their argument is worth re-examining:

"Protest civil rights loss over property rights? Yes, I have no problem with that. Property rights are secondary, and ultimately the property isn't yours anyways, as eminent domain demonstrates.

I have as much right to interfere with their use of the streets as their consumerism has a right to interfere with my air, water, and food. No less. They are threatening to kill me.

Block the access to a business or institution? Yep. That's the whole purpose of a strike - it's to make it clear that to SEEK access to the business or institution is a personal attack on every protester or striker there, and they are as fallible and easy to anger as any other humans.

Local NOISE laws? It depends. If they're not objective, based in decibel measurements, based in health concerns and not the tastes of the wealthy, and equally applied to everyone and everything, including construction machinery and commercial establishments, then yes, they're both corrupt AND unimportant.

Likewise with health laws - they have to be REASONABLE. Bogus laws clearly used to discriminate are UNWORTHY OF RESPECT. It is FALSE respect for our legal system to pretend that clearly unconstitutional laws and interpretations are legitimate. It is all of our responsibility to challenge such laws, every time.

Likewise fire safety, which is infamously used to harass social phenomena that TPTB disapprove of - usually these laws are written in such a way that it's impossible - not merely difficult but impossible - for anything but a large corporate enterprise to obey them.

I would expect officers enforcing health and safety laws to be counseling people on better alternatives - that is, actually doing their jobs as public servants - rather than using those problems as excuses for psychotically violent attacks.

I have yet to see a single case where an officer who violently attacked a nonviolent protester deserves anything less than felon status - permanently losing the right to have a gun, to enforce the law, to have physical power over others. Nothing about any of the laws involved would be an excuse for these attacks - NOT EVEN THE VIOLENCE AND BOMBINGS OF 1960's PROTESTS."


"NOT EVEN THE VIOLENCE AND BOMBINGS OF 1960'S (Sic) PROTESTS"!

See how that makes sense? So what is all this heartache over an (alleged) violation of "soveriegn (Sic) air space"?





( :eyes:)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
krucial Donating Member (103 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #7
18. Yeah US is right,its the Pakistanis fault
Right the US is Always right and never wrong.It is always the victims fault,
because America always tells gives us the facts and give us the truth.
Thats why we found that massive quantity of WMD's in Iraq, and
also thats why they would like wikileaks founder julian assange dead or in prison,for exposing all the truth to the world.They want to make sure sure that their tracks are always covered, and that no one is there to expose and refute wrongdoings and whatever they give us as truth and fact
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
russspeakeasy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
11. Ever read "How to win friends and influence people" ?
This approach wasn't in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
14. I hate this war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
unionworks Donating Member (967 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-28-11 05:14 AM
Response to Original message
22. ESAD PACKISTAN
You had no trouble hiding Bin Laden all those years. WFW. :nopity:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-28-11 05:26 AM
Response to Original message
23. This or something like it ..
... was inevitable, as soon as the bin Laden incident occured.

The Pakistanis were "hurt" that we didn't involve them, we were pretty sure that if we had he would have been tipped off and helped to "escape".

The Pakistanis have been acting like they are our friends but they have not been for a long time. Maybe among political leaders, but they don't matter, the country is effectively ruled by the military and all they want is our money.

They are rightly afraid of India and to some extent of Afghanistan, but being dishonest about their motives and intentions has not worked out too well for them. I don't see this relationship ever healing now, it was on life support already, now it is a corpse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
unionworks Donating Member (967 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-28-11 05:39 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. agree wholeheartedly
Bush played footsie with Pakistan to the very end.It still curdles my blood remembering him, when asked about the whereabouts of Bin Laden, making his cute little jokes. Obama did the right thing. He found Osama, knew the Pakis couldn't be trusted, and took care of business. And the next time they take pot shots at NATO forces, I hope they find out what a REAL attack looks like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JCMach1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-28-11 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
26. Where is the rage in America over Pakistani duplicity on terrorism?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Sep 21st 2014, 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC