Bush secretly approving ground assaults inside Pakistan

[snowmayne]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush secretly approved orders in July allowing U.S. special forces to carry out ground assaults inside Pakistan without approval from the Pakistan government, the New York Times reported on Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT

The disclosure is certain to further anger Pakistan's military, whose Army chief said on Wednesday that Pakistan would not allow foreign troops to conduct operations on its soil, after a cross-border incursion last week by U.S. commandos.

The new orders reflect concern about safe havens for al Qaeda and the Taliban inside Pakistan and an American view Pakistan lacks the will and ability to combat militants, the Times said.

"The situation in the tribal areas is not tolerable," said a senior U.S. official who spoke to the newspaper on condition of anonymity. "We have to be more assertive. Orders have been issued."

The newspaper said the orders also reflected a belief some U.S. operations had been compromised once Pakistanis were advised of the details.

Helicopter-borne U.S. commandos carried out a ground assault in Pakistan's South Waziristan, a sanctuary for al Qaeda operatives, last week, the first known incursion into Pakistan by U.S. troops since the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. The raid killed 20 people, including women and children.

Army chief General Ashfaq Kayani Kayani said in a statement on Wednesday: "The sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country will be defended at all cost and no external force is allowed to conduct operations ... inside Pakistan."

"There is no question of any agreement or understanding with the coalition forces whereby they are allowed to conduct operations on our side of the border," he said.

The U.S. action complicated the situation for Pakistan's new civilian president, Asif Ali Zardari, who was sworn in on Tuesday, having forced former army chief Pervez Musharraf to stand down last month after nearly nine years in power.

Zardari, like Musharraf, has vowed to defeat the Taliban and support the West's mission in Afghanistan, but the civilian government has to pay more heed to public opinion than Musharraf had done in a country rife with anti-American sentiment.

At the same time, Pakistan is highly vulnerable to any reduction in U.S. financial support, given the rapid depletion of Pakistan's foreign currency reserves, which has sparked talk the country could default on a sovereign bond early next year unless it gets billions of dollars of foreign financing.

AFGHANISTAN TROOP SURGE

U.S. President George Bush, days before his final 9/11 anniversary in office, said this week he will send more troops to Afghanistan as his top military officials told Congress America was not winning a fight against the nearly seven-year insurgency.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee success in Afghanistan would require more civilian effort beyond the military fight.

"Frankly, we're running out of time," Mullen said.

"I'm not convinced we are winning it in Afghanistan. I am convinced we can," he said, offering a sober assessment nearly seven years since U.S.-led forces toppled the Taliban after the September 11, 2001, attacks.

Violence in Afghanistan has soared over the past two years as al Qaeda and Taliban fighters have regrouped in the remote region between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"These two nations are inextricably linked in a common insurgency that crosses the border between them," Mullen said.

"We can hunt down and kill extremists as they cross over the border from Pakistan ... but until we work more closely with the Pakistani government to eliminate the safe havens from which they operate, the enemy will only keep coming."

U.S. commanders in Afghanistan have requested three more combat brigades, about 10,000 soldiers. About 33,000 U.S. troops are already there, including 14,000 who are part of a 53,000-strong NATO military command.

The officials said the West should do more to help Afghans with new investments in roads and other infrastructure, education and crop assistance.

"These are the keys to success in Afghanistan," said Mullen. "We cannot kill our way to victory."

He said Afghanistan badly needed a national security force supported by local leaders. Gates supports an Afghan government proposal to double the size of the country's army by creating an active-duty force of 122,000 troops by 2014.

However, U.S. reinforcements depend on Washington's ability to reduce forces now deployed in Iraq, where the Bush administration has waged an unpopular war that critics say distracted attention from Afghanistan and al Qaeda.

Bush approved secret orders for Pakistan raids: report - Yahoo! News

sure you can get a better story from somewhere other than yahoo but meh

[snowmayne]

lol no one checkd this out or replied kinda wondering why

[Smaerd]

I was hesitant(to reply) mainly because I wouldn't be surprised.

[Hostile]

I didn't see the thread. This is a crucial topic. America has been making military incursions into Pakistan without permission, while the CIA fires missiles into Pakistan from unmanned drone planes. 22 Pakistanis dead this week. Pakistan has said it will protect itself "at all costs", and is sending it's military to repel US forces. This is huge. A nuclear power is violently attacking an allied nuclear power. It doesn't get any more important than this.

Not to mention, the situation with Russia is fascinating. They've threatened both Poland with Ukraine with nuclear annihilation if they continue aiding NATO. They told the Czech Republic in no uncertain terms that they are not to host the missile shield, and they'll go back into Georgia in a heartbeat if necessary. Basically, the bear is back. The very fact that the neocons in charge could be suicidal enough to propose, of all things, an anti-nuclear missile defence shield is extremely telling. It's probably the biggest development in world atomic policy since the India/Pakistan nuclear tests of '98, and if the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists aren't already racing to set the Doomsday Clock waaaay forwards, they're not doing they're fucking job right.

Lets not forget that we're already only 5 minutes from midnight. In 2007 we lost 2 minutes because of the N. Korean nuclear test and a few rumours about Iran. How many minutes do we lose when America bombs Pakistan and attacks Russia?

[Smaerd]

Hostile what would I do without you?

[ProfessorMurder]

What good is it when alqeada has already moved to the interior of Pakistan?

Bush is two steps behind two years too late.

bin laden isn't in a cave; he's in a castle.

[Dozer McDozer]

i just don't know what to say about this shit anymore

[snowmayne]

theres the responses i wanted to see

[snowmayne]

bump cause my thread deserves responses from those of the likes of Letsplayyourway, SSD, Verk, Ego, and you other good posters in here.

[ziplock]

What the fuck?

The US is setting a precedent under the Bush administration by arbitrarily determining who does and does not meet their standard of how a country should be ran and using this as some sort of justification for military operations. How fucking stupid do you have to be? Or desperate...

When anyone says something about "winning" or "losing" in Iraq or Afghanistan people immediately think of some sort of region, area, arena, or something localized along those lines. That's bullshit. When an enemy does not hold claim to any particular land but operates through and beyond national borders you can't attempt to describe the conflict through those inappropriate lines. The PLO for instance for quite some time have made it a practice to move out amongst the various nations and use them as platforms to launch attacks.

It's bullshit rhetoric, anyone who buys into it really hasn't thought through things to a good enough depth. The various moves done by nations lately has gone a long way to shape the way global politics takes place. The leverage of nuclear weapons and their threat has become painfully clear and seems to be being used effectively to maneuver around the economic girth of the superpowers.

Ah fun times are ahead.

[tedkennedy]

Originally Posted by snowmayne

bump cause my thread deserves responses from those of the likes of Letsplayyourway, SSD, Verk, Ego, and you other good posters in here.

AND TK!()!*()!@*#!()@#*

Woohoo for Bush giving the middle east more reason to hate us! keep the war machine going!!!

[ProfessorMurder]

Bush does like body counts?

Even if it is women and children.

[Ego Tripping]

Thanks Snowmayne, but I really don't concern myself with this stuff anymore, at least, not getting angry or even disturbed by it. All my attention is focused on the environment, since without that, there can't really be any wars to be waged in the first place. Plus, I'm over feeling like the future is going to be filled with war and destruction, I just don't see it happening. These skirmishes will linger but war in general is fizzling out as any reasonable answer to any problems we are facing.

[Antediluvian]

some would say it was predictable.


next move.....?

[snowmayne]

lol how could i forget TK

and ziplock

its funny how this thread somehow goes unseen but each time I bump it, it gets great responses.

[koshiva]

A new level is had when 'unamanned' drones are targeting 'people'. In future wars I would imagine a 'hell' of alot of military hardware in Pakistan or Iraq for example, will be controlled by some computer geek in Houstan. Wait, that is already taking place.

The missile shield is similar to that Cuban missile crisis in the 70's - the Russians called their bluff, they even invaded just to show how it is done as a warning of what may be to come. Too bad all those Georgians had to lose their lives. I thought Polland was a totally open and democratic country with little corruption?:rolleyes ::rolleyes : hahahahah Would be fun to see the Americans try and install that shit in Germany or France, or Spain, or England, Or Sweden, Or Denmark, or Italy, or Turkey, or Switzerland, or Austria, or......

But - they could install what ever they like in Iraq, including puppets. Once the puppets are in power and they do what you want them too - this is what the state dept considers a democratic society. Like Idi Amin or Mbutu and so many others.....

Still, the past imperialism supposed hedgemony is over. The Neocons have conned too many and now the whole world see's them for what they are - thieves and murderers! Like every one is against the Muslim extremism huh...but what about if the side which claims to oppose it so much is the one fueling it the most? You know...drone drops real bomb on civilians....30 civilians dead....300 recruited to Al-quaida.

The Christian fundamentalism is also something which should be tamed.

You know the people of Iraq do desperately want freedom - freedom from America!

One day, perhaps - the people of the world should draft their own constitution - perhaps if but symbolic only - to say something to the effect of...'We the people of the true free world do not wish to be subjected to American bombs, wars, economic manipulation, regime change etc...unless we can vote in your elections!' Why does the world have to be sujected to American laws? Whoopsie...those fithy commies!

You had the Truman doctrine...now it is the Neocon doctrine..the doctrine which says the war machine need not sit idly and only be used to take down the most depraved regimes - but can be used as a vehicle for investment. What good is peace in the world if you have to keep an army doing nothing? Costs alot of money unless you can reap what you sown.