Pakistan Border Attack Death Toll Rises

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 21, 2011
    3,665
    38
    The border area where this took place is porous and doesn't seem to be well-defined, by all accounts.


    I dont see why in the 10+ years we have been there, we havent done something about this? If not to set an agreed upon border, then to establish one that WE wouldnt cross
     
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 21, 2011
    3,665
    38
    Which is more tactically advantageous for us, an ambiguous border or a well-defined line where enemies can cause trouble then slink back behind the line to the "safe" zone? I imagine that the failure to identify such a line is intentional. If we have no problem sending drones into their airspace in pursuit of our enemies or sending a special forces team deep inside their territory to take out a high-value target, I don't see why we'd be concerned about some imaginary line in a region that is decidedly lawless to begin with.

    Pakistan is not our ally, despite the lip service that our government gives them.


    At least (for now anyway) they are going to ban us from using their land to transport important material to soldiers stationed in Afghanistan, and telling us to close air bases we operate out of their nation. Just because they arent our ally, doesnt mean they aren't a sovereign nation. What were you saying about advantageous?
     

    Blackhawk2001

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 20, 2010
    8,196
    113
    NW Indianapolis
    There are various geopolitical reasons for us to try to maintain relations with Pakistan, just as we maintained relations with Russia and Red China during the Cold War. Pakistan is a nuclear power (primarily because India is one) and it's in our national interests to keep the control of their nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of our outright enemies. Not only are fairly large areas of the country not under the control of the central government, there are factions within the government and military (most notably the Pakistani intelligence service - the ISI) who bear us no good will and were almost certainly aware that OBL was hiding out in their country. It can be argued whether it is a strategic error to "antagonize" the Pakistanis by chasing bad guys over their borders or raiding enemy safe houses located on their claimed turf, but TACTICALLY it is easy to make the case that enemies shouldn't be allowed to operate openly and freely from sanctuary - look what happened to us in Vietnam when we allowed the same thing to happen. On a diplomatic level, the Pakistanis, no matter what they may feel about the Taliban (remember, the Taliban have claimed responsibility for terror acts against Pakistani citizens in their largest cities) can't stand by and allow us to invade their borders without taking SOME action, but then they probably won't make a really big long-term fuss because they don't want to sever ties with us, either.
     

    88GT

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 29, 2010
    16,643
    83
    Familyfriendlyville
    At least (for now anyway) they are going to ban us from using their land to transport important material to soldiers stationed in Afghanistan, and telling us to close air bases we operate out of their nation. Just because they arent our ally, doesnt mean they aren't a sovereign nation. What were you saying about advantageous?

    Advantage changes with circumstances. It doesn't negate prior realities.
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    Stop bombing Pakistan and Yemen, and endangering our National Security.

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBs1XpQanUI[/ame]
     

    BumpShadow

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 7, 2011
    1,950
    38
    Fort Wayne
    At least (for now anyway) they are going to ban us from using their land to transport important material to soldiers stationed in Afghanistan, and telling us to close air bases we operate out of their nation. Just because they arent our ally, doesnt mean they aren't a sovereign nation. What were you saying about advantageous?

    Ok, so they "ban" us. Just like Iraq "banned" PSC from operating in their country. They'll "ban" us, and we'll do it anyway because they can't really stop us. Personally I think that saying their going to "ban" us is a ploy to gin up support from their populace from election reasons, or a ploy to charge a higher fee from us. Or both. Either way it doesn't really change anything.
     

    Boiled Owl

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jul 29, 2010
    721
    18
    Newton Co. !
    Ok, so they "ban" us. Just like Iraq "banned" PSC from operating in their country. They'll "ban" us, and we'll do it anyway because they can't really stop us. Personally I think that saying their going to "ban" us is a ploy to gin up support from their populace from election reasons, or a ploy to charge a higher fee from us. Or both. Either way it doesn't really change anything.

    Every now and then I like to look at the perspective of "placing the shoe on the other foot". Imagine if it was our troops being killed on our border?

    "They really can't stop us" No that's for sure, even our own electorate cannot stop it. We pretty much operate without impunity.

    "Either way it doesn't really change anything" I'm afraid you're right!
     
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 21, 2011
    3,665
    38
    Ok, so they "ban" us. Just like Iraq "banned" PSC from operating in their country. They'll "ban" us, and we'll do it anyway because they can't really stop us. Personally I think that saying their going to "ban" us is a ploy to gin up support from their populace from election reasons, or a ploy to charge a higher fee from us. Or both. Either way it doesn't really change anything.


    orly?


    NATO relies on the land routes to ship 2/3 of its supplies to Afghanistan. They CAN stop us, and they have (at least for now). How would you like it if Pakistan and their "militants" declared open hunting season on US convoys?
    Us giving them MORE money doesnt change anything? No wonder we are 15 trillion in debt. keep spending, "it doesnt change anything." Give our enemies more money, "it doesnt change anything." etc etc. We borrow money from China, to give to their ally Pak. Giving our enemies money to arm themselves or do whatever they are doing with that money, DOES change things. And throwing money at the problem (especially involving other countries) is a horrible foreign policy solution. Its a band aid fix and will do nothing to garner support from their populace. We are just making more enemies and more than likely more terrorists out of these strategies
     

    Blackhawk2001

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 20, 2010
    8,196
    113
    NW Indianapolis
    Every now and then I like to look at the perspective of "placing the shoe on the other foot". Imagine if it was our troops being killed on our border?

    "They really can't stop us" No that's for sure, even our own electorate cannot stop it. We pretty much operate without impunity.

    "Either way it doesn't really change anything" I'm afraid you're right!

    You're welcome to put the shoe on the other foot if you want. The situations are actually analogous. We have Mexican troops coming across our Southern borders and killing our citizens, but the Mexican government - with some justification - disavows them and we let them get away with it. If a nation fails to maintain its sovereignty by failing to secure its borders, it is subject to invasion by any force which wishes to do so and must put up with the consequences unless it takes EFFECTIVE steps to secure its borders.
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    Pakistan PM angry at continued breach of sovereignty

    Pakistan PM: No more business as usual with US
    ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani warned the United States that there would be 'no more business as usual' with Washington after a NATO attack that killed two dozen Pakistani troops.

    In an interview with an American news channel Monday, Gilani said that Pakistan was re-evaluating its relationship with the United States.

    He said Pakistan wanted to maintain its relationship with the United States as long as there was mutual respect for Pakistan's sovereignty.

    Gilani highlighted incidents such as the killing of the Pakistani troops and a US raid into Pakistan to kill Osama bin Laden as violations of the country's sovereignty.

    11-28-2011_27495_l.jpg
     

    jeremy

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Feb 18, 2008
    16,482
    36
    Fiddler's Green
    2 things you must realize about this Border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.
    1.) It's Location shifts Daily, plus or minus over 5 Kilometers a day, almost every day.
    2.) The other thing is this is the Frontier Provinces for the Pakistani's not exactly where they send there best, actually it is usually considered punishment.
     

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,631
    149
    Still seems to boil down to U.S. troops being where they don't belong.
    Where do you draw this conclusion from? Unless you are trying to make a bigger point that they shouldn't be in Afghanistan altogether.

    I don't believe I read anywhere in that article that they were actually in Pakistani territory and why would they not be in the area close to the border to try and intercept insurgent fighters?
     
    Top Bottom