world

Pakistan's army warns U.S. not to stage more raids

28 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

28 Comments
Login to comment

"Washington has given the Pakistani army more than $10 billion in aid"

Right. Officers have used that money to purchase their villas in Abbottabad. Why the Americans chose Pakistan over India, I cannot understand. India's ridiculous flirtation with socialism was the cause, perhaps, but it was very short sighted of the U.S.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, now that we've gotten the main person we were supposed to be after in the first place, there is no need to be in either country anymore. Afghanistan doesn't need any more funds or training (they've had more than enough chance and continue to botch it) and Pakistan certainly will have to either deal with the infiltration of the extremist insurgents or lose. Now I'm with the band of people that say its time to bring our boys and girls home.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

warnerbro: "Why the Americans chose Pakistan over India, I cannot understand."

The previous US government DESPERATELY needed support (even if only symbolic) in the 'war on terror', especially when they illegally entered Iraq, so when Pakistan (who needs aid) quickly thrust up their hand the US took it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Its way, way past time to bring the soldiers home HonestDictator. All America has done is stoke the cause for extremism by sticking around so long fighting the Taliban, who were (and probably secretly still are) Pakistani allies. If the focus had stayed on al-Quaida, we probably would have had bin Laden a long time ago and since all those other violations of Pakistani sovereignty would not have happened, the anger today would be less even if we did invade to get bin Laden.

I don't exactly think Pakistan is going to turn on us, but its a lot like trying to get the One Ring to Mt. Doom with Gollum along for the ride. Expect trouble and deception from them at the very least.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That the US continues to send huge amounts of money to Pakistan (and money that they have to borrow from China, to boot), should be an impeachable offense.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm not that gullible Woody, this extremism you're talking about has been around for over 50 years, it's just that with the "information" age people know more of whats going around the world in an hour or less after something happens.

@WilliB if that were the case we'd have a LOT of presidents impeached well before Obama xD...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyone who thinks elements of the Pakistani ISI is not playing both sides of the fence here -- U.S. and the taliban -- is simply ignoring reality. So the U.S. would have every right to tell Pakistan to get lost, and spend no more money on aid there. But, allowing a nuclear-armed country to fall into complete anarchy is probably not in anyone's best interests. Except the terrorists. Many foreign-policy experts think Pakistan will be one of the world's major source of problems/instability for many years.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

US answer to Pakistans demands. You want money and support from us easy you get off your lazy a** and do something about the terrorists sheltering in your country. Alternative is by by money we will go talk to India about their needs and what we can do for each other.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WilliB: "That the US continues to send huge amounts of money to Pakistan (and money that they have to borrow from China, to boot), should be an impeachable offense."

Should have been when it started.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Pakistani Army did not wake up the last time we flew in, so I doubt they will again if we do it again. Everyone knows that those stealth helicopters do not make any noise at all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The money sent to Pakistan? You can call it aid if you want to. I think of it as a payoff.

I really wish we had just pulverized al-Q at the start and got out of the area asap.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ihavegreatlegs.

Yet, they got spotted as no sound or small radar signature don't reduce their heat signature or their visibility to the ol' Mark 1 Eye-Ball.

They got reported and Pakistan did scramble F-16's, which would have roasted them if they were caught.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ooooh, a warning.

Fine. The US will now quail in the face of admonition.

Or not.

Instead, the US may simply wait for Pakistan to calm down while it waits for its next aid check -- money, incidentally, that didn't seem to go towards discovering bin Laden living a scant 40 miles from the Pakistan capital, while avoiding anwering uncomfortable questions about that lapse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If al-Qaida's new #1 guy is found in Pakistan, the U.S. will have a choice between getting Pakistan's approval to carry out a raid/bombing or asking/demanding and trusting Pakistan to carry it out, which would carry a far greater risk of failure, or just do it, which would have a far greater chance of success. I'm betting it will be the latter again.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"what’s viewed by many here as a national humiliation delivered by a deeply unpopular America."

Tha national shame should be that this creature had lived under their noses, certainly with the knowledge of some, perhaps even in the ISI. If Pakistan were a reliable ally the Americans might have kept them up to speed.

Pakistan is a basket case. Sadly a nuclear basket case, so I guess the aid must keep flowing....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Pakistan's army warns U.S. not to stage more raids

Or what? You'll stop accepting our aid?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Pakistan's army warns U.S. not to stage more raids."

At least, not the kind that succeed,expose the Pakistanis as double-dealing chumps, and further strengthen the increasingly vital ties between the US and India.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The tough-sounding statement..."

That's about right, it's only SOUNDS tough.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smithinjapan: The previous US government DESPERATELY needed support (even if only symbolic) in the 'war on terror', especially when they illegally entered Iraq, so when Pakistan (who needs aid) quickly thrust up their hand the US took it.

I'm pretty sure you just made that up on the spot and decided that it sounded good because you have little to no knowledge of the area or the situation. Basically, you pulled a smitty.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"'m pretty sure you just made that up on the spot and decided that it sounded good because you have little to no knowledge of the area or the situation"

The U.S. funneled nearly $5.3 billion to Pakistan during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. Some people can't quite grasp that geo-political strategies run deeper than party affiliation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Don't hide anymore Bin Laden's and it won't be a problem.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The army warned the United States not to launch another attack like the one that took out bin Laden....Many of the world’s most wanted militants are believed to be in Pakistan, including Ayman al-Zawahri...

"We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them, and feed them, and house them." - George W. Bush, September 15, 2001

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It might have caused a new war if the Pakistani Air Force had been able to get out of bed in time. And both helos might have gone over hard in any case. Obama has major political cojones to order this and nobody can say enough about the men who carried it out. But let them "review" all they want. The Americans have plenty of drones left.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wasn't that from the "with us or against us" speech?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

yeah, it's nice to know who your friends are. The sooner we wrap things up and get out the better. I'm not saying to cut and run, but it would be nice to not have to pay off Pakistan any longer. Let them rot while the extremists kill people. The next (and last) raid in Pakistan should be to take out their nukes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There should be a major reappraisal of U.S security relations with Pakistan. I doubt if any good would come out of the current U.S policy in combating extremism. Instead, the U.S. should should push for closer ties with India. There is increase doubt that U.S. money is not buying anything that's deep or durable. I doubt the leaders in the Afghan government and the Pakistani government are going to do anything except pursue their own narrow self interests.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The USA also needs China, China is Pakistan´s so called ally, so and China does not need any Jihadists being trained next door in Pakistan to try and help their Muslim brothers in the Uighur province, so sooner than later Paksitan too must understand it can not let the Osama bin ladens of the world tried to hide over in that country because now, drones etc..will come and ZAP, you be dead and down at the bottom of the sea as even the official hompepage for AlQaeda admitted recently, that their martyr, Sheik Usama bin laden is 20,000 leagues under the sea. Time for Pakistan to understand that it is better for them to at least to try to be friends with the USA or risk getting all of their Talibanis sent into martyrdom by Navy SEALS etc..now if we could only get these SEALS to take out the gangs in the USA, Mexico, Colombia too.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sfjp330: the U.S. should should push for closer ties with India.

Bin Laden wasn't located in India and neither is the ISI. The "partnership" with Pakistan has two fronts....one is to try to help catch the Taliban and Al Queda, the other is to try to stop those within Pakistan trying to help them. The US has very strong ties with India already but they aren't part of the problem.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites