Pakistan fires on US helicopters near border

shadowtrekker writes,

"why is everyone so quick to jump on anyone's side except the U.S"

"will you all of a sudden be on the U.S. side if Obama is president and he orders attacks w/in Pakistan?"

Well it's simpler than you think.

Countries aren't entitled to kill other people because they want to or it seems convenient. There has to be a real reason to go blow somebody's head off.

Now it's one thing to declare somebody is an enemy and go hunt down guys with assault rifles and rocket launchers and so on. But when you aren't killing an armed enemy in combat but women and children it doesn't matter who a President is - what is happening is illegal, by any world standard, immoral by Christian standards, and cowardly by all military standards.

It has nothing to do with 'choosing sides' it has everything to do with respect for honor, and law and understanding the difference between right and wrong.

In your home town if the police find a drug distribution chain do they set up teams to go shoot people at random and bomb out the entire neighborhood?

No? Why not? What's the difference? If somebody authorized them to do it? Isn't it "choosing sides" to say, "Hey! Wait a minute! You're killing innocent people here!"

Simple: when the violence is in excess of what is required to correct the situation the violence is wrong.

So sure: Take down the baddies and leave the rest alone. They become your friends - they do not become your mortal enemies.

People in the military understand this - politicians don't.

Path-o-logic,

Interesting take on destabilizing Pakistan and why it's too risky to succeed. The Pakistani military is reportedly as divided as is their ISI on the question of whose side the future looks better on..

If Zardari falls, then who steps in? Musharraf?

Dubious.

Whoever replaces Zardari needs only to reinstate all the high court judges and Musharraf risks being banned from office, incarcerated, or worse, and Zardari sent to the slammer.

By every definition Pakistan either is, or is about to be, a failed state about to crack across ethnic and religious lines - and (47 million?) Pashtuns near the Afghanistan border are unlikely to tolerate any more incursions onto their turf.

For help they can turn to China or Russia. Not a pleasant thought.

tanveerdogar writes,

"Pakistan is a colony of USA like Australia and New Zealand are colonies of Britian."

Pakistan is a colony of USA? Don't say that on any street in Pakistan.

First, Australia and New Zealand stopped being colonies a long time ago. They still are members of a commonwealth, yes, but they are increasingly being drawn into China's treaty and trade orbit because that's where the money is. Britain is long past being an Imperial Power.

"We should not say that USA is attacking Pakistan."

Really?

OK then, to follow your line of logic, to hit a criminal gang operating out of New York, we bomb their friends in Chicago and kill innocent civilians? Then we say to the Mayor of Chicago - "tell your citizens: forget regional sovereignty - we didn't attack you personally, just a random bunch of your neighbors, women and children. Forget the sympathy crap, that's why we decided it was alright, OK?"

Um. no, you don't get it.

Destabilizing Chicago is to aid and abet the resistance movement trying to overthrow their mayor. Now more than ever the mayor becomes a target. It galvanizes the state against him and the latest attackers. Now instead of aiding us in our holy war they shoot at us to protect themselves - from us..

Who benefits? The bad guys..

This is another unilateral and brain-dead Bush initiative which can help lose it all.

You don't get it. But I'll wager that the military and state department know exactly why this was an amazingly dumb operation. Zip for benefits and a cost beyond measure.

It is not what the people of America have become, it is the US Government policies.
The American people, as a whole, are not like what happens to be in office at this time.
Hopefully with a regime change, the US can regain some of the credibilty we once had.

why is everyone so quick to jump on anyone's side except the U.S. - you know, your country. "let's move to Canada" , blah, blah, blah.

will you all of a sudden be on the U.S. side if Obama is president and he orders attacks w/in Pakistan?

you could find a good third party candidate to vote for, we still may make strikes around the world but we won't be spending billions of dollars trying to "democratize" or rebuild when we are done.

I'm ashamed at what we have become. We are a pariah to the world. Everything we touch just goes from bad to horrible.

Without war-mongering, Americans would never stand for our government funneling trillions of our tax dollars to the defense industry. People mostly just still don't seem to understand that this is what it's all been about since the beginning. It's was the PNAC’s published propaganda long before Bush was elected and it's been behind every foreign policy move they've made.

Everyone quickly...to Canada!!! Where the smart and peaceful people live!

The bottom line in all of this -

- don't start wars you can't win,
- don't start wars you can't afford to pay for
- don't start wars with allies.
- people notice and they shun you.

Don't start wars that cripple your economy and don't keep them going because you're too vain to see it's not worth what you're paying, and you're afraid that if you end it everyone will call you "chicken" at recess..

At every step the Bush gang acted as though they expected miracles to intervene. So instead of consulting with the generals they ignored them - when not firing any general who told them - "You do realize - This is not going to work."..

But no. "They will welcome us with flowers" after a 48 hour rain of bombs. It is "going to be quick" - McCain? "The resistance is in its last throes" - Cheney. "The war will pay for itself" - Bush. America can use Iraq's oil wealth "to pay for the war" - Bush.

is this legal? Nope. Did the buyers line up? Nope. Does Iraq want the troops out now? "We will leave if they ask us to" - Bush. They have asked and been refused.

Victory was at hand. Victory was in sight. Victory needed another surge, and more time, and more money, and another surge, and more money..

But it somehow seemed reasonable to extend the agony to another "100 years if need be" - McCain. A guy who calls himself a Maverick but has none of a Maverick's ideas or insight into why anyone would be a maverick...

Now the same blind crew sends missions into Iran to provoke another war. While sending other missions into Pakistan that could split that country in favor of 48 million heavily armed Pashtuns and hand it to far more dangerous people with nuclear weapons ready to go..

It doesn't matter whether the Pentagon denies that Pakistani soldiers shot back - what matters is whether the Pakistanis decide - "OK enough. Get out and stay out. And take your poodles with you. You're on your own."

At which point China, Russia and maybe even India steps into the vacuum.

Or maybe Afghanistan finally decides - after all the killing in all these wars maybe it's time to cut deals with our war and drug lords. At least we get some of our country and security back. At which point China, Russia and maybe even India will step into the vacuum.

Had Iraq and Afghanistan included troops from China or Russia as a "peacekeeping occupation force" there would already be enough forces to occupy both countries. And all this chaos would be over by now.

But does anyone still think these invasions weren't to control oil and restrict who got access? If so explain why those restricted were also those who could have pulled it all out of the fire - if cooperation in the war on terror had any meaning.

You have to laugh at McCain. He claims Obama should know better than to raise taxes in a recession.

An "experienced" pro like Diss-Honest John would tell you (but a general would not) what you should do now is have a 3 or 4 theatre war going simultaneously and watch the US economy sink into oblivion.

That's much better than un-taxing the vast lower end of the scale and bumping the taxes on the rich back to where they were under Clinton. Ask any McCain flack which is better.

I have always thought the one of the main reasons Bush lied and distorted facts about the invasion on Iraq was a vendetta for Sadam's attempt to assasinate his Father. He is now desperate to deliver on his "wanted dead or alive" comment about Bin Laden before he's out of office. He is mentally sick and weak.

Pakistan had every right to fire at our helicopters! Same with Russia in our placing missiles in Poland.

Hey intelligenceisacurse, it looks like you lack of the curse. Where have YOU been? Pakistan wants the US out and actually wants to get out of this "War on Terror". One more attack that would cost 20 more civilian lives would get the US kicked the hell out. In other words, this "attack" gives the US an excuse to fight back and stay longer.

Did you now connect the dots?

hey petarro:

we already did attack Pakistan, where have you been?

we are already in Pakistan.

you been sleeping?

we've slaughtered dozens of Pakistani innocents this month already.

wake up will you.

Why encourage this Article if both ways Deny this? This is being setup to give the "US an excuse to attack" and go into Pakistan.

Isn't that what one does in a war? What are they supposed to do, use harsh language and hand gestures?

A war in Afghanistan and Iraq would definitely get worse if nuclear-armed Pakistan gets in the picture. And on top of that Palin Moose-Hunter wants to get "tough" with Russia...

Yeah good luck with World War 3 there. I'm going to Canada, were the guns are as cold as the St. Lawrence in September.

Three Wars... Can anyone say draft?

Glad they missed, lol. That would not have been a good situation.

we have two choices... mccaine or obama... both seem pretty grim.

i hope you're ready for what we have coming...

You cant abuse a nations lives land and resources for to long before they start retaliating.If you need proof look at all of human history.

They need to beat us out of their country. We don't need three wars.

Lack of communication??Maybe they were supposed to know we were coming.....and didn't get the heads up or didn't care.......

Just imagine if Iran fired upon us. I bet the gov't wouldnt be denying it.

America versus the world. World War Three.

It must be time to write more taxpayer checks to the defense industry again...

You seriously are not considering that Bush would provoke a response from Pakistan...do you? Just for an election? Naw. The republicans would never use cheap tactics to win an election.

Scary.

Very fucking scary.

If an american is killed there will be a HUGE portion of the american public demanding retribution and as america doesn't have a history of level-headedness in situations of violence against them it could escalate rapidly.

3 wars would be very bad.

Glad to see a country not willing to take our shit.

Does this surprise anyone, I mean they tod us they would fire on us, well duh. But this is what should have been done on Sept 12th 2001. Instead Bush and Co. saw 9-11 as an opportunity to illegally invade Iraq and take thier oil, sell bombs and guns and instill fear in Americans to feed the Penatgon trillions of dollars that disappear. If he does not belong in prison who does?

we would fire on them. the reaction seems logical.

Well if the Pakistanies keep harboring Al Qaeda it will get worse. If John Kerry had of been elected in 2004
Ben Laden's head would have been on a pike out front of the Statue of Liberty by now. It takes a democrat to win this war.

Can't say I blame them.