News and Politics | January 25, 2009 | 36 comments

First strike: 10 dead as Obama aims missiles at Pakistan-Afghanistan border, Taliban enclaves

Image
escarondito
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - The Pakistan military's top spokesman said attacks against suspected terrorists by pilotless U.S. drones - such as two alleged to have occurred Friday - are ''counterproductive'' because they undercut his country's efforts to oust militants from Pakistan's tribal region.

Seventeen people were killed Friday in the two missile strikes in the ungoverned tribal areas. One government official and two military officials said they were U.S. attacks. They are the first such strikes since President Barack Obama took office on Tuesday.

Read and Discuss....

Odd we are going after targets which actually make sense?
  1. groups:
    News and Politics,   Current News US
  2. tags:
    News and Politics Obama Barack Obama America 8 more
  3.     
    |

36 comments // First strike: 10 dead as Obama aims missiles at Pakistan-Afghanistan border, Taliban enclaves

  • Robroy1
  • metrospective
    • 0
      metrospective  
    • Firstly, Obama probably did not even know about the drones. Secondly, Pakistan has the right to protect their own border and prevent insurgents to enter Pakistan mainland. Thirdly, "terrorists" do not exist in the sense that the US government poison their people and the rest of the World to believe. Watch the Zeitgeist movie.

    • 3 years ago
  • thesfdude
    • 0
      thesfdude  
    • This is very encouraging. Pakistan was warned. And besides, there doesn't seem to be much of a border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is where the people who planned and carried out the attack on the USA on Sept.11, 2001. This is where our attention should have been focused for the past 7 years. Bravo Obama administration!

    • 3 years ago
  • JasonCovich
  • jyotti
    • 0
      jyotti  
    • There's a new Sheriff in town. and thank God. and further .. it is not a white guy .. all the better.

      We gotta get together on this stuff people. Me and Tom Hanks .. white .. born in Oakland. Mabe you forget, about when the British colony of India, was split up after WWII. The division of the Ottoman empire after WWI .. or the creation of the state of Isreael in 1948.

      Obama needs to be firm on this stuff. Bush had 7 years to find .. whatever. And to you other "factions" that think that we americans wish you harm, I can simply only admonish you .. give this guy some time.

      While we may favor messengers of our creator in different laws .. from different books, I chose my login name here, from the ancient sanskrit of 6,000 years ago. Way, before chirstians, and jews, and islamics.

      It is Jyotti ..which means .. inner light. The inner light, within you. You were born with it. You are of course, conflicted with current events. We all have our opinions.

      So, as a surviving Viet Nam veteran, I say, give this guy a chance, and further, the jyotti thing. The inner light .. not rocket science .. in your heart of hearts, You know what is right. I say .. give him a chance.

    • 3 years ago
  • atari_graphics
  • dabne
    • 0
      dabne  
    • Obama should continue to follow in Bush's footsteps and chase down and kill these terrorist bastards.

      One of the few rational things Obama has done so far.

      And yes it is extremely funny to read many of the posts on Current in relation to this. Where they once slammed W. for the same action they now praise Obama.

      Hell, at least I'm consistent.

    • 3 years ago
  • NEwsNuT888
    • 0
      NEwsNuT888  
    • dabne:

      Obama didn't start the fight.
      He doesn't believe in preemptive war, war profiteers, and the lousy debate hacking tactic of patriotism.
      If he "just pulled out of it" like all the idiot super-liberals want him to it would be a shit storm. Everyone knows that. And if he did all the neocons would be grabbing their guns.

    • 3 years ago
  • JasonCovich
    • 0
      JasonCovich  
    • dabne:

      I have disagreed with you before on other things. You are correct on this one. This started as a Bush policy and it is justified in its intent, it should followed.

    • 3 years ago
  • undeadbydawn
    • 0
      undeadbydawn  
    • dabne:

      no-one slammed Bush for chasing terrorists. There was, in fact, a huge wave of public support for war in Afghanistan. The problem was that Bush blocked every final effort to go ahead and take bin Laden, even when he was literally in the sights of Delta Force troops. He then went to Iraq, which was and is a blunder of near incalculable proportions.

      Obama is now trying to finish what Bush would not - to actually take bin Laden out. Whether he's doing it the right way I'm not so sure, but he is at least making the effort.

    • 3 years ago
  • nursediesel
  • akamaial
  • Nephwrack
  • Mymicz1
    • 0
      Mymicz1 [removed]  
    • Wow, I think though he might actually be looking for the guy instead of letting him go every time like Bush. Listen, this is a man with a big heart, with a lot of facts, I don't think he is attacking anyone who doesn't deserve it. I just wish there were no kids around ever.

    • 3 years ago
  • Cynic2
  • earthmann
    • 0
      earthmann  
    • There is no "border" between Afghanistan and Pakistan. That line you see on maps is just something topographers cooked up to make their jobs easier.

    • 3 years ago
  • mqz4
  • cheezynuts
    • 0
      cheezynuts  
    • What were their crimes , does anyone know? Were they all "Terrorist"? Just as Bush was , I guess Obama is now the Judge , the Jury and the Executioner.

    • 3 years ago
  • Sexirobot
    • 0
      Sexirobot  
    • cheezynuts:

      killing civilians, harboring 9/11 conspirators, beheading foreigners and non-Muslims just to name a few. Its very easy to be the arbiter of the Taliban. Obama is doing a great job.

    • 3 years ago
  • NEwsNuT888
  • akamaial
  • courage
    • 0
      courage  
    • it wont work im all for killing these guys but until the majority of islam decide that radicalism cant be tolerated they will persist.A normal muslim saying I don't agree with there methods BUT I can understand why they are angry is the term that keeps islamofacism alive forever

    • 3 years ago
  • ampersand
    • 0
      ampersand  
    • courage:

      Dear Courage,
      I'm not a Muslim, but I can well understand why Muslims are angry. Does make me a supporter of "Islamofacism"?
      Silly term, in any case, I must say. Facism was defined by Mussolini as the marriage of the corporate and military state. Looking around the globe there are entities that more exactly match that description than some Muslim fundamentalists dreaming of a restored Caliphate. I would have added "marginalized" to modify Muslim fundamentalists but a lot of our actions in concert with the repressive and corrupt regimes in the Muslim world continue to lessen their marginalization and add to their numbers every day.

    • 3 years ago
  • TabulaRasa
    • 0
      TabulaRasa  
    • Pakistan has had how long to fix this problem? And only truly started to do something about it when the Mumbai incident happen.
      Whatever the case may be, I just hope we're out of the middle-east very soon.

    • 3 years ago
  • JimboTheHippo
  • csmonut
    • 0
      csmonut  
    • Crossing a border to bomb suspected militants is not a wise thing to do, unless there is an agreement between those nations.
      There is no agreement between the US and Pakistan.
      The bombings are illegal by any standard.
      I would hope that Obama will now try to get the cooperation of the Pakistani government, so that the US will no longer be invading another nation, as in Iraq.

    • 3 years ago
  • maasanova
    • 0
      maasanova  
    • I think Obama is smart enough to know that Osama bin Laden has been dead for years. Why he keeps playing along with the media's fictitious accounts of bin Laden still being alive is beyond me.

    • 3 years ago
  • NEwsNuT888
  • undeadbydawn
  • kennymotown
    • 0
      kennymotown  
    • The government of Pakistan has not been doing a good job of collecting or killing these extremist, the safety of the free world is at stake when these extremist are given a safe haven too thrive. I know the thought of a victory over an Ideology is absurd but President Obama will keep the pressure on these hideouts.

    • 3 years ago
  • clownpuncher
  • Varex_Sythe
  • maasanova
    • 0
      maasanova  
    • Why would you say that violating a sovereign country's airspace (an act of war) with unmanned drones is a good idea? What about letting the government of Pakistan handle their extremists without our involvement?

      This targeting of militants in Pakistan has been going on all year under Bush. The media is just propping up this attack behind Obama to make him look tough and in control.

    • 3 years ago
  • edbr
    • 0
      edbr  
    • maasanova:

      fyi, obama long ago (during the presidential candidate debate #2) stated that if pakistan doesn't do anything to control the unchecked passage of terrorists through its border with iran, that we would do something about it ourselves. they've had 3 months to change their ways and must now face the reality.

      we're not warring with pakistan; we're just taking out the terrorists they're helping to harbor. i'd say that's pretty diplomatic of obama for not bombing the shit out of pakistan for enabling the taliban.

      "And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act and we will take them out. We will kill bin Laden; we will crush Al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority."

      http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/presidential.debate.transcript/

      i'd say obama's just following through with his promise.

    • 3 years ago
  • Alex_French
  • NEwsNuT888
    • 0
      NEwsNuT888  
    • maasanova:

      Not to mention these terrorists/extremists are the tribal men of these areas and have been forever. They pakistani government will not go after them because they would only be firing upon their own countrymen and enticing a radical response from the rest of the Islamic terrorists groups.

    • 3 years ago
more from News and Politics:

top videos