Pakistan Expands Cooperation With U.S. Military

[slgrieb]

Courtesy of The Onion:

Pakistani Intelligence Announces Its Full Cooperation With U.S. Forces During Upcoming Top Secret June 12 Drone Strike On Al-Qaeda At 5:23 A.M. Near Small Town Of Razmani In North Waziristan

link

[slgrieb]

And, now for some real world news about our staunch Pakistani Allies.

[slgrieb]

One might suspect that the intel from Bin Laden's compound is paying off, or possibly lots of other threads are coming together. In any event it hasn't been a good month for al Qaeda commanders and friends. I like Bill Roggio's reporting on Longwarjournal.org.

Just on a purely partisan note, does it bug any of you Wrongwingers that a Pinko Lefty President is currently killing major terrorist leaders at a rate that would have given Wubbya wet dreams? Not to mention the Big O.

[ilovetheusers]

And, now for some real world news about our staunch Pakistani Allies.

In short, they are our alies on paper. There is a VERY good reason they were not told about the assault on OBL's compound...

From what I have heard, they simply don't have the same goals as we do and just want the money from us to keep flowing and will only do the minimum to get what they want.

[Niclo Iste]

One might suspect that the intel from Bin Laden's compound is paying off, or possibly lots of other threads are coming together. In any event it hasn't been a good month for al Qaeda commanders and friends. I like Bill Roggio's reporting on Longwarjournal.org.

Just on a purely partisan note, does it bug any of you Wrongwingers that a Pinko Lefty President is currently killing major terrorist leaders at a rate that would have given Wubbya wet dreams? Not to mention the Big O.

Never was a fan of either but just to point one thing out. Ol' Big Ears isn't pulling the trigger or doing intel work so I'll still pin the congratulations on the shoulders of the CIA and the Troops.

[slgrieb]

In short, they are our alies on paper. There is a VERY good reason they were not told about the assault on OBL's compound...

From what I have heard, they simply don't have the same goals as we do and just want the money from us to keep flowing and will only do the minimum to get what they want.

Pakistan has a very strong democratic tradition, and it wasn't long ago that a lot of Pakistanis proved it with their lives and blood by opposing Musharraf. Unfortunately, within the Pakistani Intelligence Service, the IIS, reactionary and fundamentalist causes have a great deal of support. I think that's also true to a lesser degree in the army. Many officers in the Pakistani army, both active and retired are critical of links between militant Islamic groups and the IIS. There is virtually no doubt that the IIS has sponsored and trained terrorist organizations in India.

So, there is a great divide in the Pakistani government. They are mostly pro-democracy, but the opposition is strong. I've seen reports of U.S. contingency plans to secure Pakistani nuclear weapons if the government appeared to be in imminent danger of overthrow by militants, and I don't doubt they are real. This is old news. like 3-4 years old.

[slgrieb]

Never was a fan of either but just to point one thing out. Ol' Big Ears isn't pulling the trigger or doing intel work so I'll still pin the congratulations on the shoulders of the CIA and the Troops.

The guys on the front line ultimately rely on support from the top. Intel is a long term effort, and there isn't any doubt that leads developed during Wubbya's administration contributed to the success of the effort to get Osama. That doesn't change the fact that the Bush administration failed to adequately focus on killing Bin Laden, and pissed away huge amounts of resources waging a pointless war in Iraq.

Debate all you want, but at the end of the day, Bush didn't kill Osama. As Maxwell Smart might say, "Missed it by this much!" I attribute that to the fact that Obama has been more aggressive and effective in his use of military force than Wubbya. As a disclaimer, just let me say I don't support some of his military actions, but nobody is going to call him a wuss.

Edit: After reviewing my post, I think that I would like to substitute the word "intelligent" for "aggressive". Though there is no doubt that his policy of drone strikes against Al Qaeda and the Haqqani Network has killed many U.S. enemies. The Haqqnis in particular have been responsible for many suicide bombings using children as bombers.

[slgrieb]

Well, thought it was high time to once again say "Thanks" to our staunch allies in Pakistan. As many of you probably already know, Dr. Shakil Afridi, who helped the U.S. locate Osama Bin Laden has been convicted of treason.

I recommend this fine editorial from Bill Roggio's Long War Journal for a compelling view of Pakistani hypocrisy and double-dealing.

Just in case your blood pressure isn't elevated enough, check out this transcript of Andrea Mitchell's interview with Bilawal Zardari.

[Niclo Iste]

To sum it up.

I'm not surprised. The Paki's weren't really our allies to begin with they just played along to help conceal Bin Laden. Arresting the person who helped bring down Bin Laden is a logical approach as he's a risk to them and could be used to uncover more of their secrets in the future. Granted one would think "why didn't we just bring him to the USA and grant him assylum for his good deeds to the U.S.?". Well we could have, either we didn't feel he was important enough to save OR there was the intention of saving him for a later use in the area. Where we messed up is by being too open with details on the names, techniques, methods, and equipment used in the operation jeapordizing and nullifying the advantage for future operations with all associated and in the same turn putting at risk the previously mentioned assets. So who's to blame? Big mouth politicians bragging and the Pakistanis but only to a degree..

[slgrieb]

I doubt that the situation is as simple as the U.S. failing to remove Dr. Afridi. He may not have wanted to leave his home country and probably didn't expect to be prosecuted. Coming right on the heals of the anniversary of Bin Laden's death, I think this is all about certain factions of the Pakistani Government sending the U.S. a message or two. Civilian government in Pakistan is still weak, and the IIS and the military remain closely aligned and supportive of Islamic extremists.

But it was that slimy little weasel Zardari that really made me puke. Squeeze that guy in a press and you could supply the world's oil needs for the next 5 years.

[CCT]

slgrieb, the "Onion" as a source is as bad as "Pakistan" as an ally.

Just sayin!

[slgrieb]

slgrieb, the "Onion" as a source is as bad as "Pakistan" as an ally.

Just sayin!

The Onion is funny, Pakistan is depressing. Why worry about Iran's nuclear program when Pakistan already has nukes and delivery systems?

[Niclo Iste]

To go with my rant from earlier, why are we giving away information so freely? Is that what the current administration is about? Bragging about others achievements as if they were their own doings/ideas and then giving up critical information jeapordizing all the assets involved while trying to ride someone elses glory. Is there one person in DC who may think... oh wait that requires a brain, I guess I answered my ranting question.

here is what set me off.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06...us_israeli_op/

[slgrieb]

Interesting if true, but I'm not sure how far we can trust Sanger's research; which according to a related New York Times story is all based on sources that refuse to be identified:

"This account of the American and Israeli effort to undermine the Iranian nuclear program is based on interviews over the past 18 months with current and former American, European and Israeli officials involved in the program, as well as a range of outside experts. None would allow their names to be used because the effort remains highly classified, and parts of it continue to this day."

You really have to wonder why American, Israeli, and European sources all developed loose lips on the subject for Mr. Sanger. I'm not sure I buy it.

All the same, I doubt that anyone would argue that the scenario proposed in the book is unlikely.