January 16, 2007
1) Pakistan takes out suspected Taliban site.
2) Taliban spokesman arrested crossing into Afghanistan.
3) Pakistan closing down refugee camps. Breeding grounds for terror.
Add them up, and it begins to look like something is happening. Something good. Oh, and there were 'foreign fighters' at the Taliban camps, including some that might be 'European'. Personally, I'm hoping that by 'European' they meant 'just some white guy'. Heh, he is from Orange County, which is just about as close to Eurotrash as we get here. 1) The Age:
Pakistan army air strike on a militant camp near the Afghan border killed up to 20 fighters in a tribal area regarded as a hotbed of support for the Taliban and al-Qaeda, according to intelligence officials.I question the timing. I give it 12 hours before all 20 bodies are identified as guests at a wedding party--civilians, all; mostly women and children. And puppies. Lots of puppies."The operation was carried out at around 6.55am (1255 AEDT) in Zamzola in South Waziristan, based on information that 25 to 30 miscreants, including foreigners, were present there," said Major General Shaukat Sultan, Pakistan's military spokesman.
Sultan said there was a precision air strike on a cluster of five mud-walled compounds, of which three were completely destroyed, and helicopter gunships followed up.
The attack came hours after US Defence Secretary Robert Gates landed in Afghanistan for talks with President Hamid Karzai, and follows comments by senior US officials putting pressure on Pakistan to do more to stop Taliban fighters crossing the border to fight Afghan, NATO and US forces.
The Blotter has a couple of interesting things to add:
Around 30 were killed, including many foreign fighters from Uzbekistan and Chechnya. There is also suspicion that some Europeans might be among the dead....While the Pakistan Army has claimed credit for the strike, local residents reported having heard a drone circling the area, leading to suspicion that this was actually a strike by the U.S.
2) Big Fish: Top Taliban Spokesman Captured. Now administer justice, please. Texas style.
3) Pak Trib:
Pakistan`s government will close four refugee camps near its border with Afghanistan to help prevent Afghan insurgents from gunrunning and seeking safe haven in the country, Islamabad`s ambassador to the United States said.I'm sure that U.S. troops will be on the other side of the border just waiting for many of the 'refugees'. Hammer, meet anvil.Muhammad Ali Durrani said the residents of two of the camps will soon be sent back to Afghanistan as part of a new program to better control the 1,550-mile shared border.
Posted by: Rusty at
04:29 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 441 words, total size 3 kb.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 16, 2007 05:50 PM (w+w6p)
Posted by: Cruiser at January 16, 2007 06:24 PM (Pl6jA)
Posted by: greyrooster at January 16, 2007 08:56 PM (w+w6p)
Yes, America fears the mighty pakistani nuclear arsenal. Arsehole.
Musharraf does not have complete control over Pakistan, and the very army and security services he would need to take out all the"extremists" (terrorists, dip-shit,) are responsible for creating the Taliban.
America is using Pakistan to go after terrorists. Would you prefer that America didn't exploit Pakistan? Pakistan has been very useful. If we stop exploiting Musharraf, America gets nothing.
Maybe you're suggesting America should go to war with Pakistan?
Or maybe you're just suffering from BDS.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 16, 2007 09:25 PM (abVz3)
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 16, 2007 09:25 PM (abVz3)
Jeff, remember to take your lithium.
I do not have BDS - look at my blog. I support the president about as much as any person can at this point.
My whole point is that we have no choice but to pay Pakistan to get the cooperation that we get. We cannot go to war with Pakistan because of the nukes. But, without those nukes, we could: (a) be much more threatening and Pakistan would produce a lot more of the "miscreants" for us; or (b) we could invade the tribal areas and take care of business ourselves.
I do not think that Mush. is as weak as he wants us to believe. I also do not think it is in his interest to really gut AQ or the Taliban in Pakistan. That would end the gravy train.
Do you really think that Mush. couldn't produce most of the Taliban leadership in short order? Do you really think that the ISI has no idea where Taliban and AQ training camps are in the Waziristan?
We are being played for money. I do not have a solution to end it. I no longer expect big things from Pakistan.
As to my screen name - it is very gay. I should drop it. It was a nickname I had for short time from a joke I made (and that no one recognized) during introductions in my college dorm. Think Stripes.
Posted by: Cruiser at January 16, 2007 10:16 PM (XLwcY)
If you don't want to be mistaken for a leftist, don't argue like one. Musharraf is useful. If you think Musharraf only cooperates for cash and weaponry, your'e deluded. He knows what happens to America's islamopithecine enemies. If you think pakistan's puny nuclear arsenal is a threat to us, your'e doubly deluded. Their delivery systems are an even bigger joke than their payloads.
In any case, America has the ability to wipe out REAL nuclear powers, which Pakistan manifestly is not
What you believe about Musharraf is obviously based on emotion, because you've never spoken to him and are not privy to any private conversations he's had with the President. The guy is in a tough spot, and will eventually end up seeking asylum in the West if he has any sense. He doesn't control the ISI (which as I noted, created the Taliban,) and he cant produce most of the Taliban leadership in short order. Hell, mullah Omar is the only real leader left unaccounted for, and he's just a figurehead. That organization no longer exists as a functional entity. It's now comprised of dickless bandits and conqueror wannabes. The pot smoking hippy homosexuals in the Dutch Army are wiping them out even as I write this.
America has killed or captured more Al Qaeda terorists with the help of Pakistan and Iraq than any other countries, so our alliance of convenience is paying off. Eventually any camps located will be taken out with aerial bombardment--not that there are any camps of significant size. Some of them have been already.
Glad you agree about your screen name. When I see it, I think "Cruising" with Al Pacino, not "Stripes."
Sorry for the misunderstanding. Cheers.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at January 17, 2007 01:16 AM (abVz3)
Posted by: greyrooster at January 17, 2007 10:17 AM (w+w6p)
34 queries taking 0.0395 seconds, 163 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
