More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) aircraft
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Templar Inner Circle
- Posts: 4029
- Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:40 am
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) aircraft
Details are still coming through, but it appears that US gunships, as a part of NATO, that were stationed off the coast of Pakistan (more toward the Pakistan-Afghanistan border area) launched air support upon a Pakistani outpost, killing more than 24 confirmed dead and 13 wounded. Of course, 40 troops were stationed there, so pretty much all of them got hurt when the outpost was blown up.
Military officials have apologized and stated, "The border is often poorly marked, and Afghan and Pakistani maps have differences of several kilometers in some places". However, Pakistani officials responded, "When the other side is saying there is a doubt about this, there is no doubt about it. These posts have been marked and handed over to the other side for marking on their maps and are clearly inside Pakistani territory."
In this instance, i'm going to have to agree with Pakistan, unless new information comes out to change that, as we've been active in Pakistan for ten years, we should know where the outposts are by now.
What I find interesting is how biased the news is being, not just US news, but Reuters and BBC as well. First off, they make sure to always say NATO when describing who the aircraft belonged to, so there is diffused blame, even though they all specifically mention that Pakistan is not mad at NATO, but specifically at the US. Secondly, all of the news reports are worded in a way that describes this as a terrible accident and we're so sorry, it's never happen again.
Anyone want to bet if that if it was the opposite and 20 US soldiers had died, all the news outlets would be calling for war?
Article link: Here.
Military officials have apologized and stated, "The border is often poorly marked, and Afghan and Pakistani maps have differences of several kilometers in some places". However, Pakistani officials responded, "When the other side is saying there is a doubt about this, there is no doubt about it. These posts have been marked and handed over to the other side for marking on their maps and are clearly inside Pakistani territory."
In this instance, i'm going to have to agree with Pakistan, unless new information comes out to change that, as we've been active in Pakistan for ten years, we should know where the outposts are by now.
What I find interesting is how biased the news is being, not just US news, but Reuters and BBC as well. First off, they make sure to always say NATO when describing who the aircraft belonged to, so there is diffused blame, even though they all specifically mention that Pakistan is not mad at NATO, but specifically at the US. Secondly, all of the news reports are worded in a way that describes this as a terrible accident and we're so sorry, it's never happen again.
Anyone want to bet if that if it was the opposite and 20 US soldiers had died, all the news outlets would be calling for war?
Article link: Here.
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
This is a very touchy subject, mainly because of security issues between the two forces. We don't actually know if the US military actually received such marked outposts or even the correct ones. In a political world, it is a "He said, She said" argument in which is worthless battering until the actual information comes in as the media tends to screw with the actual reality when it just happened. Right now, many pakistani citizens and/or soldiers would want to wage war with America, and if the Opposite happened(Which would be highly doubtful) our soldiers and citizenry would want war too. The Political world of Pakistan and America would wave it off, even if does cause tensions between the two, its not enough to actually wage war, and the pilots and commanding officer will be put on trail, whether they are guilty or not depends on the judges there. Its like the bombing of the South Korean Island and why we and/or South Korea didn't go to war with North Korea once again, causes alot of tension, but no war; only difference is that the NK did it to be hostile, We did it on "Accident"(awaited until further notice).
That's my thoughts on it anyways.
That's my thoughts on it anyways.
The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
I really don't understand why, when there's a difference of opinion, the other guy is always right, and we (US) are always wrong. I'm calling baloney. Either it was an honest mistake, a miscommunication, or -go ahead, tell me this never happens- it was staged.
Seriously, why on earth, when the US already as a 'tattered' reputation, would we set out to actively make it worse?
Seriously, why on earth, when the US already as a 'tattered' reputation, would we set out to actively make it worse?
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
I say, society is to blame; Anything on top is usually a target for everyone, very much so for the media. In the eyes of society, the US is supposed to be a perfect paradise of hearts and rainbows and capitalism is supposed to be about hope and freedom. When something bad rolls around, even the minuscule thing, people beats that horse until it is no-longer living because they believe that accidents should never happen forever.Wynni wrote:I really don't understand why, when there's a difference of opinion, the other guy is always right, and we (US) are always wrong. I'm calling baloney. Either it was an honest mistake, a miscommunication, or -go ahead, tell me this never happens- it was staged.
Seriously, why on earth, when the US already as a 'tattered' reputation, would we set out to actively make it worse?
The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
Because we made it accidentally?Wynni wrote:Seriously, why on earth, when the US already as a 'tattered' reputation, would we set out to actively make it worse?
It's not always the fault of the US and yes, there were instances where the US wasn't to blame either, but political enemies said it anyway because they were enemies of the US. This doesn't mean we should always assume baseless US bashing if the opposite claims that we made a mistake.
This story needs more time to become clearer.
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
I wholeheartedly agree with waiting on further details.
-
- Templar Inner Circle
- Posts: 4029
- Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:40 am
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
Pakistan has shut down all of the supply routes that run through the country into Afghanistan, which NATO was using to shuttle supplies. All of the trucks that were using the paths have been sent back. Pakistan has also ordered US personnel to evacuate Shamsi Air Base within 15 days, which Pakistan was letting US troops use to coordinate drone attacks in Afghanistan.
Article link: Here.
Article link: Here.
- Talaisan
- Templar Inner Circle
- Posts: 2642
- Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:41 pm
- Location: Billings, Montana
- Contact:
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
Golly. Sounds like they're pissed off. Hope it doesn't come back to bite them in the [censored].
Marian's Tale 1-4 and 5-? - Rated R. Sex, kink, spies, nobility, scandal, plots, ploys, and one poor, confused college girl stuck in the middle.
My FurAffinity : Stories and fantasy garb.
My FurAffinity : Stories and fantasy garb.
-
- Templar Inner Circle
- Posts: 4029
- Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:40 am
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
Now here's something that changes my opinion more. Apparently, a group of NATO and Afghan forces were at the Afghan border running a patrol when they came under fire from the outposts. So, they called in an air strike and here we are.
I'm going to assume the counter argument will be that the NATO and Afghan forces were acting in a way that made them appear to be terrorists, which is why the Pakistanis opened fire.
Now i'm more on the US side.
Article link: Here.
I'm going to assume the counter argument will be that the NATO and Afghan forces were acting in a way that made them appear to be terrorists, which is why the Pakistanis opened fire.
Now i'm more on the US side.
Article link: Here.
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
Frankly? Looks like the Pakistani [censored] this one up. If they can't get their troops to discriminate between friend and foe they shouldn't be surprised at incidents like this.
- Talaisan
- Templar Inner Circle
- Posts: 2642
- Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:41 pm
- Location: Billings, Montana
- Contact:
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
This. If you shoot at someone, you don't get to call foul when they shoot back.Kinuki wrote:Frankly? Looks like the Pakistani [censored] this one up. If they can't get their troops to discriminate between friend and foe they shouldn't be surprised at incidents like this.
Marian's Tale 1-4 and 5-? - Rated R. Sex, kink, spies, nobility, scandal, plots, ploys, and one poor, confused college girl stuck in the middle.
My FurAffinity : Stories and fantasy garb.
My FurAffinity : Stories and fantasy garb.
-
- Templar Inner Circle
- Posts: 4029
- Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:40 am
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
The Pakistani Army Commander has responded saying that, no, the soldiers at the outpost didn't fire on anyone at all, NATO is incorrect. Also, he says that the NATO bombardment went on for two hours, long after they were informed that they were bombing Pakistani soldiers.
So, now i'm on the fence again.
Article link: Here.
So, now i'm on the fence again.
Article link: Here.
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
Like I said, "He said, she said" Argument that'll be difficult to prove due to the security issues.Silver Seren wrote:The Pakistani Army Commander has responded saying that, no, the soldiers at the outpost didn't fire on anyone at all, NATO is incorrect. Also, he says that the NATO bombardment went on for two hours, long after they were informed that they were bombing Pakistani soldiers.
So, now i'm on the fence again.
Article link: Here.
The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.
- Phantom
- Templar GrandMaster
- Posts: 677
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 12:14 pm
- Location: In the land of Mountains, lacs and hills. Where the rails meet, binding the knot.
Re: More than 20 Pakistani soldiers killed by NATO (US) airc
Meh well there is friendly fire often in wars, it happens. 2 big Military powers just dont want to take the blame, because they think it will tarnish their reputation. Meh. Its War, people die, im not surprised. Loads of cases throughout time of such incidences. Thou i would expect that from the time these forces were there, that they would know a bit more about the terrain abit more, as well as military areas, i mean, they didnt build it yesterday =.=