Re: Drone strikes
Pakistani people are stupid, Government is Stupid, Malala also stupid (only for thinking this..otherwise she is a saint)......
they are good, because they are 'purported' to hit talibans aka kharjies and also because amreeka says so...
Re: Drone strikes
The popular narrative regarding the war on terror is that of the right, it always has been. In 79, the same people were against Russia and pro US. The bloodletting that we have seen during the past 35 years, the left seems vindicated.
as far as the topic at hand is considered, there are two issues with regards to drones:
1) they violate our sovereignty
2) they fan violence
i agree with both.
what if Pakistan has the control of drone strikes and uses them sparingly on specific targets? Would drones be better or attacks by gunship helicopters?
i can understand the attacks on specific targets, but not on the people who gather around them. Signature drone strikes which were carried out between 2009 to 2012 is plain wrong.
Re: Drone strikes
You obviously don’t read TheEconomist. Majority of the population of the WHOLE of Pakistan including an elder from North Waziristan, and others who did not want to be named favor them. The reporting could not be erroneous because it was conducted in South Waziristan, and don’t forget the one elder from North Waziristan.
So, yeah… take that. 
Re: Drone strikes
what if Pakistan has the control of drone strikes and uses them sparingly on specific targets? Would drones be better or attacks by gunship helicopters?
My answer would still be a "no".
Re: Drone strikes
Re: Drone strikes
The popular narrative regarding the war on terror is that of the right, it always has been.** In 79, the same people were against Russia and pro US.** The bloodletting that we have seen during the past 35 years, the left seems vindicated.
Another misconceptin that is not correct. Those who were pro US are still in US laps (a.k.a northern alliance), others might have taken some support from one enemey against another enemy but that does not make them pro US.
Waisay taliban stem from molvi younis khalis group who was not one of those groups that took support from US.
Re: Drone strikes
Another misconceptin that is not correct. Those who were pro US are still in US laps (a.k.a northern alliance), others might have taken some support from one enemey against another enemy but that does not make them pro US.
Waisay taliban stem from molvi younis khalis group who was not one of those groups that took support from US.
I think its the other way around - in 1970s Russia made alliance with northern alliance and USA was with Pashtuns (Mujahadins), now its the other way.
Re: Drone strikes
In every war there is collateral damage - I think drones are a wonderful tools to strike with minimum civilian causalities. Look how many TTP are killed precisely against ground force deployment. Only thing against them is that they are in the hands of USA not Pakistan. They violate our sovereignty just as those beasts out there in the mountains.
Re: Drone strikes
Ironically, masood rabbani etc escaped to Pakistan to run the resistance after Daoud Khan came to power in 1973. Pakistan probably helped because it was Daoud Khan who sent troops into bajaur in early sixties leading to them being checked in Bajaur by tribals / FC ? and then around then, Afghanistan was closed off from Pakistan and the infamous, at least according to hurt “afghan nationalists” 
, the PAF bombed eastern Afghanistan in that skirmish. Believe it or not, the Pashtuns (the urban ones) were commies and they dominated pretty much the khalq and parcham faction. I remember reading that it was the tajiks who protested first in the cities, while of course some unrest was in the rural Pashtun areas, for the rapid modernization of Afghanistan. Still, you can’t imagine it that there are pictures of female nurses getting out of jeeps wearing western hats and dresses (knee length) going to houses in villages for medical checkups. I never did get the “fashion” of wearing miniskirts with a scarf as it happened in Kabul back then.
Re: Drone strikes
I think its the other way around - in 1970s Russia made alliance with northern alliance and USA was with Pashtuns (Mujahadins), now its the other way.
Ahmed shah masood? at times dostum(who switched sides)? , burhanuddin rabbani? , professor siyaf?
Re: Drone strikes
It's a tough situation. On the one hand, innocent people are killed every time there is a strike which is bad for two reasons: 1) it is wrong to kill innocents. 2) It is counter productive because it helps mullahs push their narrative and present terrorists as resistance fighters.
On the other hand, we have a bunch of these guys who plot against and are wanted by uncle sam. Now uncle sam happens to be the lone super power in the world and would not have sanctuaries for the nut jobs to plot against it. On top of that, these nut jobs are no friends of Pakistan and have killed more of our innocent people than US could ever match with its drone strikes. Pakistan's leadership (military at least if not civilian) wants these guys just as much as the US and would rather have the US do the dirty work than risk its own men and machinery.
Now, we need some way of hitting the terrorists in the tribal areas and exercising our sovereignty there. After all, we can't claim a violation of sovereignty if we've got none there. Either a full-scale military operation to get rid of these guys once and for all or control(or at least collaboration with the US) over drone strikes. Take your pick.
Re: Drone strikes
Some information about younis khalis group, haqqani was the commander of this group.
Pakistan and the Emergence of Islamic Militancy in Afghanistan - Rizwan Hussain - Google Books
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2011\09\26\story_26-9-2011_pg7_22
Re: Drone strikes
Yeah like I said in that thread. 20 people now constitute the majority 
Re: Drone strikes
Ohh Lookie. US drone strikes may tantamount to war crimes: Amnesty - DAWN.COM
Amnesty International says they maybe War Crimes. They must be in cahoots with the Taliban right?
Re: Drone strikes
Amnesty has finally woken up, drone strikes are taking place for the past 9 years.
Re: Drone strikes
UN Report finds strong evidence that Pakistan’s military has been actively allowing drone strikes, often with the approval of Pakistan’s government.
?Strong evidence? Pakistan military approved US drone strikes: UN report - DAWN.COM](http://dawn.com/news/1050387/strong-evidence-pakistan-military-approved-us-drone-strikes-un-report)
Re: Drone strikes
Will I be next?
Re: Drone strikes
Question is if drones are stopped , are they (TTP ) gonna stop attacking PK and AFG. If answer is yes than they should be stopped .
I believe thatfor TTP attack by drone and attack by PK army is same. They consider both equal
“Strong evidence” Pakistan military approved US drone strikes: UN report
Before approaching SAM on the issue, NS should have put his house in order. Does he know the following revelation? What has he done about this in last five, six months of his tenure? I don’t think under the prevailing circumstances, his plea be heard favorably. In a way NS will be pleading against his own army to SAM.
“Strong evidence” Pakistan military approved US drone strikes: UN report
http://dawn.com/news/1050387/strong-evidence-pakistan-military-approved-us-drone-strikes-un-report
**A recently released UN report suggests there is “strong evidence” that top Pakistani military and intelligence officials approved US drone strikes on Pakistani soil during 2004 and 2008.
The study says in some cases, even “senior government figures” gave their approval to the strikes in the country’s militancy-hit tribal areas.
“There is strong evidence to suggest that between June 2004 and June 2008 remotely piloted aircraft strikes in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas were conducted with the active consent and approval of senior members of the Pakistani military and intelligence service, and with at least the acquiescence and, in some instances, the active approval of senior government figures,” says the report by Ben Emmerson, UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism.
**
The report, however, does not elaborate on the details of the evidence collected.
Islamabad officially condemns US drone attacks as a violation of its sovereignty and counter-productive in the fight against terrorism and militancy.
**In April this year, former military dictator Gen (Retd) Pervez Musharraf admitted in an interview to CNN that his government had given approval “only on very few occasions”.
**
Musharraf, who ruled over Pakistan until 2008 after coming to power in a bloodless coup as army chief of staff in 1999, said drone strikes were discussed and approved “at the military and intelligence levels” but only “two or three times”.
Together with a study by the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, Christof Heyns, Emmerson’s interim report will be debated at the UN General Assembly on October 25, 2013.
“In an apparent reference to Pakistan, Heyns’ report suggests consent from military or intelligence officials may not be enough to satisfy legal requirements for the US to conduct drone strikes on foreign territory, according to international, humanitarian and human rights law.”
“Only the State’s highest government authorities have the power to give consent to use force. It is not sufficient to obtain consent from regional authorities or from particular agencies or departments of the Government,” says the report, which lays down the legal conditions for the use of drones in armed conflicts around the world.
The report adds that though consent may not necessarily be made public, it must be “clear between the States concerned that consent is being given to a use of force, and the parameters of that consent should also be made clear.”
“Once consent to the use of force is withdrawn, the State conducting the targeting operations is bound by international law to refrain from conducting any further operations from that moment,” it says, adding that states “cannot consent to violations of international human rights law or international humanitarian law on their territory.”
Emerson, during his international investigation into drone strikes and targeted killings, visited Pakistan in March this year and was provided with statistics by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs recording at least 330 drone strikes in Fata since 2004.
According to the numbers provided by the Pakistani government, US drone strikes have resulted in at least 2,200 deaths in Pakistan, out of which the government confirms at least 400 were civilians, with an additional 200 individuals regarded as “probable non-combatants.”
“Officials indicated that, owing to underreporting and obstacles to effective investigation, those figures [of civilian casualties] were likely to be an underestimate,” says the report.
Emmerson urged the United States to “release its own data on the level of civilian casualties” caused by drone strikes to increase the level of transparency on the controversial campaign.
The release of both reports coincides with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s visit to Washington to meet US President Barack Obama.
A spokesman for the Sharif government says the Pakistani premier will raise the prickly issue of the Obama administration’s drone campaign in Pakistan’s tribal areas.
Re: Drone strikes
Question is if drones are stopped , are they (TTP ) gonna stop attacking PK and AFG. If answer is yes than they should be stopped .
Yes, but what if the answer to your question is "No"?
Nobody likes sovereignty of the country violated but there are few things which come in mind:
- Do we really have sovereignty in the areas like Waziristan which are totally under control of Taliban mufsideen? Army can not even enter those areas.
- For those people to whom sovereignty is the biggest issue then instead of trying to stop the most effective tool to eliminate Islam's enemies, such people should work for transfer of technology to Pakistan or buying of drones, so that we can carry out those attacks ourselves.
- There is no confirm reports of exactly how many civilians or terrorists are killed in those strikes. Whenever a strike happens, the mufsideen seal off the area. So all figures are nothing but estimates or conjectures.
- Civilian deaths, no matter what the figure is, can be further minimized by better ground intelligence. This is what is needed.
- Similar effective action taken by Pakistan army will result in huge collateral damage. Compared to tha, t drones are very accurate.
- Drones are the ONLY things which khawarij fear. Otherwise they are not afraid of America, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, judiciary, political parties, or Imran Khan.
