Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US strike violates Pak sovereignty: Musharraf
CNN-IBN, India ^ | May 02, 2011

Posted on 05/02/2011 2:06:22 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki

US strike violates Pak sovereignty: Musharraf

CNN-IBN

Posted on May 02, 2011 at 01:58pm IST

New Delhi: Former Pakistan president General (retired) Pervez Musharraf called the operation by US forces to kill al Qaeda leader and 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad near Islamabad a violation of Pakistani sovereignty."America coming to our territory and taking action is a violation of our sovereignty. Handling and execution of the operation (by US forces) is not correct. The Pakistani government should have been kept in the loop," Musharraf told CNN-IBN in an exclusive interview."Foreign troops crossing the border into Pakistan will not be liked by the people of Pakistan.

US forces should not have crossed over into Pakistan," he said.Musharraf, who was the chief of Pakistani Army before he orchestrated a bloodless coup in 1999 and took over the government in Pakistan, said that Pakistan has also been incurring the wrath of terrorists and has been an ally in the 'war against terror'. He said that all the forces trying to neutralise terror group should trust each other.

"If there is a lack of trust, it is bad. We are fighting the same enemy. It is wrong strategically and the issue of lack of trust is very bad. There has to be trust between the two agencies fighting the same enemy," he replied when asked if US claims that Pakistan was not kept in the loop about the operation against bin Laden were true.

He rubbished speculations that some Pakistani authorities were helping bin Laden and they helped him during his stay in Abbottabad, which incidentally also has the Pakistan Military Academy.

"There is no possibility of any local administration collusion but there could be involvement of

(Excerpt) Read more at ibnlive.in.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: binladen; crushislam; cultureofcorruption; musharraf; obl; operationgeronimo; pakistan; pakitrash; pockystand; proislamist; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last
To: sukhoi-30mki
Musharraf called the operation by US forces to kill al Qaeda leader and 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad near Islamabad a violation of Pakistani sovereignty

So sue us.

41 posted on 05/02/2011 4:04:48 AM PDT by theDentist (fybo; qwerty ergo typo : i type, therefore i misspelll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dglang

“It’s hard to determine how much cooperation we got from Pakistan but this makes them look really incompetent.”

From official and off-the-record statements so far, Pakistan appears to have had no role whatsoever in this attack. Which is not surprising.

As for the “mechanical problem”, who knows. It´s quite possible that the Pakistani military shot it down, but that it´s hushed up in order to avoid the inevitable shitstorm that would follow such a revelation.


42 posted on 05/02/2011 4:12:26 AM PDT by globelamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

About time. We have two choices here: 1) send a clear message to EVERY world leader that our respect for your national sovereignty is contingent on your demonstrated due diligence in routing out these vermin yourself. You fail and we will do what we must without apology. or 2) bring all our troops home and admit we are wimps.

The cold, hard truth is that evil exists in this world and that there are many who will aid and give cover to it either out of agreement, intimidation, or greed. We need to let such folks know that we have no respect for them and will protect our national interests against these people. In short, if you aid these people and serve as human shields, you are acceptable collateral damage to us when we go take them out.


43 posted on 05/02/2011 4:14:36 AM PDT by RochesterFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bgill
Sorry. Our bad. No doubt zero has already texted an apology.

Next step will be to apologize to the world at the UN, blaming the US for bin Laden's bad behavior, and to give Pockeestan $900 billion dollars as the first step in reparations.

44 posted on 05/02/2011 4:17:04 AM PDT by Right Wing Assault (Our Constitution: the new Inconvenient Truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dglang

The Pakis must have cooperated, which can only mean that they no longer had any use for OBL or that they were getting pressure from other parts. It wouldn’t surprise me if China wanted them to get rid of OBL, too, since it has its own problems with Muslims and probably would not want closer contacts with Pakistan (which Pakistan is really seeking) if there was a threat of OBL stirring up Chinese Muslims.

The Pak government, of course, can’t come out and say this, because there are so many radical nutcases in the government itself. But I’d suspect they weighed the options and decided that OBL had become a drag on them and wasn’t worth protecting anymore. After all, the US discovered this house about 4 years ago; while I read that we were delaying in hopes of getting a real positive ID, it’s also possible that we were waiting for permission from Pakistan.

When the Seals landed, they told everybody who came out into the streets to just go back in their houses and stay away from the windows, and they all did so very obediently, so I think that some sort of official order from the Paki military might have gone out almost simultaneously.


45 posted on 05/02/2011 4:20:38 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

“The Pakistani government should have been kept in the loop”

HAHAH!! That’s a cracker.


46 posted on 05/02/2011 4:42:54 AM PDT by Christian Engineer Mass (25ish Cambridge MA grad student. Many conservative Christians my age out there? __ Click my name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: globelamp
I don't think the U.S. was scammed although I understand what you mean. It seems to me that it's been pretty common knowledge that Pakistan has done everything it can to help out terrorist while pretending to help us just so they could keep the money and equipment coming in. It worked, but I don't know how when what they were doing was so transparent. They would go on the offensive when pressured hard enough and accomplish nothing as expected only to pull back and repeat when needed to keep the money coming in.

We knew they were protecting terrorist. We might not of knew to what extent they were doing it, but we knew it(I would assume that many in the government had more knowledge about it than we did so it's a little perplexing to what we thought we were going to gain after so long of working with these terrorist and terrorist sympathizers). We should cut off all funds and equipment to Pakistan and blow the hell out of the military sites and homes of military connected residents near this mansion Bin Laden was living in. I still can't believe we have helped the Pakistani military. We should have sanctions against them while offering assistance and weapon purchases to India as punishment. And if there is ever another war between India and Pakistan I hope India makes it the last by totally destroying them.

47 posted on 05/02/2011 4:50:54 AM PDT by ThermoNuclearWarrior (Illegal immigration is a bigger security threat to our nation than any terrorist group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Is Mushy claiming we violated Paki sovereignty in the same way that Al Qaida violated US sovereignty on 9/11?

just curious...


48 posted on 05/02/2011 4:58:07 AM PDT by C210N (0bama, Making the US safe for Global Marxism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
Middle East and terrorism, occasional political and Jewish issues Ping List. High Volume

If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.

..................

Yes, it does. So what.

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists, Pub.L. 107-40, 115 Stat. 224, September 18, 2001.
Section 2 - Authorization For Use of United States Armed Forces
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

49 posted on 05/02/2011 5:00:43 AM PDT by SJackson (Normal people don't sit cross-legged on the floor and bang on drums, WI State Sen Glenn Grothman (R))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Given that OBL was “hiding” right next to Pakistan’s elite military, we should immediately ask for all the $$ we’ve given to them since 2001, with interest. And if we don’t get it, we take it it out of Musharraf’s hide.


50 posted on 05/02/2011 5:01:56 AM PDT by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

It boggles the mind to think that Musharraf doesn’t realize that the Chinese are manipulating them, mainly to convince the Afhgans to give the Chinese a perfect excuse to test their military in a live battle situation. Then if the Chinese are successful, it would be a massive propaganda coup for the PLA and then of course, the perfect way for the Chinese to establish a military foothold in the Middle East. Just like the CHinese are doing with their ‘investments’ in Africa.


51 posted on 05/02/2011 5:12:41 AM PDT by Niuhuru (The Internet is the digital AIDS; adapting and successfully destroying the MSM host.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000
They might have or perhaps it was regular troops which were also in the area.

The chopper might not have crashed but if it was hit by enemy fire became unreliable for transport out.

I wonder what type of choppers they were. With a strike force of 40 they probably were Chinooks with one or more blackhawks present.

I don't think the Blackhawks alone could handle 40 occupants.

There is also some question of exactly how many there were. Everything I've seen lately indicated only two choppers and with one going down, there was no way 40 troops plus prisoners would fit in a single blackhawk.

Perhaps there was a third chopper flown in from standby to make up for the lost one.

From what I JUST read, a Blackhawk can carry 11 troops plus crew while the Chinook can handle 33 troops plus crew.

The Blackhawk is the standard Special Forces chopper but it would have required 5 of them to handle the landing force plus an unknown number of prisoners or prisoner bodies.

Since ti was most likely Chinooks, ti would explain what the ground observers reported as being extremely loud.

52 posted on 05/02/2011 5:13:09 AM PDT by dglang
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dglang

However it went, we killed the monster at long, long last.


53 posted on 05/02/2011 5:14:25 AM PDT by Niuhuru (The Internet is the digital AIDS; adapting and successfully destroying the MSM host.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

FU mushy eat nuts. Paks should be happy we dont carpet bomb the shit out of them.


54 posted on 05/02/2011 5:18:52 AM PDT by MARKUSPRIME
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

It’s always been like that. The only difference is that unlike the Cold War era, things appear glaring because the US and Pakistan are on opposite sides due to the Islamic question.


55 posted on 05/02/2011 5:31:50 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I see. So it’s the same but different.?.


56 posted on 05/02/2011 5:40:57 AM PDT by TigersEye (Who crashed the markets on 9/15/08 and why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: dglang
"I really wonder how the helicopters got in so far without being discovered or shot down."
either prowlers or growlers......"No slack in electronic attack"..
57 posted on 05/02/2011 5:46:21 AM PDT by joe fonebone (Project Gunwalker, this will make watergate look like the warm up band......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

People in the US and elsewhere think it stands out because China is a now a rival. Back in the Cold War, esp from the 60s, all three were on the same side. Nobody bothered to ask where Pakistan got most of its fighters from. Or its tanks, missiles and nuclear technology. Now everyone talks about it as if Pakistan has suddenly embraced China.

So as I said its more visible now since China is viewed as a rival.


58 posted on 05/02/2011 5:48:25 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook
You think the Chinese are going to put up with the antics of throwbacks from the 7th century??

Terrorism is bad for business. What is bad for business is bad for China and bad for America. Peace can be prosperity. Thank you Obama. Now is your time to leave.

59 posted on 05/02/2011 5:58:51 AM PDT by Rapscallion (Obama is a fraud. The founders gave us the tool of impeachment for a reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

F- you, Musharraf. You harbored a known terrorist - consider yourself lucky that the US doesn’t do to you what it did to the Taliban.


60 posted on 05/02/2011 6:01:39 AM PDT by rabscuttle385 (Live Free or Die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson