From the horse's mouth: http://tribune.com.pk/story/383733/t...-did-not-miss/
From the horse's mouth: http://tribune.com.pk/story/383733/t...-did-not-miss/
This article may clear the "fog of war" a little: http://www.pakistankakhudahafiz.com/...ut-fighting-4/
Omar:
I couldn't get through that article after the author described the various muj groups fighting the Soviets as a "brilliant war machine."
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
For all the stereotypical Pakistani proclamations that Americans are fat, lazy and stupid, I find it quite interesting that that Pakistan still does not realize the game is rigged, due to the vast asymmetry, such that heads USA wins, and tails Pakistan loses. The sooner Pakistan realizes that, the less painful the change in course will be, but change its course it must, at one point or another.
The rather clever "damned if you do, damned if you don't" (The DIYD^2) policy as I see it:
Insist on an apology for Salala = Paint your foreign policy into a corner
Forego an apology for Salala = destroy morale and lose prestige
Don't do an operation in NWA = harboring terrorists
Do an operation in NWA = get drawn into a bloody and costly conflict on own territory
OBL hidden by ISI = partners in 9/11
OBL not hidden by ISI = incompetent fools
Dr. Afridi sentenced for treason = prosecuting a hero who help kill OBL with the attendant fallout
Dr. Afridi let go = live with a growing number of spies and traitors working with impunity on own soil, and loss of domestic prestige
Close supply routes = change from ally to adversary
Open supply routes = be seen as being for sale
And I could go on, but one can get an idea that USA may not be as foolish as Pakistanis would like to think.
My guess is that one day someone somewhere within the Pakistani government had an appointment with an American official who informed him that he knew that bin Laden was in Abbottabad and that both of them knew that there was only one non-negotiable in the U.S./Pakistan relationship. There was an agreement that blind eyes would be turned on 01 May 2011 to a raid that could be written off as a drone strike if need be. Big Problem #1: The execution was such that the drone strike narrative became untenable and Much Bigger Problem #2: The POTUS made a media event out of the killing without consulting anyone in Pakistan beforehand. Now, I doubt any of us will ever know the real story, but if the above were to be true how would that color the actions of the Pakistani government over the course of the past year?
So your advice is for the Pakistani government to be the State Department’s bitch?
If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)
Ganulv:
That is a very good guess. The only part I think different is that it was never meant to be a drone strike. It was meant to be what it turned out to be from the beginning and the Pak Army/ISI knew it.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
Bookmarks