|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 1:02 pm Post subject: Predator Drones in Pakistan |
 |
|
Slate reports
| Saletan wrote: |
1. The drones are succeeding tactically. They found and killed three al-Qaida leaders in the first nine months of this year. In October, after drone operations intensified, they killed three more.
2. Pakistan tacitly accepts the drones. The U.S. and Pakistan "reached tacit agreement in September on a don't-ask-don't-tell policy that allows unmanned Predator aircraft to attack suspected terrorist targets in rugged western Pakistan, according to senior officials in both countries." Terms: "the U.S. government refuses to publicly acknowledge the attacks while Pakistan's government continues to complain noisily about the politically sensitive strikes."
3. Terrorism in Pakistan has made the government more acquiescent to drones, not less. According to U.S. officials, "Pakistan's new acquiescence coincided with the new government there and a sharp increase in domestic terrorist attacks." The attacks have persuaded Pakistan that the terrorists along its border are a grave threat to Pakistan as well as to Afghanistan and the U.S. The new acquiescence can be measured in hits: "From December to August, when Musharraf stepped down, there were six U.S. Predator attacks in Pakistan. Since then, there have been at least 19."
We've talked before about hover time: the drones' superior ability to stay in the air, without fatigue or risk of death, allowing them to watch the ground and identify and track targets. If that level of persistence and precision improves our ability to distinguish the bad guys from everybody else, then the bottom line isn't just kills. It is, in Clapper's words, fewer "collateral casualties." If you look back at reports from the ground, that's exactly what stands out about the recent drone attacks: We've been hitting an impressively high ratio of bad guys, especially senior bad guys, to innocents. Yes, some innocents have died. But no counterinsurgent air war has ever been this precise.
And that precision, in turn, feeds back into the political equation. Pakistan tolerates the drones not just because it fears the terrorists but because the drones are earning its confidence. They're not inflicting the sort of massacres that trigger domestic unrest and destabilize allies. In fact, the drones are doing such a good job that Pakistan now wants drones of its own. "Give them to us," Pakistan's president tells the Post. "We are your allies." |
First good news from Pakistan (besides Mush's retirement) in like forever.
Last edited by Kuros on Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:25 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Surveillance technology is getting scary (if you're a target). Linked to the article you posted:
http://www.slate.com/id/2200292/
| Quote: |
| Congratulations. The good news is, we might win in Iraq and Afghanistan after all. The bad news is, now we all have red dots on our heads. |
This is also related:
http://www.slate.com/id/2135969/
| Quote: |
| Reluctance to kill was a big problem in World War II. By one military estimate, fewer than one in four American riflemen in combat pulled the trigger, and "fear of killing rather than fear of being killed was the most common cause." The Army tried to solve this problem by making its training exercises feel more like real combat. But what if we could do the opposite? What if we could make combat seem unreal? What if we could turn it into a video game? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's more on the drone wars.
| Quote: |
Wednesday's missile attack by an unmanned United States Predator drone on the Pakistani village of Jani Khel marks a significant development in the battle against militants.
On the one hand, it is the first such attack to take place outside of the semi-autonomous tribal areas, that is, in territory directly ruled by Islamabad. Previous US strikes have focused on North Waziristan and South Waziristan, where at least 20 missile attacks and a cross-border commando raid have killed scores of people since September.
But on the other hand, the strike also signifies that there is now a genuine alliance between the Pakistani military and US forces against the common foe of al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Previously, under former president General Pervez Musharraf, this relationship was blurred by pockets of latent sympathy on the side of the Pakistanis for the militants. |
It appears the Slate article may be underemphasizing the importance of Musharraf's departure, and the departure of his obstructionism along with him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cool.
Whenever I hear of U.S. forces targeting that Afghan/Pakistan border, I just think how cool it would have been to have had a President who supported the real 'war on terrorism' over that wierdass Iraq fiasco. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Is Osama Bin Laden from Afghanistan? Were anyone of the 9-11 hijackers from Afghanistan? In fact is their a single member of Al Qaeda that is from Afghanistan?
US needs a more powerful drone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Is Osama Bin Laden from Afghanistan? Were anyone of the 9-11 hijackers from Afghanistan? In fact is their a single member of Al Qaeda that is from Afghanistan?
US needs a more powerful drone. |
Are you suggesting we should be going into Saudia Arabia? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paji eh Wong
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Meh. My first thought was "pentagon psy ops/press offensive."
But its from Slate. hmmm. They should know better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tiger Beer wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Is Osama Bin Laden from Afghanistan? Were anyone of the 9-11 hijackers from Afghanistan? In fact is their a single member of Al Qaeda that is from Afghanistan?
US needs a more powerful drone. |
Are you suggesting we should be going into Saudia Arabia? |
I doubt it. Joo tends not to make retarded geopolitical suggestions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| What if we could make combat seem unreal? What if we could turn it into a video game? |
Thanks for posting this, Caniff. This seems to be the trend since the Gulf War, actually, and I remain unsure it is such a good thing overall, although it does have it pros. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Tiger Beer wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Is Osama Bin Laden from Afghanistan? Were anyone of the 9-11 hijackers from Afghanistan? In fact is their a single member of Al Qaeda that is from Afghanistan?
US needs a more powerful drone. |
Are you suggesting we should be going into Saudia Arabia? |
No.
but I don't know if you have seen this.
| Quote: |
S Arabia 'real reason for war'
NEWS.com.au ^ | April 3, 2004
FORGET Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The real reason the United States invaded Iraq was Saudi Arabia, according to a US intelligence analyst.
Dr George Friedman, chairman of the United States private sector intelligence company Stratfor, said the US had settled on WMD as a simple justification for the war and one which it expected the public would readily accept.
Dr Friedman, in Australia on a business trip, said the US administration never wanted to explain the complex reasons for invading Iraq, keeping them from both the public and their closest supporters.
"That, primarily, was the fact that Saudi Arabia was facilitating the transfer of funds to al-Qaeda, was refusing to cooperate with the US and believed in its heart of hearts that the US would never take any action against them," he said.
Dr Friedman said the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the US prompted the strategy to hunt down al-Qaeda wherever it was to be found. But that proved exceedingly difficult.
"The US was desperate. There were no good policy choices," he said.
"Then the US turned to the question - we can't find al-Qaeda so how can we stop the enablers of al-Qaeda."
He said those enablers, the financiers and recruiters, existed in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
But the Saudi government variously took the view that this wasn't true or that they lacked the ability and strength to act, he said.
Dr Friedman said in March last year, the Saudis responded to US pressure by asking the US to remove all its forces and bases from their territory. To their immense surprise, the US did just that, relocating to Qatar.
He said Saudi Arabia and al-Qaeda shared a number of beliefs including that the US could not fight and win a war in the region and was casualty averse. There was a need to change that perception.
But close by was Iraq, the most strategically located nation in the Middle East, bordering Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, Turkey and Iran.
"If we held Iraq we felt first there would be dramatic changes of behaviour from the Saudis," he said. "We could also manipulate the Iranians into a change of policy and finally also lean on the Syrians.
"It wasn't a great policy. It happened to be the only policy available."
Dr Friedman said US President George W Bush faced the difficulty of explaining this policy, particularly to the Saudis. Moves to link Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda failed completely.
"They then fell on WMD for two reasons," he said.
"Nobody could object to WMD and it was the one thing that every intelligence agency knew was true.
"We knew we were going to find them. And we would never have to reveal the real reasons.
"The massive intelligence failure was that everybody including Saddam thought he had WMD. He behaved as if he had WMD. He was conned by his own people." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jandar
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The strategy appears to be working.
U.S. deaths in Afghanistan drop sharply
1 American serviceman died there in November; variety of factors cited
AP updated 6:19 p.m. ET Dec. 1, 2008
KABUL, Afghanistan - One American serviceman died in Afghanistan in November, a dramatic drop from earlier months that the U.S. military attributed to their campaign against insurgent leaders, operations by Afghan and Pakistani forces and the onset of winter.
Twice this year, monthly U.S. death tolls in Afghanistan surpassed the monthly toll in Iraq, highlighting the differing trends in the two war zones: Security in Iraq has improved while it has deteriorated in Afghanistan.
The Taliban's reach is expanding � and even the capital, Kabul, is more dangerous than before.
U.S. troops suffered an average of 21 deaths in Afghanistan each month this year from May to October � by far the deadliest six-month period in Afghanistan for American forces since the 2001 U.S.-led invasion. The Afghan Defense Ministry does not release fatality figures.
Militants this year have unleashed increasingly powerful roadside bombs and sophisticated, multidirectional ambushes. The deadlier attacks, combined with a record number of U.S. troops patrolling Afghanistan's vast provinces, has this year led to more American military deaths than ever before in Afghanistan � 148.
The sole U.S. military death recorded last month came when a suicide bomber rammed his car into a military convoy Nov. 13 as it was passing through a crowded market in eastern Afghanistan. The blast killed Sgt. Jonnie L. Stiles, 38, who was serving with the Louisiana Army National Guard.
Start of trend?
Lt. Col. Rumi Nielson-Green, the spokeswoman at the U.S. base at Bagram, cautioned that one month of data does not make a trend "but may be an indicator."
But she noted that operations conducted by U.S. forces last summer against insurgent areas and bomb-making networks helped lower November's violence. Those efforts likely contributed to a 40 percent drop in improvised explosive device attacks in October, compared with September, and may have pushed down troop death last month as well.
In addition, U.S. forces also pressed ahead in November with what commanders call the Winter Campaign.
"This campaign is designed to create the conditions of lowering enemy capabilities, diminishing their support areas both by hard-power and soft, and continue strengthening border operations to complement the Pakistani efforts in the FATA," she said, referring to Pakistan's northwestern Federally Administered Tribal Areas.
She said Pakistani military operations in Bajur have also helped security in Afghanistan.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28001559 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
