Lahore Real Estate Forum

                                                          
 
Back to Forum |

Lahore Real Estate Forum: Property News & Community Talk : ,

(52379)
Wednesday, April 8, 2009 02:09 PM 

Pakistan To America: Back Off
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—For the first time in a long time, the Pakistani government managed to turn heads in Washington by saying all things America doesn’t want to hear: Islamabad will not allow the United States to expand its war inside Pakistan, won’t allow U.S. boots on the ground, and CIA better stop its drone attacks ASAP. If this was not enough, the ISI chief reportedly refused to meet top U.S. officials and a former air force chief announced that the Pakistani Air Force is just a green signal away from shooting down CIA’s drones and that it only awaited orders from the President and the Prime Minister.

The week certainly did not start auspiciously for Mr. Richard Holbrooke, Washington’s arrogant special envoy who appeared visibly shaken yesterday in Islamabad. Apparently after getting used to apologetic Pakistani government officials, the sudden change of mood in the Pakistani capital was not something the seasoned diplomat anticipated. He was either too self-assured or was fed wrong reports by U.S. diplomats based in Pakistan.
All of this coincided with another major news story: the former Chief of the Pakistani Air Force, Air Chief Marshal (retired) Kaleem Saadat, came out on television yesterday night to decisively settle all speculation about what Pakistan can do to stop repeated U.S. violations of Pakistani airspace through the CIA-operated drones.
‘Yes, we can shoot them down,’ Saadat told Express News, throwing to the dustbin repeated statements by the defense minister and other ministers in the pro-U.S. elected government over the past months where these officials claimed Pakistan did not have the technology required to shoot down U.S. spy planes that violate Pakistani airspace. Those statements disappointed a majority of Pakistanis who look up to their military, one of the best in the world, to stand up for Pakistan.
Saadat gave an example: Pakistani Air Force jets shot down a sophisticated, Israeli-manufactured drone that India sent deep inside Pakistan on Jan. 7, 2002. The Indo-Israeli spy plane was supposed to be undetectable and beyond the reach and the capabilities of Pakistan Air Force. The Indian military was stunned. It initially tried to feign ignorance but then had to grudgingly half-accept the truth. And even then it was surprising for Pakistanis how Britain and the United States failed to censure India for a confirmed act of war.

The U.S. drones are much bigger in size [in comparison to the Indo-Israeli plane],’ said Air Marshal Saadat, and hence easier to target.

The former air chief left no doubt about who was failing in protecting Pakistani sovereignty. ‘The issue,’ said the former Chief of Air Staff, ‘is not military but a political one.’

This statement throws the ball in the court of the elected politicians who have long been suspected of quietly permitting Washington to mount missile attacks inside Pakistan.

Saadat’s statement came a few hours after a joint press briefing in Islamabad where visiting U.S. officials appeared shaken and confused. Richard Holbrooke, America’s envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan, and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, appeared surprised at the friendly but firm and straightforward talk by Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi.

Qureshi was blunt, something new for a member of the Zardari-Gilani government. Mr. Qureshi went as far as snubbing President Obama, who had earlier said Pakistan would get "no blank checks" and the release of more U.S. aid would depend on how it dealt with terrorism.

In response, Qureshi turned to both Holbrooke and Mullen who shared the stage with him and firmly said: “It works both ways. We'll neither accept one nor will we give one”.

Mr. Qureshi also said a “gap” existed between Islamabad and Washington on the problem of CIA-operated drones.

full article here

http://www.ahmedquraishi.com/article_detail.php?id=648

Braveheart Pakistan replied on Wednesday, April 8, 2009 03:36 PM 

Thanks for the article that has some encouraging news for the demoralised Pakistani nation. I wish it all turns into truth. Its the time when Pakistan should stand in the community of nations with head up on the shoulders rather than licking the dust.

yesss replied on Wednesday, April 8, 2009 03:56 PM 

The US is laughing at Pakistan for being such a willing slave. America wishes all foreign powers dropped so quickly to their knees.

Sharif-B.Clinton replied on Wednesday, April 8, 2009 04:09 PM 

I will never forget the lowest day in Pakistan's history, when N.Sharif decided to leave Pakistani army stranded in Kargil, in exchange for a photo session with B.Clinton.
Amazing part is liberation of Siachin was few days away and Indians went bonkers and start running around to find a broker to buy our political leaders. N.Sharif lost it all.

Saleem replied on Thursday, April 9, 2009 07:18 AM 

Mr yeses

If you donot know the history donot missguide the people of pakistan.
Who went there who died? ask us as we are living near by-'Kargil".
Idians were not started running but pakistani army was trtapped.i know 100% because one of survival was my close relative.
It was wrong desession of That time Generals incuding G-Aziz Who is also living there.They did blundder.Nawaz Sharif was requested by local people and those were retired army men including my uncle to save remaining trapped yuong men.Indian did runn at the time of attacking because they were unuware the plan.Later on they cut supply line.It is long story to write.This is only to issure you about that acceden. I am not going to deffand other thing about Nawsz Sharif.

limo replied on Thursday, April 9, 2009 09:31 AM 

Saleem, let’s correct the spellings first before discussing the incident.
Idians – Indians
Trtapped – trapped
Desession – decision
Blunder – blunder
Incuding – including
Young – young
Runn – run
Unaware – unaware
Issure – assure
Acceden – incident
Deffand - defend

Observer replied on Thursday, April 9, 2009 01:10 PM 

@limo

Lets give you a proper name before discussing the incident

limo - grammatical loser who cant argue with logic
>