U.S. launches artillery into Pakistan

[Space-Cowboy]

BAGRAM AIR BASE, Afghanistan - Asserting a right to self-defense, American forces in eastern Afghanistan have launched artillery rounds into Pakistan to strike Taliban fighters who attack remote U.S. outposts, the commander of U.S. forces in the region said Sunday.

The skirmishes are politically sensitive because Pakistan's government, regarded by the Bush administration as an important ally against Islamic extremists, has denied that it allows U.S. forces to strike inside its territory.

The use of the largely ungoverned Waziristan area of Pakistan as a haven for Taliban and al-Qaida fighters has become a greater irritant between Washington and Islamabad since Pakistan put in place a peace agreement there in September that was intended to stop cross-border incursions.

Army Col. John W. Nicholson, commander of the 3rd Brigade, 10th Mountain Division, said in an Associated Press interview that rather than halt such incursions, the peace deal has led to a substantial increase.

Pakistani border forces, which had been active in stopping Taliban incursions into Afghanistan as recently as last spring, stopped offensive actions against them once the peace deal took effect, he said.

"That did relax some of the pressure on the enemy," Nicholson said.

The Pakistan army's top spokesman said Sunday that coalition forces operating in Afghanistan are not allowed to fire into Pakistani territory, but acknowledged that artillery fire from the coalition had landed inside Pakistan in recent days. Pakistan also plans to seek "clarification" about Nicholson's comments.

Members of Nicholson's brigade, which is based at Fort Drum, N.Y., recently were told that instead of going home this month after a yearlong tour, they will stay for an extra four months, until June.

Nicholson told the Army's vice chief of staff, Gen. Richard Cody, that this news hit soldiers and their families hard, but that they are now adjusting well. Cody is traveling in Afghanistan.

The brigade of about 3,500 soldiers is being kept in Afghanistan because senior commanders decided they needed more forces to deal with an anticipated Taliban offensive this spring. The offensive is expected to focus not only on eastern Afghanistan but also the south, where the traditional Taliban stronghold of Kandahar is seen as a prized target. NATO forces operate in that area.

Nicholson described the fighting along the border, particularly in Afghanistan's Paktika and Khost provinces, as intense. In some cases, he said, the Taliban have crossed the border at night, using wire cutters to breach the perimeter of small U.S. outposts, "trying to get hand grenades into our bunkers."

"I mean we're talking World War I type of stuff," Nicholson said. "These are some very sharp, intense fights" initiated by an enemy he described as resilient and undeterred by superior U.S. firepower.

"They'll keep coming back," he said.

When Taliban forces on the Pakistan side of the border fire on U.S. outposts on the Afghan side, the Americans are equipped to quickly pinpoint the launch location using radar and then strike back with artillery, he said.

"We do not allow the enemy to fire with impunity on our soldiers, and we have the inherent right of self defense," he said, speaking by video teleconference from his headquarters at Jalalabad air field. "Even if those fires are coming from across the border (in Pakistan), we have the right to defense ourselves, and we exercise that right." He added later, "We do fire missions across the border."

Nicholson responded to questions from an AP reporter after the commander spoke by video teleconference with Cody.

Cody had planned to fly to Jalalabad to meet with Nicholson and other commanders but poor weather forced him to remain at Bagram, the main American air base in Afghanistan.

Nicholson told Cody that U.S. forces have made important strides this winter in persuading local Afghans to side with the U.S.-backed government and to be less accommodating to the Taliban. The Taliban have been resurgent in some parts of the country after being driven from power by U.S. forces in 2001.

Nicholson's area of responsibility includes the border provinces from Nuristan to Paktika. He said his forces are not required to get approval from Pakistan before responding to an attack. But he emphasized that efforts are made to warn Pakistani government forces along the border to clear the intended target area before U.S. artillery is launched.

"We make every effort to communicate with the Pakistan military," he said, Nicholson said the computers used to target U.S. artillery are programmed with the map coordinates of Pakistani border posts.

"If a fire mission is being called that would impact on a Pakistan border post, we typically will not shoot — we will not shoot that mission," he said.

The United States has given radios to Pakistan border posts so they can communicate with U.S. forces in Afghanistan, he said. If U.S. troops are unable to contact them directly before launching an artillery assault, an illumination round is fired first as a means of warning the Pakistanis that high explosives will follow.

The Pakistani army spokesman, Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan, told the AP by telephone in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, "Pakistan would not allow any coalition forces to violate the international border. This is the understanding between us and the coalition forces."

He added, "In case of any target inside Pakistani territory, the intelligence would be passed on to us and we would take action. This is the policy and we strictly adhere to the policy and we would not allow any violation of Pakistani border."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070211/...us_afghanistan

[WildWolfdog]

Good old USA and their "we'll do what we want, regardless of what anyone thinks, says or does" policy. Maybe Cuba should start firing a few rounds into Hawaii and see what the US does.

[8541]

wow i ddnt know america was gonna do it this quick, but i saw it coming, 1st afganistan 2nd iraq 3rd iran 4th pakistan

good 4 good ol' U S of A

[surface2air]

..reserved

[Cunard]

the US has every right to launch strikes into Pakistan when fire is directed from across border at them by Taliban fighters and other islamic jihadists....Pakistani forces should have been all over this and watching its own border to prevent such radicals from operating on pakistani soil

[Cunard]

Originally Posted by WildWolfdog

Good old USA and their "we'll do what we want, regardless of what anyone thinks, says or does" policy. Maybe Cuba should start firing a few rounds into Hawaii and see what the US does.

omg...i had no idea hoola girls were firing rounds into Cuba from Hawaii

[Space-Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Cunard

the US has every right to launch strikes into Pakistan when fire is directed from across border at them by Taliban fighters and other islamic jihadists....Pakistani forces should have been all over this and watching its own border to prevent such radicals from operating on pakistani soil

I don't even know how much control Musharraf has over its north western border, as opposed to the tribal leaders who run the area..... my guess would be 'slim'.....

[schaxeb]

Originally Posted by Space-Cowboy

I don't even know how much control Musharraf has over its north western border, as opposed to the tribal leaders who run the area..... my guess would be 'slim'.....

its actually closer to none...

[Space-Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Cunard

omg...i had no idea hoola girls were firing rounds into Cuba from Hawaii

Hey man, those hoola girls are U.S.'s secret weapon....

[WildWolfdog]

Originally Posted by Cunard

omg...i had no idea hoola girls were firing rounds into Cuba from Hawaii

It was a sarcastic statement to make a point. There's no excuse to start firing into another country. Unless the other country and it's officials (not some group from within that country) is directly threatening you, you have no right to start firing into it's borders. That's the point I was trying to make. With that kinda bullshit US policy, a lot of wars can start flaring up, even if they are intentional (example, N.Korea send it's own members to start shooting at N.Korea to find an excuse to bomb S.Korea).

[WildWolfdog]

Originally Posted by WildWolfdog

It was a sarcastic statement to make a point. There's no excuse to start firing into another country. Unless the other country and it's officials (not some group from within that country) is directly threatening you, you have no right to start firing into it's borders. That's the point I was trying to make. With that kinda bullshit US policy, a lot of wars can start flaring up, even if they are intentional (example, N.Korea send it's own members to start shooting at N.Korea to find an excuse to bomb S.Korea).

The US has to use "political means" to find a solution to the problem, like it expects every other country to do.

[.AK.]

wtf is wrong with US
u cant just randomly fire into another country cuz u felt like it
im pretty sure u should infrom the gov body of that country, and they should take steps to fix it, or give u permission.

[.AK.]

Originally Posted by WildWolfdog

The US has to use "political means" to find a solution to the problem, like it expects every other country to do.

[Space-Cowboy]

Originally Posted by WildWolfdog

It was a sarcastic statement to make a point. There's no excuse to start firing into another country. Unless the other country and it's officials (not some group from within that country) is directly threatening you, you have no right to start firing into it's borders. That's the point I was trying to make. With that kinda bullshit US policy, a lot of wars can start flaring up, even if they are intentional (example, N.Korea send it's own members to start shooting at N.Korea to find an excuse to bomb S.Korea).

True, but if the Pakistani military failed to address the situation, and U.S. troops are being fired upon from within Pakistani northwestern border, what choice did U.S. have?

[WildWolfdog]

Originally Posted by .AK.

wtf is wrong with US
u cant just randomly fire into another country cuz u felt like it
im pretty sure u should infrom the gov body of that country, and they should take steps to fix it, or give u permission.

I'm sure Cunard will say that if the other country didn't do anything or wasn't able to stop the attacks within 1-4 minutes and a few seconds, the US has every right to and that Pakistan is allowing it to happen on purpose and so on. It's a standard Cunard-like reply.

[.AK.]

Originally Posted by Space-Cowboy

True, but if the Pakistani military failed to address the situation, and U.S. troops are being fired upon from within Pakistani northwestern border, what choice did U.S. have?

leave?
its not like they were atacking US soil
from a political point of view US has no rights to fire anything into another country and if it does thats a clear indication of war

[schaxeb]

Originally Posted by WildWolfdog

It was a sarcastic statement to make a point. There's no excuse to start firing into another country. Unless the other country and it's officials (not some group from within that country) is directly threatening you, you have no right to start firing into it's borders. That's the point I was trying to make. With that kinda bullshit US policy, a lot of wars can start flaring up, even if they are intentional (example, N.Korea send it's own members to start shooting at N.Korea to find an excuse to bomb S.Korea).

agreed to an extent... but i think pakistan should do something about the area in question before they start whining about the US attacking the country. the lawlessness in those parts of pakistan amounts to small wars every year, whether it be between tribes of that area, or against pakistani authorities.

[WildWolfdog]

Originally Posted by Space-Cowboy

True, but if the Pakistani military failed to address the situation, and U.S. troops are being fired upon from within Pakistani northwestern border, what choice did U.S. have?

How about (1) Giving them more time since it's the same group (Taliban I mean) that the US hasn't been able to control since 2001 or (2) sending armed US-Pakistani military personnel to (3) Try to negotiate and if that fails (4) Launch a joint attack WITH the military of the country in which you're launching attacks - hmmm, that sounds about right.

[.AK.]

Originally Posted by WildWolfdog

I'm sure Cunard will say that if the other country didn't do anything or wasn't able to stop the attacks within 1-4 minutes and a few seconds, the US has every right to and that Pakistan is allowing it to happen on purpose and so on. It's a standard Cunard-like reply.

this is just fucked up
its funny how US is gradually building this up, starting with smaller things and now doing something as big as this, now people have just become immune to this bs and ignore it
if this happend a few years back it woulda been a big deal

[WildWolfdog]

Originally Posted by .AK.

leave?
its not like they were atacking US soil
from a political point of view US has no rights to fire anything into another country and if it does thats a clear indication of war

That's the basic bottom-line, the US doesn't have any rights to fire into another country, especially a country it hasn't openly declared war against.

[paki_canadian20]

Originally Posted by Cunard

the US has every right to launch strikes into Pakistan when fire is directed from across border at them by Taliban fighters and other islamic jihadists....Pakistani forces should have been all over this and watching its own border to prevent such radicals from operating on pakistani soil

damn this guy needs to be in the US military but u know what hes just a pussy who can sit on his computer all day and talk a lot o shit but when it comes time to fight he will go behind his mommy and pee in his pants

[.AK.]

Originally Posted by schaxeb

agreed to an extent... but i think pakistan should do something about the area in question before they start whining about the US attacking the country. the lawlessness in those parts of pakistan amounts to small wars every year, whether it be between tribes of that area, or against pakistani authorities.

u cant expct a country to cover every lil inch of its terrotry, most if not, all countries can do that
they should have given pakistan time or MAINLY asked for permission and gotten an aproval b4 they did what they did

[Guddia]

I knew it was coming, it was just matter of time.

[WildWolfdog]

Originally Posted by schaxeb

agreed to an extent... but i think pakistan should do something about the area in question before they start whining about the US attacking the country. the lawlessness in those parts of pakistan amounts to small wars every year, whether it be between tribes of that area, or against pakistani authorities.

I agree, that Pakistan should bring law and order to those parts of the country but that's Pakistan's problem not the US. It's like someone coming into your house and kicking your brother's ass. True he's being a pain in the ass and causing trouble but that's your problem it's your families problem. A stranger can't come inside and beat the shit out of him because the brother threw a rock at him. The stranger has to come sort it out with you.

[ilyas@!!oops!!]

world war 3 is coming.....