Bertster7 wrote:
DBBrinson1 wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
Because they conducted a military operation on foreign sovereign soil belonging to an allied nation without permission. Surely that is reason enough to apologise. In what way is any of what they did "legit"?
Pissing off the Pakistanis is incredibly stupid. It's about the stupidest thing you could possibly do with regards to the war on terror.
Join Operation. Besides bullets don't recognize state borders. Do you really expect
US soldiers any competent military to not defend itself.
These guys killed were tribally recruited soldiers (low pay=easily corruptable), I'd bet they were firing on US forces.
About the "war on terror"....
Screw Pakistan. It's not like we give the Pakies a butt load of money or anything. And it's not like the Pakies take full f'n advantage of it. Hell if there is one person who doesn't want Osama caught its Pakies' fearless leader. No more search for Bin Laden = No money.
I'm guessing you mean join
t operation. In what way is it a joint operation? None of the forces that called in the airstrike were Pakistani and they did not have permission to be there or be conducting operations there. The US were clearly in the wrong, they should just apologise and be done with it. They are just coming off, even more so than usual, as arrogant pricks who don't give a fuck.
You really don't seem to have any clue as to the significance of Pakistan in the war on terror.
They have apologised, of course if this was a vid of Israeli tanks bombarding something taken by a Palestinan it would be the worlds ultimate justice weapon. That video shows no structures of an outpost, how do you know that the Pakistani sodiers weren't either
A) Shooting at US forces thus prompting a response.
B) Caught in an entanglement between US forces and Taliban fighters, failed to identify themselves and were thus engaged.
Now contrary to what everyone seems to think, the US does not engage friendly units on purpose. I still find it odd that Pakistan had such a bad reaction to this incident. Other countries that have sustained friendly fire in the past did not refer to the attacks as cowardly. I'm failing to see how they came to that conclusion, its almost like one the Taliban would say when they're fighting and a bomb gets dropped on them, because they don't have that weapon and can only fight on the ground they label it as cowardly.
So far the US side of the story seems far more truthful than the Pakistani one. Don't understand why people think its wrong that the US is trying to show people what actually happened, almost like some people dont want to know the actual events and rather just say, 'omg friendly fire, they stupid.'
Also US forces operating in those regions are not exacly difficult to distinguish from enemy fighters if they wear their ACU uniforms and gear. The only ones that could be mistaken for enemy fighters that could prompt an attack by Pakistani forces are the SF units, and even then regardless if you take heavy fire from a position you will retaliate.
Last edited by M.O.A.B (2008-06-12 13:25:09)