Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Pakistan military ordered to return fire if attacked by Nato forces

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bearack

Originally posted by Krono

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen
Battle lines are being drawn. Just watch the news.

Syria, Pakistan, Venezuela, Iran, China, Russia, N. Korea, Cuba, ???
v.
Israel, US, Canada, Australia, Germany, France, UK, ???



May I ask why people bring up venezuela? Let me guess...another country the US government has pissed off?

The US government are digging themselves a grave.


Chavez has been pissing in the US wheaties for some time now. One of its reasons for picking on Columbia, is because of Columbias allaince with the US. Also, Venzuela has been arming up the last 5 years with Chavez buying billions of dollars worth of new military hardware from China and Russia.


Oh so it's a role reversal!

Makes a nice change don't you think?




posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Krono

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen
Battle lines are being drawn. Just watch the news.

Syria, Pakistan, Venezuela, Iran, China, Russia, N. Korea, Cuba, ???
v.
Israel, US, Canada, Australia, Germany, France, UK, ???



May I ask why people bring up venezuela? Let me guess...another country the US government has pissed off?

The US government are digging themselves a grave.


Look at their recent gold movements. Moving hard assets back to their country so they cannot be seized by foreign powers. Why might they think they need to do that? Venezuela's first batch of repatriated gold comes home

Oh, and the recent visit by Ahmadinejad: Chavez says Iran's Ahmadinejad to visit Venezuela

I didn't just pull those countries out of my gorilla butt.
edit on 12/2/11 by AnonymousCitizen because: (no reason given)
edit on 12/2/11 by AnonymousCitizen because: further clarification and links



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by rcanem
 


There is a thing called "ROE" (Rules of Engagement) that every military has. It's adapted to every situation, checkpoint, battle, whatever... but it basically says who you can and can't fire.

And yes, it's hard to know who to shoot. NATO and Pakistan aren't enemies, and friendly fire accidents happen everyday in the military.

You don't open fire against someone just because you are being fired upon. Otherwise whole armies or air forces would self-destruct.

Which this states, is political, not strategic. It says that Pakistan has had enough of US/NATO "playful" nature and will retaliate to any provocation or attack, which means, not only to survive, but to actually counter-attack.

You see, not everything is a "no brainer".



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Tifozi
 


I know all about the rules of engagement, I spent 22 years in the Tennessee National Guard. If someone shoots at you you have a right to return fire and ask for forgiveness later. No one expects a soldier to stand there and be killed without lifting a finger to defend themselves. My job is not to die for my contry but let that other SOB die for his.
If you are fired upon, your immediate duty is to secure as fortified a position as possible and return fire, no questions. All the permission to retaliate thing means is that it is fully backed by the government and that you can't cry foul when you get lit up because you are shooting at them.





new topics

top topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join