It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US Defense Secretary Panetta threatens ground intervention into Pakistan

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Source

Speaking in Kabul yesterday, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta threatened Pakistan with a ground intervention if it did not crush forces in Pakistan fighting US occupation troops in Afghanistan.

Panetta singled out the so-called Haqqani network, a militia in Pakistan’s North Waziristan region that mounts raids on US forces across the Afghan-Pakistani border. He said, "Haqqani safe havens still exist on the other side of the border. Pakistan has to take action [to stop] allowing terrorists in their country to attack our forces on the other side of the border. We are reaching the limits of our patience here."

He continued, "It is difficult to achieve a secure Afghanistan as long as there is a safe haven for terrorists in Pakistan from which they can conduct attacks on our forces. … The United States will do whatever we have to do to protect our forces."

Asked if the US might send ground troops from Afghanistan to attack targets in Pakistan, Panetta refused to rule it out. "I’m not going to go into particulars," he said. "It’s about protecting our forces and trying to urge the Pakistanis to take the steps they have to take to control the situation."


It appears the US has it in them to enter into Pakistan with ground troops.. I know it would be 'easy' enough, since they could just transfer in from Afghanistan AND they entered Pakistan already to supposedly 'kill' OBL, but to actually invade the borders of pakistan with a force of troops?! Are the potentially kicking a hornet's nest here?

Panetta also visited India, Pakistan's biggest rival. Not unusual but then he declined to visit Islamabad and flew straight to Kabul where he threatened Pakistan to do something about the Haqqani network operating on the border region

More from the article:


The US has responded with an escalating series of drone attacks in Afghan-Pakistani border regions, with eight strikes in Pakistan’s northwest frontier areas in the last two weeks alone. US defense officials told the Christian Science Monitor yesterday that "the recent increase in drone strikes on insurgents in Pakistan is due in part to frustration with Islamabad."


So now to make the Pakistani's do what the US wants, they just start droning the shazzle out of the border region as a warning, 22, so far this year, killing 'militants/terrorists' along with the many many civilian deaths (17 percent overall (but a mere 11% in 2011) since 2004 were civilian deaths! NAF
Here is an ATS thread regarding the fox news story about this report
Remember thats from the New American Foundation, linked by some to be an NWO org so they obivously use the official numbers but remember,
U.S. Drone Policy: Standing Near Terrorists Makes You A Terrorist


How long is Pakistan going to take this from the US? I know they used to be good allies, but everyone gets sick of the bully pushing them around eventually... they have very dangerous weapons at their disposal... remember these incidents?
No US soldier to be charged for killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers
and
American Charged With Murder in Pakistan
then they let him go (most definitely through CIA pressure)
and
Pakistan to US : get the hell out of our country. US : No
and
Does this still apply??!
China Ultimatum to US? 'Any Attack on Pakistan is Attack on China'

What do you think Pakistan would do if the did send ground troops across the border? What role does India have in this?

Thoughts?!
edit on 6/9/2012 by Nspekta because: forgot link




posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Nspekta
 


That's highly misleading. I saw the interview and the report asked "would the us ever send group troops in to defend our troops?" and he gave the standard answer "we'd do whatever necassary to protect our troops". What is he suppose to say? No, it's cool if they launch attacks from Pakistan?



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   
The man is a fool.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Im pretty sure soon some countries will just decide to gang up on the US. Its getting rediculous, they can seemingly threaten any country with a ground invasion but when any other country issues threats of that nature, the US takes its as a threat.

The tides need to change soon, the ammount of sabre rattling is getting rediculous.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   
LMAO, wtf is going on seriously. There is a drone war already going on in Pakistan and now this warmonger wants more ground war?

He should really have a CT scan of his head to see where the tumor is growing.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
Huffing & bluffing! Just like when North Korea says it’s going to “liberate” the South (for the 10,000th time) sometimes the US says some very stupid things.
Really you would have to be of like monkey intelligence, to believe these threats.

We cannot send troops into Pakistan (without their permission) without seriously escalating the situation, and why the hell should we?
Our Western modelled, yet in practice heroine trading, corrupt, Afghan government will always be on the life support of US cash & allied troops. It’s due for collapse. Had we wanted democracy in Afghanistan, we would have just armed & supported the Northern Alliance against the Taliban.
What we wanted instead was a functional, centralised government, where you need know only a few corrupt people to talk too, to get things done.
But the country is not even functional!!!
It has been unified on paper thousands of times, but never once in practice (not in the last few thousand years –literally).

We could have sent troops into Pakistan, with their permission, had we just supported the previous dictatorship for being a dictatorship. Really we should have done. They’ve hardly got a functional democracy now, as there are only certain places where (Western) democracy works, and Tribal Societies ain’t one of them!
When the British Empire was dismantled in the 50 & 70’s most countries where started of with a democracy. Only those govetnments without tribalism, kept the democracy.

Because…
In a tribal society an aspiring politician, can play people against each other, a thousand more ways than just a racially mixed society. And in a tribal society people vote because their elder has received a “gift” in exchange for “asking” his tribe how to vote. Nobody puts a gin to these people’s heads when they go to the ballot either –ok not usually! They just do as their elders ask, out of loyalty.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Nspekta
 


What do you get when you cross an ###hole with a windbreaker?





Pakistan is not our friend. Nor is it our enemy.

We should just stop all aid to them until they cooperate.

If they don't?

Then it'll be money well saved.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
I really think this old dude has lost his edge.



Someone needs to start thinking of a replacement.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Boom we're back to playing Phoenix like in Laos.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   
I hope the USA just walks away from the middle east. And never sends one penny or ounce of food or water out of their borders again. That will fix yah!



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:01 PM
link   
they never learn,,,,,,,,,,,,,,




Afghanistan

www2.macleans.ca...





reply posted on 8-6-2012 @ 07:27 PM by BobAthome

Originally posted by BobAthome
A lot of things should be remembered,,

a lot of this,,,

the-healing-begins,, stuff cant hurt,,

www2.macleans.ca...

i agree no guns in the Garden.




the Lion of Panjshir.

Afghanistan’s ambassador to Spain.

Of all the conquerors that we have had, we loved Alexander the Great

Almost 100 years ago, Amanullah Khan, another Afghan king, hanged Khalili’s grandfather.

wow nice lineage,,,

why didnt the Secretary of State,, Hillary Clinton
ever get her picture with this guy??

Maybe she did,,
ya i like that guy for some reason.

Apparently,,she didnt see all the candidates,,
Karazi vs this guy?

no brainer.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:01 PM
link   
I'm not screaming conspiracy here, for it seems his merits somewhat back up his career, but... Panetta has been at the top for a long time now... and I don't think it's because he's such a great guy. Rather, a tool, and a means that is kept in the Government to ensure the success of some ultimate plan. lol, ok... maybe I am screaming conspiracy!

Lets see... what positions has he held?

He goes from, the house of representatives, to

Director of the Office of Management and Budget from 1993–1994

Panetta served as President Bill Clinton's White House Chief of Staff from 1994 to 1997

he served as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

and current United States Secretary of Defense




Washington Post columnist David Ignatius said that Panetta did have tangential exposure to intelligence operations as Director of the OMB and as Chief of Staff for President Clinton, where he "sat in on the daily intelligence briefings as chief of staff, and he reviewed the nation's most secret intelligence-collection and covert-action programs in his previous post as director of the Office of Management and Budget".


He goes from Finance, to CIA, and now Secretary of Defense...

Lets see... Since 9/11 working into the whole 2008 financial 'crisis'... the government went from... Finance, to CIA, and War.

Office Of Management and Budget



ABSTRACT: The Office of Management and Budget assists the President in overseeing the preparation of the Federal budget and in supervising its administration in Federal agencies. The OMB also oversees and coordinates the Administration's procurement, financial management, information, and regulatory policies.


I mean CMON!

THIS GUY LITERALLY had his hands in EVERYTHING... Every Single Aspect of Everything that has brought us to the point in which we are, has fallen at THIS MANS FEET.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by DoctorMobius
 


Those pennies are accompanied with bombs dropping and drones hitting you.

I would rather be poor than to be on that end of the deal.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
Okay Panetta if you want to intervene and interfere with their business, we'll send you in.

You'll be equipped with an M4A1 and a few thousand rounds of ammo, plus all the MRE's you can eat.

Good-luck, ya dumb ass clown!

edit on 9-6-2012 by seasoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Where did he say he wants a ground war? Wow some folks on here lack some serious reading comprehension skills. ATS for ya though!!

edit on 9-6-2012 by princeofpeace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by FractalChaos13242017
 


I would blame Robert Zoellick for being involved in all the messes our country is in before I blamed US Defense Secretary Panetta. Zoellick has been involved in everything from Executive Vice President of Fannie Mae, Department of the Treasury, Senior International Advisor to Goldman Sachs, White House Deputy Chief of Staff and Assistant to the President, served on a panel that offered Enron executives briefings on economic and political issues, Zoellick served as a foreign policy advisor to George W. Bush, Bush nominated Zoellick to be Deputy Secretary of State and then he ended up the World Bank President who had controll over all the US nation building money for around the world.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Again-where did Panetta say he wants a ground war as the thread and most replies indicate?



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


First two sentences in the OPs source:



Speaking in Kabul yesterday, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta threatened Pakistan with a ground intervention





posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
"Your thoughts?' OK. Perhaps my less important thought concerns the source. Is this supposed to be news, or opinion? it includes:

Panetta’s inflammatory comments in Kabul highlight the reckless and aggressive character of his tour and Washington’s broader policy in the region.
A "reckless and aggressive" tour? I thought that was reserved for rock bands.

More important, I can't imagine anyone thinking that Obama will launch another ground war this close to the election. (Sure, I could easily be wrong, and I'd be delighted if someone would show me my error.) I think it is just a threat, but it doesn't threaten anything terrible enough to get Pakistan to change its mind.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Again-where did Panetta say he wants a ground war as the thread and most replies indicate?


It says he threatens Pakistan...


He said, "Haqqani safe havens still exist on the other side of the border. Pakistan has to take action [to stop] allowing terrorists in their country to attack our forces on the other side of the border. We are reaching the limits of our patience here."


The United States will do whatever we have to do to protect our forces."


Asked if the US might send ground troops from Afghanistan to attack targets in Pakistan, Panetta refused to rule it out. "I’m not going to go into particulars," he said. "It’s about protecting our forces and trying to urge the Pakistanis to take the steps they have to take to control the situation."


He doesn't say he 'wants' a ground war as you indicate, he's threatening Pakistan because they aren't moving in on the militants that the US wants. He also doesn't rule it out, or deny it, but pledges that he will do whatever it takes to protect their forces..
If its not a ground war, what do you think the US action would be if Pakistan continues to not follow orders from their ally?







 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join