AP News/Yahoo News: Pakistani Ruling Party Demands U.S. Apology

[heyholetsgogrant]

Pakistani Ruling Party Demands U.S. Apology

By RIAZ KHAN, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 46 minutes ago

PESHAWAR, Pakistan - Pakistan's ruling party on Monday demanded an apology for an alleged

CIA airstrike that killed at least 17 people, but the country's prime minister said his trip to the United States this week would go ahead as planned.

Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz and his ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Q on Monday condemned the alleged U.S. airstrike on a village near the Afghan border, which intelligence officials have said targeted al-Qaida's No. 2 leader, Ayman al-Zawahri

But Aziz said he was still scheduled to leave Tuesday for the United States, where he said he would talk about security issues but also meet business leaders to encourage foreign investment.

The leader called Friday's airstrike on a village near the Afghan border "very regrettable" but said, "I don't think that takes away from the fact that Pakistan needs investment."

The Muslim League-Q party later issued a statement demanding an official apology from the United States.

Islamic groups, meanwhile, vowed to step up anti-American protests.

Al-Zawahri,

Osama bin Laden's top lieutenant, was invited to an Islamic dinner in the village but did not show up, two Pakistani officials told The Associated Press.

Al-Zawahri sent some aides to the dinner instead and investigators were trying to determine whether they had been in any of the three houses destroyed in the missile strike, one of the officials said Sunday.

In Washington, a U.S counterterrorism official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the information's sensitivity, said it is not yet known if al-Zawahri was killed in Friday's attack.

The official said the compound that was hit has been visited in the past by significant terrorist figures. "There were strong indications that was happening again," the official said.

With media reports out of Pakistan indicating that at least four foreigners were killed, the official said it appears that some damage was done, even if al-Zawahri was not there. "This place had a history," the official said.

Islamic groups held nationwide protests Sunday as anger mounted over the attack that Pakistan said killed innocent civilians.

"There will be more ... bigger protests," Shahid Shamsi, a spokesman for the anti-American religious coalition that organized the rallies, said Monday.

Protesters believe the airstrike was ordered by the CIA and launched by U.S. forces pursuing Taliban and al-Qaida militants in neighboring

Afghanistan, and Shamsi said the war on terror should not extend across borders without permission.

"Pakistani civilians, including children, were killed," Shamsi said. "Principles cannot be broken in the name of (fighting) terrorism."

In the first comments about the attack from a top U.S. official, Secretary of State

Condoleezza Rice said Sunday that serious action was necessary against al-Qaida.

"These are not people who can be dealt with lightly," Rice said.

Many in this nation of 150 million people oppose the government's participation in the U.S.-led war against international terrorist groups, and there is increasing frustration over a recent series of suspected U.S. attacks along the frontier aimed at militants.

"They should try to work to improve their image," Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed said Monday of U.S. activities in the region.

A senior army official told The Associated Press on Sunday that "foreigners" were reported in the area around the village of Damadola, four miles from the Afghanistan border, but he said there was no information al-Zawahri was among them.

A number of al-Qaida and Taliban combatants, including al-Zawahri and bin Laden, are believed to have taken refuge in the rugged mountains along on the Afghan-Pakistani border.

___

Associated Press writers Sadaqat Jan in Islamabad and Katherine Shrader in Washington contributed to this report.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060116/ap_on_re_as/pakistan_al_qaida_attack_63;_ylt=AhpKS7s3.uZ3l7psR2IKjR0wuecA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pervez Musharraf has been one of the most staunch allies of the united states in the war on terror..Pakistan has cought over 700 suspected Terrorist and have caught the #3 ranking member of Al Qaeda..that to me is better than all of the of middle eastern countries combined...The part of Pakistan that was bombed is considered by many to be one the most brutal terrains in the world, and ,many who have seek refuge there die...This incident has caused outrage especially by the Pakistani people, to the extent of calling for Musharraf's head..god I hope we have gotten someone high in Al Qaeda.

"And the new policy certainly means more trouble for Pakistan's military ruler, Gen Pervez Musharraf, who is already perceived by many to be surviving mainly on American life-support."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4618476.stm

"Pakistani Ruling Party Demands U.S. Apology

AP - 1 hour, 16 minutes ago

PESHAWAR, Pakistan - Pakistan's ruling party on Monday demanded an apology for an alleged CIA airstrike that killed at least 17 people, but the country's prime minister said his trip to the United States this week would go ahead as planned. Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz and his ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Q on Monday condemned the alleged U.S. air strike on a village near the Afghan border, which intelligence officials have said targeted al-Qaida's No. 2 leader, Ayman al-Zawahri."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060116/ap_on_re_as/pakistan_al_qaida_attack_63;_ylt=AhpKS7s3.uZ3l7psR2IKjR0wuecA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

If Musharraf is removed it will be even more difficult the war on terror and to deal with Pakistani officials...Furthermore Pakistan has committed over 50,000 troops near the border of Iraq and Pakistan, to the USA's mere 15,000...The Pakistani army is fully capable of carrying out actions on their side of the order, with one of the bigger militaries in the world...why didnt we try to get Pakistian to carry out the action?...meanwhile we allow the Saudi’s to have a free pass , when the majority of the 9/11 highjacker’s where from Saudi Arabia…by no means am I giving Pakistan a free pass, but the US should not take their efforts for granted….keep in mind we are dealing with a country that actually has nuclear weapons....

-Grant

[Sarge]

I thought that DNA test got done a little early

Let's hold off on the apology until we see if any of the leftover goo is our boy

[heyholetsgogrant]

I thought that DNA test got done a little early

Let's hold off on the apology until we see if any of the leftover goo is our boy

The question is, what if Musharraf is removed?...If this happens again, I dont think the next leader will be anywhere near as coopertive as him and they will play hardball...

-Grant

[Sarge]

The question is, what if Musharraf is removed?...If this happens again, I dont think the next leader will be anywhere near as coopertive as him and they will play hardball...

-Grant

Then we'll pull the rug out from under Pakistan and we have India as an ally. There's a reason we've been building relations with them

[Predicto]

Then we'll pull the rug out from under Pakistan and we have India as an ally. There's a reason we've been building relations with them

You are assuming India will want to play along. They haven't in the past - that is why we had to settle for Pakistan.

[Sarge]

You are assuming India will want to play along. They haven't in the past - that is why we had to settle for Pakistan.

We settled for Pakistan because it's next to the border with Afghanistan and alot of arseholes use it to hide. Failing that, we'll be in Pakistan and operate from India.

And they're playing along quite nicely. Just got back from there last month. Interesting how a derainged cowboy can figure something like that out, huh?

[visionary]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/01/17/pakistan.strike.ap/index.html

4 terrorists were killed in the strike.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/01/17/pakistan.strike.foreign/index.html

at least 10-12 militants involved.

[Predicto]

We settled for Pakistan because it's next to the border with Afghanistan and alot of arseholes use it to hide. Failing that, we'll be in Pakistan and operate from India.

And they're playing along quite nicely. Just got back from there last month. Interesting how a derainged cowboy can figure something like that out, huh?

No, I meant we had to settle for Pakistan for the past 50 years because India was not interested in being our ally in the Cold War. I do not think they will be interested in having us operate militarily from India. I could be wrong.

By the way, I wasn't being hostile to you.

[heyholetsgogrant]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/01/17/pakistan.strike.ap/index.html

4 terrorists were killed in the strike.

you have to do better than that, we kill these guys by the hundreds every month in Iraq...if you gonna start launching bombs at countries, you better hope you get someone big...This has ticked off Pakistian, and will hurt the relationship deeply..again we let Saudi Arabia off the hook, why arent we launching bombs at them?...

-Grant

[visionary]

you have to do better than that, we kill these guys by the hundreds every month in Iraq...if you gonna start launching bombs at countries, you better hope you get someone big...This has ticked off Pakistian, and will hurt the relationship deeply..again we let Saudi Arabia off the hook, why arent we launching bombs at them?...

-Grant

LOL, don't be foolish, they took a chance and were partially successful, though it seems that they missed their main target.

They didn't do this without getting information about it from the Pakistani government in the first place.

What happened to going after terrorists and Bin Laden, is that not what so many people have been whining about for the past few years now?

I guess it only needs to be done until it actually is done, and then it is wrong.

Also they are now saying that is is more like 10-12 terrorists in the latest news....I bet there will be even more information coming out still yet.

[SkinsHokieFan]

We settled for Pakistan because it's next to the border with Afghanistan and alot of arseholes use it to hide. Failing that, we'll be in Pakistan and operate from India.

And they're playing along quite nicely. Just got back from there last month. Interesting how a derainged cowboy can figure something like that out, huh?

What part did you visit Sarge? It has been 7 years since I have been there

And yeah, anytime the PML speaks I cringe. While not complete wackos, it is far from a national party and really only represesents the Punjabi portion of the coumtry as well as Nawaz Sharif (who was prime minister before Musharraf overthrew his corrupt ass)

Actually, just about when ANY political party speaks over there I cringe. At least it wasn't Beanzir speaking her fat trap, these old politicians over there really just need to go away

[Sarge]

What part did you visit Sarge? It has been 7 years since I have been there

And yeah, anytime the PML speaks I cringe. While not complete wackos, it is far from a national party and really only represesents the Punjabi portion of the coumtry as well as Nawaz Sharif (who was prime minister before Musharraf overthrew his corrupt ass)

Actually, just about when ANY political party speaks over there I cringe. At least it wasn't Beanzir speaking her fat trap, these old politicians over there really just need to go away

I had to go to Delhi/New Delhi. It's growing a lot there. THey were all happy because Bill Gates was in country at the time

[SkinsHokieFan]

I had to go to Delhi/New Delhi. It's growing a lot there. THey were all happy because Bill Gates was in country at the time

I need a reading comprehension class. You meant you had gone to INDIA, heh, I remember you did bring up a possible trip to Pakistan to me before

Haven't been to India ever, I'll get there eventually

[Sarge]

I need a reading comprehension class. You meant you had gone to INDIA, heh, I remember you did bring up a possible trip to Pakistan to me before

Haven't been to India ever, I'll get there eventually

Ya had me a little confused with Pakistani politicians and a trip to India :laugh:

I didn't think you'd be running around India anyway :laugh:

[visionary]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/18/world/main1218527.shtml

More news is out about this...it seems we probably got some big names too.

[Predicto]

Can you imagine the firestorm if some other country launched a missile attack onto US territory to get some terrorists, while killing a bunch of civilians in the process?

Like say, waht if ten years ago the United Kingdom sent a missile into South Boston to blow up a house where they had information that a bunch of IRA guys were hanging out.

It's pretty amazing that the Pakistanis aren't more pissed than they are.

[visionary]

Can you imagine the firestorm if some other country launched a missile attack onto US territory to get some terrorists, while killing a bunch of civilians in the process?

Like say, waht if ten years ago the United Kingdom sent a missile into South Boston to blow up a house where they had information that a bunch of IRA guys were hanging out.

It's pretty amazing that the Pakistanis aren't more pissed than they are.

So you think we should have done what then?

And it isn't as if Pakistan didn't know what we were up to ahead of time.

from the latest CBS article.

"The U.S. government will not officially confirm these CIA airstrikes are even taking place, Martin added, and the Pakistani government files protests against them, even though they are conducted with Pakistani approval."

This was probably just a way for us to do the job for them (and for us) without them pissing off the militants if it went wrong.

But maybe you would rather we risk a much better chance of them getting away and having tons of innocents killed in the process of trying to hunt them down and dealing with the locals at the same time....

[Predicto]

So you think we should have done what then?

And it isn't as if Pakistan didn't know what we were up to ahead of time.

This was probably just a way for us to do the job for them (and for us) without them pissing off the militants if it went wrong.

But maybe you would rather we risk a much better chance of them getting away and having tons of innocents killed in the process of trying to hunt them down and dealing with the locals at the same time....

Don't put words in my mouth, please. I did not say we should not have gone after Al-Zawarhi if we thought we could get him. If you recall, I was the VERY FIRST person to post the story on this board, with the comment that I truly hoped we had gotten him. And I still hope we did.

I was just pointing out how strange this situation is. We can just fire missiles into other countries and take out civilians as well as bad guys. Isn't that weird? And we expect the people in those countries to be ok with it, even though we ourselves would absolutely go berzerk if it happened to us.

I guess I just want us to be careful not to destablize the government of Pakistan, a country that we need to have on our side, one that already has nukes.

[visionary]

Yeah, I was maybe a bit harsh about that, after reviewing your post and my response. I guess I was not just aiming it at you, but at the whole idea that a lot of people are complaining about this, when they have been clamoring for going after Al Queda in Afghanistan and Pakistan for years now.

;-)

Anyway, it is nasty business and it sucks that this kind of stuff may be necessary, but there doesn't seem to be much better solutions out there right now.

Also it is important to think of the fact that Pakistan is not like the US. Especially not the areas that the terrorists are likely hiding in. These are often places that are far outside of government control and are very hard to get to with soldiers or police, without causing a lot of collateral damage and getting a lot of people killed. It isn't like these are places that respect the national government's rule anyway. So it is almsot akin to going into a no-man's land between countries or in international waters.

Still it is kind of wierd and I would not want to be the folk living in that village area. I'm sure that not all of them are big Al Queda fans, and probably some of those get killed sometimes too, but on the most part, it is done in a way to ensure the least amount of casualties of those not invovled, while still getting the main target.

In this case, I would guess that most of those 18 who were killed were not innocent's who had no idea what was going on, and were in fact either terrorists themselves, or big time sympathizers who invited the others over for dinner and a meeting.

Then again I don't know the details, so maybe they only invited them over to tell them to stop bothering them. Hopefully the people in charge of the strike knew....

[Predicto]

Agree with everything you said.

[heyholetsgogrant]

Why arent we launching bombs at Saudi Arabia, when they were just given a failing grade by the US in their efforts to stop terrorism?

-Grant

[visionary]

Do you really want us to? I kind of doubt it....

Anyway

For one thing, Saudi Arabia is a lot different country than Pakistan. The Saudis had been supposedly killing off Al Qaeda leaders in that country every few months for the past year it seems. They also may have more reach and access to places than Pakistan does.

For another it was upsetting enough across the Middle East to have troops there and the huge presence that we still have in that country politcally and economically. It would be quite another level of offense to attack that country or appear to be doing that. It could start the jihad of all jihads....

Also Bin Laden and a lot of his buddies are banned from the country, though there may be a lot of other Al Queda guys running around there in hiding or under lower/medium level government protection.

Now as for doing what was done in Pakistan specifically, I am not sure, it might be possible to get away with doing that in Saudi Arabia a few times if done discreetly enough and picking the right targets...but I am not sure. I bet that we are partially involved though in at least some of the anti-terrorist raids and searches that they have been doing over the past year.

[Sarge]

Why arent we launching bombs at Saudi Arabia, when they were just given a failing grade by the US in their efforts to stop terrorism?

-Grant

Hate Bush. Bush is Hitler.

Bush and the Crown Prince are gay lovers

Thought I'd do my Chom impression. How did I do?

[Mr. S]

India and Pakistan do have their rivalry obviously. However, I wonder if India would actually co-operate militarily if some US intervention were to happen in Pakistan. I can easily see though that India would let the US use bases and whatnot.