Petraeus: Military Reserves 'Right of Last Resort' for Threats Inside Pakistan

Status
Not open for further replies.

SAWYER

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,742
42
91
Maybe this will make Pakistan clean it's own house, but I doubt it
http://www.foxnews.com/politic...reats-inside-pakistan/

The U.S. military will reserve the "right of last resort" to take out threats inside Pakistan, but it would prefer to enable the Pakistani military to do the job itself, Gen. David Petraeus said Monday in an exclusive interview with FOX News.

The commander of U.S. Central Command was interviewed as the Obama administration prepares to step up the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

Asked about lingering concerns that Pakistan is not fully on board, Petraeus told FOX News' Bret Baier that the U.S. military is putting "additional focus" on rooting out ties between Pakistan's intelligence service and the Taliban.

One incident of obvious cooperation between the Pakistani intelligence community and extremists has already been uncovered, he said. "There is a case in the past year or so that we think was unambiguous. There appears to have been a warning prior to a Pakistani operation," Petraeus said.

But he said trust between the two countries will be key as President Obama seeks more Pakistani cooperation and calls for billions in aid to the country.

"I think we are building that kind of trust. And that's the way I think is the best description for that. And it's hugely important that that trust be built," Petraeus said, pointing to "gradually increasing intelligence sharing" among Afghan, Pakistani and U.S. forces along the border.

Obama, in unveiling his regional plan for Afghanistan and Pakistan on Friday, said the U.S. will "insist that action be taken, one way or another, when we have intelligence about high-level terrorist targets."

He added on Sunday that "we're going after" such targets, though the U.S. will need to work with Pakistan's government to do so. He did not specifically say U.S. troops could be sent into the country.

Asked about the president's comments, Petraeus signaled that all options would be on the table.

"I think we would never give up, if you will, the right of last resort if we assess something as a threat to us, noting that what we want to do is enable the Pakistanis, help them, assist them to deal with the problem that we now think, and their leaders certainly now think, represents the most important existential threat to their country, not just to the rest of the world," he said.

The Pakistanis have expressed frustration over unmanned U.S. drone strikes to take out terrorist targets inside their border.

But Petraeus said the U.S. is mindful of perceptions in the region.

"It's hugely important that we be seen as good neighbors, as friends, certainly fierce warriors who will go after the enemy and stay after them -- but also as individuals who try to avoid civilian casualties whenever possible and are seen again as supporting the people and trying to help them achieve a better life," Petraeus said, specifically referring to the fight on the Afghan side of the border.

On the Pakistani side, Petraeus acknowledged an effort to put a halt to any collaboration between Taliban members and individuals in Pakistani intelligence.

"There are some relationships that continue. It is not as clear as one would like. There's certainly additional focus on that," Petraeus said. "Obviously, we've had these conversations with our counterparts (in Pakistan)."

Obama has announced that he's sending 21,000 more troops to Afghanistan and is requesting $1.5 billion a year for the next five years in aid for Pakistan -- he is also planning to call for $2.8 billion just for Pakistan's military.

As to threats elsewhere in the region, Petraeus said Iran is still "some years away" from a nuclear weapon.

"They have low-enriched uranium that is about the amount that would be required perhaps to make a weapon, but there are many, many more steps that are required.

You have to highly enrich it," he said. "But are they a threat? Certainly."

Petraeus also dismissed online speculation that he is considering a run for office (the speculation was fueled by a posting, later revealed to be a joke, that he is planning a 2010 speaking engagement at the University of Iowa).

"I do not (have interest in running for office)," Petraeus said. "Not at all. And I've tried to say that on numerous occasions."

He said he's not heading to Iowa.
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Like comments like these help at all! :roll:
We've made our intentions very clear against any US invasion.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Like comments like these help at all! :roll:
We've made our intentions very clear against any US invasion.

No one is talking about an invasion.

They are stating that if Pakistan will not clean house, the US may do it regardless of Pakistan's desires.

Within the ISI, the two faces have been exposed. Will the your government continue to support the Taliban/AQ or erradicate them?

Both options are presently being done.

 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Like comments like these help at all! :roll:
We've made our intentions very clear against any US invasion.

No one is talking about an invasion.

They are stating that if Pakistan will not clean house, the US may do it regardless of Pakistan's desires.

Within the ISI, the two faces have been exposed. Will the your government continue to support the Taliban/AQ or erradicate them?

Both options are presently being done.

Nothing has been exposed. It's your media that has been brainwashing you.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Like comments like these help at all! :roll:
We've made our intentions very clear against any US invasion.

No one is talking about an invasion.

They are stating that if Pakistan will not clean house, the US may do it regardless of Pakistan's desires.

Within the ISI, the two faces have been exposed. Will the your government continue to support the Taliban/AQ or erradicate them?

Both options are presently being done.

Nothing has been exposed. It's your media that has been brainwashing you.
Agreed. This "threat" in Pakistan exists, but is blown way out of proportion.

It's a local issue. Let the Pakistanis deal with it.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Like comments like these help at all! :roll:
We've made our intentions very clear against any US invasion.

No one is talking about an invasion.

They are stating that if Pakistan will not clean house, the US may do it regardless of Pakistan's desires.

Within the ISI, the two faces have been exposed. Will the your government continue to support the Taliban/AQ or erradicate them?

Both options are presently being done.

Nothing has been exposed. It's your media that has been brainwashing you.

Our media has been trying to brainwash to the tune of "WAR BAD... PEACE GOOD."
US Media will NEVER push pro-war until we are attacked.
[edit: Let's change that a bit. Our Media doesn't push pro-war unless we are attacked, or it deals with the attackers. While the media will thoroughly enjoy pushing out news regarding al Qaeda, support for them, setbacks for them, etc... they still try and push their anti-war agenda.]

If Pakistan is going to continue to harbor al Qaeda and Taliban cells, then fuck them. They are no good, and are making new threats against the US, and are a constant threat to the progress in the region. If your own country isn't going to do something about it, then NATO forces should have the damn right to come in and clean house.

Hell, Pakistan has signed what is essentially a cease-fire agreement, of sorts, with one of the most wanted al Qaeda-in-Pakistan leaders.

And don't worry. Petraeus is something of a genius. If he anytime soon completely shifts all focus to Afghanistan, we'll make much needed progress there. His planning completely turned around the lack of progress in Iraq.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Like comments like these help at all! :roll:
We've made our intentions very clear against any US invasion.

No one is talking about an invasion.

They are stating that if Pakistan will not clean house, the US may do it regardless of Pakistan's desires.

Within the ISI, the two faces have been exposed. Will the your government continue to support the Taliban/AQ or erradicate them?

Both options are presently being done.

Nothing has been exposed. It's your media that has been brainwashing you.

Pakistan itself has admitted to the ISI working with/supplying info to the Taliban & AQ.
Then the ISI is working with NATO intelligence against the Taliban.

That seems to be the ISI is operating under two masters, the Pakistani goverment and the Taliban.

 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
The Pakistanis have expressed frustration over unmanned U.S. drone strikes to take out terrorist targets inside their border.

Google Earth reveals secret history of US base in Pakistan

The US was secretly flying unmanned drones from the Shamsi airbase in Pakistan's southwestern province of Baluchistan as early as 2006, according to an image of the base from Google Earth.

US special forces used the airbase during the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, but the Pakistani Government said in 2006 that the Americans had left. Both sides have since denied repeatedly that Washington has used, or is using, Pakistani bases to launch drones. Pakistan has also demanded that the US cease drone attacks on its tribal area, which have increased over the last year, allegedly killing several ?high-value? targets as well as many civilians.

Yeah, real frustrating.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Like comments like these help at all! :roll:
We've made our intentions very clear against any US invasion.

No one is talking about an invasion.

They are stating that if Pakistan will not clean house, the US may do it regardless of Pakistan's desires.

Within the ISI, the two faces have been exposed. Will the your government continue to support the Taliban/AQ or erradicate them?

Both options are presently being done.

Nothing has been exposed. It's your media that has been brainwashing you.


LOL. Your own media tried to hide the fact that we have US forces ON beloved patriot SOIL.

Who do you think maintains/guards/pilots at the Predator base that we have there?


What a sad country...

 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Like comments like these help at all! :roll:
We've made our intentions very clear against any US invasion.

No one is talking about an invasion.

They are stating that if Pakistan will not clean house, the US may do it regardless of Pakistan's desires.

Within the ISI, the two faces have been exposed. Will the your government continue to support the Taliban/AQ or erradicate them?

Both options are presently being done.

Nothing has been exposed. It's your media that has been brainwashing you.

Our media has been trying to brainwash to the tune of "WAR BAD... PEACE GOOD."
US Media will NEVER push pro-war until we are attacked.
[edit: Let's change that a bit. Our Media doesn't push pro-war unless we are attacked, or it deals with the attackers. While the media will thoroughly enjoy pushing out news regarding al Qaeda, support for them, setbacks for them, etc... they still try and push their anti-war agenda.]

If Pakistan is going to continue to harbor al Qaeda and Taliban cells, then fuck them. They are no good, and are making new threats against the US, and are a constant threat to the progress in the region. If your own country isn't going to do something about it, then NATO forces should have the damn right to come in and clean house.

Hell, Pakistan has signed what is essentially a cease-fire agreement, of sorts, with one of the most wanted al Qaeda-in-Pakistan leaders.

And don't worry. Petraeus is something of a genius. If he anytime soon completely shifts all focus to Afghanistan, we'll make much needed progress there. His planning completely turned around the lack of progress in Iraq.

So who has killed more people. The taliban or Americans? Peace? My ass!!
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: OCguy
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Like comments like these help at all! :roll:
We've made our intentions very clear against any US invasion.

No one is talking about an invasion.

They are stating that if Pakistan will not clean house, the US may do it regardless of Pakistan's desires.

Within the ISI, the two faces have been exposed. Will the your government continue to support the Taliban/AQ or erradicate them?

Both options are presently being done.

Nothing has been exposed. It's your media that has been brainwashing you.


LOL. Your own media tried to hide the fact that we have US forces ON beloved patriot SOIL.

Who do you think maintains/guards/pilots at the Predator base that we have there?


What a sad country...

Where did I say my media was God?

 

artikk

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2004
4,172
1
71
Originally posted by: Skoorb
US Media will NEVER push pro-war until we are attacked.
It did in the runup to Iraq, imo.

Well we were attacked, just by a completely different enemy, the tension had to relieved on some country right :). The sad thing is most countries attack when they're attacked and not before, though.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,277
0
0
Originally posted by: Sawyer
...
Obama has announced that he's sending 21,000 more troops to Afghanistan and is requesting $1.5 billion a year for the next five years in aid for Pakistan -- he is also planning to call for $2.8 billion just for Pakistan's military.
...
Obama is sooo misguided. He should be reserving this money for bonuses for executives of failed financial companies.

On the other hand, even though seven years late, it might be smart to go after the real source of global terrorism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.