Possible Invasion of Pakistan aborted in 2005

[The Green Bean]

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- A secret 2005 mission to capture senior al Qaeda members in Pakistan's tribal areas was aborted at the last moment when Bush administration officials decided it was too risky and could jeopardize relations with Pakistan, The New York Times reported Saturday.

Citing intelligence and military officials, including a former senior intelligence official involved in the planning, the Times said in a story posted on its Web site that the target was a meeting of al Qaeda leaders. That conference was thought by intelligence officials to have included Ayman al-Zawahri, Osama bin Laden's top deputy, who was believed to run the group's operations, it said.

The classified mission was scotched even as Navy SEALs in parachute gear had boarded C-130 cargo planes in Afghanistan after then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld rejected a last-minute appeal by then-CIA director Porter Goss, the Times said, citing the officials and the former intelligence official, all of whom requested anonymity.

Rumsfeld felt the mission, which grew from a small number of personnel to several hundred, would risk too many U.S. lives, and he was also concerned about possible repercussions on U.S.-Pakistan relations, the Times said.

But that decision also frustrated some top intelligence officials and members of the military's secret special operations units. Some said the United States missed a significant opportunity to possibly nab senior al Qaeda members, the newspaper reported.

Another concern was his determination that the United States could not carry out the mission without Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's permission, which was unlikely given its size and scope, the officials said.

The former intelligence official involved in the mission's planning said it grew to the point where "the whole thing turned into the invasion of Pakistan," which he nonetheless felt was still worth the risk.

"We wanted to take a shot," the official added. Several former officials said it was not the only time since the September 11, 2001 attacks that plans were developed for a large U.S. military force in Pakistan, the Times said.

Spokesmen for the Pentagon, CIA and the White House declined to comment, the Times said.

"We're not going to speculate about contingency planning -- past or present," Maj. Patrick Ryder, a Pentagon spokesman, told Reuters on Saturday.

The newspaper said it was not clear whether President Bush was informed about the planned operation. E-mail to a friend

One should learn to betray a friend from the United States. I would never trust America to keep it's word. In fact, I believed with friends like these, Mushrraf was correct in making peace in Waziristan. They may have a common enemy - The USA. I don't think anything is more important to Musharraf than the sovereignty of his country. With his "friends" planning to be prepared to invade and possibly overthrow his government, he needs to take a harder line, perhaps stop all support of the war on terror, a war where Pakistan is fighting herself.

 

[ElFenix]

repost

search works now

 

[ProfJohn]

It wasn't an 'invasion'
What's with the outlandish thread titles? Can't get any attention otherwise?

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It wasn't an 'invasion'
What's with the outlandish thread titles? Can't get any attention otherwise?

They would've been prepared to take it as far as a full-fledged war had it come to that.

 

[StageLeft]

I bet it would have worked, they should have done it!!

 

[K1052]

Sounds like Rumsfeld actually made a sound decision in killing the mission when the apparent risks outweighed the possible gains.

Musharraf is almost just as big an enemy to radical Muslims in that part of the world as the West is. They have made repeated tries to assassinate him and are still trying.

If he radicalizes or gets killed and the radical forces gain sway India is not just going to sit their twiddling their thumbs while they get their hands on Pakistan's nukes.

 

[imported_Lothar]

I agree with Rumsfeld's decision.

 

[CanOWorms]

Don't be silly. Pakistan is not a friend of the USA. It's more like an acquaintance.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Blah blah blah neocon blah blah brainfart blah neocon neocon brainfart. Blah Blah GWB &Co. neocon brainfart blah blah. Neocon neocon.... GWB & Co. blah blah. Brainfart neocon neocon.

I swear... if I started selling keyboards with "Neocon", "GWB & Co", and "brainfart", I could retire.

PS... the "neocons" are the ones who pulled the plug on this operation, because it was too risky... I don't see what you are whining about.

I am whining about all the other operations where the plug wasn't pulled--can you spell Iraq?

And don't be too sure it was a neocon who pulled the plug on this one. You are posted way past the available evidence.

 

[Craig234]

Good reporting by the NY Times to tell the story.

 

[Idontcare]

the mission's planning said it grew to the point where "the whole thing turned into the invasion of Pakistan,"

Thank god somebody had the balls to stop this thing. Just what we could have done without - more data to support extremists claims that the US does what it wants, where it wants, when it wants.

 

[alien42]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

the mission's planning said it grew to the point where "the whole thing turned into the invasion of Pakistan,"

Thank god somebody had the balls to stop this thing. Just what we could have done without - more data to support extremists claims that the US does what it wants, where it wants, when it wants.

if this would have successfully gone down there would have been no 9/11 nor the current situation in iraq. (its pure speculation what would have happened otherwise)

without 9/11 there would have been no 'war on terror'. good ol fashioned random terrorism would have occured just as it had the past 30 years.

 

[Lemon law]

Thats exactly why neo-cons are so dangerous---such an operation could well have caused Musharaf to get deposed and replaced by someone who might turn some of Pakistan's nukes over to Al-Quida.

But far too many of these neocons are over eager to sign up for any brainfart and they are too mentally lazy to ever worry about what happens if things backfire. Which their brainfarts inevitably do--because they are also unable to plan their way out of a paper bag. And always fail in the implementation which they leave to other incompetents. Steven Hadley springs to mind first as the big idea man.

Thank God someone had the brains to pull the plug on that one brainfart.

We have enough trouble already with the brainfarts GWB&co's set of neocons managed to bungle past step one because no one had the brains to pull the plug.

 

[jrenz]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Blah blah blah neocon blah blah brainfart blah neocon neocon brainfart. Blah Blah GWB &Co. neocon brainfart blah blah. Neocon neocon.... GWB & Co. blah blah. Brainfart neocon neocon.

I swear... if I started selling keyboards with "Neocon", "GWB & Co", and "brainfart", I could retire.

PS... the "neocons" are the ones who pulled the plug on this operation, because it was too risky... I don't see what you are whining about.

 

[alien42]

link

this is huge.

"The classified mission was scotched even as Navy SEALs in parachute gear had boarded C-130 cargo planes in Afghanistan after then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld rejected a last-minute appeal by then-CIA director Porter Goss"

hopefully we will have some documentation regarding this show up in the near future.

 

[The Green Bean]

Before Pakistan went down, it would've made sure that most Israeli cities were nuked. The rest of the nukes would have been given away to Iran. Nuclear secrets would've leaked to groups around the world. Thousands of American soldiers would've been killed and I would've had a 1/100 chance of being one of America's innocent victims.

On the other hand, Pakistan might've just won with the help of China (considering how America has fared in recent wars) losing credibility and it's status as superpower.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Before Pakistan went down, it would've made sure that most Israeli cities were nuked. The rest of the nukes would have been given away to Iran. Nuclear secrets would've leaked to groups around the world. Thousands of American soldiers would've been killed and I would've had a 1/100 chance of being one of America's innocent victims.

On the other hand, Pakistan might've just won with the help of China (considering how America has fared in recent wars) losing credibility and it's status as superpower.

Yet even though Israel had no play with this at all, you state the Pakistan would have attempted to nuke Israel.

That is the mind set that creates concern about the Muslims. And you do not even come across as a radical Muslim - yet you are willing to nuke a country that has no beef with yours.

This is the same attitude that Saddam had in Gulf War I. Launch missles at Israel just because, even if Israel was staying out of the conflict. And then you wonder why Israel does not trust the Arab/Muslim countries.

Also realize that even though Pakistan may be nuclear, the ability to launch a missle with a nuke warhead is a different story. Even a couintry that is famous for launching missles can not get a long range missle up in the air.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Before Pakistan went down, it would've made sure that most Israeli cities were nuked. The rest of the nukes would have been given away to Iran. Nuclear secrets would've leaked to groups around the world. Thousands of American soldiers would've been killed and I would've had a 1/100 chance of being one of America's innocent victims.

On the other hand, Pakistan might've just won with the help of China (considering how America has fared in recent wars) losing credibility and it's status as superpower.

It sounds almost as if you wish for such a thing to take place, which is odd. The plan was prudently canceled.

I can pretty much guarantee you that any scenario that includes Pakistan using nuclear weapons against US forces spells the end for Pakistan as a nation (or inhabitable area for that matter). There is no way in hell China would stick its neck out for Pakistan against the US, they are only concerned with themselves.

 

[Fern]

Misleading thread title FTL

And "Big Whoop" for another secret mission that never happend.

Fern

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: Idontcare

the mission's planning said it grew to the point where "the whole thing turned into the invasion of Pakistan,"

Thank god somebody had the balls to stop this thing. Just what we could have done without - more data to support extremists claims that the US does what it wants, where it wants, when it wants.

if this would have successfully gone down there would have been no 9/11 nor the current situation in iraq. (its pure speculation what would have happened otherwise)

without 9/11 there would have been no 'war on terror'. good ol fashioned random terrorism would have occured just as it had the past 30 years.

Check your calendar

9/11 happened in 2001
Iraq went into play in 2003
These events are talked about in 2005

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Before Pakistan went down, it would've made sure that most Israeli cities were nuked. The rest of the nukes would have been given away to Iran. Nuclear secrets would've leaked to groups around the world. Thousands of American soldiers would've been killed and I would've had a 1/100 chance of being one of America's innocent victims.

On the other hand, Pakistan might've just won with the help of China (considering how America has fared in recent wars) losing credibility and it's status as superpower.

Yet even though Israel had no play with this at all, you state the Pakistan would have attempted to nuke Israel.

That is the mind set that creates concern about the Muslims. And you do not even come across as a radical Muslim - yet you are willing to nuke a country that has no beef with yours.

This is the same attitude that Saddam had in Gulf War I. Launch missles at Israel just because, even if Israel was staying out of the conflict. And then you wonder why Israel does not trust the Arab/Muslim countries.

Also realize that even though Pakistan may be nuclear, the ability to launch a missle with a nuke warhead is a different story. Even a couintry that is famous for launching missles can not get a long range missle up in the air.

You must realize that once an American invasion would be launched it would not take much time for the masses to realize that this is an all out war against Islam itself. And it is no secret that America's blind favoritism towards Israel is interpreted as Israel's role in this war against Islam. Pakistan did send soldiers in the Arab Israeli war. In fact, Israel is the main problem hindering Muslim - American relations.

The Shaheen II missile has a range of 2500KM and ability to carry nuclear warheads. The Tipu Sultan with a range of 4000KM is under development.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Before Pakistan went down, it would've made sure that most Israeli cities were nuked. The rest of the nukes would have been given away to Iran. Nuclear secrets would've leaked to groups around the world. Thousands of American soldiers would've been killed and I would've had a 1/100 chance of being one of America's innocent victims.

On the other hand, Pakistan might've just won with the help of China (considering how America has fared in recent wars) losing credibility and it's status as superpower.

It sounds almost as if you wish for such a thing to take place, which is odd. The plan was prudently canceled.

I can pretty much guarantee you that any scenario that includes Pakistan using nuclear weapons against US forces spells the end for Pakistan as a nation (or inhabitable area for that matter). There is no way in hell China would stick its neck out for Pakistan against the US, they are only concerned with themselves.

Is it not sad when country's wish to blow up each other on the basis of false evidence? I wouldn't trust anything coming from the CIA after their invasion of Iraq based on lies. I'm sure China doesn't want an American occupied country as a neighbor.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Before Pakistan went down, it would've made sure that most Israeli cities were nuked. The rest of the nukes would have been given away to Iran. Nuclear secrets would've leaked to groups around the world. Thousands of American soldiers would've been killed and I would've had a 1/100 chance of being one of America's innocent victims.

On the other hand, Pakistan might've just won with the help of China (considering how America has fared in recent wars) losing credibility and it's status as superpower.

Yet even though Israel had no play with this at all, you state the Pakistan would have attempted to nuke Israel.

That is the mind set that creates concern about the Muslims. And you do not even come across as a radical Muslim - yet you are willing to nuke a country that has no beef with yours.

This is the same attitude that Saddam had in Gulf War I. Launch missles at Israel just because, even if Israel was staying out of the conflict. And then you wonder why Israel does not trust the Arab/Muslim countries.

Also realize that even though Pakistan may be nuclear, the ability to launch a missle with a nuke warhead is a different story. Even a couintry that is famous for launching missles can not get a long range missle up in the air.

You must realize that once an American invasion would be launched it would not take much time for the masses to realize that this is an all out war against Islam itself. And it is no secret that America's blind favoritism towards Israel is interpreted as Israel's role in this war against Islam. Pakistan did send soldiers in the Arab Israeli war. In fact, Israel is the main problem hindering Muslim - American relations.

The Shaheen II missile has a range of 2500KM and ability to carry nuclear warheads. The Tipu Sultan with a range of 4000KM is under development.

As always been stated, the conflict is not against Islam but those that twist Islam to suit thier purpose of forcing Islam upon others.

If those that are Muslims are unable to determine the difference it again demonstrates why there is such a problem between the Mulims and the non-Muslim world.

Israel is an excuse by the Arab world for them to confront their own problems.

Israel is more than 2500Km from Pakistan.
Had there been a conflict, Pakistan wouild not have a chance to develp the Tipu Sultan.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: Fern
Misleading thread title FTL

And "Big Whoop" for another secret mission that never happend.

Fern

Yes, and we as humans should be thankful that sanity prevailed. Another WW could've been easily triggered. I can't believe someone wound not accept the that the combined occupation of Iraq, Iran Afghanistan would not be termed "imperialism" or a "war against Islam"

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: Fern
Misleading thread title FTL

And "Big Whoop" for another secret mission that never happend.

Fern

Yes, and we as humans should be thankful that sanity prevailed. Another WW could've been easily triggered. I can't believe someone wound not accept the that the combined occupation of Iraq, Iran Afghanistan would not be termed "imperialism" or a "war against Islam"

Everything is a war against Islam.