Another OBL thread! Re: Pakistan's role

[John_Mace]

@ak84

1. now i do not doubt the us seals could have gotten through, but there would always be a risk of detection. And if detected, there are pre existing procedures that would take place, i can assure you that no one would think “seals to kill bin laden”, the first thought would be, “my god, indians are going to attack islamabad”…

Geronimo!

[Damfino]

@Gray_Ghost

So the nastiness around the Siachen Glacier has finally come to an end? Good to hear. And was it ever determined who was behind the Mumbai attacks? Was it AQ, trying to blame it on elements of the ISI? I had thought part of the ISI was at least implicated in training/support of the suicide attackers. In any event, I am impressed with India’s forbearance and restraint. Thinking if the equivalent act were to occur in the United States, I’m sure the U.S. would have invaded whichever country we deemed responsible. See, e.g. efforts to capture Pancho Villa.

If indeed India and Pakistan have proceeded through detente to cordiality, I’d be delighted. Nuclear armed states shouldn’t get mad at each other.

For the Kashmir border, I see on Google Earth a line 15 miles from Abbottabad, presumably denoting the beginning of the region. I then see another line, roughly 18-20 miles beyond that, denoting the Indian border. In any event, whether Abbottabad is 15 miles or 35 miles from Indian territory, I don’t believe it disproves my point that it’s sufficiently close to India to give local military commanders cause to have watchful troops stationed in the area. Of course, with an absence of hostilities, those troops won’t be as paranoid as those say, on the Korean DMZ. Still, they’ll have access to SAMs and AAA and probably would be alarmed by v. low flying helicopters through their areas of responsibility.

Once the raid is over, the helicopters still have to fly out of the country. Which is going to mean a minimum of 115 miles of flying—assuming they didn’t exfiltrate via the Indian border, and about 40 minutes of flight time. Most countries take a dim view of other countries invading their airspace at night with helicopters filled with armed men. I would think that 40 minutes of flight through a now hostile environment would be a worse alternative than alerting part of the Pakistani military to the raid ahead of time, so that the airspace won’t be as hostile. It’s not impossible to do it all covert, of course, and the 160th SOAR employ just the fliers and equipment to do it, but why add risk by doing it w/o permission if you don’t have to?

I think I acknowledged that a proxy war exists between the two countries. India does blame the ISI for being behind the Mumbai attacks and has in fact asked Pakistan for extradition of certain suspects. However the two countries are not at war. Your comment about distance from the borders is correct. A few miles here and there should make no difference to air defence, but may affect ground intelligence.
Yes, India is acting with restraint. No one wants a nuclear war.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Damfino

Yes, India is acting with restraint. No one wants a nuclear war.

I’d kinda like to see one between India and Pakistan, just out of curiosity…

[John_Mace]

Well, we sure are bitch slapping Pakistan, what with 2 (count 'em, 2) drone strikes since the ObL raid.

[Try2B_Comprehensive]

I honestly believe the helicopter could have crashed or clipped a wall or wire during the raid. I also suspect temperatures are easily raised by flying lead. I get it that they’re tricked-out military helicopters, but in a backyard they must make an obvious target and a guy with a handgun or rifle might get lucky?

And, is it possible the US notified Pakistan of the raid in-progress?

[TriPolar]

There are a lot of reasons why the helicopter could have had a problem. Since it’s been ‘stealthified’ whatever the actual reason is won’t be released, and intententionally obfuscated with false stories.

Neither Pakistan or the US wants to reveal the level of trust and/or duplicity on either side (unless we just get fed up with them). So we may never get the real story there either.

Now, reports of Pakistani grumbling about raids on their nukes are starting to appear. Pakistan may decide that we can’t be trusted and try to set up a situation where we can’t monitor their nuclear weapons and prepare to take them out. I have heard anything in particular, but India must be on edge now, worried about a fracture in the relationship between the US and Pakistan. Without US funding, Pakistan can become very unstable, and war with India erupt.

So I hope the Pakistani government is staying up nights trying to figure out how to get past this and keep the money flowing. I think they will have to roll some heads, or deliver some actionable intelligence, or drop some nukes to restore the sense of a mutually beneficial relationship with the US.

[Damfino]

@Bryan_Ekers

I’d kinda like to see one between India and Pakistan, just out of curiosity…

No thanks, I live here!

You could ask Frederick Forsyth to revive his manuscript for an Indo-Pak war which I believe he was writing around 2000. In co-operation with an Indian general.

[AK84]

@TriPolar

So I hope the Pakistani government is staying up nights trying to figure out how to get past this and keep the money flowing. I think they will have to roll some heads, or deliver some actionable intelligence, or drop some nukes to restore the sense of a mutually beneficial relationship with the US.

As pointed out by a former Pakistani Finance Minister and former World Bank Vice President even if all US aid to Pakistan was shut off the effect would be only 0.14% of the GDP.
Aid is politically important not economically.

[mlees]

@AK84

As pointed out by a former Pakistani Finance Minister and former World Bank Vice President even if all US aid to Pakistan was shut off the effect would be only 0.14% of the GDP.
Aid is politically important not economically.

Is wiki wrong?

Foreign aid to Pakistan | Military and economic aid

(Total aid from US to Pakistan = roughly 18 billion dollars from 2002 to 2011. 2010 numbers was 1.6 billion.)

GDP of Pakistan = 162 billion. Pakistan | Data

[AK84]

Look up the sources again from the wikipedia article. l http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/Final_DP_2009_06_08092009.pdf

That article counts 5 sources of transfers to Pakistan

1. CSF (Coalition support fund)—Covering the extra cost to Pakistan’s military of fighting terrorism
2. Security Assistance—Military equipment to fight terrorism
3. Cash Transfers to the Pakistani government
4. Development and Humanitarian Assistance
5. Covert Funds

1 and 2 are (till FY 08-09) 90% of the funds transferred. CSF is reimbursement for using Pakistani facilities to support the NATO operations in Afghanistan, such as ports, roads, railways and the cost of providing personnel and secuirty. As it is something like 75% of the costs have been borne by the Pakistan and the Frontier Governments.

The second is FMS=Foreign Military Sales; weapons purchased by Pakistan from the United States; till FY2007 something like 10 billion worth of weapons were purchased from from the US. Again not aid.

3,4,5 can probably be called aid, but these are a tiny fraction of the whole.

Of course this does not take into account the cost to Pakistan of the whole war, the Government’s own estimates are a loss of economic productivity of US$ 45 Billion , while other are much higher, I have read one which is closer to US$ 100 billion, though that might be pushing it. To say nothing of the costs of keeping the brand new security apparatus that has had to be built and housing feeding and rehabilitating millions of displaced persons, never mind the Afghans.

If US aid was really as significant as it is made out to be (on an economic not political scale) then the US would have much greater clout, it has very little these days.

Re Osama, it is an embarrassment but the fallout from that even in a worst case scenario for Pakistan is manageable. Continued military operations and unstability on the western border, not so much.

[mlees]

@AK84

Look up the sources again from the wikipedia article. l http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/Final_DP_2009_06_08092009.pdf

That article counts 5 sources of transfers to Pakistan

1. CSF (Coalition support fund)—Covering the extra cost to Pakistan’s military of fighting terrorism
2. Security Assistance—Military equipment to fight terrorism
3. Cash Transfers to the Pakistani government
4. Development and Humanitarian Assistance
5. Covert Funds

1 and 2 are (till FY 08-09) 90% of the funds transferred. CSF is reimbursement for using Pakistani facilities to support the NATO operations in Afghanistan, such as ports, roads, railways and the cost of providing personnel and secuirty. As it is something like 75% of the costs have been borne by the Pakistan and the Frontier Governments.

The second is FMS=Foreign Military Sales; weapons purchased by Pakistan from the United States; till FY2007 something like 10 billion worth of weapons were purchased from from the US. Again not aid.

3,4,5 can probably be called aid, but these are a tiny fraction of the whole.

Of course this does not take into account the cost to Pakistan of the whole war, the Government’s own estimates are a loss of economic productivity of US$ 45 Billion , while other are much higher, I have read one which is closer to US$ 100 billion, though that might be pushing it. To say nothing of the costs of keeping the brand new security apparatus that has had to be built and housing feeding and rehabilitating millions of displaced persons, never mind the Afghans.

If US aid was really as significant as it is made out to be (on an economic not political scale) then the US would have much greater clout, it has very little these days.

Re Osama, it is an embarrassment but the fallout from that even in a worst case scenario for Pakistan is manageable. Continued military operations and unstability on the western border, not so much.

I’m not sure why you’re analysing the funds that way.

Are you disputing that the U.S. gave Pakistan 1.6 billion in 2010?

Are you disputing that Pakistan’s GDP = 162 billion?

All I am saying is that 1.6 billion is 1% of 162 billion, not .14%.

Either way, I would agree that the U.S. influence on Pakistan has been somewhat spotty, and reasonable people can debate the merits of the efforts of the various foreign aid.

[AK84]

The 1.6 bn includes reimbursements for costs incurred by NATO forces using Pakistani facilities. The vast majority of said “aid”.

[AK84]

As it is, something like 3.5 Billion dollarsin reimbursements are are still outstanding; from last year.

[mlees]

@AK84

The 1.6 bn includes reimbursements for costs incurred by NATO forces using Pakistani facilities. The vast majority of said “aid”.

So?

[mlees]

@AK84

As it is, something like 3.5 Billion dollarsin reimbursements are are still outstanding; from last year.

Right. Several links above mention that monies are tied up in overhead and beuracracy. So… it shouldn’t be counted?

Since my original comment was a math nitpick anyway, I won’t bug y’all about it any more.

[gonzomax]

Michael Meacher: The Pakistan connection

Pakistan has been implicated in 911. This story from England where it is discussed, mentions the ISI cabling 100 K to Atta before the attacks. Pakistan is not our friend. They are pretending they are chasing Al Qeada to get our tax money. We love the illusion and Americans will buy it.