Roflstan and US Exchange fire

[Shaehl]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/09/25/pakistan.helicopters/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

In other news, Pakistan has WMDs?

[Tdog]

Pakistan would not like the outcome of a war with the US.

(As long as Bush is not in charge and they can use the troops and equipment from Iraq)

[Carl Ragadamn]

In other news, Pakistan has WMDs?

Um they have nukes. I say we take away their nukes, and leave the scraps for India.

[Someone]

Yes Pakistan has WMDs. They probably have around 50 nukes and capacity to launch all of them. The technology that Pakistan used to get nukes is the same that Iran wants to use and that North Korea has used, the plans were apparently stolen by the man who worked it out and then sold to the North Koreans and the Iranians. Pakistan also has the capacity to launch their nukes on short to medium distances, the reasons for the nukes is so that they won't get drowned underneath a Indian zerg and make sure that the Indians don't use their own nukes. Pakistan also has close military ties to the Chinese and they have several defensive pacts.

While Pakistan wouldn't like a war against the USA I'm pretty sure that USA wouldn't be happy about it either. Forcefully going into another nations borders to attack their citizens when said nation has not given their approval is a violation of sovreignty. That's a very clear violation against UN international law, the fact that USA is doing this agains one of their closest allies in the region isn't exactly helpful for future relations.

[Carl Ragadamn]

Yes Pakistan has WMDs. They probably have around 50 nukes and capacity to launch all of them. The technology that Pakistan used to get nukes is the same that Iran wants to use and that North Korea has used, the plans were apparently stolen by the man who worked it out and then sold to the North Koreans and the Iranians. Pakistan also has the capacity to launch their nukes on short to medium distances, the reasons for the nukes is so that they won't get drowned underneath a Indian zerg and make sure that the Indians don't use their own nukes. Pakistan also has close military ties to the Chinese and they have several defensive pacts.

While Pakistan wouldn't like a war against the USA I'm pretty sure that USA wouldn't be happy about it either. Forcefully going into another nations borders to attack their citizens when said nation has not given their approval is a violation of sovreignty. That's a very clear violation against UN international law, the fact that USA is doing this agains one of their closest allies in the region isn't exactly helpful for future relations.
But Obama and McCain both promised to "get Bin Laden".

[Justinian]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/09/25/pakistan.helicopters/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

In other news, Pakistan has WMDs?

has had them for a while. why do you think they were so cushy with the USA?

p.s. roflcopterz on the roflstan

[Jangang]

Screw Pakistan, if they could, or would take care of the tribal regions, and more to the point the Al'Queda, and Taliban hiding in said regions we wouldn't need to do anything to begin with.

They chose not to, so we'll do it for them.

[Carl Ragadamn]

They chose not to, so we'll do it for them.

And by we, you mean NATO.

[Someone]

But Obama and McCain both promised to "get Bin Laden".

Yes and nothing bad ever happened by disregarding sovreignty and simply sending in the troops to get what you want. Oh no wait, that's how the first world war started, gee I wonder if that means it could be a bad idea.

Pakistan is currently conducting a large offensive against the Tribal areas that Bin Laden is supposedly hiding in. These are also the areas in which the ones responsible for killing Bensasir Bhutto is probably hiding, the woman who was up until the moment when she was quite brutally murdered, the current Presidents wife. I think he has some quite good reasons to want to see those people brought in put through a trial and then hanged. The best way to get things done here would not be to act alone, it would be to offer assistance to the pakistani armed forces currently advancing against the tribals and cooperate with them, not fighting against them.

[Carl Ragadamn]

Yes and nothing bad ever happened by disregarding sovreignty and simply sending in the troops to get what you want. Oh no wait, that's how the first world war started, gee I wonder if that means it could be a bad idea.

Pakistan is currently conducting a large offensive against the Tribal areas that Bin Laden is supposedly hiding in. These are also the areas in which the ones responsible for killing Bensasir Bhutto is probably hiding, the woman who was up until the moment when she was quite brutally murdered, the current Presidents wife. I think he has some quite good reasons to want to see those people brought in put through a trial and then hanged. The best way to get things done here would not be to act alone, it would be to offer assistance to the pakistani armed forces currently advancing against the tribals and cooperate with them, not fighting against them.

We have to elect mccain because palin could get the president of pakistan to do what ever she wants.

[Someone]

We have to elect mccain because palin could get the president of pakistan to do what ever she wants.

Well the VPILF could probably get somewhere on that front, but she's a deeply religious woman and the president of pakistan is a godless heathan. I think it could be hard to convince her to do the proper convincing of him.

[Jangang]

And by we, you mean NATO.

I don't know if NATO is involved or not. By we I mean The United States. (I didn't click the link.)

[Carl Ragadamn]

Well the VPILF could probably get somewhere on that front, but she's a deeply religious woman and the president of pakistan is a godless heathan. I think it could be hard to convince her to do the proper convincing of him.
He was quite enamored with her, she wouldnt have to do more than ask and bat her eyes. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/24/palin.pakistan/
I don't know if NATO is involved or not. By we I mean The United States. (I didn't click the link.)

Well of course it would be our troops, but the Afghan region is a Nato deal now.

[Apex Vertigo]

They better be careful or they might get a quick dose of Liberation in their ass.

[Wickfield]

has had them for a while. why do you think they were so cushy with the USA?

p.s. roflcopterz on the roflstan

I didn't think it was funny, I thought it was confusing. After all, he could have meant: Pakistan, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, or Kyrgyzstan.

(I spelled the first four right, and spell check got the other three)

But yes, very confusing.

[Thrill_KIll]

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (CNN) -- U.S. and Pakistani troops exchanged fire Thursday along the Pakistani-Afghan border minutes after the Pakistani military fired shots at two American helicopters that were providing cover for the troops, a U.S. military spokesman said.


Pakistan says it shot at two U.S. OH-58D helicopters like this one pictured in a U.S. Army photo.
The U.S. Army OH-58D Kiowas, part of NATO's International Security Assistance Force mission in Afghanistan, were patrolling the Pakistani-Afghan border when the Pakistani military fired on them, NATO and U.S. officials said.

The Pakistani military said the fire was warning shots, and President Asif Ali Zardari said it was flares. Both Zardari and the Pakistani military said the helicopters had crossed into Pakistani territory -- a charge U.S. officials denied.

So, Pakistan admitted to firing at NATO helicopters, later changing that to "warning shots", which was later revised again by their President to read "it was flares".

NATO officials and the US both say these choppers were not in Pakistan airspace. However, the people who shot at them are saying they did, and they were justified to shoot at them...I mean fire warning shots at them...I mean shoot some flares at them.

Yea...the big bad USA is just trying to start more war with someone.

[Carl Ragadamn]

So, Pakistan admitted to firing at NATO helicopters, later changing that to "warning shots", which was later revised again by their President to read "it was flares".

NATO officials and the US both say these choppers were not in Pakistan airspace. However, the people who shot at them are saying they did, and they were justified to shoot at them...I mean fire warning shots at them...I mean shoot some flares at them.

Yea...the big bad USA is just trying to start more war with someone.

Until the Pakistan Military has GPS locators and not sticks with string for coordinate tracking, I will bet we were just inside Afghanistan.

[Beorg]

Just Americans that can't admit that they literally crossed the line. I hope the U.S. doesn't go to war with Pakistan, though, or Babu Bhat will never come back to the U.S.

[Carl Ragadamn]

Just Americans that can't admit that they literally crossed the line. I hope the U.S. doesn't go to war with Pakistan, though, or Babu Bhat will never come back to the U.S.

we would never cross the line with troops. (thats what unmanned drones are for)

[Thrill_KIll]

Just Americans that can't admit that they literally crossed the line. I hope the U.S. doesn't go to war with Pakistan, though, or Babu Bhat will never come back to the U.S.


I know, and all those other NATO heads saying the same thing are in on our conspiracy to cross borders of a country we want diplomatic relations with, so their soldiers can fire "flares" at us.