« | »

Obama Considering Strikes In Pakistan

From a strangely unfazed New York Times:

U.S. Weighs Taliban Strike Into Pakistan

March 18, 2009

WASHINGTON — President Obama and his national security advisers are considering expanding the American covert war in Pakistan far beyond the unruly tribal areas to strike at a different center of Taliban power in Baluchistan, where top Taliban leaders are orchestrating attacks into southern Afghanistan.

According to senior administration officials, two of the high-level reports on Pakistan and Afghanistan that have been forwarded to the White House in recent weeks have called for broadening the target area to include a major insurgent sanctuary in and around the city of Quetta.

Mullah Muhammad Omar, who led the Taliban government that was ousted in the American-led invasion in 2001, has operated with near impunity out of the region for years, along with many of his deputies.

The extensive missile strikes being carried out by Central Intelligence Agency-operated drones have until now been limited to the tribal areas, and have never been extended into Baluchistan, a sprawling province that is under the authority of the central government, and which abuts the parts of southern Afghanistan where recent fighting has been the fiercest. Fear remains within the American government that extending the raids would worsen tensions. Pakistan complains that the strikes violate its sovereignty.

But some American officials say the missile strikes in the tribal areas have forced some leaders of the Taliban and Al Qaeda to flee south toward Quetta, making them more vulnerable. In separate reports, groups led by both Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of American forces in the region, and Lt. Gen. Douglas E. Lute, a top White House official on Afghanistan, have recommended expanding American operations outside the tribal areas if Pakistan cannot root out the strengthening insurgency.

Many of Mr. Obama’s advisers are also urging him to sustain orders issued last summer by President George W. Bush to continue Predator drone attacks against a wider range of targets in the tribal areas. They also are recommending preserving the option to conduct cross-border ground actions, using C.I.A. and Special Operations commandos, as was done in September. Mr. Bush’s orders also named as targets a wide variety of insurgents seeking to topple Pakistan’s government. Mr. Obama has said little in public about how broadly he wants to pursue those groups…

As for American strikes on militant havens inside Pakistan, administration officials say the Predator and Reaper attacks in the tribal areas have been effective at killing 9 of Al Qaeda’s top 20 leaders, and the aerial campaign was recently expanded to focus on the Pakistani Taliban leader, Baitullah Mehsud, as well as his fighters and training camps. American intelligence officials say that many top Taliban commanders remain in hiding in and around Quetta, but some Afghan officials say that other senior Taliban leaders have fled to the Pakistani port city of Karachi.

Missile strikes or American commando raids in the city of Quetta or the teeming Afghan settlements and refugee camps around the city and near the Afghan border would carry high risks of civilian casualties, American officials acknowledge.

Isn’t it conspicuous how little attention this, and indeed all of the war related news, is getting from the press?

It’s almost as if our media watchdogs want the Democrat base to forget that we are still in the middle of a war.

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, March 18th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

6 Responses to “Obama Considering Strikes In Pakistan”

  1. proreason says:

    The Moron hasn’t completely destabalized Pakistan yet?

    Well, it’s only day 58…..give him time.

  2. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    If the administration goes ahead with strike, it would be the first thing he got right. Of course he’ll probably pull back once there are protests. He wouldn’t want the shine to come off the apple.

    Support for the effort in Afghanistan is at its lowest point, and the media has shifted its assault on Iraq to the Afghani front. For the last two years they have been reporting that the Taliban are at the gates of Kabul. Let’s face it, the resolve of our enemies is so much greater than ours (America as a whole, not those who post here, we all know what needs to be done), it is beginning to trump our military superiority.

  3. Odie44 says:

    The current wars are for posturing purposes only.
    What to actually do is another thing.
    This goes for Bambi, Dems and the MSM.

  4. artboyusa says:

    Good thing we’ve kept the element of surprise, huh? Banned’s right; they know they can’t outfight us but they can sure outlast us…

  5. Right of the People says:

    Missile strikes? I guess there goes another aspirin factory.

    Not to be a stick in the mud, but has anybody consulted with the Paki government about this? After all, this qualifies a invading a sovereign country, even a piss-poor one like Pakistan. If they give their OK then fine but we don’t need more crap from the left in third world countries like France and the Cuba about us being “imperialists”.

    I don’t like this “limited” war crap. It got a lot of friends killed in Vietnam, and it is getting a lot of our brave men and women killed and maimed in here and Iraq.


  6. Rusty Shackleford says:

    Wow, one of Oblabby’s wee little testicles got an itch. You go git ’em, Barry. You show ’em who’s boss ’round here. But not too much…you might horrify Hillary and Pelosi and cause permanent damage to their eternal good looks. Or, you might cause Barney to acquire a speech impediment.

    So be careful. And shhhhhhhh don’t let ’em know you’re coming.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »