Could this incident cause a serious riff between Pakistan and NATO?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.guardian.c...-pakistan-kills-eight

At the moment NATO are being blamed, but could it have been the USA who are responsible, and if so why do you think they carried out this killing of dozens of Pakistani troops?

[emmie]

AH, then don't do it, i have seen far worse spelling mistakes on here, and you all know what he meant. Teasing is one thing on AB, but downright rudeness, and yes i have been on the end of that for some reason, isn't right.

[ichkeria]

"Gung-ho cowboys, they don't consider deaths of foreigners to particularly important in the great scheme. "

Sadly, there's a lot of truth in that.

Now, big guitar solo ...
Oh damn, sorry!!

[keyplus90]

Reasons could be many. For years Pakistani people have believed that all of the terrorist acts within Pakistan were backed financially by CIA. Pakistan govt never accepted (or admitted) this. Even drone attacks have been carried from a air base within Pakistan and the corrupts rulers have always denied until few new reporters showed clips.

Main reason is that Pakistan army has cleared almost all of their side of the areas. For years NATO and USA had blamed Pakistan for not doing enough to stop people entering Afghanistan which Pakistan army always denied and claimed that they had done whatever possible due to difficult terrain. And they said that why can’t NATO and USA stop these people on Afghan side if they don’t trust Pakistani army?

Now towards your question. Now willingly or unwillingly Pakistan govt did accept that terrorism was coming into Pakistan from Afghanistan. Reason was increasing hate in Pakistan and reservations from army about CIA operations within Pakistan. Now Pakistan army are doing their best to stop people coming into Pakistan from Afghanistan and of course USA do not want that as it is halting their efforts and the main reason why they went to Afghanistan. And that is destabilising Pakistan.

On small note, Pakistani army personnel’s are being killed by the people who are supposed to be allies and with the ammunition going through Pakistan. Anyway, last reports are that Pakistan has decided to stop logistic deliveries to NATO. Let’s see how long that lasts as president Zardari can’t risk his bank balances in Swiss banks.

[Gromit]

There was already a rift. Pakistan were not overjoyed about their souvreign territory being violated in the Bin Laden assasination. And this is not the first time Pakistani military and police have been the victims of friendly fire.

This was clearly a mistake. UK personnel have also been killed by US bungling, but our alliance has survived because the bigger picture is that everyone wants al qaeda/Taliban defeated.

[jno]

I seem to recall in the first Iraq war, more British soldiers were killed by Americans than by Iraqis. Obviously the Americans do not set out to kill people with friendly fire, but they can be a bit careless.

As Gromit says, Pakistan already has rifts with pretty well everybody. They are never reliable allies (though they may be the best we can get north of India) and the government does not control the whole country.

[rojash]

"AOG that statement is not silly, it sums up the John Wayne mentality within the US"

Ah, but apparently, when AOG says "serious answers" he means "answers that agree with mine"

[andy-hughes]

em10 - my teasing was nothing to do with AOG's typing errors - I let everyone's typos go without comment, hoping they will do the same with mine.

I tried a little joking with AOG once, he didn't like it, I haven't done it since - I am not in the business of deliberately upsetting anyone.