From WAPO.

The paragraph that jumps off the page in the wake of Pakistan’s bombast regarding the “unprovoked” Coalition airstrike is this one:

Both sides said they believed they were attacking insurgents along the border. A senior Pakistani defense official acknowledged that Pakistani troops fired first, sending a flare, followed by mortar and machine-gun fire, toward what he said was “suspicious activity” in the brush-covered area below their high-altitude outpost barely 500 yards from the border.

That the Pakistanis so loudly decried the events, and then very fundamentally change the narrative of events should leave us with little confidence in the assertion that the Pakistanis believed they were firing on “insurgents”. It seems that the Pakistanis did indeed fire first, as was the Afghan and Coalition assertion in the immediate wake of the incident. I believe it highly probable that the Pakistanis, with their track record of support of the Taliban, Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, the Haqqani network, and the Army’s gigantic loss of face with the bin Laden raid, knew very well who their targets were. They were targeting the Coalition efforts along the border, either in support of the insurgents, or on their own. All the “coordination mechanisms” in the world will not stop a deliberate attack.

Pakistan has been caught in a lie. Even if events prove that they indeed misidentified their targets, which strains credibility, the reports of “unprovoked attacks” and “sleeping soldiers” being killed in their beds is a colossal fabrication, and Pakistan knew such was fabrication well before they told those fabrications to the world in order to affix blame. They will cover that fact with loud bluster and threats, flag-burning, and the usual anti-American sentiment. But they have been caught in a gigantic lie, and as the myriad sources of battlefield information are sanitized and released, the world will know it.

Now would be an excellent time for our State Department to say so. Loudly.


Posted by UltimaRatioReg in Air Force, Army, Aviation, Foreign Policy, Hard Power, History, Marine Corps, Navy

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • Byron

    One suspects that the drone video was presented to the Pakistani ambassador with the advice that this footage might well show up at the UN or even the morning news reports.

  • Jay

    Border events never are simple, or clean. I am not surprised how the Paksistanis are reacting, especially given how this turned out for them. I don’t think we gain anything by rubbing their noses in this – it seems they would be embarrassed enough already, and their public statements may be trying to assuage their own public more than anything else.

  • The Usual Suspect

    They just forgot which lie they told first. Calling them an unreliable “ally” would be being more than kind. I predict we will be in a shooting war or police action with Pakistan before all is said and done. Sad thing is that we have armed them with some of the latest and greatest weapons that our own troops do not already possess. They have always been untrustworthy and unreliable – a leopard can’t change its spots and neither can Pakistan.

  • Jay

    Pls educate me on weapons we have given the Pakistanis that our troops don’t have.

  • UltimaRatioReg


    I don’t think we gain anything by letting them perpetrate deliberate falsehoods to influence the rest of the Muslim world. And where have you detected that they are the slightest bit embarrassed?

  • “Now would be an excellent time for our State Department to say so.  Loudly.”

    Yep! But don’t hold your breath.

  • Jay

    I don’t expect them to act embarrassed – the casualties say enough. As difficult as the current government in Pakistan is to deal with right now – we do have some important cooperation. We gain *nothing* by negatively impacting the current level of cooperation we do get…just how important is it to you – how this incident is portrayed?

    I doubt that thise that don’t support or trust us are going to believe our account, no matter the facts. Do you need the Paks to apologize for their folks getting killed? Really?

    Could this incident have been made worse by night conditions? Even if it were some rogue (or heck, even a deliberate intent) action by the Pakistan border troops – given the results – how much time and effort would like us spend demanding a recounting from those who may or may not have had situational awareness (compared to our own)?

    Good statecraft in this instance is to lower the volume on these events, and to work towards preventing a repeat in the future.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    “preventing a repeat in the future”

    Assuming it was not deliberate in the first place. And what is the Pakistani narrative to me? I don’t believe them in most of their statements. But to let them perpetuate the out and out lie in the Muslim world is foolhardy.

    Actions without narration are open to interpretation. You would think we’d have learned that by now.

  • Capt. HW “Woody” Sanford,MC,USNR(ret.)

    What Rules of Engagement, if any, were in place for Coalition Forces at the time of these hostilities? If there were, was anything violated or ignored? Was the weapon response appropriate? What were Coalition casualties? If I were Secretary of State, I would want these questions answered before I made an official statement on behalf of the US Government. Having said that,I fully support the actions of US, Afghan and Coalition Forces in this incedent. Woody

  • Jay

    Interesting take by both sides coming out now. Unsure if this is the Pakistanis bowing to their income lost by halting our convoys, now that some suitable mourning time has passed, and investigation (with emotion somewhat removed) has been conducted. Very likely public pronouncements, while coordination continues under the radar…