« Never Forgetting Our Wounded Heroes | Main | Herald Tribune My Local Paper PRO Illegals Article »
November 03, 2007
Pakistani Troops Surrender
Masked militant supporters of Maulana Fazlullah, a hard line cleric, armed with AK-47 assault rifles stand guard in Charabagh near Mingora, the main town of Pakistan's Swat district bordering Afghanistan, Friday, Nov. 2, 2007. Dozens of paramilitary troops defect in northwest Pakistan saying they do not want to fight their Muslim brothers, an embarrassment to President Gen. Pervez Musharraf as he struggles to regain control of an mountainous region from Taliban and al-Qaida-linked militants. (AP Photo/Mohammad Iqbal) Email Photo Print Photo
Pakistani troops surrender
November 2, 2007
AP ...for complete story
SWAT, Pakistan
Islamic militants paraded 48 men on Friday described as government troops who surrendered during fighting — an embarrassment to President Gen. Pervez Musharraf as he struggles to regain control of a mountainous region from Taliban and al-Qaida-linked extremists.
Islamic militants said Saturday they had taken control of a police station in the volatile northwest region, hoisting their flag over its roof.
Officers fled the police station in Swat late Friday, said Sirajuddin, a spokesman for a radical cleric who leads the militants. "Our flag is hoisted above Matta police station now," said the spokesman, who only goes by one name.
No government official was immediately available to comment on Sirajuddin's claim, which comes a day after Adm. William Fallon, the chief of the U.S. Central Command, met with Musharraf and other top generals to discuss the security situation. Washington backs Musharraf as a bulwark in its war on terrorism.
The rising violence and political turmoil have fueled fears that Musharraf might extend his military rule by imposing a state of emergency or martial law, jeopardizing a promised transition to democracy. The Bush administration and European allies have urged against such measures, according to a Western diplomat in Islamabad.
"I think it would be quite obvious that the United States wouldn't be supportive of extraconstitutional means," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters in Ireland ahead of a diplomatic mission to Turkey and the Middle East.
The Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said elements in Pakistan's ruling party were pushing for such a move in case the Supreme Court disqualifies Musharraf's Oct. 6 presidential victory because he did not first give up his position as army chief.
A verdict is due before his current term expires Nov. 15, after which Pakistan is due to hold parliamentary elections by January.
The deteriorating security situation is adding to the sense of crisis. Pakistan has been rocked by a string of suicide bombings and clashes between soldiers and Islamic militants who have expanded their influence inland beyond existing strongholds in border regions.
The army said it killed up to 70 rebels Thursday when helicopter gunships pounded the once-popular tourist destination of Swat, where a hard-line cleric is trying to enforce Taliban-style rule. The militants said the toll was exaggerated, and pointed to their own successes.
Masked extremists armed with AK-47 assault rifles and long knives escorted journalists Friday to a two-story concrete building in the town of Charabagh to show off 48 men who surrendered after the battle. Most were described as paramilitary troops from the Frontier Corps. They were released after the display.
"We have surrendered to these mujahedeen," said Barkat Ullah, 24, who, like other captives, was wearing civilian clothes, saying they had left their uniforms at their posts. "We had no ammunition. We had no other option."
Army spokesman Maj. Gen. Waheed Arshad, who announced the reported militant death toll on Thursday, declined to comment Friday on the surrenders.
.
Wild Thing's comment........
Well this sure stinks! There has been a lot of fighting in this area recently, more then usual. The Pakistani government has failed to meaningfully address the terrorist threat. We have given Pakistan $11 billion I think it is,
F-16's and other incentives ( military , and economic etc.) But even so the Pakistani government has not been able to do a a lot of what needs to be done.
Also, I have always been curious how this works, how does AP or Reuters get close enough to report and photograph things like this. I mean without being killed, or taken prisoner. Pay the terrorists money? Promise them great 8 X 10 glossies of themselves to send to put up in their caves? hahaha
Posted by Wild Thing at November 3, 2007 12:50 AM
Comments
Now I know the world is F'D UP when 'masked militant supporters of a religious cleric' carry AK-47's and conceal their identities... and the U.S. is the Great Satan? "I don't care if the horses are blind... circle the wagons and lock 'n load!" - Ayatollah Assahola 2007
Posted by: darthcrUSAderworldtour07 at November 3, 2007 05:24 AM
Darth, "Ayatollah Assahola"....LOL good one.
Posted by: Wild Thing at November 3, 2007 12:04 PM
It was inevitable WT, they can't be trusted as friend or foe. "How does AP or Reuters get close enough to report and photograph things like this ?" For starters they pay off handsomely for protection and agree to portray the terrorists as freedom fighters, adding directly to their support. It's not about credibility it's all about appeasement to gain favor for that scoop story.
The name PAKISTAN represented, according to Choudhary Rahmat Ali, the "thirty million Muslims of PAKSTAN, who lived in the five Northern Units of (British) India—Punjab, N.W.F.P. (Afghania), Kashmir, Sindh, and Baluchistan." The nation was founded officially as the Dominion of Pakistan in 1947, and was renamed the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in 1956. The republic declared in 1956 was stalled by a coup d'etat by Ayub Khan (1958–69), who was president during a period of internal instability and a second war with India in 1965.
The UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) has maintained a small group of 'peacekeepers' since 1949; India does not recognize Pakistan's ceding of historic Kashmir lands to China in 1964.
Want to guess which U.S. President and administration threw his support to Pakistan in it's independence, thereby alienating India, a move that herealded their nuclear programs, so much for the Dem's declared preference for diplomacy.
With that many splinter groups, where every group of three people is a frigging tribe, the tribal loyalty takes precident over national loyalty, add the raghead cult and there is no loyalty or law and order.
How did Jane Fonda get to Hanoi? I reckon you you have to be one to see one. Back in the RVN the safest place to be was in the cab of that Shell Oil Company truck, it travelled the length and breadth of I Corps without ever getting attacked, Esso and Texaco didn't share such good fortune. Why? Payoffs.
Same thing for certain U.S. contractors there at the time. Brown & Root won a $380 million contract to build airports, bases, hospitals and other facilities for the U.S. Navy in South Vietnam. By 1967, the General Accounting Office had faulted the "Vietnam builders" -- as they were known -- for massive accounting lapses and allowing thefts of materials. There was a Brown & Root complex just South of Chu Lai that never got hit despite everything around them being attacked, do you reckon those "massive accounting lapses " could have been payoffs?
Corruption is part of daily life in the orient, there is nothing different in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan or Iran, it's only the degree of corruption that changes. I'm not chastising Halliburton, Kellogg Brown & Root or any U.S. contractor, they have the world's best example of corruption as their example and mentor, the UN both use payoffs to stay in business.
Posted by: Jack at November 3, 2007 12:44 PM
You know we are really in this thing by ourselves, aren't we.
Somebody in Iraq said, the Iraqi's are ready to take over security. It makes one wonder how deep is their committment to keeping Iraq, secure.
The US is not a good example of how to secure your border. Hopefully, they have been taught the right way. Otherwise we will probably be back over there in another few years.
Posted by: Mark at November 3, 2007 02:55 PM
Pakistan is probably a lost cause. I would much rather that we look to India as an ally. One of these days India may just have to nuke Pakistan. Unless Pakistan self destructs into multiple tribal civil wars.
The statement that muslims don't kill muslims is absolute bull shit. Luckily, they gleefully kill each other in the name of allah.
Jack has done a great job summerizing Pakistan history and world wide corruption.
Posted by: TomR at November 3, 2007 03:36 PM
Jack, wow thank you so much, that is really interesting. Fantastic information you shared.
"it's only the degree of corruption that changes"....amazing and it sure isn't going to change either.
Posted by: Wild Thing at November 3, 2007 04:41 PM
Mark your so right, it is like do as we say not as we do when it comes to securing borders. I really upsets me because it would really take so little for us to take a stand on this and do what has to be done. Maybe so little only because for you and I and all of us on here we know the cost of not securing borders etc. means to a Nation, a country. sigh
Posted by: Wild Thing at November 3, 2007 04:48 PM
Tom that is so true...."muslims don't kill muslims "...and we are told that a lot. It is baloney.
Posted by: Wild Thing at November 3, 2007 04:51 PM
