Report: Pakistani Troops, Tribesmen Fire On US Helicopters

DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan — Pakistani troops and tribesmen opened fire on two U.S. helicopters that crossed into the country from neighboring Afghanistan, intelligence officials said Monday. The U.S. denied the report.

The helicopters did not return fire and re-entered Afghan airspace without landing, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media.

"There was no such incursion, there was no such event," said Col. Gary L. Keck, Defense Department spokesman.

The reported incursion late Sunday will likely add to tensions between Islamabad and Washington.

A spate of suspected U.S. missile strikes into Pakistan's border region and a raid by U.S. commandos said to have killed 15 people have angered and embarrassed Pakistani leaders while signaling Washington's impatience with Pakistani efforts to clear out militant havens.

During a recent speech to Parliament, newly elected President Asif Ali Zardari, who is considered U.S.-friendly, warned that no country would be allowed to violate Pakistan's sovereignty in the name of the war on terror.

Zardari is on his way to New York to attend the U.N. General Assembly, and he is expected to meet President Bush.

The two intelligence officials said informants in the field told them the incursion was about a mile inside the disputed and poorly demarcated border in the Alwara Mandi area in North Waziristan, a tribal region the U.S. considers a sanctuary for Taliban and al-Qaida fighters.

A week ago, U.S. helicopters reportedly landed near Angoor Ada, a border village in nearby South Waziristan, but returned toward Afghanistan after troops fired warning shots.

A Pakistani military spokesman said last week that troops had orders to open fire in case of another cross-border raid by foreign troops.

The U.S. cross-border attacks have angered Pakistanis and analysts said the weekend suicide bombing of the Marriott hotel in Islamabad may have been a warning from al-Qaida and the Taliban to the Pakistani government to end cooperation with U.S. in fighting militants. The attack prompted foreign diplomatic missions and aid groups in Pakistan to review their security status.

The U.S. Embassy in Islamabad warned its employees Monday to limit their movement to travel to and from the Embassy and to shopping for essential items only. American consulates in Lahore and Peshawar reminded their personnel to avoid large hotels in those cities. The Embassy warned all Americans to stay away from crowds, keep a low profile, and avoid setting patterns by varying times and routes for all required travel.

__

Associated Press writers Zarar Khan in Islamabad contributed to this report.

Comments

[UKVisitor]

Am I right in thinking that Pakistan's second biggest ally is The PRC? They have a shared hostility to India,
That being the case, is a confrontation with Pakistan realistic?

[Manni]

Pak!stan does not respect Afhgnaisntan and Indian border...and hence they lose the right to their countries borders!

Simple as that.

But then the hate America crowd here..aka Obamobots would side with the terrorsists ofcourse!

[splendidbeast]

You are so cute when you are angry.

[Ohg]

If the surge was so smart then how come we continue to have so many problems in the middle east? The wrong war, fought correctly, is still the wrong war.. ...............
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/09/22/the-iraq-surge-has-not-worked/

[riskada]

They have a right to defend their homeland and shoot down the terrorist helicopters.

[Whinger]

What will happen if the Pakistan army bring down a chopper with loss of life?

[Lenyon]

First of all, Pakistan never agreed to allow U.S. armed forces to enter the country. That is for a good reason. If a nation is truly SOVERN it can never allow FOREIGN ARMED forces to enter, especially a more powerful one. How could they force then out. Second the proud Pakistani muslims would not let their Government. Third they have plainly seen what happens to nations that allow U.S. military to establish a presence, (other than emergency humanitarism, with well ageed upon timelines) Muslim nations in the gulf. Accidental killing of brown people in Iraq and Afghanistan are worth a meaningless apology and $2,000. Collateral damage, for the sake of freedom. I guess their family should be just as honored and proud as the Palestenian family over their suicide bomber sons. Maybe the people of Pakistan think they are worth more. Of course they take our billions of Dollars, the people get nothing out of the billions spent on military aid. Tribal people have depended on the security of tribal ties. Central government is a foreign concept that the jury is still out on.

[Durango]

It is the first duty of every nation on earth to protect their borders and their sovereignty. Pakistan is no different.

The trick is to be able to fight the fundamentalists with either the cooperation of the Pakistani Government, or with them looking the other way.

No matter what, it will take intelligence and good judgment. Something Bush/Cheney and McCain have shown a definite lack of when it comes to dealing with the problems of Islamic fundamentalist radicalism.

Our only hope is that President Obama will be able to negotiate a strategy.

Because the Republicans have had 8 years. And have failed.

Miserably!

[itmaybetoolate]

Pakistan, with its large nuclear arsenal, is on fragile ground. But who has time to pay attention to this? Wall street is going under and we are staring down the gun of a pa(l)in administration.

[darthdarcy]

We may end up going to war or declaring war on Waziristan... and try and separate it from being war with or in Pakistan..

Waziristan signed a treaty with Pakistan so there may be precedent for this...if we can get Pakistan to see it that way..

[Manni]

But the IS! (the tal!ban leadership) is part of the P@k army and they are in Punjab!

[wadenelson1]

What is it Al-Quaida wants? Same thing they've always wanted. US Troops out of Islamic countries.

I don't understand why we don't give them what they want, choosing instead a battleground of ever increasing scope. How do we, the American public, win from this choice?

How do we, the American public, win from stationing troops in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Pakistan.

What exactly are we fighting for?

Wouldn't energy self-sufficiency, renewables, make a lot more sense than trying to "secure" the insecurable oil that belongs to Muslim nations with ground wars that only spur greater terrorism?

I'm obviously very ignorant. The leaders of this country must know so much more than I do.

[abouttime]

RE: "How do we, the American public, win from this choice?"

We, americans loose.

[eugenegerard]

You forgot. The OIL companies need these pipelines. We need to control the oil. Oil Oil Oil If you think this is about a few tribesmen. You are wrong. The ones that have been given guns had to get them from someone. Ask who supplies the weapons and put them out of business.

[ThinkLiberal]

Whenever we have an administration that has proven time and again that it's integrity is as meaningless as an empty barrel, it would be wise to question their every utterance and take it with a healthy serving of salt, for good measure. It is not far-fetched to presume that the Butch regime may be provoking the Pakistanis into some kind of military conflict, something as sinister as the Gulf of Tonkin incident. They are sure trying to do this with Iran.

See more about the Gulf of Tonkin incident here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Incident

[abouttime]

Some would say you are cynical, but, however, it makes sence considering the Administration has offered no other reasonable explanation. War seems to be the impetus and reason to make the neocon's wealthy beyond reason. However, insanity has no boundary in the quest for money.

[OutsiderSA]

Been watching the news on the alleged truck bomb and was really surprised at the size of the crater of the explosion. CCTV footage of the truck trying to breach the security gates shows it getting stuck in the booms and catching fire - then the footage stops.

Now I am not a physics major or explosives expert but 400kg's explosives in a truck - well the force would be deflected mostly upwards and outwards yet there is a crater reminiscent of a bomb as in a falling one.

The challenges from the new prime minister to sovereignty may just have been met with a "friendly" USA reminder.

With AlCIAda being involved in soo many other covert operations, I would not put it past them.

Reported as a very secure area viz. close to the Prime Minister's residence,(?) well one would assume that there are security measures in place in that suburb. If they (terrorists) wanted to send a message, why a hotel and not nearer the PM residence?

It will be interesting to see now if the PM capitulates to allow breach of sovereignty to the USA troops.

Personally, if Boosh was not able to get BL for 7 years, maybe it is time to pull out and focus on getting the USA economy sorted - you really cannot afford either of these wars Russia learned the hard way too.

[OkieIntellectual]

Direction and momentum of an explosive at the time of detonation have very little to do with the size and shape of any crater caused by it. A charge can be shaped to direct the majority of the explosive force in a particular direction, and this can often happen unintentionally with this kind of bomb. The way the explosives were stacked in the truck, the construction of the vehicle (roof and chassis) and the material and construction of the ground under the truck when it exploded could all contribute to the crater.

[abouttime]

Why is the US sending troops into Pakistan?
Seriously - why?

[Angel1961]

Because we have been in Afghanistan for 7 years and have not found Osama (we cannot afford to find him- people would call for an end to Bush's war on terror and that would halt the war-profiteering by his colleagues). Also, the Taliban has resurged and is stronger than ever. They regroup and run supply lines from Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province and Baluchistan.
We have been throwing billions at Pakistan for years. But their troops do not want to fire on the Taliban because the idea of Muslims killing Muslims is abhorrent to them. In fighting in the Swat valley, many Pakistani troops simply switched sides.

[abouttime]

Thanks for the explanation. It is as good as any I have heard, though why all the fuss about the Taliban? They atre not our enemies - at least they do not threaten our security.
Sounds more like war-profiteering,.. kinda like the US economy is dependent on selling our corporates bullets, bombs and airplanes. What a waste - maybe we should change our name to the United States of War Incorporated? or USWI for short?

[Manni]

Because the ISI are the AQ supporters and they are in P@kistan

[chaos4700]

I suspect we are seeing the beginning of the end of the so-called War on Terror. I don't think Pakistan will be the first country to stand in open defiance of Bush's invasive military doctrines. Unfortunately, this leaves a lot of innocent people -- both civilians of the various nations we're attacking and our dedicated soldiers who are ordered into these death traps by our blind, corrupt military leadership -- will suffer and die as a direct result.

[Jaml3000]

Good to know that the $10-12 billion given to their government on a promise that they'll secure the tribal regions is paying off. We just paid these guys to shoot at us.

[captnEarl]

You are right, just like we paid and are currently paying the Iraqi Sunnis about $300 per person NOT to kill us, THE SURGE