South Waziristan: Suspected US Drones Kill At Least 45 In Pakistan

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - South Waziristan: Suspected US Drones Kill At Least 45 In Pakistan stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

CHRIS BRUMMITT | 07/ 8/09 04:22 PM | AP

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Pakistani police officers stand beside the body of an attacker at the site of a suicide bombing in Peshawar, Pakistan on Wednesday, July 8, 2009. The suicide bomber blew himself up in the main northwestern city of Peshawar, which lies just next to the tribal areas. No one was killed in the attack except the bomber, a police officer said. (AP Photo/Mohammad Sajjad)

ISLAMABAD — Suspected U.S. unmanned aircraft launched two attacks against militants loyal to the head of the Pakistani Taliban on Wednesday, killing at least 45 in the latest in a barrage of strikes against a group also being targeted by the Pakistani military, intelligence officials said.

The convergence of U.S. and Pakistani interests in the South Waziristan tribal region suggests the two uneasy allies were cooperating in the strikes, making it harder for Islamabad to protest them publicly as it has in the past.

The army denied signing off on the attacks and insisted they were hurting its campaign against Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud by alienating local tribes it is trying to enlist in the fight.

Meanwhile, an army spokesman said a Pakistani jet attack wounded the local Taliban commander in the scenic Swat Valley elsewhere in the northwest. Troops have been battling militants in Swat for more than two months, an offensive that has so far failed to net any top insurgent leaders.

The mountainous border region is home to al-Qaida and Taliban leaders who plot attacks in Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan, which is witnessing an unprecedented level of violence against U.S. and NATO troops.

South Waziristan is the stronghold of Mehsud and his followers, whom the government blames for more than 90 percent of the suicide bombings in Pakistan in recent years. The U.S. State Department says Mehsud is a key al-Qaida facilitator in the region.

Suspected American drones have carried out more than 45 attacks in the region since last August. Although most have targeted foreign al-Qaida militants and those accused of violence in Afghanistan, increasingly they are aimed at the Mehsud network.

The first strike Wednesday took place before dawn. Six missiles were fired at a mountaintop training camp in the Karwan Manza area of South Waziristan, killing 10 militants, Pakistani intelligence officials said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media.

Story continues below
advertisement

Hours later, 12 miles to the east, missiles hit four vehicles carrying Taliban militants, killing at least 35, including a key Taliban commander, one intelligence official said. Another said 50 were killed.

Independent verification of the targets and casualties was not possible because the region is remote, dangerous and largely inaccessible to journalists. U.S. and Pakistani officials do not publicly comment on such strikes.

On Tuesday, a suspected U.S. missile attack killed 12 militants in South Waziristan, including five foreigners, according to intelligence officials. Another recent strike killed up to 80 insurgents attending a funeral.

The timing is significant because Pakistan's military is also carrying out bombing runs and firing mortar rounds at militant targets in the region as part of efforts to kill or capture Mehsud and his followers. It says it plans to launch a large offensive there soon.

The government routinely protests suspected U.S. missile strikes as violations of Pakistani sovereignty and has publicly asked the U.S. to give it technology to launch its own attacks. But many analysts suspect the government _ which has received billions of dollars a year from the U.S. since 2001 _ supports the strikes, especially those against Mehsud and his Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan.

"They are decrying them on one hand and aiding and abetting them on the other," said Shuja Nawaz, director of the U.S.-based Atlantic Council. "It is helpful for the Pakistanis when the TTP is being targeted. There is obviously much better coordination now."

Speaking after Tuesday's attack, Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas insisted the U.S. help was unwelcome and alienated local tribes it wanted to enlist in the fight against Mehsud.

The United States has been trying to get Pakistan's military to crack down on militants in the border area since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, but the country's past nurturing of militants to use as proxies in Afghanistan and Pakistan has complicated those efforts.

The Swat offensive began after militants there violated a peace deal with the government and moved into regions close to the capital, Islamabad. The army claims to have nearly cleared the valley of insurgents, killing more than 1,500.

Abbas told a news conference Wednesday that according to "credible information," the leader of the Swat Taliban, Maulana Fazlullah, was wounded in a recent airstrike. Fazlullah's capture or killing would be a major symbolic victory for the army and could ease the fears of some 2 million residents who fled the valley and surrounding districts and have yet to return.

___

Associated Press writers Munir Ahmad, Ishtiaq Mahsud and Hussain Afzal contributed to this report from Islamabad, Dera Ismail Khan and Parachinar.

ISLAMABAD — Suspected U.S. unmanned aircraft launched two attacks against militants loyal to the head of the Pakistani Taliban on Wednesday, killing at least 45 in the latest in a barrage of str...
ISLAMABAD — Suspected U.S. unmanned aircraft launched two attacks against militants loyal to the head of the Pakistani Taliban on Wednesday, killing at least 45 in the latest in a barrage of str...
Loading...
 
Report Corrections
 
Comments
391
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)

The word "suspected" always amuses me in these stories. Like who really knows? The missiles might have been sent by Zeus.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:06 AM on 07/09/2009
photo

Doesn't matter Zeus, Thor or a virtuoso Sony PlayStation trained kid. As long as some Talib/AQ types were taken out.
One cannot win a war without breaking the will of the opponent to fight on.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:06 PM on 07/09/2009
- raaf I'm a Fan of raaf 24 fans permalink
photo

"Independent verification of the targets and casualties was not possible because the region is remote, dangerous and largely inaccessible to journalist­s."

If you don't know then why is this article loaded with terms like 'militants' and 'insurgents'? Now you're just acting as a mouthpiece for US military propaganda.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:09 AM on 07/09/2009
- Shavano I'm a Fan of Shavano 7 fans permalink

The fact is, we don't know the facts. I do know that IF innocent civilians were injured or killed in this attack, it is, unfortunately, the wages of war. On the other hand, what are we to do? We operate on the best intelligence available and my guess is that most of those killed or injured were legitimate targets. One thing I know for sure, is (as far as Afghanista­n/Pakistan­) goes, we didn't start this mess. Most importantly, those that attacked us couldn't find refuge in an area that didn't support them (through intimidation or otherwise. We have a sovereign obligation to defeat our enemy; if that means that those that harbor our enemy sustain casualty so be it. Every "innocent" civilian who dies or is wounded should blame their own government for the problem and not the U.S. It should give them every reason to rise up and rebel against a government that supports terrorism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 AM on 07/09/2009
- FHTB I'm a Fan of FHTB 71 fans permalink
photo

I love the way there is no mention of "collateral damage", read: civilian deaths...
Whether Obama does it, or Bush, the casualties of war are a serious and problematic outcome of this continued engagement in both Iraq and Pakistan..­.winning hearts and minds has been a fruitless endeavor for the most part; in Pakistan, it took the public flogging of a woman by the Taliban to wake them up to the reality that those medieval religionists were trying to destroy their country...­Obama killing a few militants when there are probably more civilians killed is not going to help matters in how Pakistani public views us. THEY have to realize what is happening.­..when they do, as they have, they take action...I think the Afghanis and Iraqis feel the same way...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:45 AM on 07/09/2009
photo

What are we to do? Stopping the excessively imprecise air campaign would be a start. Civilian casualties lead the otherwise pacifistic local population to support and join the Taliban insurgency, and thus any strategy which results in significant civilian casualties is self-defeating. No action would be better than this action.

Steps in a positive direction would entail listening to what the Afghanis want, like a focus on reconstruction, not war, and perhaps just getting the f*** out because we seem so woefully incapable of doing what's effective or right.

By the way, we DID start this mess back when we funded the mujahideen in the 1980s. These anti-Soviet forces quite literally morphed into the Taliban.

Oh, and thanks for your completely arbitrary and inexpert guess that "most of those killed or injured were legitimate targets."

And what the hell is "a sovereign right to defeat our enemy"? No such right exists under current international law. I suppose you're saying, "we're attacking the Taliban because they harbored Osama bin Laden, who was responsible for 9/11". But he probably wasn't, hence the FBI's unwillingness to list him as wanted for that crime. And the Taliban offered to term him over in exchange for evidence from the Bush administration, none of which was produced. But we went to war anyway. And now eight years later we're still doing a bad job at it. And people like you are still sitting around justifying it.

http://rethinkafghanistan.com/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:39 AM on 07/09/2009
- petera63 I'm a Fan of petera63 14 fans permalink
photo

Good!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:01 AM on 07/09/2009
- Luvial I'm a Fan of Luvial 17 fans permalink

How to create terrorists forever.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 PM on 07/08/2009
- FHTB I'm a Fan of FHTB 71 fans permalink
photo

Exactly...­Obama is not any different than Bush in Pakistani, Afghani or Iraqi eyes if innocent civilians die. Obama's backers are deluding themselves into thinking it is different.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:48 AM on 07/09/2009
photo

"if innocent civilians die."
But according to all reports none did. Happy?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:04 PM on 07/09/2009
- Callyson I'm a Fan of Callyson 45 fans permalink
photo

I am glad that Pakistan appears to be on board now with defeating the Taliban. Civilian casualties aer defintely tragic, but if the alternative of Taliban control of Pakistan (or large regions within Pakistan), is an even greater horror.
I do hope though that the government of Pakistan does a decent job of postwar reconstruction and aid for the people in the areas where fighting is going on. Several reports I have seen suggest that a lot of ordinary Pakistanis are alienated from their government because they think it does nothing for them, so if this is going to lead to a sustainable peace we (the US & Pakistan) need to be serious about economic and humanitarian aid as well.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:36 PM on 07/08/2009
- Callyson I'm a Fan of Callyson 45 fans permalink
photo

I meant "Civilian casualties are definitely tragic, but if the alternative is Taliban control of Pakistan (or large regions within Pakistan), that is an even greater horror."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

Are you sure the Taliban is the greater horror? The locals seem to disagree, preferring peace under them to war under us.

For just a small piece of anti-war evidence, go here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v==R7jAT0FAGBc

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:47 AM on 07/09/2009
- FHTB I'm a Fan of FHTB 71 fans permalink
photo

I am glad that Pakistan appears to be on board now with defeating the Taliban. Civilian casualties aer defintely tragic, but if the alternative of Taliban control of Pakistan (or large regions within Pakistan), is an even greater horror.

I wish some of you said this when Bush was doing this...it'­s not any different.­..still bad...VERY bad...for support among the populace of Pakistan, or Aghanistan, or Iraq...the public in those countries really don't care who is running America if what they see is their countrymen dying unnecessarily.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:50 AM on 07/09/2009
- mamacat I'm a Fan of mamacat 136 fans permalink

It sounds like military targets were hit this time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:27 PM on 07/08/2009
- TheBaffler I'm a Fan of TheBaffler 44 fans permalink
photo

So they say.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:51 PM on 07/08/2009
- FHTB I'm a Fan of FHTB 71 fans permalink
photo

Uh huh...you go on believing that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:50 AM on 07/09/2009
photo

I suspect that many of these "drone" attacks are carried out by the Pakistani Air Force and for political cover, blamed on the USA.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:19 PM on 07/08/2009
- lornejl I'm a Fan of lornejl 619 fans permalink
photo

You suspect, or R ush suspects ?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:24 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

How many hundreds of times have you used that line?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:38 PM on 07/08/2009
- Squaker I'm a Fan of Squaker 2 fans permalink

"Suspected U.S. unmanned aircraft launched two attacks against militants loyal to the head of the Pakistani Taliban"

its sad that we apparently do not admit it when we attack people
I am also very intrigued by the language of describing the people who were killed. Apparently they are not actually Taliban (and of course not al queda, the group we should be fighting) they are only allegedly "loyal" to some guy associated with the Taliban

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:05 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

If the body parts used to belong to Talibs-- that's' great.
And said left overs belong to some tribe allied with Taliban, all the more reason they renege on that alliance and switch sides. Before it''s too late.
In any case It's a win- win situation. Except for fundies and their American cultural anthropology takin' supporters.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:14 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

A few things:
This isn't strategic carpet bombing - like Japan or Germany during WWII or Vietnam. These are tactical strikes designed to take out Taliban leadership. They are effective to the point that said leadership tends to send illiterate boys out on suicide raids while the they themselves remain relatively safe. Because these predator raids take out key leadership they are not only tactically effectly but psychologically damaging to enemy's said method of operation. In addition, these bombing raids are only one of many tactical applications as there are also coordinated land operations taking place in Afghanistan.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:41 PM on 07/08/2009

The raids are cowardice to say the least

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:04 PM on 07/08/2009
- FHTB I'm a Fan of FHTB 71 fans permalink
photo

Yes, cowardly..­.whether done by Bush, or Obama...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:52 AM on 07/09/2009
- wadenelson1 I'm a Fan of wadenelson1 227 fans permalink
photo

With the exception of mainland Japan, following its nuclear bombardment, not a single country has ever successfully been bombed into submission.

Japan wasn't even CONSIDERING surrendering after massive firebombings of most of its major cities, Tokyo included, killing a million civilians or more. Nor was Germany after the leveling of Hamburg, Dresden, and other cities.

Not Germany, not Britain, not Vietnam, no where has bombing ever won a war.

More bombs were dropped on North Vietnam than during WWII in its entirety. How well did that work for us. Cambodia? Laos?

In every single case it has taken ground troops to follow up the bombing and ACTUALLY OCCUPY the area under attack in order to "win."

What makes us think that killing a few hundred Taliban is going to win this war?

These are real fun, hi-tech (read expensive) bombs that minimize "collateral damage" but the principle of bombing the enemy is the same.

Not to mention, for every dozen Taliban killed, how many younger brothers, sisters, uncles and cousins get recruited to the cause?

Insanity is doing ...exactly what we're doing, and expecting a different result.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:27 PM on 07/08/2009
- AmandaBC I'm a Fan of AmandaBC 570 fans permalink
photo

"With the exception of mainland Japan, following its nuclear bombardment, not a single country has ever successfully been bombed into submission­."

That's not an exception at all. Read "Japan's Longest Day", Japan's last day of the war as seen from the Japanese government's perspective. The nu.kes were completely ineffective in the final decision to surrender (which came only after an attempted coup and an entire week after Nagasaki.) Americans are still believing a fairy tale originating from wartime pr0paganda, because the truth is too horrible to be told (the nu.clear bombings were both an experiment with human guinea pi.gs and a warning sent to Moscow.) The real reason Japan surrendered was the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and their amazing advance south towards the Korean peninsula that had made Hi.tler's Blitzkrieg look like child's play (the Soviets had the most powerful tank armies in the world and the Japanese Army had literally nothing to stop them with.)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:44 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

....the Japanese Army had literally nothing to stop them with.
==========­==========­=====
The Japanese had an ocean that stopped land armies and Russia had no Pacific Fleet to speak of.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:17 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

Certainly Japan was stunned by the Soviet attack. But not by Soviet military successes, as you erroneously claim. Rather by loss of expected Soviet mediation with U.S. over possible peace deal.
To cite Soviet attack as sole reason for unconditional surrender betrays certain cognitive rigidity and inability to process information contrary to one's personal biases. In the end, three main elements led to surrender-- Soviet attack, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
It’s no accident that Hirohito referred to the Hir/Nag in his Gyokuon-hoso speech. Soviet attack in distant Manchuria was ignored.
A more subtle approach would be to argue that Hir/Nag provided a certain face saving element. Some historians spoke about Deus ex machina effect. But to blithely ignore historical evidence just to score a feeble anti-American point adversely affects credibility of your statement.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 PM on 07/08/2009

Scores of civilians in Pakistan have been killed by Obama's drones since he took office. Yes, Obama continues financially disastrous mercantile wars for empire that diminish national security, spying on its citizens, torture, a useless and immensely expensive War on Drugs that results in the world's highest rate of incarceration including an incarceration rate for minorities that devastates their communities, corporate welfare, oligarchic manipulation of the nation's money supply, militarization of state and local police, the Patriot Act, loss of Habeas...

Ain't no change yet. Bush = Obama.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:52 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

I haven't seen such such density of politically correct slogans per square inch since Garner's "Politically Correct Bedtime Stories."
Fascinating.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:31 PM on 07/08/2009
- FHTB I'm a Fan of FHTB 71 fans permalink
photo

Hmmm...apo­logist hour at a close.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:55 AM on 07/09/2009

This is like k.ill.ing everyone in the bank to get the one robber. Absurd.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:35 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

Wong. it's more having to take out the entire gang of robbers to get at the leader.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:44 PM on 07/08/2009

Not quite, seeing how we are k.il.ling innocent people in the process of going after a few.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:05 PM on 07/08/2009
- mamacat I'm a Fan of mamacat 136 fans permalink

So far, it looks like we targeted military targets this time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:28 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

Bravissimo!!! The Talibs should know no rest by day or night.
Kudos to Pakistani army for finally cooperating with the Yanks.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:17 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

Oh look over there>>>>>>>> Sarah resigned and Michelle's wearing a bracelet!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:16 PM on 07/08/2009
- FHTB I'm a Fan of FHTB 71 fans permalink
photo

FOCUS! How many Huffpoers have ADD like this poster...?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:59 AM on 07/09/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect