More

Key NATO Supply Route Hit Again In Pakistan

Pakistan Nato

ZARAR KHAN   10/ 3/10 11:25 PM ET   AP

ISLAMABAD — Suspected militants attacked and set fire to at least 20 tankers carrying oil for NATO and U.S. troops in Afghanistan on Monday, the third such strike inside Pakistan in as many days, police said.

The attack not far from the capital Islamabad took place on a supply line that has been stalled because of a temporary border closing imposed by Pakistani authorities to protest a NATO helicopter attack that killed three Pakistan troops last week.

It will raise the stakes in the closure, which has exacerbated tensions between Washington and Islamabad but has been welcomed by Islamist groups opposed to Pakistan's support of the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan.

Police officer Umer Hayat said three people were killed and blamed Monday's attack on "terrorists."

The attackers opened fire on trucks that were parked at a poorly guarded terminal before setting them afire, he and other officers said.

The trucks were en route or waiting to travel to the Torkham border crossing along the fabled Khyber Pass, which is used to bring fuel, military vehicles, spare parts, clothing and other non-lethal supplies for foreign troops in Afghanistan. Pakistan's other main route into landlocked Afghanistan, in Chaman in the southwest, has remained open.

While NATO and the United States have alternative supply routes into Afghanistan, the Pakistani ones are the cheapest and most convenient. Most of the coalition's non-lethal supplies are transported over Pakistani soil after being unloaded at docks in Karachi, a port city in the south.

On Friday, a day after the closure of the Khyber Pass route to NATO and US traffic, there were two attacks on oil tankers headed to the country. The Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility for at least one of them, and vowed to launch more.

Striking now gains them more media attention than normal and adds to unease between Pakistan and the United States.

The convoys take several days to reach the border after setting off from Karachi and make frequent stops. They receive little or no protection outside the frontier region and are indistinguishable from ordinary trucks and tankers that ply Pakistani roads.

Over the past two years they often have been attacked by militants, mostly in the northwestern border region where militants are strongest.

Attacks on convoys in Pakistan give militants a propaganda victory, but coalition officials say they do not result in shortages in Afghanistan. Hundreds of trucks cross into Afghanistan each day.

Some attacks are believed to be the work of criminals, who can sell much of the vehicles, clothes and other goods they carry. Officials have alleged truck owners may be behind some of the incidents, perhaps to claim insurance fraudulently.

Earlier Sunday, Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S., Husain Haqqani, said on CNN's State of the Union program that he did "not expect this blockade to continue for too long."

Asked whether the route could be opened within the next week, he said "I think it will happen in less than that duration."

U.S. officials are also predicting the route will not stay closed for long.

Analysts have said that the relationship between Pakistan and the United States is too important for both nations for this incident to derail ties.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

ISLAMABAD — Suspected militants attacked and set fire to at least 20 tankers carrying oil for NATO and U.S. troops in Afghanistan on Monday, the third such strike inside Pakistan in as many days...
ISLAMABAD — Suspected militants attacked and set fire to at least 20 tankers carrying oil for NATO and U.S. troops in Afghanistan on Monday, the third such strike inside Pakistan in as many days...
Filed by Adam J. Rose  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,372
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (30 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbmetzger
04:34 PM on 10/04/2010
More NATO-Bound Tankers Burn in Pakistan
Pakistani police said more oil tankers intended to supply NATO forces in Afghanistan have been attacked. Around 20 burned in a terminal near the capital Islamabad early Monday. http://www.newslook.com/videos/255230-more-nato-bound-tankers-burn-in-pakistan?autoplay=true
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Butterfly M
02:06 PM on 10/04/2010
I don't understand why people will not just leave PAkistan to themselves to self destruct.
02:36 PM on 10/04/2010
Nukes.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
-PZ-
Amateurs talk tactics, profession­als talk logist
01:51 PM on 10/04/2010
Heres what actually led to the Pakistani ban...

In words of Rachel Maddow

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/39450283#39450283
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Butterfly M
02:11 PM on 10/04/2010
Would Gay Rachel Maddow be treated well in Pakistan when she visits PAkistan and tells them that she is gay? Just asking.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
-PZ-
Amateurs talk tactics, profession­als talk logist
02:42 PM on 10/04/2010
What does that have anything to do with her reporting the truth?

You can see more details on this @

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Pakistan
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Butterfly M
02:12 PM on 10/04/2010
How are gays treated in Pakistan? May I know/. I am curious.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
-PZ-
Amateurs talk tactics, profession­als talk logist
02:55 PM on 10/04/2010
Well; mostly left the heck alone...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Elijah A Alexander Jr
Elijah NatureBoy
12:53 PM on 10/04/2010
In all wars the US has been in, except this one, the military transported their own supplies of every kind. Why does this fighting have to contract out the transporting of goods to our personnel? The military train and prepare personnel to secure their transporting of goods, prepare them to defend against for attacks and so forth, what is happening to the US war machine, did Halliburton have something to do with the decision not to use our military to transport our goods to our personnel?

Since George Bush, Jr. didn't actually participate during his military guard years he wouldn't know what really goes on in the military. As Commander in Chief he would have to listen to his advisers to make his decision on how to handle the military. The same with Obama, over a year ago he wanted to end the war but without having military knowledge all he could do was to listen to his generals who has kept it going and asking for more troops. If he was the Constitutional Lawyer he claims he would have realize all he needed to do was invoke the second Amendment saying our military is for our own security {defense} and end the war. The only exit strategy would be is to uphold our constitution.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Uggg
09:52 PM on 10/04/2010
Because Rummy and Dick decided it would be cheaper to have unarmed civilians transport military supplies and feed them and they could make big profits on their stock ops in KBR and Haliburton
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Butterfly M
12:46 PM on 10/04/2010
This is PAkistan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA67OPNzF8g&feature=related
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
-PZ-
Amateurs talk tactics, profession­als talk logist
01:49 PM on 10/04/2010
And this is India;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z0nGmZOFWA

Please note that this video contains footage of people targeted because of their religion...

The Pakistani lynching happened because people believed that those two kids had killed someone in cold blood.

This happened to christians...
photo
MikeDu
Both salubrious and lugubrious concurrently.
11:23 AM on 10/04/2010
One of the luxuries of modern technology is you can fly to that spot in Google Earth and look down on that very road at that very spot. You're pretty much guaranteed to say "This is our army's primary supply route to Afghanistan? You've got to be F'ing kidding me!"
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
scarletxoxoxo
I was born in a ditch and I eat babies.
11:21 AM on 10/04/2010
sigh:(
10:18 AM on 10/04/2010
Attempting to cross the Khyber Pass in the best of times is suicidal. This is just stupid.
10:23 AM on 10/04/2010
they have been using that route for 10 years now with little problems. this looks like retaliation for the helecopter attacks from a couple of days ago.
photo
Littlewords
My micro bio was outsourced to my nano-bio: I'm me
01:22 PM on 10/04/2010
...and the stepped up drone attacks by the US inside Pakistan.
01:52 PM on 10/04/2010
little reported problems
my guess is there have been many losses
it's an area made for terrorist traps and a known bin laden hangout
09:58 AM on 10/04/2010
To me it seems very odd that these attacks started after the helecopters entered in to that country, which raises the following question: to what degree is the Taliban acting on behalf of the pakistani goverment?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:51 AM on 10/04/2010
good point.
02:19 PM on 10/04/2010
Paki intelligence services basically sponsored talib as a tool in Afghanistan. No doubt the same holds true for Paki talib. They are all basically pashtun - no?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:55 AM on 10/04/2010
Let me get this straight. NATO has another way to route these oil tankers (NATO and the United States have alternative supply routes into Afghanistan), yet they parked them, poorly guarded, at this road block at Khyber Pass? Just who's runnin' the show over there? Even a retard knows you don't place needed supplies in hostile territory unless it's absolutely necessary and if you have to, you guard the livin' chit outa' them.
10:07 AM on 10/04/2010
What routes are you refering to; and just what region in that area is not hostile to the US?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:12 AM on 10/04/2010
I see "suspected militants" are said to bee the cause of this.

That way, when we blow up a house with a drone missile and kill a family of "suspected militants", we will be justified.
Gaylord P Farqua
Herb Gardner Amateur Chef, Historian and Political
08:58 AM on 10/04/2010
We have no relationship with Pakistan except financial. We pay them billions and they deliver half hearted attempts to wipe out the terrorist bases within their borders. In the not too distant future the Pakistani military will once again govern and they will act out of self defense and not as an agent of the "infidels." There is no good reason for any of this. Iraq under Saddam was a painful counter balance to Iran. Afghanistan threw the Russians out and that is where we should have helped them build some roads and hospitals for a few billion and then quietly leave them alone. There is, however, a bad reason to continue these wars and fund  Pakistan and that reason is profit. A number of US politicians, at least one with a heart condition, and big corporations are profiting handsomely on the war material they sell at the expense of the lives of young Americans. And no member of the House or Senate has the courage to stand up and demand an end to this travesty.
08:49 AM on 10/04/2010
Haqqani is such a tool.....
08:34 AM on 10/04/2010
What Senator is running for office that is going to end the war in Afghan?
09:46 AM on 10/04/2010
October 27, 2007 -- OBAMA: "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home, we will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank."
10:15 AM on 10/04/2010
Quote was probably taken out of context. My guess is that he was refering to ending the war in Iraq, which he has done. Don't forget he said that he would draw down Iraq and pay more attention to Afganistan.
11:36 AM on 10/04/2010
That promise was for Iraq. He pomised to escalate in Afghanistan start bombing Pakistan. This is his war!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
den1953
The best politicians are for free!
08:21 AM on 10/04/2010
The fact that the convoy's are being targeted means either the drones and the attacks are killing innocents or our military is honing in on the Al Qaida presence in Pakistan, my guess would be a little of both.