Where is your allah now?

Stop shooting at people with bigger guns.

How long before someone shoes up in the thread and blames America for this?

Poor communication amongst the Pakistanis. Then again, I'm pretty sure that letting them know a NATO attack was coming would just lead to tipping off the AQ folks...

where does it say they fired warning shots at them?

The outpost is 1.5 miles (2,000+ meters) away from the border and they were firing with small arms (probably AK-74) which has a max range of about 400-600 meters with iron sights and maybe about 800 meters max with optical sights.

Clearly the NATO choppers were already at least 1 kilometer within Pakistan's border, violating their sovereignty. As much as I dislike Pakistan for being a bunch of two-faced, lying cockroaches who soaked US for billions of dollars so far, NATO is the one who clearly farked up here, unless they were actually looking for provocation.

It's pretty well known that particular part of the world is jacked up to hell and back. If you think firing on a squad of gunships is a good idea then you deserve whatever you get in return.

All that being said there are only a billion people in that part of the world left so I don't think the world is going to fall apart at this point.

The way Pakistan has acted the past few years, they deserve to get biatch slapped around a little bit. We give them money and they still spit in our face. The instant we stop being their sugar daddy is when we would see their true colors.

That entire section of the earth has been in conflict for 700+ years, hate/violence/holy war is all they really know - and there isn't a damn thing the US or NATO can really do to fix it.

I guess my point is: "Fark Em"

If I'm being too harsh, I suppose we could always send over that freaky and stupid Duggar family that has the wife with the clown car vagina. That would be win/win right?

He said they had responded to small arms fire, according to NBC News. Asked to confirm that it was retaliatory, he said yes.

The Pakistani border guards probably thought they were shooting at Taliban helicopters.

Why subby? Was that not a good idea? Should he not have done that?

/at least the problem is more or less self correcting

gimmie some water!

/cool cool water

//cause i spotted some nato at the pakistani border

Voiceofreason01: Why subby? Was that not a good idea? Should he not have done that?

/at least the problem is more or less self correcting

So this is the NATO version of Darwin in action?

Oh well, at least it's a bit of extra bleach into the local gene pool

ronaprhys: How long before someone shoes up in the thread and blames America for this?

Poor communication amongst the Pakistanis. Then again, I'm pretty sure that letting them know a NATO attack was coming would just lead to tipping off the AQ folks...

I am unsure who else to blame this on. The headline aside I saw no mention anywhere of the Pakistanis doing anything other than being shot at and dieing inside a miliatry base in their own country.

BravadoGT: vudukungfu: Where is your allah now?

Stop shooting at people with bigger guns.

Amen. Unless you have a stinger, best just radio that one in. Or better yet--how about if you see some gunships on the Afghan side of the border, know that they are your "allies" in NATO and chill the fark out.

This would only make sense if Pakistan were interested in honoring its side of the agreement. They're not. They never have been. Pakistan is a failed state in the making, and all we have to do to seal their fate is to stop paying them off. We stop paying them off and the whole rest of the country turns into the tribal border areas. With nukes.

We know it, they know it, and that's why nothing will come of this on the Pakistani side beyond them whining about their "sovereignty," much as they did when we sent that SEAL team in to take out Osama. This sort of shiat flares up every few months and the outcome is always the same: diddly squat. As much as they hate us, they know damned well just how farked they are without our monetary support, as their continued existence is contingent upon their capacity to keep paying the tribal warlords to look the other way.

/Makes sense then why we don't want Iran having nukes, cuz it means we'd have to enter into similar agreements with them on the hope that they'd value their continued hold on power more than their willingness to hand the nukes over to terrorists. That's the only reason we care about the well-being of Pakistan's stability - if they didn't have nukes, we'd have already told them to DIAF.

Firing small arms at gunships = poking stick at wasp nest.

Loki-L: ronaprhys: How long before someone shoes up in the thread and blames America for this?

Poor communication amongst the Pakistanis. Then again, I'm pretty sure that letting them know a NATO attack was coming would just lead to tipping off the AQ folks...

I am unsure who else to blame this on. The headline aside I saw no mention anywhere of the Pakistanis doing anything other than being shot at and dieing inside a miliatry base in their own country.

Sounds like maybe their own side should have warned them that there was a coordinated operation going on. Also, maybe the troops in question should have considered NOT firing on helicopters in their area, considering that the Taliban/insurgents don't currently have any.

Loki-L:
I am unsure who else to blame this on. The headline aside I saw no mention anywhere of the Pakistanis doing anything other than being shot at and dieing inside a miliatry base in their own country.

towards the bottom of the article it mentions that the Americans are claiming to have been responding to "small arms fire" and the strike was "retaliatory"

Oh I saw this mission in MW3.

Loki-L: I am unsure who else to blame this on. The headline aside I saw no mention anywhere of the Pakistanis doing anything other than being shot at and dieing inside a miliatry base in their own country.

Let me help you with that, then:

Colonel Gary Kolb, spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Kabul, said the aircraft were taking part in a strike that was a coordinated effort with ISAF, Pakistani military and the Pakistani border authorities, NBC News reported.

He said they had responded to small arms fire, according to NBC News. Asked to confirm that it was retaliatory, he said yes.

The helicopters were flying over and the Pakis started firing on them. They retaliated and the Pakis paid the price. The moral here? Don't be stupid. It's not like AQ has many helicopters that have NATO markings on them and keep flying in and out of Pakistan. I'd say the NATO forces knew they were being fired upon and reacted as they should. Shoot at me, get shot at.

What weaponry on a Hello Gunship might look like:

Fire at helicopter squadron when your ally is the only one with helicopters -- that's a killin'.

ronaprhys: How long before someone shoes up in the thread and blames America for this?


Do we Americans have something comparable to a shoe taunt? (Muslims seem to hate shoes thrown at them more than other folks.) I guess "Your mother" is closest, though it terrorizes me as much as "cracker."

chaddsfarkprefect: ronaprhys: How long before someone shoes up in the thread and blames America for this?


Do we Americans have something comparable to a shoe taunt? (Muslims seem to hate shoes thrown at them more than other folks.) I guess "Your mother" is closest, though it terrorizes me as much as "cracker."

oh snap. failure to proofread on my part.

chaddsfarkprefect: Do we Americans have something comparable to a shoe taunt?

That's what NATO should have done, launched about 11,000 pairs of shoes at them.

Lord Farkwad: Firing small arms at gunships = poking stick at waspAsian Hornet's nest.

Corrected.

Here's a hornet in question, for your edification:

pyrion: if they didn't have nukes, we'd have already told them to DIAF.

We are covertly there for their nukes.

FTFA: "The attack comes as relations between the United States and Pakistan - its ally 'ally' in the war on militancy - are already badly strained"

There, FTFY

urgit39: where does it say they fired warning shots at them?

Towards the end of the article.

Pew pew, gotcha!

urgit39: where does it say they fired warning shots at them?

Colonel Gary Kolb, spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Kabul, said the aircraft were taking part in a strike that was a coordinated effort with ISAF, Pakistani military and the Pakistani border authorities, NBC News reported.

He said they had responded to small arms fire, according to NBC News. Asked to confirm that it was retaliatory, he said yes.

Since you can't be bothered to read the article or the thread, that's the quote for you.

BravadoGT:

Give that exchange, even categorizing the gunfire "warning shots" seems a bit generous.

Yeah - it really sounds like someone caught a case of the retards and paid for it. There's honestly no good reason whatsoever for firing the shots. They're going to have zippy success attacking the copters even if AQ somehow came up with them, they're going to absolutely destroy your base (weer in ur base killin ur noobs) because it could've been taken over by AQ, etc.

War on militancy? Is the war going double plus good?

Well if we hadn't found Osama living next to their version of West Point, I might actually care about respecting Paki sovereignty. As it stands they'll welcome to shiat down and have a nice cup of the shut the fark.

Pakistan has cut off supply routes into Afghanistan in response.

I'd say: Point Pakistan

3rd anniversary of the Mumbai massacre. The West forgets nothing.

MugzyBrown: Pakistan has cut off supply routes into Afghanistan in response.

I'd say: Point Pakistan

I'm betting we can get supplies there without them. It'll be a bit more costly, but meh. Hell, if it wasn't for their nukes we could simply take out their military just on principle.

Callous: chaddsfarkprefect: ronaprhys: How long before someone shoes up in the thread and blames America for this?


Do we Americans have something comparable to a shoe taunt? (Muslims seem to hate shoes thrown at them more than other folks.) I guess "Your mother" is closest, though it terrorizes me as much as "cracker."

The bird.

Justin Beiber.

ronaprhys: BravadoGT:

Give that exchange, even categorizing the gunfire "warning shots" seems a bit generous.

Yeah - it really sounds like someone caught a case of the retards and paid for it. There's honestly no good reason whatsoever for firing the shots. They're going to have zippy success attacking the copters even if AQ somehow came up with them, they're going to absolutely destroy your base (weer in ur base killin ur noobs) because it could've been taken over by AQ, etc.

Don't even have to get that complicated. From those distances, there is absolutely no difference whatsoever between an AQ nutjob firing wildly at a gunship with an AK-47 and a Pakistani military nutjob firing wildly at a gunship with an AK-47. Especially since, either way, the moment our guys retaliate, you know Pakistan's gonna biatch about their "sovereignty" being violated.

ronaprhys: How long before someone shoes up in the thread and blames America for this?

The only thing to "blame" America for is perpetuating the fantasy that Pakistan is a friendly nation and an ally.

Don't mess with Sikh. India's got talent.

Link (it just gets better and better)

Callous: The bird.



I had not heard. About the bird.

I love it when NATO reminds Pakistan that its sovereignty is moot where the big boys want to play.

//I actually do; nae a troll!

According to Al Jazeera, it was a new checkpoint, recently set up. Sounds like NATO wasn't aware of it and thought they were attacking somebody else.