Don't worry guys, everything is under control. Their nuclear weapons are safe, they've stopped sponsoring terrorism against India and I'm assured that Osama is not hiding there.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43127791/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/
QuoteMilitants storm Pakistani navy base
Between 10 and 15 attackers entered the high-security facility
By ADIL JAWAD
The Associated Press
updated 14 minutes ago 2011-05-22T21:55:46
KARACHI, Pakistan — Islamist militants stormed a naval base in the Pakistani city of Karachi late Sunday, attacking a U.S.-supplied surveillance aircraft, firing rockets and battling commandos sent to subdue them in one of the most brazen attacks in years, officials said.
One Pakistani navy officer and a firefighter were killed in fighting at the Mehran naval station that was going on more than four hours after the strike began, said navy spokesman Irfan ul Haq said. Between 10 and 15 attackers entered the high-security facility before splitting up into smaller groups, setting off explosions and hiding in the sprawling facility, he said.
The coordinated strike rocked the country's largest city just under three weeks after the death of Osama bin Laden in an American raid on the northwestern garrison city of Abbottabad, an event al-Qaida allied extremists here have vowed to avenge.
The unilateral American raid triggered a strong backlash against Washington, which is trying to support Pakistan in its fight against militants, as well as rare domestic criticism against the armed forces for failing to detect or prevent the operation.
Story: Militant training camp near bin Laden' hideout
The fact that militants were able to enter one of the country's largest military bases is another embarrassing blow to the army and will raise questions over whether the attackers had inside information. That they targeted a U.S. supplied aircraft draws attention to American aid to the military, something generals here do not talk about, fearing criticism from the county's fiercely anti-American people.
After heavy American prodding, security forces launched several operations against militants in their heartland close to the border with Afghanistan over the last three years. The extremists have struck back against police and army targets around the country.
Sunday's raid appeared to be most serious against the military since October 2009, when militants attacked the army headquarters close to the capital, Islamabad. They held dozens hostage in a 22-hour standoff that left 23 people dead, including nine militants.
Advertise | AdChoices
Advertise | AdChoices
Advertise | AdChoices
It began with at least three loud explosions, which were heard by people who live around the naval base, one of the largest military facilities in the country. It was unclear what caused the explosions, but they set off raging fires that could be seen from far in the distance.
An Associated Press reporting team outside the base heard at least six other explosions and sporadic firing.
Authorities sent in several dozen navy and police commandos to battle the attackers, who responded with gunfire and grenades, said a second navy spokesman, Salman Ali. At least one airplane — a P-3C Orion, a maritime surveillance aircraft that was recently given to Pakistan by America, — was destroyed, he said.
The United States handed over two Orions to the Pakistan navy at a ceremony at the base in June 2010 attended by 250 Pakistan and American officials, according to the website of the U.S. Central Command. It said by late 2012, the Pakistan would have eight of the planes.
At least one media report said team of American technicians were working on the aircraft at the time of the strike, but U.S. Embassy spokesman Alberto Rodriguez said no Americans were on the base. Ali also stated there was no foreigners inside the base.
No group claimed responsibility for the attack. But the Pakistani Taliban, an al-Qaida allied network which has previously launched attacks in Karachi, has pledged to retaliate for the death bin Laden, and has claimed responsibility for several bloody attacks since then.
Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani condemned the attack, saying such a "cowardly act of terror could not deter the commitment of the government and people of Pakistan to fight terrorism."
Karachi has not been spared the violence sweeping the country, despite being in the south far from the northwest where militancy is at its strongest. In April, militants bombed three buses taking navy employees to work, killing at least nine people.
The Pakistani Taliban and other militant groups have little direct public support, but the army and the government have struggled to convince the people of the need for armed operations against them. The militants' identification with Islam, strong anti-American rhetoric and support for insurgents in Afghanistan resonates with some in the country.
If Tim says it's okay, who am I to disbelieve?
QuoteAt least one airplane — a P-3C Orion, a maritime surveillance aircraft that was recently given to Pakistan by America, — was destroyed, he said.
The bastards.
I'm not worried yet. 10-15 attackers. Fuck, someone attacked a military base 50 miles from here last week. He claims he got lost through construction and so he decided to crash the front gate of Fort Leonard Wood. With an assault rifle in his car. He seems to have realized his mistake and quickly drove off shooting at police all the way. He later crashed in to a college of some kind and stole a different car and drove off. He surrendered after going down some dead end county road.
Probably the same thing here.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2011, 06:03:32 PM
Don't worry guys, everything is under control. Their nuclear weapons are safe, they've stopped sponsoring terrorism against India and I'm assured that Osama is not hiding there.
Tainted?
Quote from: Tyr on May 22, 2011, 07:06:46 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2011, 06:03:32 PM
Don't worry guys, everything is under control. Their nuclear weapons are safe, they've stopped sponsoring terrorism against India and I'm assured that Osama is not hiding there.
Tainted?
Sarcasm?
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war
Thre is nothing bettar than fighting muslims.
They only look good when fighting other muslims.
When the try to fight a real war, their armies collapse like hot butter.
They only survive because we don't have the willingness to crush them to the bottom.
We are a bunch of pussies.
Make no mistake. If they had the upper hand they would crush us like a bug. No doubt about it.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2011, 07:54:18 PM
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war
The good old times...
Shit posted that in the wrong thread. :bleeding:
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2011, 11:11:22 PM
Shit posted that in the wrong thread. :bleeding:
Give me 25 push-ups, you fag!!!
Advertise | AdChoices
Advertise | AdChoices
Advertise | AdChoices
I drunk too much tonite.
Its not a gooof idea to gif me a four day weekend.
4
So Tim, what is your solution for Pakistan?
Quote from: Faeelin on May 22, 2011, 11:21:17 PM
So Tim, what is your solution for Pakistan?
I don't really think there's a solution to the problem. They'll probably end up in tearing themselves apart in civil war or get overrun by Islamists who start a nuclear war with India.
Quote from: Faeelin on May 22, 2011, 11:21:17 PM
So Tim, what is your solution for Pakistan?
Nukes.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2011, 11:36:52 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 22, 2011, 11:21:17 PM
So Tim, what is your solution for Pakistan?
I don't really think there's a solution to the problem. They'll probably end up in tearing themselves apart in civil war or get overrun by Islamists who start a nuclear war with Pakistan.
You mean India.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2011, 07:54:18 PM
Cry havoc and let slip the hogs of war
corrected a typo there
Quote from: Siege on May 22, 2011, 11:37:38 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2011, 11:36:52 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 22, 2011, 11:21:17 PM
So Tim, what is your solution for Pakistan?
I don't really think there's a solution to the problem. They'll probably end up in tearing themselves apart in civil war or get overrun by Islamists who start a nuclear war with Pakistan.
You mean India.
D'oh!
Well, I guess it could be a civil war that goes nuclear. :unsure:
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 23, 2011, 01:27:49 AM
Quote from: Siege on May 22, 2011, 11:37:38 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2011, 11:36:52 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 22, 2011, 11:21:17 PM
So Tim, what is your solution for Pakistan?
I don't really think there's a solution to the problem. They'll probably end up in tearing themselves apart in civil war or get overrun by Islamists who start a nuclear war with Pakistan.
You mean India.
D'oh!
Well, I guess it could be a civil war that goes nuclear. :unsure:
Wow, you know it's bad when you're corrected by a drunk Siege. :lol:
Quote from: Tonitrus on May 23, 2011, 02:48:42 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 23, 2011, 01:27:49 AM
Quote from: Siege on May 22, 2011, 11:37:38 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2011, 11:36:52 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 22, 2011, 11:21:17 PM
So Tim, what is your solution for Pakistan?
I don't really think there's a solution to the problem. They'll probably end up in tearing themselves apart in civil war or get overrun by Islamists who start a nuclear war with Pakistan.
You mean India.
D'oh!
Well, I guess it could be a civil war that goes nuclear. :unsure:
Wow, you know it's bad when you're corrected by a drunk Siege. :lol:
It's true! :weep:
Quote from: Siege on May 22, 2011, 11:09:15 PM
Make no mistake. If they had the upper hand they would crush us like a bug. No doubt about it.
The atomic bomb ended the age of war. These days, there are only skirmishes and minor expeditions.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2011, 06:03:32 PM
Don't worry guys, everything is under control.
Whew. Glad to hear it.
So, how is that supporting of radicals going for you, Pakistan? Having some trouble holding that tiger by the tail, thinking you have some control over it? <_<
Why do we always have to be butt-buddies with the worst countries? Why can't we be butt-buddies with nice countries, like India? :(
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on May 23, 2011, 11:28:34 AM
Why do we always have to be butt-buddies with the worst countries? Why can't we be butt-buddies with nice countries, like India? :(
Maybe you have B.O.?
Quote from: grumbler on May 23, 2011, 12:17:49 PM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on May 23, 2011, 11:28:34 AM
Why do we always have to be butt-buddies with the worst countries? Why can't we be butt-buddies with nice countries, like India? :(
Maybe you have B.O.?
Has B.O. supported a closer India-US relationship? :hmm:
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on May 23, 2011, 11:28:34 AM
Why do we always have to be butt-buddies with the worst countries? Why can't we be butt-buddies with nice countries, like India? :(
We give Pakistan money to fight the taliban, it only stands to reason that Pakistan divert some of that money to the taliban to make sure there is a taliban that the US wants to continue funding the war against.
But, do note, the US has either a bi-lateral, multi-lateral or a uni-lateral commitment to defend every single nice country in the world, with the possible exception of India.
Quote from: Viking on May 23, 2011, 01:04:10 PM
But, do note, the US has either a bi-lateral, multi-lateral or a uni-lateral commitment to defend every single nice country in the world, with the possible exception of India.
:hmm:
Botswana?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 23, 2011, 01:08:20 PM
Quote from: Viking on May 23, 2011, 01:04:10 PM
But, do note, the US has either a bi-lateral, multi-lateral or a uni-lateral commitment to defend every single nice country in the world, with the possible exception of India.
:hmm:
Botswana?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botswana_Defence_Force
QuoteHistory
Following political changes in South Africa and the region, the BDF's missions have increasingly focused on anti-poaching activities, disaster-preparedness, and foreign peacekeeping. The United States has been the largest single contributor to the development of the BDF, and a large segment of its officer corps has received U.S. training.
The BDF consists of one armoured brigade, two infantry brigades, four infantry battalions, two armoured artillery, one engineer regiment and one commando regiment.
Not exactly a defense comittment.
Quote from: Viking on May 23, 2011, 01:16:12 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 23, 2011, 01:08:20 PM
Quote from: Viking on May 23, 2011, 01:04:10 PM
But, do note, the US has either a bi-lateral, multi-lateral or a uni-lateral commitment to defend every single nice country in the world, with the possible exception of India.
:hmm:
Botswana?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botswana_Defence_Force
QuoteHistory
Following political changes in South Africa and the region, the BDF's missions have increasingly focused on anti-poaching activities, disaster-preparedness, and foreign peacekeeping. The United States has been the largest single contributor to the development of the BDF, and a large segment of its officer corps has received U.S. training.
The BDF consists of one armoured brigade, two infantry brigades, four infantry battalions, two armoured artillery, one engineer regiment and one commando regiment.
And we pair our state National Guards up with various 3rd-world countries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Partnership_Program