I also do not believe Pakistan is 'suddenly' an enemy. They are, however, paternalistically left 'out of the loop.' Those soldiers should have known they were in the line of fire. I do believe this is called friendly fire. I don't believe it is appropriate and we have also witnessed attacks on NATO and UN caravans before. So, where is Petraeus going with all this?I'll be the first one to state, the ISI is a concern within Pakistan, but, that does not give permission to the USA and NATO to simply run rough shod over the Pakistani military. I realize 'defense' against aggression is important, but, the USA has to ask when it is inappropriate when 'friendly fire' occurs. Yes?
I don't believe the USA and NATO have been very inclusive of the Pakistani military, especially near the Afghan border. Why? Does the USA actually believe the Paki military is as much the enemy as the Taliban? Sympathizers? I believe General Petraeus needs to make a clear deliniation between the Paki miltary and the Taliban. Sincerely. They are not the same thing.
My first instinct would be to have the USA apologize, make reparations, which has to occur anyway, but, that isn't 'IT,' exactly. These border excursions have been problematic. I am confident the USA military has documentation or videos to justify their aggression, but, there are issues here that are being ignored and General Petraeus needs to look beyond his immediate plans to make this a partnership THAT WORKS and does not victimize. I remind, Pakistan is under dire conditions with its populous, its military is stretched way past capacity by floods alone. The Pakistani people have issues and I know the Taliban are taking advantage of that, but, at the same time the USA should NOT be.
Now, if General Petraeus is going to start stating Pakistan is more an enemy than an ally, he needs to realize that point of view will only cause more problems for him and the USA than not. See, India already has problems with past Paki activities in their country. To declare Pakistan is a problem opens up all kinds of shifts in dynamics. I do not believe this is an aggression by Pakistan. I do, however, believe they are being disregarded in ways that are problems for their miltary and government.
A friendly fire incident is NOT the basis of declaring another country an enemy. And quite frankly if the USA was under attack when a caravan of supplies was approaching, I would expect the caravan to stop and reassess the region for safety. The caravan was stopped by Pakistani military for a very good reason. They didn't want the supplies compromised. That's being an enemy? Nope. General Petraeus has some in roads to make here and he needs to do it ASAP. I believe Pakistan WANTS to be a good, if not great ally even through its stuggles to protect and serve their own people. The USA has been exceptionally good to Pakistan and the people are best to come to understand we are very friendly and care about them and their well being. I believe stopping the supply caravan was the right thing to do considering the chaos that existed in the Pakistan military about their dead soldiers. FIX IT !
