Pakistan says U.S. strike violated its sovereignty

[sabra]

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/B767058.htm

Pakistan says U.S. strike violated its sovereignty

LONDON, Jan 26 (Reuters) - Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf said in an interview on Thursday that a U.S. airstrike this month which killed some 18 civilians near the country's border with Afghanistan was a "violation of sovereignty."

In an interview with CNN at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Musharraf said he believed around five or six al Qaeda figures had died in the raid.

The U.S. airstrike on Jan. 13 targeted Ayman al-Zawahri, deputy to al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, in the remote Bajaur tribal region along the border with Afghanistan, according to American officials.

...

"But at the same time, while we are angry at the violation of sovereignty by the U.S., I am also angry at the violation of sovereignty by al Qaeda."

[chelsea0011]

1. You can't bomb sovereign nations? Bush doesn't except that concept.

[DemInDistress]

2. Yes but what will he do about it.....NOTHING sad....nt

[PATRICK]

3. Isn't this belated cover

for having Bush as his ally? In an interview instead of a clear public pronouncement? Not only chicken and late but ineffective to win ground among his citizens. And then qualifies it with putting Al Qaeda into the same balance. Real chicken. We harbor people like that from many countries and certainly would take an airstrike very unkindly if Castro were to smart bomb Miami.

Might makes right.

[central scrutinizer]

4. Why doesn't the MSM report how dangerous this is?

For God's sake, a moran could connect these dots. Musharraf has a tenuous hold on his country at best. Pakistan has a strong Muslim fundamentalist component. Many there are sympathetic to Al Qaeda. Pakistan has nukes. If Bushco's cowboy approach to foreign affairs destabilizes Musharraf and these dominos start falling - September 11 will look like a tea party.

[jseankil]

5. Plans to go into Pakistan and secure the nukes if Musharraf govt. falls

would be triggered. (As far as another 9/11, they dont have the capabilty to get their nuke weapons into the U.S.)

[dysfunctional press]

8. wanna bet?

between cargo ships and private yachts/planes- i'm willing to bet that somebody with a nuke, and the intent of getting it here- could.

odds are- the first nuke used againt the U.S. won't be delivered by an icbm.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

10. I'm sure it's a wonderful kick ass plan....in theory. n/t

[dysfunctional press]

9. BTW- those are some plans that I'd like to see-

I wonder what they expect and would accept as "acceptable casualties"(on both sides) in order to secure the pakistani nukes.
I'm guessing that they numbers would be prety high- and i know that's one mission i would sure as hell never want to be sent on.

[closeupready]

11. Personally, I think you are feeding into the hysteria.

I'm not really sure upon what basis you claim that Pakistan is on the brink.

Yes, Pakistan has nukes, but not ICBM's - or at least, not of the sort necessary to throw them anywhere outside 600 miles or so, as I understand it.

[MichiganVote]

6. Figured it out did they? Man, and all this time I thought they were

welcoming us ala American style.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

7. Was he shaking his tiny fist in the air as he said this? n/t