Demolishing couple of planes would do a loads of good to calm the itchy and aggressive nerves of the US

So says Brigadier Zaman, over at The Pakistani Spectator, a Pakistani blog written in English which interviewed Gerald of Internet Anthropologist Think Tank.  I stumbled upon Brigadier Zaman’s entry while perusing the blog and he was feeling pretty froggy two weeks ago:

Where United States has decided to wage a war in the FATA area, the Pakistani security forces have also devised their strategy. All the supplies to the NATO and US forces go through the Pakistan all the way from Karachi port through G.T Road up to the Peshawar (which makes a distance of thousands of kilometers) and then enters the Afghanistan. US cannot afford suspension of these supplies, and that would be one of the powerful leverage in the hands of the Pakistani forces to leash the US forces.

Moreover, Pakistan could resume the support to Taliban in Afghanistan and could engage US and NATO forces pretty severely in the central and Northern Afghanistan. The attack of US on the tribal belt would certainly unite the different factions of Talibans, and then Pakistan could facilitate the militant coalition of Mangal Bagh, Maulana Fazlullah, Haji Namdar, Qazi Mehboob and Baitullah Mehsud against the US onslaught. This would give Pakistani government dual benefit of getting rid of the militants from their areas, while giving US a tough time in their yet another misadventure.

When US attack, Pakistan must not go against the Taliban, because then instead of striking at US, Talibans would start suiciding in the Pakistani cities, and then it would be an impossible situation for Pakistani forces to handle, and they would be hapless in front of the US led NATO forces.

And what should be done to the continuous violation by US aircrafts of Pakistani aerial space? Despite a strong protest lodged by Pakistan with the US-led Nato forces in Afghanistan over attack on the border town of Angoor Adda, a US fighter aircraft and pilotless spy planes again intruded into Pakistan’s airspace in Bajaur, and North and South Waziristan tribal agencies. And this practice has become a daily routine.

Demolishing couple of planes would do a loads of good to calm the itchy and aggressive nerves of the US, and that would teach them that Pakistan is not their Banana republic, and while Yousuf Raza Gillani, our puppet Prime Minister puked in front of Michael Mullen of US, the images of drones’ wreck would speak themselves.

They can’t make the writ of Islamabad run in the F.A.T.A., they can’t be bothered to do much to prevent hostile armed bands from leaving sanctuaries on their side of a boundary that really doesn’t make much sense, they can’t or won’t stop armed invasions of a friendly neighboring state launched from  territory they claim as theirs, and they can’t exercise  de facto and de jure sovereignty over what they claim is part of their national territory like other nuclear-armed Westphalian nation-states.  All these things they cannot do, but they can threaten to shoot down our Predators with the F-16’s we gave them.

Cooler heads will prevail.  Deals will be made.  The Great Game will go on.  Our English-speaking Pakistani “allies” perhaps are unfamiliar with the Jacksonian American concept of what goes around comes around.



Filed under The Forgotten War

13 responses to “Demolishing couple of planes would do a loads of good to calm the itchy and aggressive nerves of the US

  1. One nuclear detonation wouldn’t EMP the whole North American continent. He exaggerates.

    Before we were reduced to a population of 30 million we would rebuild what was destroyed and get back to some semblance of normal.

    What would Obama do about such an attack?

    We could EMP Iran, but we’d probably also EMP Iraq and Turkey at the same time. Wouldn’t affect the goat herders, but Tehran would collapse.

  2. “Demolishing couple of planes would do a loads of good to calm the itchy and aggressive nerves of the US, and that would teach them that Pakistan is not their Banana republic”

    Sorry, but what an asinine bit of logic as it lacks consideration of American financial leverage in Pakistan, especially in terms of military support. Knock down a few drones and you might well find yourself amidst a sudden shortage of maintenance parts for those F-16’s. I suppose they could go the route Iran went to get their Tomcat’s off the ground again and hope the Chinese develop and market them in our stead.
    Nah, I think the Paki military might well balk at the prospect of shooting down our drones.

    I agree, though, cooler heads will prevail. Once the India nuke deal loses some heat (and maybe we can convince India to cease building highways in Afghanistan) I’m betting we come to a closed doors agreement of a small, publicly deniable, American footprint in FATA, Waziristan, NWF, etc. While the safe haven provides a relief for Pakistan (Tali’s concentrate on American forces as opposed to Paki soft targets) they must realize that relief is only so long as the US and NATO remain in Afghanistan. NATO victory in Afghanistan and US containment of the Tali’s in the Lawless Lands is, in the long term, beneficial to Pakistan. I think Musharraf realized this. I also think the Bush admin, for all it’s talk of spreading democracy, misses ole Mush like hell. I know I would. Politicians are trigger happy and aim for the short term. Military leaders, if they’re any good, look down the rifles barrel and consider what’s coming.

  3. I don’t think we should convince India to cease building highways in Afghanistan. I think we ought to dump as much of the problem on them as they’ll take. India is the Great Power in that part of the world.

    The Paks are terrified of Indian conventional forces. That’s why they engage India asymmetrically through proxies. Indian forces in Pakistan’s rear might keep Kashmir quieter.

    If the Paks try to jerk us around, we make deals with the Indians.

    What would Obama do if they try to close the cracker line from Karachi?

  4. suek

    >>One nuclear detonation wouldn’t EMP the whole North American continent. He exaggerates.>>

    That’s good news. I’m vaguely aware of the effect of an EMP, but can’t say I understand it.
    Assuming you have a better idea of it and it’s potential effect, tell me something – would the effect be negated by turning off all power? In other words, if you knew such an attack was coming, could you turn everything off and avoid the effects?

  5. Nope. Cutting power to the equipment won’t help. It must be shielded.

    The ElectroMagnetic Pulse (EMP) effect [1] was first observed during the early testing of high altitude airburst nuclear weapons [GLASSTONE64]. The effect is characterised by the production of a very short (hundreds of nanoseconds) but intense electromagnetic pulse, which propagates away from its source with ever diminishing intensity, governed by the theory of electromagnetism. The ElectroMagnetic Pulse is in effect an electromagnetic shock wave.

    This pulse of energy produces a powerful electromagnetic field, particularly within the vicinity of the weapon burst. The field can be sufficiently strong to produce short lived transient voltages of thousands of Volts (ie kiloVolts) on exposed electrical conductors, such as wires, or conductive tracks on printed circuit boards, where exposed.

    It is this aspect of the EMP effect which is of military significance, as it can result in irreversible damage to a wide range of electrical and electronic equipment, particularly computers and radio or radar receivers. Subject to the electromagnetic hardness of the electronics, a measure of the equipment’s resilience to this effect, and the intensity of the field produced by the weapon, the equipment can be irreversibly damaged or in effect electrically destroyed. The damage inflicted is not unlike that experienced through exposure to close proximity lightning strikes, and may require complete replacement of the equipment, or at least substantial portions thereof.

  6. Pingback: Jerking Our Supply Chain « Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group

  7. Doug

    They better not mess w/our aircrafts.

  8. We used to could say the same thing about our trucks.

    If they declare their airspace closed to us, what are we going to DO about it?

  9. India’s very valuable, for with their help and aid, we can surround Pakistan. Currently Pakistan and Iran surrounds Afghanistan. Not a good negotiation position to be in, for us or our allies there.

  10. That’s good news. I’m vaguely aware of the effect of an EMP, but can’t say I understand it.

    Wrap wire around a magnet, and it turns into an electromagnet. Turn that electromagnet in an arc and you create electricity. Strong the magnetism, the stronger the electricity produced. Course, for generator electricity, you need three phase or what not in order to a certain uniformity of output.

    For EMP, you just need power.

    There’s only two real ways to EMP an entire continent. Both are theoretically.

    You would need a sizable nuclear yield blast over the US. A yield of more than a gigaton. Even then, the higher you up, the weaker the pulse. So you still might not be able to cover the entire continent and still hit the electronics with the strength you want.

    Either that, or you need a bomb in high orbit designed to focus, some kind of shaped charge, the EMP produced towards the US. However, since EMP pulses are magnetic, you can’t just scruntch it towards one direction like “down”. There might be a way to make a nuke use a reaction to produce EMP and keep producing it, rather than go up in a critical mass reaction.

    But still, Iran’s going to have to put a lot of R and D to get that kind of weapon. Even the US might not be able to get the physics of it right until more is researched about nuclear devices and nuclear energy.

    I suspect Iran’s missile launch capacities are to intimidate their neighbors and to use as a negotiation ploy against the US.

    If they want to nuke the US, they’ll just ship the bombs to Hizbollah and have them carry it through the Mexican border. One of the numerous tunnels the Mexicans use to smuggle meth into the US, should do it.

    “If even a crude nuclear weapon were detonated anywhere between 40 kilometers to 400 kilometers above the earth, in a split-second it would generate an electro-magnetic pulse [EMP] that would cripple military and civilian communications, power, transportation, water, food, and other infrastructure,” the report warned.

    While not causing immediate civilian casualties, the near-term impact on U.S. society would dwarf the damage of a direct nuclear strike on a U.S. city.

    “The first indication [of such an attack] would be that the power would go out, and some, but not all, the telecommunications would go out. We would not physically feel anything in our bodies,” Graham said.

    If Iran actually does that, the US’s nuclear missile submarine fleet are going to get very itchy trigger fingers.

  11. The real danger to America is if somebody pops out satellites. No gps. No sat com. No NOthing.

  12. India would be a powerful ally to have on our side. They will not help us against Iran. They don’t want us in Central Asia. They don’t want Pakistan. What they want and what we want intersect in some places but diverge in many others.