Views: 7305|Replies: 5

........ ‘US Threat To Pakistan Is Threat To China’ [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-12-3 03:43:56 |Display all floors
This post was edited by sansukong at 2011-12-3 02:49

The New News.

Chinese Government Official:‘US Threat To Pakistan Is Threat To China’
Chinese military stages massive wargame exercise near Pakistan in response to
build-up of U.S. troops

Paul Joseph Watson & Yi Han

The Chinese military has staged a massive wargame exercise near Pakistan in response
to a build-up of U.S. troops in the region as a top Chinese government official warned that
any threat to Pakistan would be taken as a direct threat to China.

Citing a report by China’s Central Television, Junshijia reports that an unnamed
government official warned, “Any threat to Pakistan is a threat to China,”
in response to increasing hostility directed towards Pakistan by both the US
and NATO in the aftermath of a NATO bombing that killed 26 Pakistani
soldiers last week.

Pakistan responded to the airstrike by sealing its border with Afghanistan, preventing supplies from reaching the US-occupied country.

According to the report, the United States is massing troops on Pakistan’s border in an act of aggression that China sees as a direct threat to its close alliance with the country.

In response, China recently sent large numbers of Second Artillery PLA troops armed with sophisticated DF-21C and short-range DF-11A tactical missiles to China’s northwestern plateau near Pakistan for a huge military exercise designed to reflect China’s “attitude towards the US threat to Pakistan.”

The drill ran from the 14-27 of November and included Pakistani troops. It was also reported by numerous other Chinese news sources (1,2,3).

The report strongly emphasizes the Chinese position that its alliance with Pakistan represents a “brotherhood,” and that “China will never be in peace if Pakistan is lost.

As we reported earlier, while China’s official rhetoric in English language media regarding hostilities towards the likes of Pakistan and Iran has taken on a concerned tone, discussions taking place inside China itself are a great deal more bellicose.

In response to increased western hostility towards Iran, Chinese Major General Zhang Zhaozhong remarked that “China will not hesitate to protect Iran even with a third world war,” comments that have provoked much debate in China.

The subject of Iran is also discussed in the Chinese media report. A western-led military assault on Iran is strongly discouraged, a point China also hoped to stress by way of a show of force in its recent wargames.

China’s ambassador to the UN has warned IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano not to create “unfounded” evidence to justify a military attack on Iran in the name of halting its controversial nuclear program.
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.

Posted by poorrichard at 8:02 AM

FIRST NATIONS ( LAKOTA PEOPLE ) Heartbreaking - (Google Search for video) "to stay true to who you are. Never allow anyone make you different or think different about what it is you are created to be ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-12-3 09:35:21 |Display all floors
After NATO airstrike, Pakistan soldiers given permission to return fire.
Pakistan today authorized its border troops to return fire without first seeking permission, in response to last weekend's NATO airstrike that killed two dozen Pakistani troops.

By Ariel Zirulnick, Staff writer / December 2, 2011

Pakistani supporters of Jammat-ud-Dawa, attend a rally to condemn NATO helicopters attacks on Pakistani troops, in Islamabad, Pakistan, Friday. Confusion and a communication breakdown prevented Pakistan's airforce from scrambling to defend troops on the ground during the deadly NATO bombing last weekend of two border outposts, the military said Friday, responding to rare domestic criticism of the powerful institution.

Muhammed Muheisen/AP

A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

For the past year, every disruption in the US-Pakistan partnership has prompted the question, "Will this incident be enough to break it?" NATO's recent deadly air strike on Pakistani soldiers raises real doubts over whether the relationship can be sustained.

Pakistan announced today that its military commanders in the border region can return fire without getting permission first – a change in the rules of engagement for what is meant to be predominantly a defensive force. The new policy, reported by Reuters, stems from a NATO strike on Nov. 26 in theAfghanistan-Pakistan border region that killed two dozen Pakistani soldiers.

NATO has said that it thought it was attacking a militant outpost and has apologized for the accidental strike on thePakistani military, while Pakistan claims the attack was unprovoked. The strike has infuriated the Pakistani public, and the government and military are scrambling to appease their calls for a break with the US.Reuters reports that the Pakistani military said today that it [url= ... USTRE7B00UH20111202]would have responded to the NATO strike[/url] if not for difficulty mobilizing its air force in time.According to a preliminary explanation from US officials, constructed through accounts from several people involved, the assault force on the ground contacted a US-Afghanistan-Pakistan border control center. Unaware that it had troops on the ground, Pakistan gave the go-ahead for NATO airstrikes on the outpost, The Wall Street Journal reports.The assault force, which was Afghan-led but included a number of American troops, was "hunting militants" in the border region when it came under fire. The group assumed the fire came from militants, but it turned out to be a temporary Pakistani military encampment. The assault force had not notified the center that it would be in the area targeting militants, according to US officials – but it did call in a request for an airstrike and received an all-clear. While Pakistan does not have veto power over airstrikes, NATO tries to keep it in the loop to avoid incidents like this one, according to the Journal.Afghanistan's Bonn Conference: 4 things you need to knowAccording to Reuters, Pakistan has denied authorizing the strike. Pakistan may not have, but it could also be hedging, unsure of how to handle the immense public anger. The Los Angeles Times reports that "the rage coursing through Pakistani society" makes this time different, and that public pressure to break with the US is "higher than ever." The pro-US Pakistani government, which has been working with the US since 9-11, will have to take a harder line, or risk losing power."If you're a politician and you're disconnected with the streets, you're in trouble. Any politician who speaks against what the prevailing sentiment is in the country today is done for," said Karachi-based security analyst Ikram Sehgal, according to the L.A. Times.Robert Grenier, the former director of theCIA counterterrorism center and former chief of the CIA station in Islamabad, writes in an commentary for Al Jazeera English titled "Pakistan: Going rogue" that there is something different – and more foreboding – in the Pakistani reaction this time around.It is hard to judge such things from a distance, but the Pakistani reaction this time feels qualitatively different from the crises preceding it over the past few months, from January'sRaymond Davis affair, to May'sAbbottabad raid on bin Laden, to September's public accusations of Pakistani perfidy from the outgoing US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. One has the sense that a political and psychological barrier has been broken, and that even if the outward forms of cooperation and civility are restored, and the border crossings for NATO supplies into Afghanistan are reopened, things will not be the same for a very long time.

Observers far closer to the action than me say there is little chance of an outright break in relations. They are probably right. But while the situation may not become so obviously dramatic, the inner reality of US-Pakistan relations is likely to be so insidiously bitter and caustic as to preclude any real co-operation on anything touching regional security and stability.
Pakistan has no qualms about going "rogue" if it feels that the US is working against its interests, Mr. Grenier writes. In the 1990s, after the US "heavily sanctioned" Pakistan for pursuing a nuclear program to counterbalance archrivalIndia's – something Pakistan considered essential to its national security – Pakistan turned to other "rogue" states.
The notion of Pakistan as a nuclear-weapons state seeking other sources of aid and countervailing strategic alliances to oppose a perceived Washington-Kabul-New Delhi axis is one that should give the US considerable pause.It is time for the US to get serious. The unintended consequences of its grossly disproportionate engagement in Afghanistan are simply becoming unbearable. With a much smaller presence and a sustainable policy, theUnited States can protect its core counter-terrorism interests in Afghanistan, and do so without further contributing to the international alienation and domestic unravelling of its far more important neighbour to the east.

FIRST NATIONS ( LAKOTA PEOPLE ) Heartbreaking - (Google Search for video) "to stay true to who you are. Never allow anyone make you different or think different about what it is you are created to be ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-12-3 12:36:19 |Display all floors
seneca Post time: 2011-12-3 12:25
So next time when Pakistani troops fire at NATO troops inside Afghanistan, the U.S. needs to shell n ...

That is not true , Pakistan is victim of American aggression in very similar way that Afghanistan is................American troops should stay in America and nobody will fire on them.
Even moron like you realise that i guess.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-12-3 12:55:13 |Display all floors
seneca Post time: 2011-12-3 09:57
Has any zoologist ever done behavoral studies on VIPERS and PANDAS kept in the same enclosure?

Seei ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-12-3 13:00:43 |Display all floors
seneca Post time: 2011-12-3 09:55
So next time when Pakistani troops fire at NATO troops inside Afghanistan, the U.S. needs to shell n ...


Use magic tools Report

Post time 2011-12-3 15:10:48 |Display all floors
Reminder: Author is prohibited or removed, and content is automatically blocked

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email:
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.