Inato Claims The Right Of Hot Pursuit
You may wonder exactly what this means and I did also when I first saw it but let me put it in a nutshell. The right of hot pursuit in this case refers to the situation in Afghanistan where insurgents attack bases on the Afghan side of the border and then duck back into Pakistan after they have done their dirt. US and NATO forces say that they have the right to chase them into Pakistan for a few miles if thats what they have to do to wipe them out. Personally I agree but it seems that the Pakistanis dont. They havent been much help to us in this war. If they would fight the insurgents on their side of the border we might have won the war by now.
The reason that insurgents have been able to last as long as they have is because they are able to find safe haven in Pakistan. They do their foul deeds in Afghanistan and limp back into Pakistan where they are able to rearm, rest, and regenerate until the next attack. If NATO forces could finish the pursuit when they flush them out they would finish them off very easily and the war would be closer to being over but the Pakistanis have been a great hindrance to our efforts.
When this war started in 2001 President Bush announced that our forces would chase terrorists into any country where they tried to hide regardless of if we had permission to do so and as far as Im concerned thats exactly what we should do.
On the other hand I can and do sympathize with the Pakistanis because this situation leaves them in a unique predicament. I wouldnt like to have people deciding that they can enter my country and fight whenever they feel like it. It endangers their civilian population and its just not right. They also have to live with those factions of the Taliban which are native to Pakistan. If they tick them off you can believe that they can cause a lot of trouble. They also face pressure from their anti American neighbors and will lose face if they are seen as assisting the United States and NATO. Its a tough situation for them however we need to do what we have to in order to deal with the terrorists.
The US has been cooperative with the wishes of the Pakistanis to a large degree in that we dont normally follow terrorists into Pakistan to kill them. We do however use drones to attack them in Pakistan and although we have been very careful there have been some inevitable civilian deaths. In the latest incident NATO air strikes killed about fifty insurgents after they had attacked a base on the Afghan side of the border and attempted to run into Pakistan. They had to conduct two separate strikes to get them all so the Pakistanis seem to be in an uproar. The government of Pakistan claims that they dont honor the doctrine of hot pursuit so they claim if any NATO troops enter their country that they will be met by force. I certainly hope that this is rhetoric for benefit of their Arab neighbors because to do so would be a huge mistake. If they fire on NATO troops who may cross over into their country I guarantee that those troops will exercise the right to defend themselves. My question to the Pakistanis is why dont you just deal with the terrorists who infiltrate your borders and are the cause of all of this confusion? If you deny them safe haven it will solve a multitude of problems for you. Military Ring Express
The reason that insurgents have been able to last as long as they have is because they are able to find safe haven in Pakistan. They do their foul deeds in Afghanistan and limp back into Pakistan where they are able to rearm, rest, and regenerate until the next attack. If NATO forces could finish the pursuit when they flush them out they would finish them off very easily and the war would be closer to being over but the Pakistanis have been a great hindrance to our efforts.
When this war started in 2001 President Bush announced that our forces would chase terrorists into any country where they tried to hide regardless of if we had permission to do so and as far as Im concerned thats exactly what we should do.
On the other hand I can and do sympathize with the Pakistanis because this situation leaves them in a unique predicament. I wouldnt like to have people deciding that they can enter my country and fight whenever they feel like it. It endangers their civilian population and its just not right. They also have to live with those factions of the Taliban which are native to Pakistan. If they tick them off you can believe that they can cause a lot of trouble. They also face pressure from their anti American neighbors and will lose face if they are seen as assisting the United States and NATO. Its a tough situation for them however we need to do what we have to in order to deal with the terrorists.
The US has been cooperative with the wishes of the Pakistanis to a large degree in that we dont normally follow terrorists into Pakistan to kill them. We do however use drones to attack them in Pakistan and although we have been very careful there have been some inevitable civilian deaths. In the latest incident NATO air strikes killed about fifty insurgents after they had attacked a base on the Afghan side of the border and attempted to run into Pakistan. They had to conduct two separate strikes to get them all so the Pakistanis seem to be in an uproar. The government of Pakistan claims that they dont honor the doctrine of hot pursuit so they claim if any NATO troops enter their country that they will be met by force. I certainly hope that this is rhetoric for benefit of their Arab neighbors because to do so would be a huge mistake. If they fire on NATO troops who may cross over into their country I guarantee that those troops will exercise the right to defend themselves. My question to the Pakistanis is why dont you just deal with the terrorists who infiltrate your borders and are the cause of all of this confusion? If you deny them safe haven it will solve a multitude of problems for you. Military Ring Express
Source...