Pakistan can initiate wars against India, and special ops....as it can against Afghanistan, Iran and China.......terrorist operations that is.
Against the USA it is a different matter as the USA is the best friend of the Pakistan military.
Many top brass of the Pakistan military have been trained there and the UK.
So the two hour inaction by GHQ Pindi on the border region saga where Pakistani soldiers were being killed and the national defenses tested, with continued pleading by GHQ not to attack is a symptom of this flawed one-sided relationship.
It is neither incompetence or mis-communication which explains the 2 hour inaction.
Other sources in Pakistan, not controlled by the military say the fighting went on for 4-5 hours....enough time to get near by units to the scene, in addition to airbourne units such as the SSG in Abbottabad, Cherat, Attock, Tarbela.......in fact not too far away from the scene of action .
But possibly it would seem the Pak military didn't want a real fire fight with additional units arriving at the scene with an escalating scenario, and instead may settle for ......???????
1. Permanent blockade of supplies to USA occupation forces in Afghanistan
2. Drastic reduction of America's presence in Pakistan.
3. A sharp swing towards China with the formal awarding of military bases in Gwadar, and FATA.
This would be wiser and logical, but sad that such tragedies jolt the top brass of the Pak military into action, rather than make such decision years ahead strategically.
Pakistan defends lack of action during Nato attackBy Dawn and AP and therearenosunglasses.com
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.
The Pakistani military, which eats up most of the country’s budget and is accountable to no one, has said the attack that killed 24 troops was an ”act of deliberate aggression” that went on for close two hours.
It has also said that Pakistani commanders contacted and pleaded with coalition commanders to stop firing.
Nato and US officials have disputed that account, which has triggered uncomfortable questions in this South Asian country over why Pakistan’s own fighter jets and helicopters stationed close to the border did not take off to defend the ground troops during the attack.
The military has said troops did fire back at the Nato choppers when they attacked.
A Pakistani military statement on Friday said the response could have been more ”effective” if the airforce had been called in, but this was not possible because of a ”breakdown of communication” and confusion at ”various levels” within the organisation.
The incident has pushed already strained ties between Washington and Islamabad over the future of Afghanistan close to rupture.
Islamabad has closed its eastern border to Nato supplies traveling into landlocked Afghanistan and said it is reviewing its cooperation with Washington.
US officials expressed their condolences over the loss of life and denied the Pakistan army was deliberately targeted.
But they have not apologized, saying it would not be appropriate before an investigation into the incident has been completed. In the past, Nato and the US has complained that militants along the border are helped or tolerated by Pakistani soldiers.
US officials have said a joint US-Afghan patrol came under fire from the Pakistani side of the border and called in airstrikes.
On Friday, the Wall Street Journal quoted American officials as saying that Pakistani officers had given the go-ahead for the raid, unaware they had troops in the area.
Pakistan’s military also faced criticism after the May 2 unilateral American helicopter-borne raid that killed Osama bin Laden, with questions – yet unanswered – over how the aircraft were able to fly deep into Pakistani territory without the knowledge of the airforce.