• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pakistan army shows its anti-drone technology : Prime Minister in audience

anatta

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
24,279
Reaction score
10,374
Location
daily dukkha
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Amid continued tensions with the US over drone strikes, Pakistan army has successfully shot down a "drone" during a military exercise that was watched by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani

During the "Azm-e-Nau 4 Exercise" at Bahawalpur in Punjab province yesterday, the army air defence demonstrated its anti-drone technology by successfully bringing down a drone by targeting it with the 35mm Oerlikon guns, The News daily said.


The event also marked the culmination of five-year series of exercises jointly conducted by the Pakistan Army and Pakistan Air Force at firing range in Khairpur Tamewali, about 75 kilometres from international borders.

The drones are an emotional issue in the country and the public opinion has been further divided with the latest strike by a CIA- operated spy plane on Friday that killed Pakistani Taliban chief Hakimullah Mehsud.

Pakistani politicians, except a few handful, have criticised the strike saying it was deliberately done to scuttle the peace talks with the Taliban. However, security analysts and former military officers are happy that Pakistan's number one enemy has been killed.

The drone strike had renewed calls from some sections of the political and religious class to shoot down the US operated unmanned plane.
Meanwhile, the Prime Minister, who arrived at a helipad near the firing range in Cholistan desert, was received by Kayani.

He himself drove an open army jeep to bring the prime minister to the observation post to witness the demonstration by armoured, artillery, air defence and civil aviation formations of the Pakistan Army and firepower by F-16, JF-17 Thunder, F 7P and Mirage aircraft to repel an attack of enemy forces.

Sharif said the government had made its position clear that drone strikes constituted a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty, were violative of international humanitarian laws, besides being counter-productive to its efforts for bringing peace and stability in Pakistan and the region.

He also maintained that his government would not take any foreign dictation to determine its national security policies,saying, the days when the country's policies were determined through telephone calls from abroad are gone

Pakistan army shows its anti-drone technology
 
way to go winning the "hearts and minds", we were always kinna hated by Paki (though they glady took our ISI bribe money);
I would imagine by the time we get chased out of there(AfPak) it will be full court press loathing.

Not sure how well the 35 mm. AA guns work, we'll see -but the political story here is the Paki Taliban get empathy, for the US drone strike that killed Mehsud.

No worries;; it's all going to be fine, the Afg/Wazi Taliban are just going to go along with our plans to transition.....:roll:
 
They shot down a remote control plane? Amazing.

Better than shooting down a manned aircraft, for us anyway.

They shoot down enough of them, and they can start saying hello to these:

cutaway-tomahawk-cruise-missle.jpg
 
^ what is that thing, and why should we use it??
 
Why don't they have the right to shoot down our military aircraft in their air space?
 
They shot down a remote control plane? Amazing.

Better than shooting down a manned aircraft, for us anyway.

They shoot down enough of them, and they can start saying hello to these:

So you're saying the Pakistan Military has no right to shoot down a UAV flying in THEIR airspace?

If China were to fly UAV over U.S. airspace would you be against the U.S. shooting them down?
 
So you're saying the Pakistan Military has no right to shoot down a UAV flying in THEIR airspace?

If China were to fly UAV over U.S. airspace would you be against the U.S. shooting them down?

When the hell did I say that?
 
When the hell did I say that?

Sorry if I mistook your position, it sounded like you were in support of the drone strikes. My apologies if mistook your position.
 
^ what is that thing,
It's a Tomahawk missile.
and why should we use it??
They are cheaper than drones, and they can still kill terrorists without putting American lives in danger. They don't work well in cloud covered skies however, since they rely on satellite laser targeting which can be dispersed by clouds (or being painted by lasers with ground troops, which would make their use moot in this instance).
 
So you're saying the Pakistan Military has no right to shoot down a UAV flying in THEIR airspace?

If China were to fly UAV over U.S. airspace would you be against the U.S. shooting them down?

Sovereignty be damned!
 
Sovereignty be damned!

I just don't understand the drone strikes. If a soverign country doesn't want drone strikes, then we don't do them. If we feel the country is harboring terrorists, then we cut off ALL aid, and make the case to the U.N.
 
Sorry if I mistook your position, it sounded like you were in support of the drone strikes. My apologies if mistook your position.

No problem.

I'm a supporter of limited drone strikes, on known and verifiable terrorist targets.

As to my response, for clarification, the Paki's have every right to shoot down any non-Paki military aircraft that crosses their border. For that matter, it's their country, and they can shoot down whatever they want, whenever they want.

We also have the right to strike enemies of the US whenever we locate them, and wherever they are. If the Paki's and the A-stani's want our strikes to stop, then they should get the terrorists themselves, unless they support the terrorists which if verified would open up more targets.
 
Sovereignty be damned!

You can't have it both ways; claiming lawless tribal zones, with the inability to control the Taliban, and that you control that sovereign territory yet are not a sponsor of what occurs in/from it.
 
I just don't understand the drone strikes. If a soverign country doesn't want drone strikes, then we don't do them. If we feel the country is harboring terrorists, then we cut off ALL aid, and make the case to the U.N.

It makes logical sense to me.
 
You can't have it both ways; claiming lawless tribal zones, with the inability to control the Taliban, and that you control that sovereign territory yet are not a sponsor of what occurs in/from it.

I agree. Cut off aid, and leave. Don't allow visas from that country.
 
I agree. Cut off aid, and leave. Don't allow visas from that country.

That will not happen. What will happen is that US aid will continue, we will leave the area after pulling out of Afghanistan and the situation will allow the Jihad to continue while funded, in part, by us.
 
That will not happen. What will happen is that US aid will continue, we will leave the area after pulling out of Afghanistan and the situation will allow the Jihad to continue while funded, in part, by us.

I know. It is sad. We can't commit to our own goals as a nation.
 
As to my response, for clarification, the Paki's have every right to shoot down any non-Paki military aircraft that crosses their border. For that matter, it's their country, and they can shoot down whatever they want, whenever they want.

We also have the right to strike enemies of the US whenever we locate them, and wherever they are. If the Paki's and the A-stani's want our strikes to stop, then they should get the terrorists themselves, unless they support the terrorists which if verified would open up more targets.

Exactly. The US is gonna do what's in American interests and the Pakistanis are going to do what's in their interest. Neither side is right or wrong.

Have fun shooting em down boys, there's always more!
 
When we first started using drones on Pakis/Afghani terrorists, I approved and thought they were a good idea. Fighting terrorism with terrorism. Terrorists sneak out and attack with suicide bombers that they have trained and equipped. This causes deaths of lots of innocents and not so innocents. Terrorism. Fight fire with fire and along come these stealthy drones to zip a missile up some Jihadi's rectum while at a meeting to organize another suicide bombing or something similar. It's all good. Along comes Military administration and suddenly there are lots more targets because every General wants to use all his toys and the careful selection of targets becomes less selective and innocents are killed. It is an administrative problem that can be solved by firing a few top military or CIA, if that is who is operating the drone strikes. Killings of women and children are unnecessary and unforgiveable. Heads should roll. Otherwise, I think the drone program is a great weapon against terrorists.
 
I just don't understand the drone strikes. If a soverign country doesn't want drone strikes, then we don't do them. If we feel the country is harboring terrorists, then we cut off ALL aid, and make the case to the U.N.

That doesn't establish the infinity war and as such is useless to the Corporate State.
 
Back
Top Bottom