The White House will not offer formal condolences to Pakistan for the deaths of 24 soldiers

[Cali_Democrat]

Obama Refrains From a Formal ‘I’m Sorry’ to Pakistan
By HELENE COOPER and MARK MAZZETTI
Published: November 30, 2011

WASHINGTON — The White House has decided that President Obama will not offer formal condolences — at least for now — to Pakistan for the deaths of two dozen soldiers in NATO airstrikes last week, overruling State Department officials who argued for such a show of remorse to help salvage America’s relationship with Pakistan, administration officials said.

On Monday, Cameron Munter, the United States ambassador to Pakistan, told a group of White House officials that a formal video statement from Mr. Obama was needed to help prevent the rapidly deteriorating relations between Islamabad and Washington from cratering, administration officials said. The ambassador, speaking by videoconference from Islamabad, said that anger in Pakistan had reached a fever pitch, and that the United States needed to move to defuse it as quickly as possible, the officials recounted.

Defense Department officials balked. While they did not deny some American culpability in the episode, they said expressions of remorse offered by senior department officials and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton were enough, at least until the completion of a United States military investigation establishing what went wrong.

Some administration aides also worried that if Mr. Obama were to overrule the military and apologize to Pakistan, such a step could become fodder for his Republican opponents in the presidential campaign, according to several officials who declined to be named because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/01/world/middleeast/for-pakistan-no-formal-remorse-yet-from-obama.html

Read this quote again: "Some administration aides also worried that if Mr. Obama were to overrule the military and apologize to Pakistan, such a step could become fodder for his Republican opponents in the presidential campaign"

Unbelievable. See what happens when you let the Defense Department run your foreign policy? It will always result in disaster. It also doesn't help when your foreign policy is based on preventing the Republicans from saying mean things to you.

The Pakistanis hate us for good reason. How would we feel if another country killed 24 of our soldiers on our own soil and offered no formal condolences?

[tabatha]

1. That is stupid. And ungracious.

[Robb]

3. No. It is diplomacy.

The language is quite clear.

[tabatha]

5. Yep, I guess it is diplomacy.

It is stupid that we have Republicans who are such jerks that they do not understand graciousness.

Hopefully, there was a private expression of regret.

[Cali_Democrat]

4. Extremely stupid

How can we expect the Pakistanis to even want to cooperate with us?

[ellisonz]

18. If they don't...

...the radical forces within Pakistan will assuredly take them down a notch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_Swat

[Hutzpa]

25. How many times in the past have they been

given an opportunity to corporate and still allowed terrorist to control their backyard? So using that as an excuse is not
going to cut it Cali sorry.

[Tesha]

10. And will generate the next round of terrorists who hate America.

And we'll say "Who could have anticipated *THAT*?".

Tesha

[BeFree]

2. British Empire saying

Never apologize and never explain.

Seems we are following that grand example. Right to the end.

[Swede]

6. What if Pakistan fired first like the Afghanis are saying.

Let's wait for some clearing of the fog.

[ellisonz]

19. It would be very dumb to fire back too...

[Cali_Democrat]

7. If you don't have a NY Times account, view the article here:

http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/obama-refrains-from-formal-im-sorry-to-pakistan-154338

[Pisces]

8. Debbie Downer strikes again

[Cali_Democrat]

9. I know

All Obama has to do is issue a formal apology to a country that lost 24 of its soldiers to the strike. Instead he listens to the defense department and some of his aides who think an apology will leave him open to attacks from Republicans.

What a downer.

[MissDeeds]

11. Exactly right

With an election coming up, he doesn't want to appear 'soft' on defense. An apology is in order, but placating the Republicans seems to
be more important. Again.

[Pisces]

12. I guess you have nothing to say now that he apologized and called the Pakistani President??

I'm sure you can find something else to complain about, you're very good at that.

[Cali_Democrat]

13. See here:

http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/197055-obama-calls-pakistan-leader-over-soldiers-deaths

Obama offers Pakistan leader ‘condolences’ over air strike deaths
By Erik Wasson - 12/04/11 12:41 PM ET

President Obama on Sunday tried to control the escalating diplomatic damage resulting from a Nov. 25 NATO air strike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

Obama called Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari to try to offer “condolences” over the deaths but the White House is making no mention of an apology. The U.S. contends that Pakistani soldiers fired on the NATO drones first.

[grantcart]

15. A formal apologies should be based on actual facts especially who

initiated the firefight.


Unfortunately it will be difficult to establish the facts as the Pakistanis are refusing to cooperate.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/05/world/asia/obama-offers-condolences-in-deaths-of-pakistani-troops.html

American officials have said that both sides thought they had come under attack by the Taliban. But Pakistan has refused to cooperate with the American investigation, impeding efforts to determine what happened.

[Cali_Democrat]

16. Any investigation by NATO and the US military will be a farce

They can't be trusted at all. I think it would be better to have a UN investigation.

[grantcart]

22. Actually a better definition of a farce is to post something that has been misreported

and then to continue to defend it after the exact opposite has been proven true.

I find it ironic that someone would prejudge the US and NATO as being unreliable but is happy to take the Pakistani version hook, line and sinker.

In the confusion of a fire fight anything is possible and the Pakistani version may be correct but the fact that they are not willing to cooperate with the ongoing investigation and the fact that they have not called for a third party investigation is somewhat suspicious.

The UN doesn't have the means to conduct investigations separate from their member states.

If the facts of the report were disputed then the ICRC would be the ideal third party candidate to do an impartial inquiry.

[jefferson_dem]

20. +1

Transparent.

[grantcart]

14. These reporters didn't have their facts straight. President did offer condolences.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/05/world/asia/obama-offers-condolences-in-deaths-of-pakistani-troops.html

WASHINGTON — President Obama phoned the president of Pakistan on Sunday to offer “condolences” for the deaths of two dozen soldiers killed in NATO airstrikes along the Afghan border, the White House said.

The conversation, eight days after the attack, overcame the reservations of some Defense Department officials and favored an approach suggested by diplomats who had urged a conciliatory gesture to try to repair the strained alliance between the two countries.


Kind of undercuts your "defense department running foreign policy' comment.

[Cali_Democrat]

17. Any time you're engaged in simultaneous wars and conducting massive drone strikes in many countries,

You can be sure that the defense department is running US foreign policy. It's not based on defending the US from strategic threats. In actuality, the US has no real threats. US foreign policy is currently based on justifying the gargantuan US defense budget.

[jefferson_dem]

21. "In actuality, the US has no real threats."

Oy.

[Cigar11]

23. How do you say I'm sorry ...

for getting shoot at FIRST!

[Hutzpa]

24. I like this fight and I know whose side Im on

they have betrayed America for too long and it is my feeling that this administration is not going to put up with their faux rage.

[dionysus]

26. sorry, but fuck those double dealing bastards... how many times have they sold us out?

:shrug:

[AtomicKitten]

27. While I'm certain the WH appreciates your tips on micromanaging foreign policy,

the Pakistani government hasn't been particularly truthful or helpful to the United States. It's prudent to gather the facts before shooting from the hip.