NATO fuel tankers torched in Pakistan attack

Pakistani fire fighters trying to extinguish burning NATO oil tankers after allegedly torched by militants at a terminal on the outskirts of Quetta, Pakistan on Dec. 8, 2011. / AP Photo/Arshad Butt

QUETTA, Pakistan - Assailants torched more than 20 tankers in Pakistan carrying fuel for U.S. and NATO troops in neighboring Afghanistan on Thursday, in the first reported attack since Islamabad closed the border to protest coalition airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani troops last month.

Several hundred trucks have been stranded at poorly guarded terminals around the country as they wait for Pakistan to reopen its two border crossings into Afghanistan. Around 40 percent of the non-lethal supplies for U.S.-led troops in landlocked Afghanistan travel across Pakistani soil.

Islamabad closed both frontier crossings into Afghanistan on Nov. 26, hours after airstrikes by the U.S.-led coalition killed 24 Pakistani troops on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. U.S. and NATO officials have said the incident was a mistake, and have pledged to investigate.

Police officer Hamid Shakil says unknown men fired rockets at a terminal for the tankers close to the southwestern city of Quetta. He said at least 23 tankers were set ablaze. There were no immediate reports of casualties.

A Global Post report published earlier Monday detailed a lighthearted, celebratory atmosphere at the Chaman border crossing, with the thousands of stranded truckers using the time to barbecue and play music.

The crossing at Chaman is apparently the same as the site of Thursday's attack.

Last year, Islamabad temporarily closed one of its Afghan crossings to NATO supplies after U.S. helicopters accidentally killed two Pakistani soldiers. Suspected militants or criminals took advantage of the impasse to launch many attacks against stranded or rerouted trucks carrying NATO supplies.

The deadly airstrikes at the border sent already tense relations between Pakistan and the United States to new lows, threatening Islamabad's cooperation in helping negotiate an end to the Afghan war.

It came amid political tensions in Islamabad following the resignation of Pakistan's ambassador to the United States following an outcry from the country's powerful military establishment, which is in charge of Afghan and U.S. policy. Envoy Husain Haqqani stepped down because of allegations he wrote a memo to Washington asking for its help to stop a supposed military coup.

President Asif Ali Zardari has been under pressure because of the scandal, and on Tuesday flew to Dubai for medical treatment related to a heart condition. His trip led to rumors that the 56-year-old was losing his grip on power.

Earlier Thursday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the U.S. expected Zardari, an American ally, "will be able to return in full health in his duties" after receiving treatment. A statement for the presidency said Zardari's health was improving.

[slatep]

Deduct any amount of money the destroyed tankers and their cargo was worth from the amount of money paid to Pakistan every month for their so-called cooperation in fighting the war on terrorism.

It just goes to show you the type of moronic terrorists we have running the US.!

Apparently we have not suffered the loss of US troops lives enough to satisfy Washington.

The 545 who supposedly are doing what is best for the US continue to feel the need to decimate the US.

Just today, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UTAH) managed to convince the other homegrown terrorists that the American middle class does not need someone appointed to stop a repeat of the crimes commited by Wall Street, banks, mortgage lenders, etc.

He is running for his seventh term; evidently feeling he and his fellow Republicans have not done quite enough to destroy our country and will continue to push forward the plot for the rich and corrupt to make slaves out of all of us.

[Fezandie]

This is not a test, for either support or assistance, perhaps the present "governing" authorities of Pakistan should not be there.

[venusvegasvada]

Our buddies

[Nikos_Retsos]

That is why gasoline costs $ 40 a gallon in Afghanistan (The Wall Street Journal, December 6, 2011). And that is why the $ 10 billions a month the U.S. wastes into Afghanistan prolong the recession and the unemployment here. The Afghan war siphons in from the U.S. Treasury most taxes collected monthly like a "black hole!" Add to that the Wall Street predators; add the elite class and the Obama Administration explanation that our blues are caused by the European crisis, and the future looks quite bleak for all of us - the 99% !

Foreign invasions used to bring stolen riches home. Now they leach our Treasury, and bring poverty to most Americans. Do I have any suggestion? Yes. Ron Paul promises to stop the wars and plow those $ 10 billions a month into the U.S. economy! Give him the nod! All others seems to be gunslingers by choice, and why not? The vast Military and Industrial Complex which benefits from wars and military contracts are their heftiest political contributors.

We cannot improve our lives here if the irresponsible politicians burn $ 10 billions a month - probably $11.5 billions with the Pakistani aid- in Afghanistan. Burning gasoline carrying trucks in Pakistan and Afghanistan at $ 40 a gallon is burning big holes in our pockets. It is time that America wake up and burn the feet of politicians responsible for in the voting booth! Nikos Retsos, retired professor

[K. Daraa]

the truck drivers should be encouraged to park just upwind of pakistani army posts in urban centers, while waiting for the border to reopen - perhaps in or near Quetta, along Quetta Road just beside the military's command and staff college preferably, or perhaps beside the military comptroller's office on the north side of the city. Nothing discourages those Pakistani soldier boys more than to lose their pay packet. They might even change their minds about supporting terrorists and helping to them to attack coalition forces in eastern Afghanistan.

[TomMariner]

Pakistan, have fun with your religiously-fueled temper tantrums. You have until Inauguration Day 2013.

No actions against them, no more aid obviously, but more to the point, India -- do whatever you think is right, we have no more interest in the matter. If India feels like taking back the province they lost in 1947, well, may the better man (or country) win.

[notparicular]

Eastern part of Pakistan can be rejoin India to make for the loss that India suffered. Then Pakistan will be reduced in size. We can then call Pak-is-tan as Pak-was-tan.

[munseym1]

They told me if I voted for McCain, we would be hated around the world. They were right.

[augustus66]

BY the way CBS,, Why did you black out my word #*****?!?!?! What is so bad about that? Or Sloughfoot for saying "ti# for tat". Rally this PC crap is getting really out of control. Look at the context before xx'ing something out. This is no less general censorship, which most of your journalistic organizations rail against....

[DistantIsland]

Someone explain to me why do we still want to ally ourselves with such a treacherous country like Pakistan?

[tsigili]

That's why Pakistan closed the border. They wanted the tankers to be attacked.