DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan, June 14, 2009

U.S. Missile Strike Kills 5 In Pakistan

Clashes Between Taliban And Security Forces Kill At Least 20 Militants; 8 Dead In Marketplace Bombing

  • View of a damaged car at the site of a bomb explosion in a market in Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan on Sunday, June 14, 2009. A Government official said 11 to 13 pounds of explosives were planted in a fruit vendor's cart. Eight people were killed.

    View of a damaged car at the site of a bomb explosion in a market in Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan on Sunday, June 14, 2009. A Government official said 11 to 13 pounds of explosives were planted in a fruit vendor's cart. Eight people were killed.  (AP Photo/Ishtiaq Mehsud)

  • Fast Facts Pakistan

    Learn about the people, economy and history.

(AP)  A suspected U.S. missile strike killed at least five people Sunday in a tribal region where Pakistan's top Taliban commander is based, intelligence officials said, breaking a lull in such attacks and posing a test for growing anti-Taliban sentiment in the country.

The strike came as violence raged elsewhere in the volatile northwest region bordering Afghanistan: a bombing at a market killed at least eight people, while officials said clashes between the Taliban and security forces killed at least 20 militants in a tribal region supposedly cleared of insurgents months ago.

Local media have reported that the Taliban claimed responsibility for several recent attacks in Pakistan, including one that killed a moderate cleric, calling them revenge for the army's offensive in the northwestern Swat Valley.

The attacks seem to have bolstered growing anti-Taliban sentiment in Pakistan, something the U.S. hopes will translate into support for sustained military action against extremists who use Pakistani soil to plot attacks on Western troops in Afghanistan.

But U.S. missile strikes could undermine that sentiment because they are deeply unpopular among Pakistanis. The government has publicly protested such strikes, fired by unmanned drone aircraft, saying they violate the country's sovereignty, even though many analysts suspect the two countries have struck a secret deal to facilitate the attacks.

The U.S. rarely acknowledges or discusses the missile strikes.

The latest strike - the first since mid-May - occurred in South Waziristan, hitting three vehicles in an area not far from Makeen, a village considered a stronghold of Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud. It was not clear who the five people killed were. Two Pakistani intelligence officials confirmed the attack on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media.

South Waziristan, which also is an al Qaeda stronghold, is believed to be the target of Pakistan's next offensive against militants. Mehsud has been linked to bombings on both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, and U.S. defense officials said last week that Pakistan intends to go after him, though no timeframe was given.

In recent weeks, militants and security forces have repeatedly skirmished in South Waziristan, though the army insists it is merely responding to attacks.

In a statement, the army said it killed some 30 militants in South Waziristan in Saturday strikes aimed in part at avenging the death of cleric Sarfraz Naeemi. Naeemi, killed in a suicide bombing Friday, had denounced the Taliban as murderers.

The market bombing Sunday occurred in Dera Ismail Khan, a town not far from South Waziristan.

Government official Inayat Ullah said 11 to 13 pounds (5 to 6 kilograms) of explosives were planted in a fruit vendor's hand-pulled cart. Police official Mohammad Iqbal put the death toll at eight, with 20 wounded.

At a hospital where some of the wounded were taken, wails and cries filled the air.

"It was crowded there when something big exploded," said 30-year-old Ilyas Ahmad, whose legs were wounded. "It was a big noise. Everybody was crying. Bodies were lying there. People were lying around blood."

Iqbal said the attack had to be a response to the Swat operation. On Saturday, senior provincial minister Bashir Bilour said the latest attacks could also be the work of militants in Waziristan ahead of "an imminent army operation" in the region.

Fighting on too many fronts could tax Pakistan's military, not to mention government resources. The latest clashes in the Bajur tribal region underscore the challenges facing the military in holding territory it claims to have cleared.

Pakistani security forces used jets, helicopters and artillery to pound suspected Taliban hideouts in Bajur over the weekend.

Zakir Hussain Afridi, the top government official for Bajur, said the fighting was in the Charmang valley, a stretch he described as largely under Taliban control. Jamil Khan, his deputy, put the militant death toll at 20 since Friday.

Bajur was the main theater of operations against the militants before Swat. After some six months of fighting, the army said in February that the Taliban there had been defeated. But reports have occasionally surfaced since then of ongoing militant activity.

Afridi told The Associated Press that the military had used airstrikes in the past in Charmang but that there were no ground troops - army or paramilitary - in that part of Bajur.

Pakistan had relied heavily on local tribes in Bajur to raise their own militias to force out local Taliban, but Afridi said that concept had not taken off well in Charmang.

Military officials could not immediately be reached for comment Sunday.

The military says its operation dating to late April has killed more than 1,300 militants in Swat and surrounding areas. But the Swat offensive has already displaced more than 2 million civilians, a huge humanitarian test for Pakistan. More battles along the Afghan border could swell that number.

© MMIX The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 28 Comments
by YrSoWrong June 15, 2009 6:32 PM EDT
America's war upon the innocents has been delayed. Too many non-innocents.
Reply to this comment
by hower4 June 15, 2009 2:06 PM EDT
.........WRONG,,,,the majority of Americans DON'T support the war....
Posted by tincup356 at 3:28 AM : Jun 15, 2009
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Only when they realised they were losing!!!!!!! Until then the majority were in support.
Reply to this comment
by tincup356 June 15, 2009 6:28 AM EDT
By the way, where is the anti-war movement lately??? Nowhere to be found even as the wars expand in scope and cost.
Posted by tautomer at 12:41 AM : Jun 15, 2009
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What's the point? The outcome is the same whoever you vote for. Face the facts, the majority of Americans LIKE wars.
Posted by hower4 at 3:02 AM : Jun 15, 2009 .................
...........................WRONG,,,,the majority of Americans DON'T support the war...it is supported by BOTH parties of congress, the White house, defense contractors , and lobbyists, who are getting personally rich off the war, not the people of this country who are not represented by the government.
Reply to this comment
by hower4 June 15, 2009 6:02 AM EDT
By the way, where is the anti-war movement lately??? Nowhere to be found even as the wars expand in scope and cost.
Posted by tautomer at 12:41 AM : Jun 15, 2009
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What's the point? The outcome is the same whoever you vote for. Face the facts, the majority of Americans LIKE wars.
Reply to this comment
by hower4 June 15, 2009 5:13 AM EDT
These extremist have had their fifteen minutes, it's time to end their constant acts of war upon the innocents of every nation. It's time to rid the world of these cowards and restore some semblance of order.
Posted by edward1975-2009 at 10:40 AM : Jun 14, 2009
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You ARE talking about America's constant acts of war upon the innocents, aren't you?
Reply to this comment
by tautomer June 15, 2009 3:41 AM EDT
Sorry to burst your bubble Lawyers_Guns but Obama said he would put a stop to civilians casualties after he greased 140 civilians a few weeks ago.



Obama pledges effort to halt civilian war deaths WASHINGTON May 8th, 2009 ? President Barack Obama is pledging ?every effort? to halt civilian casualties in the war in Afghanistan.

Evidently his efforts aren;t worth a darn. Obama criticized the previous administration for civilian deaths in Afghanistan. Now he regularly targets them. He seems to do a lot that he once criticized. It's called hypocrisy.

By the way, where is the anti-war movement lately??? Nowhere to be found even as the wars expand in scope and cost.
Reply to this comment
by lucytomato June 15, 2009 1:55 AM EDT
On the pretext of protecting local people ,Taliban is glad to this news ,The more America mistake ,the more Taliban use ...
Reply to this comment
by -Lawyers-Guns-n-Money- June 14, 2009 11:39 PM EDT
Obama targeting civilians again. I thought he promised he was gonna stop.
Posted by tautomer at 4:45 PM : Jun 14, 2009


You give a whole new plane of meaning to the word moron.
Reply to this comment
by ReallyMeanIt June 14, 2009 11:00 PM EDT
Why are we invading Pakistan and kill people. They didn't attacked us.............oh wait, forgot Bush is not president anymore.............good job, kill those bastards that threaten civilization and mankind.
Reply to this comment
by tautomer June 14, 2009 7:45 PM EDT
Obama targeting civilians again. I thought he promised he was gonna stop.
Reply to this comment
by DanRathersJr June 14, 2009 6:56 PM EDT
look...guys on the phone sayin "Dude , they executed my Vette!!!!!!"
Reply to this comment
by 1notrub11 June 14, 2009 6:43 PM EDT
as anyone else noticed how restrictive CBS has been today, not allowing comments on certain articles.

Ahmadinejad On Unrest: "Not Important( No comments allowed)

Iran Clamps Down On Protests, Press( No comments allowed)

Israel Accepts Unarmed Palestinian State( No comments allowed)
Posted by debinok1 at 2:44 PM

I have and its unfortunate - on the "Not Important" article, my feedback to Ahmadinejad would be: I guess the beliefs, feelings and feedback of the future leadership of your country are not important - what a ditz. It's the way he treats everyone in the world - no dialog, just my (read the Ayatollah's) opinion. These guys are going down - maybe not today but soon enough. The world is encroaching on their "cave" - they would be better served readying their society than covering it up.
Reply to this comment
by gravyboat3000 June 14, 2009 6:33 PM EDT
Has anyone else noticed how restrictive CBS has been today, not allowing comments on certain articles.

Ahmadinejad On Unrest: "Not Important( No comments allowed)

Iran Clamps Down On Protests, Press( No comments allowed)

Israel Accepts Unarmed Palestinian State( No comments allowed)
Posted by debinok1

I don't think it's a conspiracy, I think CBS, or the company they pay to run this site are short staffed on weekends, which means fewer babysitt...er...Moderators to watch Rowdy.
Reply to this comment
by gravyboat3000 June 14, 2009 6:31 PM EDT
Wow the CBS propaganda system allowed comment on this one-for the rest NO FREE SPEECH-talk about irony[not really they always grovel to their masters].
Posted by babooph

"AAAAHHHHHHHH!"

'LOUD NOISES!"
Reply to this comment
by gravyboat3000 June 14, 2009 6:30 PM EDT
Ooops, get out the law books, it's time to indict Obama for war crimes....
Posted by IThoughtItWasFunnyAgin

Oh Rowdy, stop funnin us.
Reply to this comment
by babooph June 14, 2009 6:10 PM EDT
Wow the CBS propaganda system allowed comment on this one-for the rest NO FREE SPEECH-talk about irony[not really they always grovel to their masters].
Reply to this comment
by debinok1 June 14, 2009 5:44 PM EDT
Has anyone else noticed how restrictive CBS has been today, not allowing comments on certain articles.

Ahmadinejad On Unrest: "Not Important( No comments allowed)

Iran Clamps Down On Protests, Press( No comments allowed)

Israel Accepts Unarmed Palestinian State( No comments allowed)
Reply to this comment
by 1notrub11 June 14, 2009 5:20 PM EDT
What would you do if they were over here killing your family?
Posted by SilentCowboy at 10:03 AM

Perhaps you would like to pose an acceptable response to 9/11? And insure that they wouldn't do it again. Oh, and if the reaction is that the Taliban aren't a party to the issue, then why do they conceal themselves among the uninvolved and hide parties that do appear (by their own admission) to be responsible?
I think it seems that publicly the Pakistani government has an issue with missle attacks - privately, however, don't be too sure that they are not providing some of the intelligence to carry it out.
Reply to this comment
by mav547166 June 14, 2009 5:17 PM EDT
We used to take prisoners. I say thank a liberal, if it wasnt for their shoddy memory of CIA briefings and life at Gitmo we would always be taking prisoners and feeding them for the rest of their lives providing cable tv, internet, and perhaps a little bit of due process.
Reply to this comment
by trapbreaking June 14, 2009 4:54 PM EDT
"They" approve violence against anyone even that means killing and maiming non-combatants. . . . Posted by mysteriousjz

Like a suicide bombt in a marketplace?

.
Reply to this comment
See all 28 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie." Watch Now

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: