NATO Air Strike Kills Civilians in Afghanistan

[celtic_crippler]

If confirmed: 4 women, 5 children, and 1 man killed, and 5 additional children injured in order to kill 4 Taliban leaders.

The deaths came hours before President Barack Obama announced that he would be withdrawing 34,000 US troops from Afghanistan by the end of this year, and a similar number in 2014, which he said would bring an end to the US war in Afghanistan.

Aricle: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/13/nato-air-strike-civilians-afghanistan

How easy to kill another when you don't have to look them in the eye. And now, with drones, it's just like playing a video game.

 

[oftheherd1]

If confirmed: 4 women, 5 children, and 1 man killed, and 5 additional children injured in order to kill 4 Taliban leaders.



Aricle: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/13/nato-air-strike-civilians-afghanistan

How easy to kill another when you don't have to look them in the eye. And now, with drones, it's just like playing a video game.

OK, if you don't mind, the next time we identify 4 or 5 terrorists deep in Taliban territory, do you mind if we send you in on foot to take care of the problem?

I'm not a big fan of President Obama, but I also have no problem with using drones. Nor do I have much sympathy for the families of those who choose to live with known terrorists, or vice versa. I have great disrespect for those terrorist leaders who try to use their famlies as shields, then complain when they are killed. For that matter, it would seem some of the family members are not afraid to pick up weapons and fight themselves. What do you suggest as a preferred manner to combat these terrorist leaders?

Or maybe I misunderstood your meaning?

 

[celtic_crippler]

OK, if you don't mind, the next time we identify 4 or 5 terrorists deep in Taliban territory, do you mind if we send you in on foot to take care of the problem?

I'm not a big fan of President Obama, but I also have no problem with using drones. Nor do I have much sympathy for the families of those who choose to live with known terrorists, or vice versa. I have great disrespect for those terrorist leaders who try to use their famlies as shields, then complain when they are killed. For that matter, it would seem some of the family members are not afraid to pick up weapons and fight themselves. What do you suggest as a preferred manner to combat these terrorist leaders?

Or maybe I misunderstood your meaning?

I already served, sir. You?

Devaluing the lives of any human being belittles us and our supposed values.

I suppose you'd be fine with just dropping a nuke on the whole country? Why not go ahead and kill them all, right? How about some good old fashioned genocide.

Ever considered if we stopped killing their children they'd be less of a threat to us. Or are their children less "precious" than ours?

I think we've done more than achieve our mission there. It's long past time to bring our people home and shift our focus to the massive domestic issues we are now facing.

 

[James Kovacich]

I watched a documentry where they asked 15 yearolds kids why were the soldiers there and their response was "I don't know." Everyone of them said that. They were so small when it all came down, all they knew was they were running around their country doing military stuff.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

 

[oftheherd1]

I already served, sir. You?

Yes, I have already served. I have mentioned that before so I won't bore you with piddly details here.

Devaluing the lives of any human being belittles us and our supposed values.

I don't devalue lives, nor did I say that I did. And in fact, that is all too often a consideration of those who must make decisions; what value to put on whose life? Whose life is more important, a terrorist, his family, or those of our military who would have to go in if we didn't use drones?

I suppose you'd be fine with just dropping a nuke on the whole country? Why not go ahead and kill them all, right? How about some good old fashioned genocide.

That's so ridiculous it hardly deserves an answer. However in present circumstances, no, I would not. And using lower level warfare helps prevent any suggestion that it should even be considered.

Ever considered if we stopped killing their children they'd be less of a threat to us. Or are their children less "precious" than ours?

First define children. I understand that children often become combatants at a surprisingly early age. Women too. And I think it is as much a cultural thing as simply retribution towards our presence there.

I think we've done more than achieve our mission there. It's long past time to bring our people home and shift our focus to the massive domestic issues we are now facing.

You may be right. What is our mission there?

 

[MJS]

I certainly see both sides. Lives, other than those of the intended targets, getting killed. Of course, like OTH said, if you associate with the bad guys, well, its possible that you'll be part of the fallout. Of course, IMO, I don't think there were too many bleeding hearts, when the badguys flew planes into the WTC, killing numerous people.

So, we have option 1) drone strikes. Option 2) send in our troops to take them out, which may still result in casualties other than the intended target. Any other options?

 

[celtic_crippler]

Of course, IMO, I don't think there were too many bleeding hearts, when the badguys flew planes into the WTC, killing numerous people.

I was, and am still furious about that.

...and where were those highjackers from again? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen. But oh... Afghani Taliban allowed "terrorist training camps" in their country. And who funded those camps? Where did that money come from? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen.

Are you sure we're bombing the right women and children?

 

[MJS]

I was, and am still furious about that.

My apologies. I wasn't clear. When I said bleeding hearts, I was talking about the terrorists, not Americans. Absolutely the WTC attack was horrible, and while I wasn't in NYC that day, it certainly was a sad day, and was upsetting.

...and where were those highjackers from again? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen. But oh... Afghani Taliban allowed "terrorist training camps" in their country. And who funded those camps? Where did that money come from? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen.

Are you sure we're bombing the right women and children?

Well, if we're bombing the wrong people, countries, etc, then the big shots need to get their **** together, and start bombing those that are responsible.

 

[celtic_crippler]

My apologies. I wasn't clear. When I said bleeding hearts, I was talking about the terrorists, not Americans. Absolutely the WTC attack was horrible, and while I wasn't in NYC that day, it certainly was a sad day, and was upsetting.



Well, if we're bombing the wrong people, countries, etc, then the big shots need to get their **** together, and start bombing those that are responsible.

You think we'd ever bomb Saudi Arabia?

 

[MJS]

You think we'd ever bomb Saudi Arabia?

No, probably not. LOL! So, I'm open for suggestions. What do you feel should be done?

 

[celtic_crippler]

No, probably not. LOL! So, I'm open for suggestions. What do you feel should be done?

Getting rid of the ones sending our people over seas like they were no more important than pawns on a chess board would be a good start. Unfortunately, people keep voting them back into office.

 

[oftheherd1]

I was, and am still furious about that.

...and where were those highjackers from again? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen. But oh... Afghani Taliban allowed "terrorist training camps" in their country. And who funded those camps? Where did that money come from? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen.

Are you sure we're bombing the right women and children?

OBL had long since been forced out of Lybia and he took refuge in Afganistan, supported and protected by the Taliban. He was behind the WTC attack. Granted he used other than Afganis to attack the twin towers. But OBL was behind it and was in Afganistan under protection of the Taliban. We went in after him, and really never left, for all that we didn't have a big buildup there to begin with.

As to the money, from all I have heard, much of the money was OBL's own money. Did he keep it in Saudi Arabia? I don't know, but at one time news reports were saying it was kept there and protected as he was a Saudi. But as MJS said, anything that hasn't been done about it yet isn't likely to be done in the future.

 

[celtic_crippler]

OBL had long since been forced out of Lybia and he took refuge in Afganistan, supported and protected by the Taliban. He was behind the WTC attack. Granted he used other than Afganis to attack the twin towers. But OBL was behind it and was in Afganistan under protection of the Taliban. We went in after him, and really never left, for all that we didn't have a big buildup there to begin with.

As to the money, from all I have heard, much of the money was OBL's own money. Did he keep it in Saudi Arabia? I don't know, but at one time news reports were saying it was kept there and protected as he was a Saudi. But as MJS said, anything that hasn't been done about it yet isn't likely to be done in the future.

No offense, man... but you should explore other "news" outside of FOX. Much of the rest of the world is better informed, unfortunately.

You might find this article intersting: http://www.phantomreport.com/former...poses-wests-alliance-with-al-qaeda#more-15114

 

[MJS]

Getting rid of the ones sending our people over seas like they were no more important than pawns on a chess board would be a good start. Unfortunately, people keep voting them back into office.

Well, yeah, I've been saying that for a long time...that we need to get the hell out of there, as well as stop getting involved with the issues of other countries. If they're not affecting us, we need to mind our own business.

Anyways...what type of person should be making the decisions? Bush and Obama are 2 Presidents that were/are active when we had people over seas, so I take it you're not fond of either of them? LOL!

 

[celtic_crippler]

Well, yeah, I've been saying that for a long time...that we need to get the hell out of there, as well as stop getting involved with the issues of other countries. If they're not affecting us, we need to mind our own business.

Anyways...what type of person should be making the decisions? Bush and Obama are 2 Presidents that were/are active when we had people over seas, so I take it you're not fond of either of them? LOL!

No argument from me.

I haven't been fond of any president in my lifetime... and that's been a long time LOL.

I just continue to vote for people that don't have a [D] or [R] in front of their name, continue to put information out there in hopes that if just one more person wakes up it will help make a difference, continue to be active in my local government through the LPGA... and that's all I can do at the moment.

 

[Tez3]

No offense, man... but you should explore other "news" outside of FOX. Much of the rest of the world is better informed, unfortunately.

You might find this article intersting: http://www.phantomreport.com/former...poses-wests-alliance-with-al-qaeda#more-15114

The site itself though seems to carry some misinformation, I had a shufti through the home page and found a lot of factual mistakes such as Greek Cyprus (Cyprus isn't Greek it's independant,) etc, etc, how sure are you that the above link is factual?

 

[Makalakumu]

OK, if you don't mind, the next time we identify 4 or 5 terrorists deep in Taliban territory, do you mind if we send you in on foot to take care of the problem?

I'm not a big fan of President Obama, but I also have no problem with using drones. Nor do I have much sympathy for the families of those who choose to live with known terrorists, or vice versa. I have great disrespect for those terrorist leaders who try to use their famlies as shields, then complain when they are killed. For that matter, it would seem some of the family members are not afraid to pick up weapons and fight themselves. What do you suggest as a preferred manner to combat these terrorist leaders?

I'd love to see you use that argument in situ. Perhaps you could go to Afghanistan tell "the civilians" that it's there fault if they get killed?

What would be the result if the roles were reversed and you just read what you typed above?

 

[Makalakumu]

But OBL was behind it and was in Afganistan under protection of the Taliban.

I wonder if you saw this...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5

The Taliban would be ready to discuss handing over Osama bin Laden to a neutral country if the US halted the bombing of Afghanistan, a senior Taliban official said today.Afghanistan's deputy prime minister, Haji Abdul Kabir, told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US.

Imagine the rivers of blood that could have been prevented simply by giving the Taliban evidence and allowing OBL to be turned over for justice? How many 9/11s has the US and it's allies inflicted after rejecting this offer?

The whole war is a lie.

 

[oftheherd1]

No offense, man... but you should explore other "news" outside of FOX. Much of the rest of the world is better informed, unfortunately.

I get most of my news from NBC, The Washington Post or a local radio news station. I don't think any of them are noted for conservatism nor inaccurate reporting.

You might find this article intersting: http://www.phantomreport.com/former...poses-wests-alliance-with-al-qaeda#more-15114

Well, that's time I won't get back. It looks like someone with an agenda, and probably different that FOX, but I don't know since I don't watch FOX. Since you are so disdainful of FOX, you must watch it some so perhaps you could comment on that?

 

[oftheherd1]

I'd love to see you use that argument in situ. Perhaps you could go to Afghanistan tell "the civilians" that it's there fault if they get killed?

What would be the result if the roles were reversed and you just read what you typed above?

I don't know the time difference, but you must not have had your first cup of coffee. :uhyeah:

But it's probably my fault for not turning on my facitious and sarcasm filters.

So no, I won't being going in on foot any more than I expected CC to do so.