Page 6 of 45 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 446

Thread: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

  1. #51
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by Andalublue View Post
    I don't think anyone's sugesting apologising to the enemy, but to the innocent civilians who lost their loved ones. Do you believe that all Afghan civilians are the enemy? I suspect the shooter did.
    This is an excellent point.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  2. #52
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    It's frustrating to us when we hear people say we need to leave Afghanistan, because we ARE leaving. We've been leaving for over a year, "force reductions" are ongoing, and all ISAF forces will be completely out by the end of 2014.
    Well, for some the change isn't happening quickly enough. You'll understand that if we're going to be leaving soon anyway, isn't every soldier or Afghan civilian that dies from this point forward a wasted life? I think that's how most Americans feel, like it or not.
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 03-11-12 at 01:31 PM.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  3. #53
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    Just asking for a little parity here. Why should our enemies expect an apology from us if it's so unreasonable for us to expect one from them?
    We will not be apologizing to the enemy. We are apologizing to the Afghan civilians who have been harmed. Unless you think the two are somehow equal. Once again, there is no double standard because you are not comparing apples to apples.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  4. #54
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    "I wish to convey my profound regrets and dismay at the actions apparently taken by one coalition member in Kandahar province, said a statement from Lt. Gen. Adrian Bradshaw, the deputy commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan.
    "One of our soldiers is reported to have killed and injured a number of civilians in villages adjacent to his base. I cannot explain the motivation behind such callous acts, but they were in no way part of authorized ISAF military activity," he said, using the abbreviation for NATO's International Security Assistance Force.
    There.

    In the meantime, our "friend" says:

    "This is an assassination, an intentional killing of innocent civilians and cannot be forgiven," Karzai said in a statement. He said he has repeatedly demanded the U.S. stop killing Afghan civilians.
    US soldier kills 16 civilians in Afghanistan
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  5. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    Well, for some the change isn't happening quickly enough. You'll understand that if we're going to be leaving soon anyway, isn't every soldier or Afghan civilian that dies from this point forward a wasted life? I think that's how most Americans feel, like it or not.
    Thats even more madining! Exactly how long would you expect it to take to move an at least 2 whole divisions, with equiptement?

  6. #56
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Thats even more madining! Exactly how long would you expect it to take to move an at least 2 whole divisions, with equiptement?
    During Iraqi Freedom it took a matter of months, if not weeks! Our not withdrawing fast enough is not a matter of ability. It is a matter of pragmatic considerations and political will.
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 03-11-12 at 01:39 PM.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  7. #57
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    06-28-17 @ 10:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,909

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by Andalublue View Post
    Slight difference, they haven't invaded your country, you (or rather 'we', as I'm a UK subject) have invaded theirs.

    The US are not invaders in Afghanistan any US involvement is done by agreement with the Afghan government.

    "In 2002, the United States and Afghanistan, by an exchange of notes, entered into an agreement regarding economic grants under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended. Additionally, the agreement allows for the furnishing of defense articles, defense services, and related training, pursuant to the United States International Military and Education Training Program (IMET), from the U.S. Government to the Afghanistan Interim Administration (AIA)...On May 23, 2005, President Hamid Karzai and President Bush issued a “joint declaration” outlining a prospective future agreement between the two countries. It envisions a role for U.S. military troops in Afghanistan to “help organize, train, equip, and sustain Afghan security forces” until Afghanistan has developed its own capacity, and to “consult with respect to taking appropriate measures in the event that Afghanistan perceives that its territorial integrity, independence, or security is threatened or at risk...On December 16, 2010, the Obama Administration, as part of its Afghanistan-Pakistan annual review, stated that it, as part of the NATO coalition, remains committed to a long-term partnership with Afghanistan. As such, the Administration maintained that U.S. forces would commence a transfer of security responsibility to the Afghan government in 2011 and conclude the transfer in2014.
    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL34531.pdf

  8. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    [QUOTE=StillBallin75;1060280687]During Iraq it took a matter of months, if not weeks![/QUOTE
    ] Bull****,weJUST NOW finished pulling out of iraq....as in just this past month.

  9. #59
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by Connery View Post
    The US are not invaders in Afghanistan any US involvement is done by agreement with the Afghan government.



    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL34531.pdf
    While this is true, I think you'd be hard-pressed to make the case that most Afghans feel any loyalty to the central Afghan government or that it represents their interests.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  10. #60
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    [QUOTE=Jerry;1060280701]
    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    During Iraq it took a matter of months, if not weeks![/QUOTE
    ] Bull****,weJUST NOW finished pulling out of iraq....as in just this past month.
    I'm talking about the initial invasion - you said it takes a long time to move 2 divisions and equipment. We moved FOUR divisions (plus a couple more smaller units) and equipment INTO Kuwait in a matter of a months. Now I understand withdrawing isn't exactly the same thing because you've got more equipment and tons of infrastructure built up over time, but my point remains that the quickness of our withdrawal is not a matter of ability.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

Page 6 of 45 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •