South Asia News
Jul 13, 2008, 14:43 GMT
Fighting erupts in eastern Afghanistan, 24 dead in south (Roundup)
And Also
Similar articles
- 12 killed as militants storm UN guesthouse in Kabul
- Up to 60 killed in NATO airstrike, Afghan officials say
- Eight soldiers, 15 Taliban killed in Afghanistan
- Afghan Suicide attack kills 23, wounds 31: governor (Roundup)
- Afghan truckers brave Taliban fire to supply NATO
Latest Headlines in South Asia
- 1. Obama to emphasize that Afghanistan commitment is not "open ended"
- 2. British soldier dies after blast in southern Afghanistan
- 3. Brown confirms 500 more troops for Afghanistan (Roundup)
- 4. Indian fighter jet crashes, pilots safe
- 5. Pakistan's Premier Gilani says he is running government, not Zadari
Via BuzzFeed
Older Talkback
page: 1
Did the fighters come from Pakistan, or they carrying Pakistan made guns? Our ill-advised millitary brass has been blaming Pakistan, rather than preparing the country and NATO forces for this day.
What a shame!!
THE COLONIAL FORCES COULD NOT SEE IT IN TIME!!
It is a very common practice among the Afghans to sell their children. India had bought this child from a poor afghan family and prepared him to kill himself in the vest.
they are simply not human
NATO troops cannot defend themselves? Than they should just leave Afghanistan otherwise more of these white devils will die.
....time to ante up and deal with this.
THIS was the problem that Bush should have dealt with.
THIS is the country that housed bin Laden when he perpetrated 9/11
THIS was the country run by the Taliban, who then were allowed to escape to Pakistan.
THIS is where al Qaeda was, before the choas in Iraq due to screwed-up policies by Bush, Franks, Rumsfeld, and a host of Neocon fools got us to where we are today, at the cost of over 4,000 lives of our troops.
Monthly death tolls of U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan surpassed U.S. military deaths in Iraq in May and June.
SP4 is an imbecile - but that's not news, is it?
Now that Petraeus is in command of the entire region, the pleas from his Generals to add to troop strength in Afghanistan will be heard. We've asked other nations to fight this battle; but as we increase our OWN commitment to Afghanistan, there will be more change of other nations adding troops as well.
This has been a mess for years, and Bush was instead paying attention to Iraq - a problem HE created through Bremer's dismissal of the Iraqi Army, and one mistake in judgment after another for 5 years, until Petraeus carried out the policy of paying off the Sunni to shoot at al Qaeda instead of U.S. troops.
Even within an optimistic story detailing the growth in numbers of the current Iraqi Army, no one is willing to bet the farm on them - which is why our troops remain to back-stop them.
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/07/09/ST2008070902270. html
As a result, the U.S. military effort is shifting from combat to providing intelligence, air power, command and control, artillery and other support that will likely be needed long after its combat role diminishes. Dubik estimated it may take until 2012 to develop the Iraqi air force and navy and establish border security.
Still, Dubik said challenges remain with Iraqi forces, pointing to a 'basic' level of training, shortages in leaders and professionalism, and 'pockets of sectarian behavior in both the police and military.'
'It will take more time to flush that out of the system because of the horrific sectarian violence' of late 2006 and early 2007, he said.
www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews+articleid_2390761&title=Afghan _Paper_Urges_Chief.html
(Text of editorial, 'Challenges facing the new commander of American forces in the Middle East', published by Afghan independent secular daily newspaper Hasht-e Sobh on 12 July)
As the new post of Mr Petraeus includes commanding all the American forces in the region, the American forces based in Afghanistan will also act under the command of Mr Petraeus from now on. One cannot rule out the possibility that Mr Petraeus has been appointed with the aim of improving conditions for the American forces in Afghanistan. It comes at a time when the success of Mr Petraeus in Iraq had other reasons, some of them unknown in Afghanistan.
The US-led coalition forces in Iraq are mainly made up of American troops, and the US forces are carrying out a major part of the task to ensure security, fight terrorists and train the Iraqi army and police, while unlike Iraq, the US forces have less responsibilities in Afghanistan and the major part of the task to ensure security, fight terrorism, train the Afghan national army and police is being carried out by NATO forces. It means that officially, NATO is mainly commanding foreign forces in Afghanistan.
The difference of views among NATO member countries on military and diplomatic issues in Afghanistan is one of the biggest challenges facing Mr Petraeus, and he should eliminate these challenges in order to boost the efforts of the troops under his command in Afghanistan. On the other hand, the American forces, unlike in Iraq, face a massive ethnic diversity in Afghanistan, and they had faced fewer problems in Iraq from this perspective. This is because the people of Iraq are Arabs, and the issue of Shi'i and Sunni faiths is the only distinction between the Iraq people.
The other issue facing Mr Petraeus as one of the biggest challenges which must be addressed is civilian casualties caused in military operations by the anti-terrorist coalition forces, led by the US forces in Afghanistan. The increase of civilian casualties in Afghanistan and the deep concern of international organizations in this respect have reduced the popularity of the coalition forces in the south and east of the country. Ordinary people want the Afghan government and foreign forces based in Afghanistan to ensure security in their lives, while it is seen that less effort is being made to prevent civilian casualties during military operations. On the other hand, the spokesmen for the coalition forces are saying that their forces are killing fewer civilians compared to the Taleban.
The other issue Mr Petraeus should deal with wisdom is the role of Pakistan in the war on terror and ensuring security of the common border with Afghanistan. In his new post as the commander of the US forces in the Middle East, Mr Petraeus should pressure the Pakistan government to close down terrorist training centres in Pakistan and take a sincere part in the war on terror. One of the main steps Mr Petraeus can take in this respect is to persuade the Pakistan civilian government to revoke its peace agreement with the Taleban. This is because the continuation of the peace deal between Pakistan and the Taleban will help the latter to increase their power and influence in the long-term to carry out more attacks on Afghanistan.
What Afghanistan needs are jobs and education. The government also needs help to deliver aid themselves without corruption. Unfortunately I see very little of this occurring which means more people will die. If the NATO countries announced they were importing large amounts of goods [other than opium] from Afghanistan - that really would be news.
Situation getting worse in Afghanistan? No way, this is just biased mis-information from the biased, defeatist, libnazi communist controlled MSM.
I believe that we are winning in Afghanistan, and the truth of our winning is being covered up by the cut and run media, hell bent upon creating negative propaganda, and emphasizing so called bad news, just like they do in Iraq.
Still not captured or killed b. hussein osama bin laden? So what. This guy is a nobody, and I believe that we will eventually find him in one of his terrorist bases in Iraq, where he was originally living before 9/11, with his cousin saddam the insane hussein. Pakistan and Afghanistan created a huge so called narco-terrorist enclave to trade drugs for weapons? This again, is nothing more that libnazi communist media propaganda. We killed all the real narcoterrorists back in the 1980's, and they were living in South America.
Another big win for the good ol USA way back then. Now, the only bad threats come from Iraq, homeland of all terrorists, and, the base of Mr. Evil of the axis of all evil, in Iran. Both countries are four letter words, so it is real easy to remember who is the real enemy. Don't let the demonrat, defeatist, anti-American, libnazi, communist propaganda fool you.
this took place in eastern Afghanistan and all the troops were American, including the 7 dead ones. How's that for upping the ante, SPfrickingidiot?
Nato is useless according to anther poster. Not so. It is amerika that is useless. Useless all the way from it's braindead childish amatuer soldiers all the way to it's corrupt President.
You're all useless, except as body bag stuffers.
the US and coalition forces in Aghanistan play with their gloves on, taking care in not destroying homes and building willy nilly, not like the much vaunted taliban...who blow up anything even themselves.
The border issue is paramount, if Pakistan keeps claiming sovergeinty over its side...it better start accually preventing the cross border shuffle the taliban do...cause time is running out on reconizing soveriegn rights on soil you dont accually control.
make that 9 useless amerikan bodybag stuffers in east Afghanistan.
page: 1
Your Talkback on this Story