u.s. continues to win the hearts of afghans

[bud]

And you can try to pretend that's what I did, but - reality says otherwise.

oops. looks like you missed a few paragraphs:

As others are hoping that it wasn't only the one guy?

there is no 'as others are hoping..' in the equation.

it would obviously be easier for the PR department if they could show the latest incident is the work of 1 crazy person as opposed to the work of a group of soldiers. that's the point i tried to make.

bad news travels faster than good news. in afghanistan, there is far more bad news which is a result of the occupation. a total of 5 afghan weddings have been bombed by u.s. planes. (the number of wedding bombings is according to the afghanis. some of the bombings were denied by the u.s., which were later found to have taken place)

Oh, we could never forget that. You and others of your mindset would never let us.

That you bring up "burning Korans" while discussing a tragedy of this magnitude confirms in my mind that it's more about the criticism than it is this tragedy.

as i mentioned, it's about the disrespect the occupier shows towards those who are being occupied. koran burning, pissing on the dead afghans, keeping afghan body parts as souvenir and of course the thousands of civilians who have been killed by americans and other NATO members is what the afghans see and remember. building a school for girls in kabul is not going to cancel all the negatives.

Interestingly enough, the Taliban is killing innocent people in Afghanistan in response.

As far as I have seen, the Taliban (as well as other factions within Afghanistan) doesn't have any great humanitarian feelings towards the very people who were killed. They have no problem killing innocent Afghan civilians themselves. Three quarters of civilians deaths, according to you, have been at their hands. So what makes them more lovable?

it doesn't make them lovable. i'm sure they're as much disliked (if not more by some) and i'm sure some blame taliban's actions on america's occupation. one thing you need to realize is that there is a big difference between the taliban and the americans. that is, the taliban is not a foreign occupier.

your mentality of either them or us is the problem. why do the afghans have to pick between the americans and the taliban? let the afghans figure this out on their own. the occupation has not worked. after 10 years, what is there besides control over kabul? the number of civilian casualties per year continuse to increase since the occupation started. this is called a failure. time for the occupiers to cut their losses and get out as soon as possible. it's also time for the those who defend the occupations to accept that occupation doesn't work.

so what do afghans think? here is what some of them think:

Popular fury over the killing spree, which brought demands that the United States withdraw earlier than scheduled, could be exploited by the Taliban to gain new recruits.

"We have benefited little from the foreign troops here but lost everything - our lives, dignity and our country to them," said Haji Najiq," a Kandahar shop owner.

"The explanation or apologies will not bring back the dead. It is better for them to leave us alone and let us live in peace."

what about when the u.s. leaves and the taliban regains more control?

"The Americans said they will leave in 2014. They should leave now so we can live in peace," said Mohammad Fahim, 19, a university student. "Even if the Taliban return to power our elders can work things out with them. The Americans are disrespectful."

the hatred for the occupier runs deep.

"The Americans are not here to assist us they are here to kill us," said Najibullah, 33, a house painter in Kabul.

"I hate the Americans and I hate anyone who loves them, so I hope there is no long-term partnership between our countries."

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't think we are "insist[ing] on keep[ing] the stupid Canadian kid" - I don't think Canada is requesting that he be sent back. I think Canada is saying "let 'the stupid Canadian kid' stay in the custody of the U.S." - I don't think Canada wants to have to deal with "the stupid Canadian kid."

The last time Canada got one back he sued the Crown and was awarded over $10 million!

[j44]

The last time Canada got one back he sued the Crown and was awarded over $10 million!

Different circumstances but that is a good point.

[Guest Manny]

I don't think we are "insist[ing] on keep[ing] the stupid Canadian kid" - I don't think Canada is requesting that he be sent back. I think Canada is saying "let 'the stupid Canadian kid' stay in the custody of the U.S." - I don't think Canada wants to have to deal with "the stupid Canadian kid."

Well they did give him a trial, and now he's staying in jail for another 8(?) years, or something like that in the US, then he moves to Canada. I don't remember the exact details but he's not getting out of jail.

These 5 guys, apparently they would be going to a half-way house in Qatar, and they would get special privileges. Did they have a trial? Don't think so. So the trial was conducted by the US.

Fact is, to answer my own question they are worth something in the big picture, as a bargaining chip for appeasement, but the kid is worthless. So he must stay in jail...

[j44]

Well they did give him a trial, and now he's staying in jail for another 8(?) years, or something like that in the US, then he moves to Canada. I don't remember the exact details but he's not getting out of jail.

These 5 guys, apparently they would be going to a half-way house in Qatar, and they would get special privileges. Did they have a trial? Don't think so. So the trial was conducted by the US.

Fact is, to answer my own question they are worth something in the big picture, as a bargaining chip for appeasement, but the kid is worthless. So he must stay in jail...

The Taliban announced today that they are backing out of the talks w the US so it doesn't look like the 5 are going anywhere. Apparently they werent enough to build confidence.

[Post To The Left]

The Taliban announced today that they are backing out of the talks w the US so it doesn't look like the 5 are going anywhere. Apparently they werent enough to build confidence.

"It was thought that a deal to exchange five Taliban fighters currently held at Guantanamo Bay for a kidnapped American soldier was only weeks away, our correspondent adds."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17393837

[GostHacked]

During Panetta's visit to Afghanistan today he gave a speech in front of US and Afghan soldiers. Usually Americans can take their weapons inside the tent where officials speak but Afghans can't. Today, in what must be a sign that the US is concerned an American could take a shot at Panetta, Americans were told to leave their weapons outside the tent.

American soldiers are rarely asked to disarm while they are in a war zone.

I thought that was a bit strange as well. They no longer can trust their own troops.

[bush_cheney2004]

....American soldiers are rarely asked to disarm while they are in a war zone.

Not sure what you mean by this, as garrisoned USA troops purposely clear and secure their weapons at forward bases when off duty. Do you think they carry their pieces, sidearms, grenades, bayonet/leg scabbard, etc., 24/7....even at Shenia Twain concerts?

[Guest American Woman]

During Panetta's visit to Afghanistan today he gave a speech in front of US and Afghan soldiers. Usually Americans can take their weapons inside the tent where officials speak but Afghans can't. Today, in what must be a sign that the US is concerned an American could take a shot at Panetta, Americans were told to leave their weapons outside the tent.

American soldiers are rarely asked to disarm while they are in a war zone.

The call for American soldiers to disarm came after Afghan soldiers were told not to bring their guns in so it wouldn't send the message that the U.S. thinks Afghans can't be trusted.

[cybercoma]

Afghan weddings bombed

Prisoner abuse at Bagram

Pissing on dead enemies

Murdering innocent civilians for sport on more than one occassion

Protecting the opium trade

Abusing their own (see: Denny Chen)

Destruction of Afghan homes and crops in 2010

The occupation of Afghanistan needs to end. The ethical high-road America claims to have in the war on terror is non-existent. And with an alarmingly escalating number of IEDs and suicide bombers in Afghanistan, you have to begin to wonder whether the war on terror actually ends terrorism or creates it.

[GostHacked]

Afghan weddings bombed

Prisoner abuse at Bagram

Pissing on dead enemies

Murdering innocent civilians for sport on more than one occassion

Protecting the opium trade

Abusing their own (see: Denny Chen)

Destruction of Afghan homes and crops in 2010

The occupation of Afghanistan needs to end. The ethical high-road America claims to have in the war on terror is non-existent. And with an alarmingly escalating number of IEDs and suicide bombers in Afghanistan, you have to begin to wonder whether the war on terror actually ends terrorism or creates it.

Canada needs to get out of Afghanistan as well. That won't happen when we have the lapdog that is Harper.

[Guest American Woman]

Afghan weddings bombed

Prisoner abuse at Bagram

Pissing on dead enemies

Murdering innocent civilians for sport on more than one occassion

Protecting the opium trade

Abusing their own (see: Denny Chen)

Destruction of Afghan homes and crops in 2010

The occupation of Afghanistan needs to end. The ethical high-road America claims to have in the war on terror is non-existent. And with an alarmingly escalating number of IEDs and suicide bombers in Afghanistan, you have to begin to wonder whether the war on terror actually ends terrorism or creates it.

It's 'interesting' that you mix individual acts that have been condemned and the perpetrators tried and punished with accidental deaths (which have not just occurred by U.S. troops - you might want to look inward) and a few incidents involving the government (not all without a little help from our friends, if you catch my drift) - and then criticize it all as "the ethical high-road that America claims to have" - as if they are all one and the same; as if they are all government policy. It most definitely is not honest criticism - and quite frankly, the more of this type of thing I see/hear, the more it reinforces in my mind that most criticism of the U.S. is not justified.

Edited March 17, 2012 by American Woman

[Wild Bill]

It's 'interesting' that you mix individual acts that have been condemned and the perpetrators tried and punished with accidental deaths (which have not just occurred by U.S. troops - you might want to look inward) and a few incidents involving the government (not all without a little help from our friends, if you catch my drift) - and then criticize it all as "the ethical high-road that America claims to have" - as if they are all one and the same; as if they are all government policy. It most definitely is not honest criticism - and quite frankly, the more of this type of thing I see/hear, the more it reinforces in my mind that most criticism of the U.S. is not justified.

AW, I'm surprised you waste your breath! You simply can't win arguments against people who have long ago made up their minds.

You see, Uncle Sam is expected to be perfect! I suspect this is because not only is he close enough to hear but there is also a chance, however small, that he will listen! Unlike the Taliban, or the Syrian regime, or Hamas or the PLO or whoever is on the opposite side of any conflict with America.

So the USA is expected to have total control over its soldiers. Not only should a potential wacko never be allowed into a uniform in the first place but if the stress and strain of a conflict drives a soldier wacko his superiors should have had enough esp to see it coming and get him out of anywhere he could cause harm.

It all boils down to the idea that America is always wrong and the "other guys" are always right! What's more, those "other guys" can cut the throats of journalists and throw acid into the eyes of school girls and it is totally understandable. Uncle Sam MADE them do it by oppressing them!

America is totally responsible for its actions, even to the point of impossibility and ridiculousness. The enemy ALWAYS gets a free pass, because America has upset them somehow, even if they have to drag out some conflict from 150 years ago as a justification.

You are trying to argue with facts and logic with people that can't grasp either! I suggest you use your time instead to emulate Opus the Penquin by going outside and kicking up some dandelion fluff!

Much more satisfying!

[Guest Manny]

I doubt if there ever was a war in which these things didn't happen. It seems like an inevitable consequence of the uninhibited savagery that war creates. So when our leaders say they condemn these acts, they can only condemn them in principle. They know there is no way to prevent it from happening on the ground. In fact it only comes to our attention now because the war has almost completely ended, there are no big battles taking place. In the heat of battle we never hear about it, hundreds and thousand of women and children get butchered.

[Wild Bill]

I doubt if there ever was a war in which these things didn't happen. It seems like an inevitable consequence of the uninhibited savagery that war creates. So when our leaders say they condemn these acts, they can only condemn them in principle. They know there is no way to prevent it from happening on the ground. In fact it only comes to our attention now because the war has almost completely ended, there are no big battles taking place. In the heat of battle we never hear about it, hundreds and thousand of women and children get butchered.

Quite true, Manny! What amazes me is how many critics here in this forum can't seem to understand the difference between an atrocity as a fluke or as a deliberate policy.

[Guest Manny]

Quite true, Manny! What amazes me is how many critics here in this forum can't seem to understand the difference between an atrocity as a fluke or as a deliberate policy.

Yeah but Bill, I'm saying it's not an outright fluke. It's not deliberate policy, but not a fluke either. It's an inevitable consequence of war, and happens a lot more than we ever hear about. I'm saying if we accept war (which I personally do not), we must also accept this.

[cybercoma]

it reinforces in my mind that most criticism of the U.S. is not justified.

AW, I'm surprised you waste your breath! You simply can't win arguments against people who have long ago made up their minds.

I would say that about sums it up.

[Rue]

It's 'interesting' that you mix individual acts that have been condemned and the perpetrators tried and punished with accidental deaths (which have not just occurred by U.S. troops - you might want to look inward) and a few incidents involving the government (not all without a little help from our friends, if you catch my drift) - and then criticize it all as "the ethical high-road that America claims to have" - as if they are all one and the same; as if they are all government policy. It most definitely is not honest criticism - and quite frankly, the more of this type of thing I see/hear, the more it reinforces in my mind that most criticism of the U.S. is not justified.

Bare with my arguement until the last sentence. I am now goingt o argue any time any military unit engages in crime we need to openly disect what happened and be objectively critical.

The U.S. and all other NATO military forces are not above criticism and the law.

The difference between the United States Armed Forces and the Taliban comes from being able to hold the US Armed Forces accountable and hold it to a code of honour, discipline and military law the Taliban will never follow.

The irony is what this man is considereda legitimate act by the Taliban but will not be by the U.S. Armed Forces.

Where I disagree with the person doing the criticizing is his not so subtle use of this horror as a pretext to bash the US and all of the United States Armed Forces because of the individual acts of a mentally ill soldier but is silent on the fact that the Taliban does the very same thing only condones it.

The United States Armed Forces are accountable and will hold themselves accountable for this. Questions have to be asked how this man served so the no. of tours of duty he did in Iraq before being send to Afghanistan-there is no doubt the US has a shortage of soldiers and is sending mentally exhausted soldiers on too many repeated tours pushing them past their emotinal thresholds. Suicide rates in soldiers are sky rocketing and there is a systemic fsilure in accountability for the no. of tours soldiers are being asked to serve-that is a real issue that needs to be criticized. There is a limit to how far you can push and expect a soldier to function in dire situations of stress before they break down.

In that respect it is no different than the phenomena of keeping a police officer under cover too long pur pushing an intern without proper sleep to function in an emergency room.

That has to be looked at as well as the manner in which he was able to do what he did without other soldiers able to detect his movements.

Painful questions have to be asked and if the US Armed Forces is to salvage its credibility it will have to be ready to hold itself publically accountable and balance between sharing too much compromising evidence the Taliban could then use to kill soldiers with sufficient evidence to explain what happened, and how it could have happened and what will be done to prevent it from happening again.

Further I am not justifying what happened it but I am saying every armed forces has had its soldiers go insane and do bad things. It is a side effect of war and so I say the Americans should take the criticism and show they can and will openly welcome the criticism.

They must remain above the Taliban.

I personally believe its a waste of time being in that country. I personally believe the current President is a corupt scum.

I am loath to see any American, Canadian or any other soldier waste their time there.

That said I defend those brave soldiers as long as they are there and I do not like them all getting smeared because of the actions of a mad man.

As for what Wild Bill already said and I second, if you want fairness from people who use such incidents as an excuse to bash the US and all its soldiers, forget it.

They exploit such tragedies for political propoganda purposes. In that regard I agree with Wild Bill's comments.

The US has had to deal with other such horrid events, i.e., Mai Lai in Vietnam. Our Canadian armed forces had two of its elite patatroopers involved in a scandal where they tortured a Somalian. Bad things happen in war zones.

The break down of sanity is an inevitable consequence of a soldier left out too long on the front lines.

[Guest Peeves]

Bare with my arguement until the last sentence. I am now goingt o argue any time any military unit engages in crime we need to openly disect what happened and be objectively critical.

Truncated fer brevity y'all.

The break down of sanity is an inevitable consequence of a soldier left out too long on the front lines.

Well I done red what ya done rit, an can only be addin ,thet til we finds jest whar that damn bar done shit in the buckwheat anythin we smell is pure speculatin.

Edited March 17, 2012 by Peeves

[Guest Peeves]

Canada needs to get out of Afghanistan as well. That won't happen when we have the lapdog that is Harper.

Wasn't Harper that got us in.

Harper got us out.

[Guest American Woman]

Bare with my arguement until the last sentence. I am now goingt o argue any time any military unit engages in crime we need to openly disect what happened and be objectively critical.

Absolutely. I have never argued otherwise. The key word, however, is "objectively."

The U.S. and all other NATO military forces are not above criticism and the law.

The difference between the United States Armed Forces and the Taliban comes from being able to hold the US Armed Forces accountable and hold it to a code of honour, discipline and military law the Taliban will never follow.

The irony is what this man is considereda legitimate act by the Taliban but will not be by the U.S. Armed Forces.

Exactly. Goes along with what I've said.

Where I disagree with the person doing the criticizing is his not so subtle use of this horror as a pretext to bash the US and all of the United States Armed Forces because of the individual acts of a mentally ill soldier but is silent on the fact that the Taliban does the very same thing only condones it.

Not only that, but this incident is being lumped with U.S. policy/military actions to denounce the U.S. as not any more moral than the Taliban/al Qaeda et al. I find it 'interesting' that every time something negative happens, everything that has happened is trotted out - but if someone were to make such a list of acts of terrorism and try to connect it all with Islam, as if it were part of Islam, and use it as proof that Islam is not peace, suddenly the same people would be crying out how unfair it is to use one single act against the whole.

The United States Armed Forces are accountable and will hold themselves accountable for this. Questions have to be asked how this man served so the no. of tours of duty he did in Iraq before being send to Afghanistan-there is no doubt the US has a shortage of soldiers and is sending mentally exhausted soldiers on too many repeated tours pushing them past their emotinal thresholds. Suicide rates in soldiers are sky rocketing and there is a systemic fsilure in accountability for the no. of tours soldiers are being asked to serve-that is a real issue that needs to be criticized. There is a limit to how far you can push and expect a soldier to function in dire situations of stress before they break down.

I'm not arguing that, and of course the U.S. is held up to such scrutiny. I do think it's wrong, however, to automatically assume that that's always the reason people snap. Sometimes individuals are just more prone to it. Certainly everyone in the same situation isn't snapping the way this soldier did; in other words, sometimes people just snap. It's been known to happen in every country throughout the world, in civilian life as well as military. That's my only point.

In that respect it is no different than the phenomena of keeping a police officer under cover too long pur pushing an intern without proper sleep to function in an emergency room.

That has to be looked at as well as the manner in which he was able to do what he did without other soldiers able to detect his movements.

Well, other soldiers knew he was leaving the base. He left alone, though. Are you thinking he should have been followed? I guess I'm not understanding your point.

Painful questions have to be asked and if the US Armed Forces is to salvage its credibility it will have to be ready to hold itself publically accountable and balance between sharing too much compromising evidence the Taliban could then use to kill soldiers with sufficient evidence to explain what happened, and how it could have happened and what will be done to prevent it from happening again.

I'm not following you here. I don't see this individual's actions as reflective of the "credibility of the US Armed Forces."

Further I am not justifying what happened it but I am saying every armed forces has had its soldiers go insane and do bad things. It is a side effect of war and so I say the Americans should take the criticism and show they can and will openly welcome the criticism.

What criticism should the US be openly welcoming, specifically?

They must remain above the Taliban.

They always have been and always will be. Light years above.

I personally believe its a waste of time being in that country. I personally believe the current President is a corupt scum.

I am loath to see any American, Canadian or any other soldier waste their time there.

I'm not going to touch on this because I don't think it has anything to do with this issue.

That said I defend those brave soldiers as long as they are there and I do not like them all getting smeared because of the actions of a mad man.

Absolutely. And as I've pointed out on more than one occasion, the acts of kindness, humanitarian acts that individual soldiers take upon themselves, the lives the troops have saved somehow do not come up, much less speak for the soldiers as a whole. But one incident like this, and they are condemned as a whole. The U.S. is condemned as a whole.

As for what Wild Bill already said and I second, if you want fairness from people who use such incidents as an excuse to bash the US and all its soldiers, forget it.

They exploit such tragedies for political propoganda purposes. In that regard I agree with Wild Bill's comments.

This is what I was speaking of. It's like the boy who called wolf. No one listened to him after awhile. It's why I now believe that most criticism of the U.S. is unjustified and why I'm less inclined to listen to a lot of the criticism than I used to be. The legitimate criticism gets lost in a sea of nonsense.

The US has had to deal with other such horrid events, i.e., Mai Lai in Vietnam. Our Canadian armed forces had two of its elite patatroopers involved in a scandal where they tortured a Somalian. Bad things happen in war zones.

Yes, sadly we have all had to deal with such atrocities.

The break down of sanity is an inevitable consequence of a soldier left out too long on the front lines.

I don't think it's "inevitable," or we'd be seeing a lot more of it. Is that the reason for this soldier's behavior? Certainly it's going to be used by the Defense, and it most definitely needs to be thoroughly reviewed, but I don't think it serves any purpose not to recognize that sometimes people just do what they do.

[Guest Manny]

Wasn't Harper that got us in.

Harper got us out.

While it's true he never got us in, the mission objectives did change under Harper, so that we are "in deeper". And we're still there now. And dying.

Canadian soldier among 17 killed in Afghan blast

[bush_cheney2004]

While it's true he never got us in, the mission objectives did change under Harper, so that we are "in deeper". And we're still there now. And dying.

The mission objectives did not change for NATO, just the number of nations who actually did the fighting, and that included Canada.

[WWWTT]

It's 'interesting' that you mix individual acts that have been condemned and the perpetrators tried and punished with accidental deaths (which have not just occurred by U.S. troops

Maybe this is not about what you think?

Maybe its about what the Afgans think.

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

AW, I'm surprised you waste your breath! You simply can't win arguments against people who have long ago made up their minds.

Actually I think you have it backwards.

Many people in the west supported Afgan occupation,say 5-10 years ago!

How long has it bein now?

WWWTT