u.s. continues to win the hearts of afghans

[Topaz]

Karzai doesn't think the killings were done by one man. Some think that US soldiers could have been on a revenge mode for the killings of soldiers earlier. Apparently, the bodies of some of the dead had body parts cut off. It wouldn't surprise me, if the US soldier is taking the blame for the rest of them. This war is a very sad and the US and the rest of NATO, should take some time off, like they did after Nam, and let peace settle before getting into another war some where again. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/16/karzai-doubts-us-village-massacre?intcmp=239

[Wild Bill]

Karzai doesn't think the killings were done by one man. Some think that US soldiers could have been on a revenge mode for the killings of soldiers earlier. Apparently, the bodies of some of the dead had body parts cut off. It wouldn't surprise me, if the US soldier is taking the blame for the rest of them. This war is a very sad and the US and the rest of NATO, should take some time off, like they did after Nam, and let peace settle before getting into another war some where again. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/16/karzai-doubts-us-village-massacre?intcmp=239

Why would you automatically believe Karzai? He is not only a politician but the leader of Afghanistan and a leader in danger of losing power at any time.

Which do you think he would rather do - find the truth or say whatever would keep the angry Afghani people supporting him?

[Guest Manny]

Why would you automatically believe Karzai? He is not only a politician but the leader of Afghanistan and a leader in danger of losing power at any time.

Which do you think he would rather do - find the truth or say whatever would keep the angry Afghani people supporting him?

I read that this was what some of the villagers said, there was a group of American soldiers came and did the killing. It's not totally unbelievable. I read that some of the bodies were burned after they were killed. How did the soldier do that? I mean, did he have a flame thrower or something? Or did he bring cans of petrol, or what. In any case it takes time to burn the bodies. How would one soldier come into a house, kill everybody, then proceed to burn the bodies all by himself? It's conceivable that a group would better be able to accomplish it.

But who can really say for sure. It's all speculation.

Still I'd be curious about how that was done by a lone gunman.

[WWWTT]

Why would you automatically believe Karzai? He is not only a politician but the leader of Afghanistan and a leader in danger of losing power at any time.

Which do you think he would rather do - find the truth or say whatever would keep the angry Afghani people supporting him?

Oh man what you are saying is starting to make serious parallels with Vietnam!

WWWTT

[Guest American Woman]

I read that this was what some of the villagers said, there was a group of American soldiers came and did the killing. It's not totally unbelievable. I read that some of the bodies were burned after they were killed. How did the soldier do that? I mean, did he have a flame thrower or something? Or did he bring cans of petrol, or what.

According to witnesses, he poured chemicals on their bodies.

In any case it takes time to burn the bodies. How would one soldier come into a house, kill everybody, then proceed to burn the bodies all by himself?

With an automatic weapon and chemicals, I doubt it would take too long. It was only three homes. It's not as if he took out an entire village by himself.

Edited March 18, 2012 by American Woman

[WWWTT]

Still I'd be curious about how that was done by a lone gunman.

I believe that if the US can keep the claim alive about a single perpetrator they have a chance at making this look like the job of an mentally unstable individual.

However if it is true that this was a group action then the parallels of similar incidents that happened in Vietnam will spread among the American public!

The Afgans already know the truth and this is why so many here in the west are perplexed as to why this war is taking so long with no end in sight.Many here are starting to wonder why it is starting to appear that the Taliban strength is gaining momentum in Afganistan.

Its in my opinion that NATO is losing its ability to keep stricter censorship over the military blunders/actions happening there.Hence the appearance of this war becoming similar to Vietnam.

WWWTT

[Guest American Woman]

Karzai doesn't think the killings were done by one man. Some think that US soldiers could have been on a revenge mode for the killings of soldiers earlier. Apparently, the bodies of some of the dead had body parts cut off. It wouldn't surprise me, if the US soldier is taking the blame for the rest of them. This war is a very sad and the US and the rest of NATO, should take some time off, like they did after Nam, and let peace settle before getting into another war some where again. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/16/karzai-doubts-us-village-massacre?intcmp=239

I find this really odd coming from you, who has made several posts about "Karzai's corruption."

What some "think" it "could have been" really means nothing.

But yeah. The U.S. and NATO "should take time off ... and let peace settle," because things were so peaceful and wonderful and 9-11 was just a figment of our imagination; if it weren't for the U.S. and NATO, there would be peace.

Edited March 18, 2012 by American Woman

[WWWTT]

But yeah. The U.S. and NATO "should take time off ... and let peace settle," because things were so peaceful and wonderful and 9-11 was just a figment of our imagination; if it weren't for the U.S. and NATO, there would be peace.

Ya OK lets go back another 10-15 before 9-11!

The Soviets were doing a fine job there stopping Islmaic radicals/terrorists.However Reagen/Thatcher just could not say hey you Soviets are doing world peace a favour.

Oh no they had to go give Osoma bin Laden and the Taliban/terrorists money and weapons and support!

So whos fault is it?

WWWTT

[Rue]

Couple of responses.

To Wild Bill; I personally believe Karzai is an opportunistic whore and is saying what he says now to suck up to the

Taliban because he has been trying his best to distance himself from the NATO forces he once embraced as he sees the clock

running out and the inevitable consequence of soon being left alone with the Taliban. He is desperately back pedalling trying

to suck up to them. Fat chance.

To Amerwoman: my comments were not directed at your comments just in general to the notion that the US Armed Forces can not be criticized. Now when I talk of not fearing criticism I mean just that-they have to be as open and accountable as they can precisely so people do not begin spinning b.s. such as it was more than one soldier.

Now when I talk of the US Armed Forces being accountable for front line soldiers doing to many tours of duty that is exactly the kind of criticism the senior echelon needs to hear in my HUMBLE opinion. The United States Army and USMC have clear guidelines as to how long you can expect a guy to serve in certain situations before mental exhaustion becomes a dangerous factor in mitigating against psychological stability.

I have read many of the studies. They are on the cutting edge of understanding how far you can push someone before they break.

Serious questions have to be asked as to why some soldiers are being asked to do so many tours yes.

The likelihood of a soldier going insane or becoming mentally ill dramatically increases after thye hit a threshold. While each soldier has their own threshold as individual as a fingerprint, there are general parameters army psychologists work with and from what I have read soldiers have been pushed past their threshold and should have been sent home were recycled to Afghanistan because of a shortage of trained soldiers. I was told that by a retired soldier who did 4 tours in Iraq and I do not think its a secret. The US Armed Forces is strung out from being in Iraq as long as it was. It takes a serious toll. This notion te US is a bottomless pit of unlimited armed force that can remain at war indefinitely is what I am challenging as do many soldiers for obvious reasons.

This all plays into the picture of asking why a man does an act like this soldier did and it has to be asked if we are to prevent it from happening again. No I do not believe these acts just happen. To me they are warning signals a system has exceeded its threshold. These are warning signals more wide-spread breakdowns and more acts like this one will occur if the psychological issues behind such actions are not addressed and resolved.

The warning light comes on you do not ignore it.

The problem with any military force is its reluctance to admit its men and women have thresholds. It goes against the macho mentality of the warrior echelon to admit their soldiers can mentally break down and it has to be dealt with because we have thousands of soldiers returning home with post traumatic stress syndrome and falling through the cracks. Because they do not have physical scars but invisible ones they are being ignored. Many a war has been lost because of the upper echelon ignoring the signals they have exceeded the capacity of their soldiers to function.

I defer to veterans on that but what I am saying loud and clear is, the same neglect that allows a soldier to do too many tours also translates into ignoring them once they return from the conflict zones as well. It is part of an overall reluctance to

acknowledge psychological thresholds ins oldiers and that to me is the issue behind this incident.

As for my comment on this man's movements yes I am saying he should not be able to leave a compound on his own without orders.

Something broke down. That was a serious security breach. I again defer to former soldiers or current soldiers to explain why

soldiers fully armed should not be walking around or leaving on their own. There is a chain of command. All movement of armed soldiers is coordinated and controlled precisely because they are armed. This notion soldiers are free to drive off fully loaded by themselves is just not an operational reality in any unit I have known. Now I again defer to the soldiers on this one. I admit I do not know the exact operational restructions-I just find it unusal he was able to leave. What if he had been kidnapped or was sneaking out to provide Taliban with information? Can you see why its important to know where everyone is all the time? Surely there was some slip up.

Anyways I appreciated your points Amer women.

Also KArzai can kiss my butt. He is a corupt whore. Why people are dying to defend him is beyond me. He does not believe in democracy. He has not one redeeming value or feature and yes this smells of what the US and other powers have done and are wiling to do-prop corupt tyrants as long as they follow most of the orders from the powers that be. Karzai to me is just another version of the corupt sob's countries have propped to protect their own foreign interests.

The difference is China goes into countries like Mozambique, Angola, Sudan, Congo and Iran and openly operates with their tyrants making no pretense of caring about human rights. The US and Europe do however.

So my question is, do we not have the right in the world of NATO countries to ask why we are propping Karzai when he is nothingv but a pimp, a corupt war lord protecting his personal opium cartel and has no use for NATO other than it momentarily keeps him alive?

He's a scum. He would sell his mother for a buck.

I see no future in Afghanistan with people like him or the Taliban. To me there is zero difference. Zero.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Rue

[j44]

The Soviets were doing a fine job there stopping Islmaic radicals/terrorists.However Reagen/Thatcher just could not say hey you Soviets are doing world peace a favour.

Tell me how they were 'doing a fine job' at stoppin them while doing world peace a favor? Weren't they stopping them by invading and occupying?

And for everyone out there that wonders why some on the right refer to people on the left as radicals, militants and communist sympathizers just remember that the 'Soviets were doing world peace a favor.'

[Guest American Woman]

Tell me how they were 'doing a fine job' at stoppin them while doing world peace a favor? Weren't they stopping them by invading and occupying?

And for everyone out there that wonders why some on the right refer to people on the left as radicals, militants and communist sympathizers just remember that the 'Soviets were doing world peace a favor.'

The only thing I have to add is that not everyone on the left thinks like WWWTT; I'm on the left and I read his post in such disbelief that I couldn't even respond. I'm still basically speechless.

[j44]

The only thing I have to add is that not everyone on the left thinks like WWWTT; I'm on the left and I read his post in such disbelief that I couldn't even respond. I'm still basically speechless.

I totally agree with you. I'm left leaning on many issues but foolish comments like his do nothing but make it easier for others to label the left in less than flattering terms. Not to mention that it makes any serious discussion almost impossible.

I have many friends on the left that use similar logic. A lot of anti-US views are so knee-jerk that anything and anyone that opposes the US is correct and moral.

Not too long ago one of my friends on facebook posted a pro-Lukashenko (sp?) article because it was anti-Nato. I can promise that he knew nothing of Belarus before that day or that it is arguably the worst dictatorship in Europe. But that didn't matter. He is against the US. So Belarus is for freedom and equality.

[dre]

Serious questions have to be asked as to why some soldiers are being asked to do so many tours yes.

The likelihood of a soldier going insane or becoming mentally ill dramatically increases after thye hit a threshold.

Thats the thing... When you botch two major wars and commit your army two 20 combined years of war these things happen. And this is just one of many incidents.

The leadership is responsible for what the troops they arm and send over there do... end of story.

[WWWTT]

Tell me how they were 'doing a fine job' at stoppin them while doing world peace a favor?

Let me ask you something.

Was Osama bin Laden,Al Kaida,the Taliban and probably a few other groups in Afganistan not terrorists?Were they not using terrorist tactics against the Soviets and the Afgan government/people at the time?

When you use terrorism against your percieved enemy guess what?Its still terrorism!

And when you support terrorism you are walking a very fine line of morality!

This is why American Woman has no responce to the truth!

The US screwed up!And so did Canada by supporting the US!

WWWTT

[Wild Bill]

Thats the thing... When you botch two major wars and commit your army two 20 combined years of war these things happen. And this is just one of many incidents.

The leadership is responsible for what the troops they arm and send over there do... end of story.

I would agree! This is a classic example of the disconnect between modern liberalism and reality.

The Democrats are usually but not always the exponents of modern liberalism disconnects but the problem started a few terms ago when the Republicans were in power. They try to have the military capacity to carry out their political goals but they don't want to pay for it!

When the economy is poor and people are hurting they tend to lose interest in international issues. They want bread on the table and they want it now! The problem of course is that often getting that bread on the table depends upon the international situation, through trade or perhaps the very availability of a product from a country or countries with political impediments.

So a national leader cannot ignore international issues but he still must maintain power. The temptation to cut the military budget is always strong. If you're the country every one ELSE looks to for their defense you have nothing but your own military to rely on. There is no other country powerful enough to realistically shoulder the lion's share of the load.

Recent American presidents have been cutting back their military and in some areas like basic man power they've gone too far. Afghanistan has fallen victim to the idea of applying private sector outsourcing to replace military personnel. In some areas this can work but when all is said and done you still need enough soldiers able to shoot weapons!

Obviously, after Iraq and in Afghanistan America no longer has enough actual soldiers to properly do the job. Some cost analyst blew it! He showed cost cuts and his political superiors loved it but part of those cuts came from flogging their soldiers with too many combat tours, for lack of replacements.

Soldiers are not machines. They need R & R. Their masters had the power to refuse them rest time but like the Danish King Cnut trying to command the tide to roll back, they could not control the limits of a human soldier.

It would seem the American military is now controlled by the "suits", who tend to have little or no actual military experience but who gained their power through the private sector. They do know how to help politicians stay in power! As I said, starving the military in favour of social programs is always popular but if you try to pretend you still have an effective military then you are only fooling yourself.

I admit to a bias here. I despise "suits"! I worked for a number of companies that when they began to rely on "suits" instead of hands-on management wound up downsizing or outright going bankrupt. All of us front line troopers could see the trend and when too many MBAs started to show up we would start sending out our resumes, trying to get off before the ship sank.

The soldier who went wacko and committed this atrocity had served 4 terms and had been denied the promise to go home. As far as I can see, it is the "suits" who are truly responsible for this tragedy.

Edited March 19, 2012 by Wild Bill

[Post To The Left]

Interesting point from Americans in the force:

Talk like that infuriates Fred Wellman, a retired Army lieutenant colonel from Fredericksburg, Va., who did three tours in Iraq. He said comments like those of Bales' neighbors and his attorney simply feed into the notion of "the broken veteran."

Wellman does not deny that 10 years of war have severely strained the service. But while others might see Bales as a wounded soul, Wellman sees a man who sneaked off base to commit his alleged crimes, then had the presence of mind to "lawyer up" as soon as he was caught.

"That may play well with certain circles of the civilian community, which doesn't understand our lives," Wellman said. "But he's going to be tried by a military court ... and chances are three or four of those guys had things happen to them, may have had three or four tours, may have lost people, may have been blown up. And NONE of them snapped and killed 16 people." He added: "It's just too easy, and a lot of us, we're not buying it."

http://www.startribune.com/nation/143108136.html?page=all&prepage=1&c=y#continue

[bud]

I'm on the left

lols.

you're not on the left.

[cybercoma]

lols.

you're not on the left.

She's on the Left in America, which puts her to the Right of Harper.

[j44]

Let me ask you something.

Was Osama bin Laden,Al Kaida,the Taliban and probably a few other groups in Afganistan not terrorists?Were they not using terrorist tactics against the Soviets and the Afgan government/people at the time?

When you use terrorism against your percieved enemy guess what?Its still terrorism!

And when you support terrorism you are walking a very fine line of morality!

This is why American Woman has no responce to the truth!

The US screwed up!And so did Canada by supporting the US!

WWWTT

Why would you bother to quote a question of mine if you're not going to answer it?

[Guest American Woman]

lols.

you're not on the left.

Wow. Thanks for that newsflash. If it weren't for you, I might have gone in thinking I know more about myself than a stranger on a web board does.

She's on the Left in America, which puts her to the Right of Harper.

!!!!

I'm sure it pains you too much to face the truth, but Harper is definitely way to the Right of Americans on the Left. He's your Bush, just as he was made out to be - and more Canadians voted for him than anyone else.

[Shady]

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

There is no occupation of Afghanistan, and there wasn't 10 years ago. In fact, at the beginning, there was barely any American or NATO troop presence. NATO isn't there to occupy. Do you really think America or NATO really want that sh*t hole anyways? I don't agree with the mission creep, but the plan was to leave that country in some semblance of order and non-15th century thinking. Not to occupy it. Like I said, it's a piece of crap. Nobody would want it anyways.

[Shady]

!!!!

I'm sure it pains you too much to face the truth, but Harper is definitely way to the Right of Americans on the Left. He's your Bush, just as he was made out to be - and more Canadians voted for him than anyone else.

You probably didn't get the memo AW, but you have to agree with them on EVERY single issue. If you stray, even just a little, you're not really on the left anymore.

This example fits in perfectly with the study I posted about liberals being the most intolerant online. Once again, they just can't hide it.

[dre]

She's on the Left in America, which puts her to the Right of Harper.

I think in these type of threads shes patriotic more than she is ideological. Sort of a "home team cheerleader" thing.

[Guest American Woman]

I think in these type of threads shes patriotic more than she is ideological. Sort of a "home team cheerleader" thing.

Oh please. Don't make me gag. It has nothing to do with "patriotism" - and your comparing me to a cheerleader is insulting to the max. I'm intelligent enough to see through all the bullsh*t and false concern for the lives of Afghan civilians even if you aren't. The U.S. could leave Afghanistan tomorrow and innocent Afghan civilians would continue to be killed an no one would give damn. People would just go back to not caring about their deaths.

Edited March 19, 2012 by American Woman

[Shady]

I think in these type of threads shes patriotic more than she is ideological. Sort of a "home team cheerleader" thing.

You're being the completely ideological one. Not her. Your ideological purity test is amusing.