Barbaric attack in the U.K.

[GostHacked]

No you don't they fly at an altitude and location where they won't be seen.

The Spectre gunships do just that. Surveillance drones do just that.

[G Huxley]

Bambino, its to some level implied, because Army Guy is promoting an invasion and occupation of an entire country based on it.

Edited May 31, 2013 by G Huxley

[G Huxley]

Not all of them wear a uniform. That was the point I was getting at. All seem to be legitimate targets in the end.

If Nato can bomb funerals and rescuers to whine that some guy attacked military personnel in the street is laughable.

[Army Guy]

And all that can be circumnavigated by how a 'war' is declared. The war zone is also as eyeball stated, the whole planet now. Since it seems a nation's sovereignty does not exist anymore, war can be waged anywhere and no declaration needs to happen.

Since no official declaration of war, I cannot see how Geneva conventions can possibly be applied.

Blackwater personnel would be in my view a legitimate target. They are armed and have military style gear. From the Iraqi view, all are legitimate targets, your Geneva conventions be damned.

Not all of them wear a uniform. That was the point I was getting at. All seem to be legitimate targets in the end.

wether a declaration is made or not the rules of war must be followed or those forces may be charged as war criminals...

Black water if unarmed are considered non combatants, those that are armed are consider combatants and subject to the rules of war.

Black water has to be marked in some fashion, and carry wpns openily .....which they do.

[G Huxley]

Your failing to get one of your own pionts, the entire country is a battlefield, Targeting is extremily hard because the bad guys fail to clearly indentify themselfs, instead blending in with the same people to whom they are supposily fighting for, which indangers inocent citizens.....Hence why the laws governing warfare make this illigal. That being said attacks can still be carried out as long as colaterial damage is limited, that decision can be taken by anyone in command.

If the entire country is a battlefield then so are the NATO countries who use Afghanistan as a battlefield. You can't have it one way and then not the other.

No, you are the one that said these acts were again'st inter national law , when they are not.

Targetting funerals is against international law.

So is targeting rescuers specifically banned by the Geneva convention.

The taliban regime at the time refused to hand over Bin Ladin and his merry crew, in fact they said they were under they're protection, and they would defend them if attacked.....US and coalition forces agreed it needed to be done.

The Taliban offered to try Bin Laden, if evidence were presented that he had been responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

It does not matter now does it, Karzi was eventually elected to his current postion not once but twice...and just because you may disagree with is government does not make it illigimate does it....

He was also voted down in at least one election and didn't leave, which made him a dictator.

Your comment about US soldiers is BS, your painting them all with the same brush, US forces make up the majority of the forces in Afghanistan and have more improvement projects than any other nation.....all the coalition forces operated on almost the same ROE's and it was not shoot first ask questions later.....

I'm saying what an Afghan refugee said. I'm just passing on the view of a local. Since its their country, that's what matters in the end.

Your right not every Afghanis seen the war the same way, but the clear majority did not want to have anything to do with the Taliban. remember over 80% of all civilian deaths are done by the Taliban...most Afghans wanted the taliban gone...in fact very little of the civilian population never even got involved in the early stages of the war....

The Afghans don't like foreign invaders either, and never have.

The country has never been completely whole as you suggest, it as always been fractured by tribes, and religion. and will be for many years to come it is in their culture...

Agreed.

Atleast your trying but reading a couple of books is just scratching the surface, one thing about the media will in Afghan was they very rarely left the wire....every night the gen would feed them the info that was cleared for public consumption, even when being spoon fed info each paper would have different stories....some journalist went out with the troops but it was a rare event. it was even rarer for a jounalist to stya outside the wire without NATO protection, to get the other half of the story....So beware of those author's claiming to have the true story....no everything you read is acurate....

I've read alot more about Afghanistan, but its the ancient history. The first thing you understand is that its the graveyard of all empires who tried to invade and occupy it from Alexander the Great to the Mongols and on.

The media liked to paint NATO as the bad guy, but facts are facts, 80 % of all the civilain deaths were done by the Terrorists....yes some of those that died were inocent civilians , but we are not talking about a trip to the mall here are we....we are talking about modern warfare and people die, and like in all warfare most of those are going to be civilians. Tragic yes it is, but unavoidable ...

That's exactly the point why I was opposed to the war from the beginning, far more Afghan civilians have been killed and displaced by the war many times in fact than were ever affected by 9/11. If the consequences are far worse than 9/11 then it hasn't been a success.

The exact same thing goes for Iraq.

[Army Guy]

Fear of shooting innocent civilians? Drone strikes anyone?

The rules of combat already take this into account High value targets can be engaged any where, all the rules of war say is civilian deaths are to be limited....

[G Huxley]

Targetting funerals and and rescuers is the opposite of limiting civilian deaths. Its a murderous act of terrorism.

Edited May 31, 2013 by G Huxley

[Army Guy]

No you don't they fly at an altitude and location where they won't be seen and they aren't marked as military targets. The victims of the attack will never see them.

Really ever seen a B-2 , spectra gunship, all are clearly marked in US colors....just because the fly at alt does not make they less of a target....are you saying because the taliban can't see them it's unfair....Hey is i was the taliban and seen any contrails i'd be hiding....

[Army Guy]

Targetting funerals and and rescuers is the opposite of limiting civilian deaths. Its a murderous act of terrorism.

funerals of top ranking officals will attract other top rank officals.....hey more targets....don't want to get a 500 lb up the ass then stay the hell away....it's as simple as that....let me ask you this question, who normally goes to funerals anyway....these top level targets normally don't have freinds not tied to the taliban because it is to dangerous .....inocents indeed...what law does it say these acts are murder and terrorism.....

[G Huxley]

Really ever seen a B-2 , spectra gunship, all are clearly marked in US colors....just because the fly at alt does not make they less of a target....are you saying because the taliban can't see them it's unfair....Hey is i was the taliban and seen any contrails i'd be hiding....

It further highlights what is an assymmetrical war. If traditionally cloak and dagger stealth was used for ages, I don`t see the difference between modern stealth. NATO plays god, this guy fought face to face.

Edited May 31, 2013 by G Huxley

[G Huxley]

funerals of top ranking officals will attract other top rank officals.....hey more targets....don't want to get a 500 lb up the ass then stay the hell away....it's as simple as that....let me ask you this question, who normally goes to funerals anyway....these top level targets normally don't have freinds not tied to the taliban because it is to dangerous .....inocents indeed...what law does it say these acts are murder and terrorism.....

If you think killing a swath of civilians is OK if you get one or two of your targets, then I don`t see much of a difference between that and the concept of terrorism.

Attacking funerals and rescuers is an utterly outrageous war crime.

[Army Guy]

If the entire country is a battlefield then so are the NATO countries who use Afghanistan as a battlefield. You can't have it one way and then not the other.

Targetting funerals is against international law.

So is targeting rescuers specifically banned by the Geneva convention.

The Taliban offered to try Bin Laden, if evidence were presented that he had been responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

He was also voted down in at least one election and didn't leave, which made him a dictator.

I'm saying what an Afghan refugee said. I'm just passing on the view of a local. Since its their country, that's what matters in the end.

The Afghans don't like foreign invaders either, and never have.

Agreed.

I've read alot more about Afghanistan, but its the ancient history. The first thing you understand is that its the graveyard of all empires who tried to invade and occupy it from Alexander the Great to the Mongols and on.

That's exactly the point why I was opposed to the war from the beginning, far more Afghan civilians have been killed and displaced by the war many times in fact than were ever affected by 9/11. If the consequences are far worse than 9/11 then it hasn't been a success.

The exact same thing goes for Iraq.

Yes you can,......

Taliban had repeatily said they would protect Bin Ladin regardless.....

So you talked to one refugee, pretty good at painting one entire group.....I've heard lots of men claim that the moon is pink, but the facts say different.....

No they do not like foreign invaders but which one of those invaders pumped trillions of dollars into , trying to create something better.....

Civilains being displaced is part of war, always has been.....but it does not mean we can sit by and let a rogue nation target inocents as they see fit....

[Army Guy]

It further highlights what is an assymmetrical war. If traditionally cloak and dagger stealth was used for ages, I don`t see the difference between modern stealth. NATO plays god, this guy fought face to face.

Did he really , he attacked his victim from the behind......caught him off guard then hacked him to death......He's a fuking hero this guy.....who will get his in prison.....NATO plays god becuase it has the toys to do so.....Stealth is only good when you have radar....it does not make it invisable to the naked eye.....

[Army Guy]

If you think killing a swath of civilians is OK if you get one or two of your targets, then I don`t see much of a difference between that and the concept of terrorism.

Attacking funerals and rescuers is an utterly outrageous war crime.

that is war it has not changed in many years....if it means that killing of one high value target can save many more lives then yes i do.....what price would the allied paided for Hilter.....once again it is a war crime in your mind only, prove to the rest of the readers here it is a crime .....

[GostHacked]

Army Guy, on 31 May 2013 - 2:23 PM, said:

that is war it has not changed in many years....if it means that killing of one high value target can save many more lives then yes i do.....what price would the allied paided for Hilter.....once again it is a war crime in your mind only, prove to the rest of the readers here it is a crime .....

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100474,00.html

Quote

President Bush's grandfather was a director of a bank seized by the federal government because of its ties to a German industrialist who helped bankroll Adolf Hitler's rise to power, government documents show.

More like paid TO Hitler.

[G Huxley]

Lets get real here bombing funerals and rescuers isn't assassinating the next Adolph Hitler. That's about the weakest justification possible for war crimes.

Did he really , he attacked his victim from the behind......caught him off guard then hacked him to death......He's a fuking hero this guy.....who will get his in prison.....NATO plays god becuase it has the toys to do so.....Stealth is only good when you have radar....it does not make it invisable to the naked eye.....

Now Nato is making little insects with cameras inside which can be used to have missiles sent in from distant points.

If this guy sewed military combatant in his underwear it would be more visible than Nato's Stealth.

[G Huxley]

Yes you can,......

Taliban had repeatily said they would protect Bin Ladin regardless.....

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

So you talked to one refugee, pretty good at painting one entire group.....I've heard lots of men claim that the moon is pink, but the facts say different.....

The civillian casualty numbers in the Afghan conflict fully support his claims.

No they do not like foreign invaders but which one of those invaders pumped trillions of dollars into , trying to create something better.....

The Soviet Union

Civilains being displaced is part of war, always has been.....but it does not mean we can sit by and let a rogue nation target inocents as they see fit....

Then you better do something about the rogue nation down south.

[Army Guy]

Lets get real here bombing funerals and rescuers isn't assassinating the next Adolph Hitler. That's about the weakest justification possible for war crimes.

You continue to spew out it is a war crime......then give us a source show the readers that it is a crime provide a link to the genva convention that prove your claim.....High value targets are targets that the governments have decided that ALLIED lifes would be saved if they were killed or captured.....to attack a HV they do an assement and to determine whether or not the colaterial damge can be limited.....thats right Colaterial damge, thats what they call the accidental deaths of civilians.....you may not like it but then again thats what war is ....

Targeting rescuers is something we learned off the Taliban....they would plant an IED on the road to create injured,, then detonate another bigger IED to kill the rescuers....sometimes this would go on 3 or 5 times.....they knew NATO soldiers would not ...leave their wounded to die, and would risk other soldiers to go get them.......So i really don't shed to many tears for dead terrorists.....and like i said before these guys spend most of their lifes running from town to town, so they don't know many inocent people....and even those that do attend know exactly what these guys are Terrorist......they know NATO strikes these events so why risk it.. Yes the media will make you cry and report that inocent were killed, when most of them were terrorist to start with....something like a Mob funeral.....how many inocents hang out with the mob....

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

The civillian casualty numbers in the Afghan conflict fully support his claims.

The Soviet Union

Then you better do something about the rogue nation down south.

The Taliban knew the US was not going to talk for very long, the US made threats of military intervention, and the Taliban said sure we will defend Bin Ladin, how did they make out.....

Civilian cas, i already provided a source which states very clearly that the Taliban and other terrorist groups within Afghanistan are responsible for 80 % of those.......So the US forces on the ground were going around killing anyone and everyone reponsable fo a Max of 20% , subtract what Allied forces killed ....what in the Hell were the terrorist doing......

But this is not about the terrorists is it, this is about pionting a finger at US soldiers....Lets disregard every fact out there and blame US soldiers....for the deaths of civilians and there has been some rogue US soldiers and they are in prison or awaiting trial......dismiss the fact that the terrorist killed 400 % more civilians.....but then again cutting off little girls hands, shooting girls in the back of the head, stripping a old mans skinn of his entire body.....this is what you perfer to defend.....

Comparing Russia's war in Afghan to the current on is like comparing WWII with Korea.....Russia exteriminated entire villages and towns....just because built airbourne mines to look like toys to kill children, ya these guys were hero's to....but then again that is who you stand behind........try doing some research....and they did not build jack shit unless it was to thier benifit.....Lots of Airbases, large military bases.....How many dams did they build to provide power to Afghan citizens, how many wells did they drill , schools, roads, highways, bridges.....ya the list gets alot longer and that is just Canadians , British and American forces built far more than we did....

[G Huxley]

Targeting rescuers is something we learned off the Taliban...

Learning your tactics from the Taliban eh? I rest my case on committing war crimes.

But this is not about the terrorists is it, this is about pionting a finger at US soldiers...

No I don't blame the US soldiers. The US soldiers are being used as pawns. I blame the politicians feeding the blood hungry primal bloodlust for revenge of their post-9/11 citizens.

Comparing Russia's war in Afghan to the current on is like comparing WWII with Korea.....

Only in that the Russians were smart enough to leave sooner.

The Russians tried to totally modernize and secularlize Afghanistan, and they pumped tons of money and resources in doing so, when that wasn't working they sent in the military, and that didn't work either.

Largely because the US started funnelling weapons to Islamic extremists in a global jihad against the Russians. That's in fact where the Mujahedeen/AQ/the Taliban learned IEDs from the CIA and other intelligence services such as the Pakistani Intelligence Agency which which created the Taliban and had worked and received funding from the US for years..

[g_bambino]

Bambino, its to some level implied, because Army Guy is promoting an invasion and occupation of an entire country based on it.

No, he indeed did not. He clearly said the elimination of a want-to-be-ruling-authority organisation that commits those barbaric acts is what the war is--now long post invasion--all about. He did not say that's why Afghanstan was invaded in the first place.

[G Huxley]

The Taliban has been out of power for years. The current warlords which run the country are a bunch of corrupt thieves, and their policies are hardly different.

[g_bambino]

The Taliban has been out of power for years.

But have not given up the fight to regain their former power.

[Army Guy]

Learning your tactics from the Taliban eh? I rest my case on committing war crimes.

No I don't blame the US soldiers. The US soldiers are being used as pawns. I blame the politicians feeding the blood hungry primal bloodlust for revenge of their post-9/11 citizens.

Only in that the Russians were smart enough to leave sooner.

The Russians tried to totally modernize and secularlize Afghanistan, and they pumped tons of money and resources in doing so, when that wasn't working they sent in the military, and that didn't work either.

Largely because the US started funnelling weapons to Islamic extremists in a global jihad against the Russians. That's in fact where the Mujahedeen/AQ/the Taliban learned IEDs from the CIA and other intelligence services such as the Pakistani Intelligence Agency which which created the Taliban and had worked and received funding from the US for years..

Yes we have learned alot from the taliban, you learn it to counter their tactics, or adopt them for you own use, it's done on both sides of the war in order to survive....I've tried to give you some insite on what it is like over there, but until you understand what war is , eperienced it's sights, smells, noises, it even has it's own taste, and feel....then you will never really understand.....Nothing ever good comes of war in the short term....and the price both sides pay is horrorific....That being said i'm not going to sit here and let some arm chair critic make judgements on me or my comrads....on something that is not a crime .....you have not earned that right....If you or anyone else can prove that war crimes did in fact happen by all means case that down...but you sir, are declaring something that is well BULLSHIT.....

Holding those responsable for 9/11 is what the US government did....that is what good government does, protect it's citizens, sending a message to the world that if you attack the US, and it's allieds you are going to pay in blood......Lets not forget that over 20 Canadian citizens died that day as well....but that is a lost fact, to which bares nothing to Canadians, now anyways.....But i can remember boarding the plane for the second tour in Afghan, the base streets were lined with Canadians from all over the nation, with banners and signs that read "get some", kill them all, cheering as combat soldiers loaded the aircraft that would carry us off to war......They wanted revenge.....and our government gave it to them.....

Russia did not do half of what we did for the afghan people, Russia did the things that would benifit Russia...and they did it at the piont of a gun.....Maybe you should read more on what Russia did for the country...

Yes lets blame the US and the CIA for all the problems in Afghan, the fact that many of these groups did not even exist during that time frame is telling....IED's came for other terrorist in the middle east, raising it's ugly head in Israel, Iraq, when blowing shit up was all these guys could do.... not from the CIA....but rather terrorist that were schooled in WAR SAW pact countries, or midle eastern countries under influence from the bear.....Pakistan Intel May have assisted in funding, training etc... but they did not create jack shit when it came down to the taliban....that was all their idea.....more research need there....

The Taliban has been out of power for years. The current warlords which run the country are a bunch of corrupt thieves, and their policies are hardly different

You mean like most governments......it is their culture , thier new government, Are they are not evolving as fast as you want them to, is that it...shit ...how long has our democracy been in place corruption free....let me see, never....

[G Huxley]

But have not given up the fight to regain their former power.

Then you might as well plan on being there for another 50 years. That's how guerrilla warfare works.

[G Huxley]

Yes we have learned alot from the taliban, you learn it to counter their tactics, or adopt them for you own use,

"Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster...' - Friedrich Nietzsche

3000 died on 9/11 There have been well over a million refugees from Afghanistan and 10s of thousands have died in the conflict. Saying that 'war is horrific,' and you haven't experienced it, isn't a winning argument. It shows what we already knew from the beginning that war is horrific and should be avoided at all costs. You aren't the first soldier that's ever lived and you're not the first soldier to ever adopt the soldier's arrogance. Humanity has had millions of years of soldiers and the only soldier to ever see the end of war is the soldier who doesn't survive.

Russia did not do half of what we did for the afghan people, Russia did the things that would benifit Russia...and they did it at the piont of a gun.....Maybe you should read more on what Russia did for the country...

Actually it was only after years of Russia's trying to build up Afghanistan before they sent in the military.

You say Russia did it at the point of a gun (when they saw no other alternative) but what have you done gone in at the point of a gun just like the Russians did claiming there was no other alternative.

Russia did not do half of what we did for the afghan people, Russia did the things that would benifit Russia...and they did it at the piont of a gun.....Maybe you should read more on what Russia did for the country...

No you need to do more research. ISI invented the Taliban.

Read Steve Coll's Ghost Wars, probably the best book you could possibly read on modern Afghanistan.

http://www.amazon.ca/dp/0143034669

You mean like most governments......it is their culture , thier new government, Are they are not evolving as fast as you want them to, is that it...shit ...how long has our democracy been in place corruption free....let me see, never....

Quite the contrary its you who are trying to speed up their evolutionary development by pushing them towards a western style democracy. There is a saying that if you try to push things move faster than they naturally move then disaster awaits.

A natural evolution doesn't require outside intervention and an arrogant attitude of cultural superiority. Afghanistan has seen each wave of arrogant foreigner believing in the superiority of his civilization from the Greeks, to the Persians, the Mongols, etc. etc. There is nothing new here, but the failure to learn from the endless repetitions of history.

Edited June 5, 2013 by G Huxley