Afghanistan insurgency surges

117 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist
Afghanistan insurgency surges

Next...

Unionist

Today:

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/05/19/afghan-assault-military.html]Ba... Airfield attacked by insurgents[/url]

Yesterday:

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/05/18/kabul-afghan-blast.html]Canadian colonel killed in Kabul bombing[/url]

 

NDPP

'Graveyard of Empire'...

Unionist

BREAKING NEWS:

[url=http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Afghanistan+Kandahar+military+base+unde... troops wounded in Taliban rocket and ground attack on Kandahar airfield[/url]

Quote:
Taliban militants fired rockets and mortars at Kandahar airfield in southern Afghanistan on Saturday, wounding NATO troops, officials said.

The attack came days after a brazen assault on one of the coalition’s biggest bases in Bagram, north of the Afghan capital, in which an American contractor was killed and nine U.S. troops wounded.

"Kandahar airfield came under indirect fire at approximately 8 o’clock tonight and shortly afterward a ground attack was under way as well," a spokesman for NATO-led forces in Afghanistan said. A small number of NATO personnel were wounded, the spokesman said.

Webgear

Breaking news, they have done this before and will likey do it again.

NDPP

Wine and Warcrimes

http://thetyee.ca/CanadianPress/2010/05/22/Afghan-Cdn-Free-Wine/

"This is a very proud moment for me as a Canadian and I hope these wines can inspire some light-hearted times during this difficult mssion for our Armed Forces.." Dan Aykroyd

Unionist

Webgear wrote:

Breaking news, they have done this before and will likey do it again.

Bravo! At last we agree!!

Frmrsldr

Webgear wrote:

Breaking news, they have done this before and will likey do it again.

Not to most Canadians. Shows the reality of 'freedom of the press' in Canada.

Webgear

So what have the insurgents gained at the end of the day?

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

Webgear wrote:

So what have the insurgents gained at the end of the day?

Casulties?

Webgear

Likely quite a few.

Unionist

Webgear wrote:

So what have the insurgents gained at the end of the day?

Just wait till the end of the day and ask your question again.

For one thing, the much-vaunted upcoming U.S. "sweep" of Kandahar hasn't prevented the insurgents from announcing, and commencing, their annual spring campaign.

Be patient, the end of the day will come soon, as it already has in the past for Britain, the Soviet Union, and others.

Webgear

 Nothing well change with these minor attacks, the US is there for the long haul. The grand spring campaign has been very ineffective thus far, by my estimate, the insurgents have killed more common Afghans than they have foreign troops since the start of this new offensive.

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

 

As Unionist implied time will tell for this offensive; logistics is the ball and chain of any fighting force including the Taliban. We'll see if they can maintain this offensive at this pace through into the summer. That is small task considering their advocacy can pounce on them with devastating effect once they are detected.

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Be patient, the end of the day will come soon, as it already has in the past for Britain, the Soviet Union, and others.

And don't forget the PDPA army of Afghan men and women volunteers. Their day ended over two years later after the Sovs pulled out. The CIA and ISI sent enough weapons and money funelled through the US Dept of Agriculture that millions eventually had to flee their terrorized country for Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Europe etc

 

NDPP

America's Exalted Capacity for Murder

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/05/22-8

"The west's war now stretches from Waziristan to Connecticut. There will be no victors in this desert of bewilderment.."

Unionist

Webgear wrote:

 Nothing well change with these minor attacks, the US is there for the long haul.

Now, now, Webgear, are you suggesting Mr. Obama lied last week!?

Quote:
Obama said he was confident he would be ale to meet his goal of beginning to withdraw US forces in July 2011, with Afghan security forces beginning to take over the fight.

[url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/obama-withdrawal-from-a... Associated Press, May 12, 2010[/url]

Hmmm? Long haul?

Webgear wrote:
The grand spring campaign has been very ineffective thus far, by my estimate, the insurgents have killed more common Afghans than they have foreign troops since the start of this new offensive.

Hmmm... you mean the U.S. has been killing civilians, right?

Quote:
He [Obama] said the United States has taken "extraordinary measures" to avoid civilian casualties, a nod to Karzai's loud complaints last year that US air strikes were killing innocents and making enemies of those who might be friends.

So, only eight (8) years after the most powerful nations on earth invaded Afghanistan, you're saying the insurgents are ... well, not defeated, but... ineffective, right?

Don't wait for 2011. If you have any friends left there, advise them to pack up and leave while they're still able. Run away fast.

 

Unionist

Amazing, SJ. You've reduced a war of aggression and occupation to the motivation and suffering of individuals on "both" sides. I will continue to cheer and gloat when imperial armies acting in my name are defeated - just as I cheered and gloated when the poor deluded dupes (your apparent viewpoint) had to run screaming out of Saigon, after the greatest power on earth was defeated by its victims.

Slumberjack

There's plenty of victimization to go around in the context of Afghanistan and Pakistan. I've come to understand that all of the casualties on both sides are victims in one way or another. Granted, Western victims who suffer their fate at the hands of the insurgency are mostly willing dupes who offer themselves up as victims, while the innocent in both of those tormented lands have had victimization thrust upon them from the outside. In that sense the scale tips heavily towards the innocent if one insists upon making comparisons. Still, western corporatists and their propaganda outlets have been relentless in making extremely thorough work of the selective rationale for being there. The willing sign on to the endeavour based on their understanding of the situation as presented. We might also weight in with a cursory assessment of the conditioning that begins from an early age and is continuously reinforced throughout the lifespan of those who are subjected to it and derive benefit from it, where western supremacy is held out above all others. In that sense it is quite challenging for any other reality to gain a foothold into the mindsets of those who have been thoroughly trained to despise any other way of thinking. I see no reason to cheer or gloat over any of the carnage that has been wrought by the insidious system which surrounds us.

Slumberjack

Well, the deluded dupes of that era returned home in many cases to a life of mental anguish, homelessness, poverty, and abandonment, having served their intended purpose and are thus categorized as useless. That they are undeserving of a seconds consideration in your estimation for the role that played at the behest of others doesn't necessarily negate an analysis that may indeed place them at a comparatively lower position along the spectrum when it comes to an accounting of the overall picture of destruction from that particular conflagration. This is not to describe it as 'all things being equal' by any stretch, only that holding fast to myopic reflections on the matter is not particularly helpful when you consider that such an approach lends toward the further categorization of human beings, which is the traditional means through which the supremacy continues to inflict its ideologies upon everything.

Frmrsldr

Webgear wrote:

So what have the insurgents gained at the end of the day?

White propaganda aka PR. They are either frightening Afghan lackeys who support the U.S.A. and/or ISAF or encouraging Afghans who want the foreign invaders the fuck out of their country. "We can strike you anywhere at any time and there isn't a thing you can do about it."

The government, the military and the mainstream media have been lying to the Canadian public about Afghanistan. When Canadians realize just how bad things are, (in Vietnam, it was called the 'credibility gap') the government and the military will lose the support of the heartland. The government is losing the 'battle of the homefront'.

The U.S.A. will lose the war as a result of both the actions of Afghans as well as opposition to the war here at home.

Frmrsldr

Webgear wrote:

Likely quite a few.

So far I have heard no reports of any insurgent casualties.

There are reports of base casualties, but military authorities are suppressing information. We don't know who has been injured, how many or the degree of injury.

Unionist

Slumberjack wrote:

Well, the deluded dupes of that era returned home in many cases to a life of mental anguish, homelessness, poverty, and abandonment, having served their intended purpose and are thus categorized as useless. That they are undeserving of a seconds consideration in your estimation for the role that played at the behest of others ...

There were heroes on "both" sides of that struggle. First, and foremost, the heroic people of Viet Nam, who defeated the U.S., its invading allies, and its puppet regime(s) without any outside forces whatsoever - as the Afghan people will do in short order.

Then, there were the heroic people of many countries, primarily the U.S. - youth, students, workers, indigenous people, veterans - who rose up in rebellion against their own murderous criminal regime and helped their Vietnamese allies to win, albeit in a purely supportive role.

And last - but not least - the heroes, not a few of whom I met and befriended at the time: Those young people who refused the draft, and those young soldiers who deserted. Some went to prison, and many came here, when the government of the day opened its borders. A composer and music teacher in our eldest daughter's elementary school; a CEGEP math instructor and well-known baritone who keeps Paul Robeson's music alive here; a sports reporter for the Gazette; an accomplished photographer who has moved back to the States (having cleverly managed to get himself 4F); many others. These are the domestic heroes of which, unfortunately, we are blessed with virtually none in our war of occupation and mass murder in Afghanistan.

But that's thread drift. This struggle isn't about the poor individual stories on "both" sides. It's about the uprising of an entire people to expel the modern-day crusaders. In that struggle, there is only one side for progressive people to take. And, unfortunately, not one poltiical party in Parliament is on that side - nor are several babblers who get easily confused when the spectre of the white man's burden arises unbidden in stories of evil Taliban.

Webgear

Unionist

The USA will have troops in Afghanistan post 2012, you can't believe everything your beloved politicians say, both Obama and Jack lie.

I believe your glorious comrades blew up a bus this week in Kabul, killing over a dozen innocent Afghans and injuring dozens more. I know you were busy not to mention this earlier this week or to issue a statement against this act. I know you think its ok to kill civilians if your team is doing the killing.

How do you believe the insurgents are wining, how do you decide who is losing or winning?

Unionist

Frmrsldr wrote:

Webgear wrote:

Likely quite a few.

So far I have heard no reports of any insurgent casualties.

There are reports of base casualties, but military authorities are suppressing information. We don't know who has been injured, how many or the degree of injury.

There were obviously no insurgent casualties - otherwise, this would be the first time the invaders haven't bragged about their kill.

As for the Canadians, coming from a democratic and open country, they never report injuries of their own, nor do they "allow" our brave journalists to say anything without pre-censorship:

Quote:

ISAF has not released the number of injured or their nationalities. There is no word whether there were any Canadian casualties — the Canadian Forces does not release information about wounded troops. [...]

For security reasons, journalists at Kandahar Airfield are prevented from reporting where the rockets landed as part of their embedment agreement with the military.

Frmrsldr

Webgear wrote:

Unionist

The USA will have troops in Afghanistan post 2012, you can't believe everything your beloved politicians say, both Obama and Jack lie.

I believe your glorious comrades blew up a bus this week in Kabul, killing over a dozen innocent Afghans and injuring dozens more. I know you were busy not to mention this earlier this week or to issue a statement against this act. I know you think its ok to kill civilians if your team is doing the killing.

How do you believe the insurgents are wining, how do you decide who is losing or winning?

Typical pot calling the kettle black bullshit. How many busses have we blown up and killed innocent civilians in the process?

I don't have the time right now, but I can post a link if you like.

As for the Afghans winning, tell me, what insurgency since WW 2 have the colonial powers won?

The only one I can think of is the Malay(si)an War (1946-1960.) Even that was not much of a 'win' as the only original goal of the colonial occupier (Britain) that was kept was preventing a communist government taking over Malaysia when it gained independence at the end of the war.

 

Slumberjack

Unionist wrote:
In that struggle, there is only one side for progressive people to take.

Be sure to table this motion at the next plenary so that others might have their say, prior to it being written into the official book of progressive rules.

Unionist

Webgear wrote:

Unionist

The USA will have troops in Afghanistan post 2012, you can't believe everything your beloved politicians say, both Obama and Jack lie.

Oh, gee, thanks for the revelation, Webgear, and I am shocked, shocked, I tell you. Difference between you and me: You're the one who follows the liars into aggressive war, with songs of "liberty" and "save the women and children" leading you on.

Quote:
I believe your glorious comrades blew up a bus this week in Kabul, killing over a dozen innocent Afghans and injuring dozens more. I know you were busy not to mention this earlier this week or to issue a statement against this act. I know you think its ok to kill civilians if your team is doing the killing.

Every single death or injury in Afghanistan is the responsibility of the regime in power and its foreign occupying military backers. There were no buses being blown up before they arrived. They should get the hell out before more civilians die.

Quote:
How do you believe the insurgents are wining, how do you decide who is losing or winning?

1. I read history. Whoops, insurgents always win.

2. I count years. Whoops, one more year until your troops have been there as long as the Soviets. Time to get out while ass is still attached to hindquarters.

3. I foolishly believe that the U.S. has not "won" one single war since World War II. Not one single war. If you think Afghanistan will be their first victory, I can recommend some soothing music and poetry to help alleviate the delusions.

4. I believe that good triumphs over evil, right over wrong, underdogs over overlords, people over oppressors. It's my religion. Please accommodate my religious beliefs.

 

Unionist

Slumberjack wrote:

Unionist wrote:
In that struggle, there is only one side for progressive people to take.

Be sure to table this motion at the next plenary so that others might have their say, prior to it being written into the official book of progressive rules.

I remember vividly some intellectuals during the Vietnam War who said: "We should get out because we've lost too many troops, it's not worth it any more, but of course we don't want the Communists to win either, so ..." and fill in the blank.

We had to explain to them - patiently - that there was only one side for progressive people to take: Defeat or retreat of the invaders, without preconditions.

And that of course is what happened.

Same today, my friend. Any nuance, any variation, any intellectual prevarication around that theme, gives solace to the murderers.

After Canada is defeated, or retreats, the Afghan people will determine their own future - in ways you may or may not enjoy. Not our job.

There is only one side.

 

Slumberjack

Unionist wrote:
Every single death or injury in Afghanistan is the responsibility of the regime in power and its foreign occupying military backers. There were no buses being blown up before they arrived. They should get the hell out before more civilians die. 

See, we're not that far apart in our analysis after all.

remind remind's picture

Frmrsldr wrote:
.... tell me, what insurgency since WW 2 have the colonial powers won?

The only one I can think of is the Malay(si)an War (1946-1960.) Even that was not much of a 'win' as the only original goal of the colonial occupier (Britain) that was kept was preventing a communist government taking over Malaysia when it gained independence at the end of the war.

You are wasting your words in stating this, as I stated this to webgear when he first came here spouting his war propganda. He did not like it then, and firmly believed such is not the case this time.

Now as to the post of his that you responded to, I am going to actually go flag it for red baiting, and general anti-progressive positoning that makes sven's and snert's pale into insignificance.

Jingles

Quote:
I believe it is our job to intervene in this phony war in order to force transparent peace negotiations on the warmongering principals of the this bullshit war on terror, and so does Jack Layton and the NDP

We already know that Layton and the NDP support the occupation. They just want a nicer one where they can visit the troops for photo ops with a greater degree of personal safety.

I don't know why you think it's your business to tell the people of Afghanistan how they should run their country. You certainly scream and holler when the US is a bit to overt in its influence over ours. Do you thinks its also our business to tell a First Nations community how to run things on their land? Maybe Jack and his gang of liberals would like to see an Indian Act set up in Afghanistan to "assist" the obviously incompetent and childlike people there how to run their business.

Fidel

Unionist wrote:
After Canada is defeated, or retreats, the Afghan people will determine their own future - in ways you may or may not enjoy. Not our job.

And we know you don't mean to compare with how the VietNamese have determined their own future. That country as well as Cambodia came out on the losing end of things after the dust settled. There were war crimes committed in VietNam and Cambodia, and the doctor and madman were never prosecuted. There are still horrible birth defects in VietNamese babies as a result of genetic mutations from the last generation of victims.

The US enabled the rise of the Khmer Rouge. The Khmer Rouge had US, Chinese and British support in similar way in which the Mujahiden were supported by the west. And then the Taliban were cavorting with US and Argentinian energy companies and running around Washington and Houston as if the US was their second home.

Unionist wrote:
There is only one side.

This is a proxy war that is ongoing since Uncle Sam began interfering in Afghanistan 30 years ago. There is evidence that surrounding countries are involved and funding and arming the Taliban as has been similarly the case for the last three decades.

What's needed are UN mediated peace talks on a level with Loya Jirga. The NDP and Layton says Canada could use international  diplomacy to play a role in making such peace talks transparent for all Afghans and the rest of the world. Instead they continue to meet with the Taliban in closed door meetings in Lahore and Islamabad according to Tariq Ali and others. This is not transparent and this is not as straightforward as what the Paris peace talks were when the NVA were able to reveal to the world just how impossible and arrogant the American's conditions for peace were at the time.

The succession of stooges in Ottawa know nothing of diplomacy or their actual obligations as "G8" leaders to help bring about transparent peace talks with accountable UN mediation and not just Uncle Sam's friends doing the mediating, which have been the Saudis and Pakistani ISI(CIA) as has been the case according to news reports over the last several years of this long and dragged out US military occupation of Central Asia.

"Not our job"?  Was the Holocaust no one else's business but for Jews and their murderers? Are war crimes no one's business but the victims? I believe it is our job to intervene in this phony war in order to force transparent peace negotiations on the warmongering principals of the this bullshit war on terror, and so does Jack Layton and the NDP. The Afghan people have been put through the ringer by the CIA and friends over the last 30 years and with no end in sight. Yes it is our business, and our stooges in Ottawa are shirking their duties to act as real leaders of a real country concerned about a criminal US military occupation of Afghanistan and marauding over the border into Pakistan.

I know you think that Chretien through Martin and Harper and Iggy have acted as vicous toadies to American empire. But sometimes I think we have to reiterate over the why's and how's of the vicious toadying to understand the nature of the kow-towing and grovelling before their Warshington masters.

Fidel

Where does the NDP tell Afghanistan how to run their country? That is Uncle Sam's job and evident by the stooges and drug barons they've propped up in Kabul.

No, what the NDP says is needed amounts to a modern day equivalent of the Paris peace talks. The Taliban need a platform to speak to the rest of the world and conditions for peace laid out on the table for all the world to see.

But what's happening today is a covert, bullshit, phony phucking war on terror - and one where ordinary Afghans and Canadians are completely in the dark as to why this conflict is still happening. Why are the Yanks marauding over the border into Pakistan? If the Sovs had done similar, there would have been a huge dustup and maybe even led to WW III.

Just so some of us are aware, a tiny minority of the opinions expressed in this thread are very compatible with a view that lets our two old line party stooges and vicious toadies off the hook for their inaction on the diplomatic front wrt this US-led military occupation of Central Asia and US interference in Central Asia that is 30 years old to-date. If we include South-East Asia and Korea, the US military and covert meddling in Asia dates back to 1945. And some babblers want us to believe that US Military and covert interference in Central and SE Asia is about to end, because the USA's former proxies in Kabul from 1996-2001 are about to win the war? Get real!

Jingles

Quote:
No, what the NDP says is needed amounts to a modern day equivalent of the Paris peace talks. The Taliban need a platform to speak to the rest of the world and conditions for peace laid out on the table for all the world to see.

They "need" to do no such thing. They just have to keep killing the Crusaders. They do not have to crawl, hat in hand, to the oppressors and beg them for legitimacy in the eyes of liberal imperialists.

You really need to understand what you're demanding here. You want the resistance to engage in talks of surrender with the very people who are destroying their country. Your history seems a bit fuzzy, but while the North Vietnamese engaged in the Paris talks, the US was increasing their genocidal bombing campaign. What did those talks accomplish? SFA. The war was won when the Americans scurried away like filthy cockroaches in defeat.

Unionist

Jingles, I agree with you, but I'd like to try to keep this thread to news about the victory of the insurgency, rather than debating those who thought the Afghan people needed help from the Soviets, and now they need help from the NDP. It's not really worth the virtual ink, is it?

Back to the news, the British are reporting that 13 "allied" troops were injured, including Canadians and U.S.

The Canadian MSM are so bought-and-paid-for that they don't even raise this question: "Why are we not allowed to know how many Canadians are wounded?"

 

Fidel

Unionist wrote:
Jingles, I agree with you, but I'd like to try to keep this thread to news about the victory of the insurgency, rather than debating those who thought the Afghan people needed help from the Soviets, and now they need help from the NDP.

 The Afghan men and women volunteers had no help from the Soviets for more than two years and defeated armed to the eye-teeth, CIA and Saudi and ISI-backed Mooj at a major dustup at Jalalabad. Sent them packing!

Some of those "freedom fighters" are propped up in power in Kabul today.

The CIA, Saudis and ISI created the Mujahedin and vicious drug lords and propped up in Kabul today.

The CIA created the Taliban and "Al-Qaeda"

The NDP had nothing to do with it you fools!

Carry on apologizing for what has been a succession of pathetic old line party vicious toadies in Ottawa - loyal lap poodles who await Uncle Sam's every instruction on Afghanistan with baited breath and bended knee aye-aye Uncle Sam may we have another!!

Fidel

Jingles wrote:

Quote:
No, what the NDP says is needed amounts to a modern day equivalent of the Paris peace talks. The Taliban need a platform to speak to the rest of the world and conditions for peace laid out on the table for all the world to see.

They "need" to do no such thing. They just have to keep killing the Crusaders. They do not have to crawl, hat in hand, to the oppressors and beg them for legitimacy in the eyes of liberal imperialists.

And in the meantime the Afghan heroes will receive no help whatsoever from Canada's  stoogeocracy nor any moral support from babblers Jingles or Unionist. They are on their own, because Uncle Sam's war crimes and illegal military occupation of Afghanistan and attacks into Pakistan are "none of anyone's business" according to the usual anti-NDP rhetoric.

They will be victorious. Some day. 30 years and counting later... Jingles is all up in arms because Jack Layton wants to intervene into what has been the CIA and Saudis and ISI's "bizness" and their business alone for over 30 years. Aye-aye Uncle Sam. In America we trust and obey, because it's the only way!! And to hell with Jack Layton and the NDP for sticking their noses into the foreign affairs of our imperial masters in Warshington and their supranational energy company palz.

Jingles wrote:
Your history seems a bit fuzzy, but while the North Vietnamese engaged in the Paris talks, the US was increasing their genocidal bombing campaign. What did those talks accomplish? SFA.

The Paris peace talks allowed the NVA to make public the Americans' arrogant and impossible conditions for peace in international newspapers and news broadcasts. US hawks were embarrassed as hell by it, and people around the world were even more emboldened in their opposition to that phony war based on lies. This war is a lie and so was VietNam. 

If Yanqui imperialists learned anything from Nam, it was to remove the press and independent news journalists from the battle and to wage their own information war based on propaganda, lies and lack of information made public in general. It makes committing war crimes and prolonging phony war so much easier when the public is kept in the dark. And after 30 year's worth of US meddling in Afghanistan and Pakistan, it really is a matter for international diplomacy/intervention to put an end to "US interests" and western energy companies' interests in Afghanistan and Central Asia with US military paving the way for them.

NDPP

Afghan Resistance Statement: On the Maldives Talks

http://www.alqimmah.net/showthread.php?p=33221

"Some media outlets have once again published a report about talks between representatives of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and the Kabul surrogate administration. These are the same baseless rumours which are now being repeated anew..

The IEA once again announces that the essential solution of the Afghan issue lies in unconditional and immediate withdrawal of the foreign forces from the country.."

IEA High Command

Unionist

How about [url=http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCATRE64D0Y720100514]last week[/url], where NATO forces killed 11 civilians - and their Afghan puppet murderers killed one of hundreds of demonstrators shouting "Death to America" and "Long Live Taliban"?

Webgear's love for humanity doesn't appear to extend to the victims of his men.

But it's ok, because Webgear's buddies will soon either be out of Afghanistan, or unable to leave. History is such a powerful force, as is the anger of the people once kindled.

 

Jingles

Fidel, you're increasingly delusional. Make up your mind: you can support the Crusader, or the resistance. I'm getting tired of your increasingly incoherent jibberjabbering about how the glorious NDP will save the people of Afghanistan from themselves. Jack Layton and his third way old-line toady party (capitalism if necessary, but not necessarily capitalism!) has made it clear which side he's on.

Quote:
 They are on their own, because Uncle Sam's war crimes and illegal military occupation of Afghanistan and attacks into Pakistan are "none of anyone's business" according to the usual anti-NDP rhetoric.

This is what I mean: you make no sense whatsoever. Unless the NDP wants to form International Brigades to help the Mujahedin, then you're talking out your ass. Your NDP, being part of the "succession of pathetic old line party vicious toadies in Ottawa", has thrown in its lot with the occupiers. You should really come to terms with that.

Quote:
 It's not really worth the virtual ink, is it?

Yeah, your right. Sorry folks.

 

 

Slumberjack

Unionist wrote:
History is such a powerful force, as is the anger of the people once kindled. 

Would that it were.

Frmrsldr

Webgear wrote:

Unionist

I believe your glorious comrades blew up a bus this week in Kabul, killing over a dozen innocent Afghans and injuring dozens more. I know you were busy not to mention this earlier this week or to issue a statement against this act. I know you think its ok to kill civilians if your team is doing the killing.

Webgear,

I believe your glorious comrades in arms blew up a bus about six weeks ago in Zhari district, west of Kandahar city, killing four innocent Afghans and injuring 18 more. Were you too busy to mention this earlier or to issue a statement against this act? Do you think it's o.k. to kill civilians if your 'team' is doing the killing? Or is it just a case of "It's war. These things unfortunately happen sometimes in war. We're supposed to be the 'good' guys. Don't you know, it's unpatriotic to criticize our country/government/war/troops."?

http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2010/04/12/nato-troops-kill-4-afghans-on...

Even "Stan the Man' Gen. McCrackers admitted:

Kathy Kelly and Dan Pearson wrote:

During a biweekly videoconference with US soldiers in Afghanistan, he was quite candid. "We've shot an amazing number of people and killed a number and, to my knowledge, none has proven to have been a real threat to the force," said General McChrystal. "To my knowledge, in the nine-plus months I've been here, not a single case where we have engaged in an escalation of force incident and hurt someone has it turned out that the vehicle had a suicide bomb or weapons in it and, in many cases, had families in it."

http://original.antiwar.com/kelly-pearson/2010/04/30/atrocities-in-afgha...

Frmrsldr

Slumberjack wrote:

Unionist wrote:
History is such a powerful force, as is the anger of the people once kindled. 

Would that it were.

Afghans' sense of time is much slower than ours.

Remember, it took about a century before the Afghans made the British realize that the "game wasn't worth the candle" and the British left. It took the Afghans 10 years to convince the Russians to leave.

Looks like it will take at least 10 years to convince the U.S.A./NATO/ISAF to leave. But convince us the Afghans will. And leave humiliated and defeated, we will.

NDPP

 

Jingles wrote:
Your NDP, being part of the "succession of pathetic old line party vicious toadies in Ottawa", has thrown in its lot with the occupiers. You should really come to terms with that."

NDPP

that really is the nub and rub of it Fidelio...

Fidel

Jingles wrote:
This is what I mean: you make no sense whatsoever. Unless the NDP wants to form International Brigades to help the Mujahedin, then you're talking out your ass.

What lunatic parallel universe have you come from?  The Mooj "freedom fighters" of the 1980s are there in Karzai's government today, you moran. Hamid Karzai was pro Mooj during the CIA-ISI-Saudi's proxy war to purge Central Asia of secular socialist thought in the 1980s, also known as the CIA's anticommunist jihad and even 'operation cyclone' Drug trafficking Afghan war lords were all propped up by the American CIA, Saudis, Brits, and Pakistani ISI. These people are war criminals and drug dealing government members who our stooges and their imperial masters are protecting from "free market forces" shall we say.

 

Jingles wrote:
Your NDP, being part of the "succession of pathetic old line party vicious toadies in Ottawa", has thrown in its lot with the occupiers. You should really come to terms with that.

Get a clue. Your country's military is deeply involved in helping Uncle Sam to prop up yet another dictatorship in yet another impoverished nation. Our two old line party stooges just follow instructions from their imperial masters in Warshington. Perhaps it's time you recognized that our long-time colonial administrativeship in Ottawa is not a real government.

Slumberjack

They've been collaborating with the corporate occupation of Parliament Hill for quite some time.

Fidel

There's just one hitch to this wild anti-NDP conspiracy theory though. So far it's been nothing but Liberal, Tory, it's the same old story of vicious toadying to their imperial masters in Warshington.

 The NDP has never actually been in federal government in Ottawa to do the vicious toadying to Uncle Sam that you people claim is true.

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

Chretien was a stooge for crazy George II, and so was Paulie Pockets Martin.

Iggy's a stooge in waiting. In fact, Iggy and his party are currently stooging for the lead lap dogs in Ottawa, the Conservative government re-elected in 2008 with an exaggerated minority.

Harper is head stooge today.

Unionist

Scroll back and guess who introduced the NDP into this thread - and then he goes into a fit when people respond and say what they think about the NDP.

Fidel, why not stop your diversionary crap for just one minute and let this thread carry on to report the victories of the Afghan people. We know you think it's a "phony war" - meaning of course the war against the occupiers. No one agrees with you, and it's a fairly unworthy position for a citizen of one of the invading countries to take. Why not just wish the Afghan people victory and demand the immediate withdrawal of Canadian troops. For a change.

 

Frmrsldr

Error

Fidel

Speak for yourself. Not everyone agrees with your warped view of recent history of Afghanistan. And not everyone agrees with your warped anti-NDP conspiracy theory that suggests the NDP are vicious toadies the same as the two parties you secretly harbor affections for.

What would Diefenbaker say, Unionist? Would he buy some dud fucking missiles from Uncle Sam before sending thousands of aircraft manufacturing jobs to the US? Is that how he would defend Canadians from Al-CIA'da and the Taliban threatening to invade Bananada?

I think old Dief and Liberal Party "opposers" in Ottawa would be nodding up and down in rapid agreement today to whatever Uncle Sam orders them to go along with.

Pages

Topic locked