# NATO Air Strike Kills Civilians in Afghanistan



## celtic_crippler (Feb 13, 2013)

If confirmed: 4 women, 5 children, and 1 man killed, and 5 additional children injured in order to kill 4 Taliban leaders. 



> The deaths came hours before President Barack Obama announced that he would be withdrawing 34,000 US troops from Afghanistan by the end of this year, and a similar number in 2014, which he said would bring an end to the US war in Afghanistan.



Aricle: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/13/nato-air-strike-civilians-afghanistan

How easy to kill another when you don't have to look them in the eye. And now, with drones, it's just like playing a video game.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 14, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> If confirmed: 4 women, 5 children, and 1 man killed, and 5 additional children injured in order to kill 4 Taliban leaders.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



OK, if you don't mind, the next time we identify 4 or 5 terrorists deep in Taliban territory, do you mind if we send you in on foot to take care of the problem?

I'm not a big fan of President Obama, but I also have no problem with using drones.  Nor do I have much sympathy for the families of those who choose to live with known terrorists, or vice versa.  I have great disrespect for those terrorist leaders who try to use their famlies as shields, then complain when they are killed.  For that matter, it would seem some of the family members are not afraid to pick up weapons and fight themselves.  What do you suggest as a preferred manner to combat these terrorist leaders?

Or maybe I misunderstood your meaning?


----------



## celtic_crippler (Feb 14, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> OK, if you don't mind, the next time we identify 4 or 5 terrorists deep in Taliban territory, do you mind if we send you in on foot to take care of the problem?
> 
> I'm not a big fan of President Obama, but I also have no problem with using drones.  Nor do I have much sympathy for the families of those who choose to live with known terrorists, or vice versa.  I have great disrespect for those terrorist leaders who try to use their famlies as shields, then complain when they are killed.  For that matter, it would seem some of the family members are not afraid to pick up weapons and fight themselves.  What do you suggest as a preferred manner to combat these terrorist leaders?
> 
> Or maybe I misunderstood your meaning?



I already served, sir. You? 

Devaluing the lives of any human being belittles us and our supposed values. 

I suppose you'd be fine with just dropping a nuke on the whole country? Why not go ahead and kill them all, right? How about some good old fashioned genocide. 

 Ever considered if we stopped killing their children they'd be less of a threat to us. Or are their children less "precious" than ours? 

I think we've done more than achieve our mission there. It's long past time to bring our people home and shift our focus to the massive domestic issues we are now facing.


----------



## James Kovacich (Feb 14, 2013)

I watched a documentry where they asked 15 yearolds kids why were the soldiers there and their response was "I don't know." Everyone of them said that. They were so small when it all came down, all they knew was they were running around their country doing military stuff.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 15, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> I already served, sir. You?



Yes, I have already served.  I have mentioned that before so I won't bore you with piddly details here.



celtic_crippler said:


> Devaluing the lives of any human being belittles us and our supposed values.



I don't devalue lives, nor did I say that I did.  And in fact, that is all too often a consideration of those who must make decisions; what value to put on whose life?  Whose life is more important, a terrorist, his family, or those of our military who would have to go in if we didn't use drones?



celtic_crippler said:


> I suppose you'd be fine with just dropping a nuke on the whole country? Why not go ahead and kill them all, right? How about some good old fashioned genocide.



That's so ridiculous it hardly deserves an answer.  However in present circumstances, no, I would not.  And using lower level warfare helps prevent any suggestion that it should even be considered.



celtic_crippler said:


> Ever considered if we stopped killing their children they'd be less of a threat to us. Or are their children less "precious" than ours?



First define children.  I understand that children often become combatants at a surprisingly early age.  Women too.  And I think it is as much a cultural thing as simply retribution towards our presence there.



celtic_crippler said:


> I think we've done more than achieve our mission there. It's long past time to bring our people home and shift our focus to the massive domestic issues we are now facing.



You may be right.  What is our mission there?


----------



## MJS (Feb 15, 2013)

I certainly see both sides.  Lives, other than those of the intended targets, getting killed.  Of course, like OTH said, if you associate with the bad guys, well, its possible that you'll be part of the fallout.  Of course, IMO, I don't think there were too many bleeding hearts, when the badguys flew planes into the WTC, killing numerous people.  

So, we have option 1) drone strikes.  Option 2) send in our troops to take them out, which may still result in casualties other than the intended target.  Any other options?


----------



## celtic_crippler (Feb 15, 2013)

MJS said:


> Of course, IMO, I don't think there were too many bleeding hearts, when the badguys flew planes into the WTC, killing numerous people.



I was, and am still furious about that. 

...and where were those highjackers from again? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen. But oh... Afghani Taliban allowed "terrorist training camps" in their country. And who funded those camps? Where did that money come from? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen. 

Are you sure we're bombing the right women and children?


----------



## MJS (Feb 15, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> I was, and am still furious about that.



My apologies.  I wasn't clear.  When I said bleeding hearts, I was talking about the terrorists, not Americans.  Absolutely the WTC attack was horrible, and while I wasn't in NYC that day, it certainly was a sad day, and was upsetting.  



> ...and where were those highjackers from again? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen. But oh... Afghani Taliban allowed "terrorist training camps" in their country. And who funded those camps? Where did that money come from? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen.
> 
> Are you sure we're bombing the right women and children?



Well, if we're bombing the wrong people, countries, etc, then the big shots need to get their **** together, and start bombing those that are responsible.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Feb 15, 2013)

MJS said:


> My apologies.  I wasn't clear.  When I said bleeding hearts, I was talking about the terrorists, not Americans.  Absolutely the WTC attack was horrible, and while I wasn't in NYC that day, it certainly was a sad day, and was upsetting.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, if we're bombing the wrong people, countries, etc, then the big shots need to get their **** together, and start bombing those that are responsible.



You think we'd ever bomb Saudi Arabia?


----------



## MJS (Feb 15, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> You think we'd ever bomb Saudi Arabia?



No, probably not. LOL!  So, I'm open for suggestions.  What do you feel should be done?


----------



## celtic_crippler (Feb 15, 2013)

MJS said:


> No, probably not. LOL!  So, I'm open for suggestions.  What do you feel should be done?



Getting rid of the ones sending our people over seas like they were no more important than pawns on a chess board would be a good start. Unfortunately, people keep voting them back into office.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 15, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> I was, and am still furious about that.
> 
> ...and where were those highjackers from again? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen. But oh... Afghani Taliban allowed "terrorist training camps" in their country. And who funded those camps? Where did that money come from? It wasn't Afghanistan or Pakistan or Yemen.
> 
> Are you sure we're bombing the right women and children?



OBL had long since been forced out of Lybia and he took refuge in Afganistan, supported and protected by the Taliban.  He was behind the WTC attack.  Granted he used other than Afganis to attack the twin towers.  But OBL was behind it and was in Afganistan under protection of the Taliban.  We went in after him, and really never left, for all that we didn't have a big buildup there to begin with.

As to the money, from all I have heard, much of the money was OBL's own money.  Did he keep it in Saudi Arabia?  I don't know, but at one time news reports were saying it was kept there and protected as he was a Saudi.  But as MJS said, anything that hasn't been done about it yet isn't likely to be done in the future.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Feb 15, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> OBL had long since been forced out of Lybia and he took refuge in Afganistan, supported and protected by the Taliban.  He was behind the WTC attack.  Granted he used other than Afganis to attack the twin towers.  But OBL was behind it and was in Afganistan under protection of the Taliban.  We went in after him, and really never left, for all that we didn't have a big buildup there to begin with.
> 
> As to the money, from all I have heard, much of the money was OBL's own money.  Did he keep it in Saudi Arabia?  I don't know, but at one time news reports were saying it was kept there and protected as he was a Saudi.  But as MJS said, anything that hasn't been done about it yet isn't likely to be done in the future.



No offense, man... but you should explore other "news" outside of FOX. Much of the rest of the world is better informed, unfortunately. 

You might find this article intersting: http://www.phantomreport.com/former...poses-wests-alliance-with-al-qaeda#more-15114


----------



## MJS (Feb 15, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> Getting rid of the ones sending our people over seas like they were no more important than pawns on a chess board would be a good start. Unfortunately, people keep voting them back into office.



Well, yeah, I've been saying that for a long time...that we need to get the hell out of there, as well as stop getting involved with the issues of other countries.  If they're not affecting us, we need to mind our own business.  

Anyways...what type of person should be making the decisions?  Bush and Obama are 2 Presidents that were/are active when we had people over seas, so I take it you're not fond of either of them? LOL!


----------



## celtic_crippler (Feb 15, 2013)

MJS said:


> Well, yeah, I've been saying that for a long time...that we need to get the hell out of there, as well as stop getting involved with the issues of other countries.  If they're not affecting us, we need to mind our own business.
> 
> Anyways...what type of person should be making the decisions?  Bush and Obama are 2 Presidents that were/are active when we had people over seas, so I take it you're not fond of either of them? LOL!



No argument from me. 

I haven't been fond of any president in my lifetime... and that's been a long time LOL. 

I just continue to vote for people that don't have a [D] or [R] in front of their name, continue to put information out there in hopes that if just one more person wakes up it will help make a difference, continue to be active in my local government through the LPGA... and that's all I can do at the moment.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 15, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> No offense, man... but you should explore other "news" outside of FOX. Much of the rest of the world is better informed, unfortunately.
> 
> You might find this article intersting: http://www.phantomreport.com/former...poses-wests-alliance-with-al-qaeda#more-15114



The site itself though seems to carry some misinformation, I had a shufti through the home page and found a lot of factual mistakes such as Greek Cyprus (Cyprus isn't Greek it's independant,) etc, etc, how sure are you that the above link is factual?


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 15, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> OK, if you don't mind, the next time we identify 4 or 5 terrorists deep in Taliban territory, do you mind if we send you in on foot to take care of the problem?
> 
> I'm not a big fan of President Obama, but I also have no problem with using drones.  Nor do I have much sympathy for the families of those who choose to live with known terrorists, or vice versa.  I have great disrespect for those terrorist leaders who try to use their famlies as shields, then complain when they are killed.  For that matter, it would seem some of the family members are not afraid to pick up weapons and fight themselves.  What do you suggest as a preferred manner to combat these terrorist leaders?



I'd love to see you use that argument in situ. Perhaps you could go to Afghanistan tell "the civilians" that it's there fault if they get killed?

What would be the result if the roles were reversed and you just read what you typed above?


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 15, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> But OBL was behind it and was in Afganistan under protection of the Taliban.



I wonder if you saw this...

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



> The Taliban would be ready to discuss handing over Osama bin Laden to a neutral country if the US halted the bombing of Afghanistan, a senior Taliban official said today.Afghanistan's deputy prime minister, Haji Abdul Kabir, told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US.




Imagine the rivers of blood that could have been prevented simply by giving the Taliban evidence and allowing OBL to be turned over for justice?  How many 9/11s has the US and it's allies inflicted after rejecting this offer?

The whole war is a lie.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 16, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> No offense, man... but you should explore other "news" outside of FOX. Much of the rest of the world is better informed, unfortunately.



I get most of my news from NBC, The Washington Post or a local radio news station.  I don't think any of them are noted for conservatism nor inaccurate reporting.



celtic_crippler said:


> You might find this article intersting: http://www.phantomreport.com/former...poses-wests-alliance-with-al-qaeda#more-15114



Well, that's time I won't get back.  It looks like someone with an agenda, and probably different that FOX, but I don't know since I don't watch FOX.  Since you are so disdainful of FOX, you must watch it some so perhaps you could comment on that?


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 16, 2013)

Makalakumu said:


> I'd love to see you use that argument in situ. Perhaps you could go to Afghanistan tell "the civilians" that it's there fault if they get killed?
> 
> What would be the result if the roles were reversed and you just read what you typed above?



I don't know the time difference, but you must not have had your first cup of coffee.  :uhyeah:

But it's probably my fault for not turning on my facitious and sarcasm filters.

So no, I won't being going in on foot any more than I expected CC to do so.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 16, 2013)

Makalakumu said:


> I wonder if you saw this...
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5
> 
> ...



The key being they would need proof OBL was behind the attacks.  I wonder what you think their standard of proof would have been?


----------



## celtic_crippler (Feb 16, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> I get most of my news from NBC, The Washington Post or a local radio news station.  I don't think any of them are noted for conservatism nor inaccurate reporting.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that's time I won't get back.  It looks like someone with an agenda, and probably different that FOX, but I don't know since I don't watch FOX.  Since you are so disdainful of FOX, you must watch it some so perhaps you could comment on that?



I don't know what you mean? I love O'Reilly! Oh... and the Five... Greg's my hero.


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 16, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> The key being they would need proof OBL was behind the attacks.  I wonder what you think their standard of proof would have been?



It would have been nice to find out and it might have saved thousands of innocent lives.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Feb 16, 2013)

Makalakumu said:


> It would have been nice to find out and it might have saved thousands of innocent lives.



That's twice now you have slipped around answering a question.  

It would have been nice to have known up front what they wanted, and it they were serious, I suppose they would have stated what would constitute proof.  But I don't think they were serious.  They knew very well who OBL was and what his goals were.  You insult them if you think otherwise.

As to your last two posts that it would have been nice to have known, the first answer that comes to my mind is that if bullfrogs had wings ...


----------



## Tgace (Feb 16, 2013)

Hell...we used to level most of German cities to take out a ball bearing manufacturing facility. While Im not FOR collateral damage, it seems like we now expect to never have it anymore. Are we not supposed to conduct operations if there is a collateral damage risk? 

Again, Im not saying we just level entire towns to get one guy, but if 4 high value targets gather in one house??


----------



## Tgace (Feb 16, 2013)

> The Taliban would be ready to discuss handing over Osama bin Laden to a neutral country if the US halted the bombing of Afghanistan, a senior Taliban official said today.Afghanistan's deputy prime minister, *Haji Abdul Kabir, told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks* in the US.



If you don't see whats going on there then there is no point going on...........


----------



## ballen0351 (Feb 16, 2013)

Makalakumu said:


> It would have been nice to find out and it might have saved thousands of innocent lives.



And you know we didnt try how?


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 16, 2013)

ballen0351 said:


> And you know we didnt try how?



Bush was determined to kill two birds with one stone. He wasn't going to negotiate with the Taliban. Those guys were holding up a major Unocal pipeline...


----------



## ballen0351 (Feb 16, 2013)

Makalakumu said:


> Bush was determined to kill two birds with one stone. He wasn't going to negotiate with the Taliban. Those guys were holding up a major Unocal pipeline...



So you dont know?  You just assume


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 16, 2013)

ballen0351 said:


> So you dont know?  You just assume



No, I don't know.  I assume the government is lying to me as soon as a politicians lips move. 

That said, I went in depth on this Unocal\Taliban connection long ago on MT. It's not a coincidence that Hamid Karzai is their former spokesperson.


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 16, 2013)

Tgace said:


> If you don't see whats going on there then there is no point going on...........



Out of curiosity, what do you think the Taliban were trying to accomplish by asking for evidence before turning OBL over for justice?


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 16, 2013)

Tgace said:


> Hell...we used to level most of German cities to take out a ball bearing manufacturing facility. While Im not FOR collateral damage, it seems like we now expect to never have it anymore. Are we not supposed to conduct operations if there is a collateral damage risk?
> 
> Again, Im not saying we just level entire towns to get one guy, but if 4 high value targets gather in one house??



Have you seen this?

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=x4PgpbQfxgo&desktop_uri=/watch?v=x4PgpbQfxgo

The Secretary of State argues that 500,000 dead children are worth the price of one man the government doesn't like.

And people here thought Adam Lanza was evil...


----------



## Tgace (Feb 16, 2013)

Makalakumu said:


> Out of curiosity, what do you think the Taliban were trying to accomplish by asking for evidence before turning OBL over for justice?




You seriously think that they would have accepted ANY evidence? That was a tactic...not an offer.


----------



## Tgace (Feb 16, 2013)

Makalakumu said:


> Have you seen this?
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=x4PgpbQfxgo&desktop_uri=/watch?v=x4PgpbQfxgo
> 
> ...



Sanctions=Mass Murder?

Seriously?


----------



## ballen0351 (Feb 16, 2013)

Makalakumu said:


> Out of curiosity, what do you think the Taliban were trying to accomplish by asking for evidence before turning OBL over for justice?



Its called stalling.  Like when you knock on the girlfriends door looking for a guy with warrants. She keeps yelling just a min Im getting dressed over and over until hes able to climb out the back window or hide in the attic


----------



## Tgace (Feb 16, 2013)

ballen0351 said:


> Its called stalling.  Like when you knock on the girlfriends door looking for a guy with warrants. She keeps yelling just a min Im getting dressed over and over until hes able to climb out the back window or hide in the attic



LOL!!

Perfect analogy.


----------



## billc (Feb 16, 2013)

Don't the criminals realize that you guys know that trick already?  Wellll...if they were smart, they wouldn't be criminals...or at a location known to the police when they have a pending arrest warrent...

If only they would use their stupidity for good...er...or something like that...


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 16, 2013)

Tgace said:


> Sanctions=Mass Murder?
> 
> Seriously?



Sanctions is just a fancy word for laying seige. An Iraqi man shared a tale of having to hold down his young son while the doctor amputated an infected leg...without anesthetic.

George Carlin has a great bit about euphemisms. Check it out...


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 16, 2013)

ballen0351 said:


> Its called stalling.  Like when you knock on the girlfriends door looking for a guy with warrants. She keeps yelling just a min Im getting dressed over and over until hes able to climb out the back window or hide in the attic



How do you know they were stalling? What if they were sincere? What if they simply wanted to have the case layed out because they distrust the West?


----------



## billc (Feb 16, 2013)

Hmmmm...I think the part where the taliban were murdering women in the soccer field hurt their trustworthiness...just a tad...don't you...


----------



## billc (Feb 16, 2013)

Makalakumu...you could go over to Afghanistan yourself and meet with the taliban...sort of convince them that they should trust us...you might want to put your will together first though...


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 16, 2013)

Tgace said:


> You seriously think that they would have accepted ANY evidence? That was a tactic...not an offer.



We'll never know, but I seriously don't think the government was interested in negotiating with the Taliban. The Neocons wanted to go into Afghan before 9\11. Unocal pipeline negotiations broke down and ambassedors were telling the Taliban to "accept our carpet of gold or accept our carpet of bombs. Ambassedors to India were informing that government that, "we would have boots on the ground before the snow flies," in August of 2001. 

Bush was going to kill two bird with one stone and it didn't matter what they offered.


----------



## ballen0351 (Feb 16, 2013)

Makalakumu said:


> How do you know they were stalling? What if they were sincere? What if they simply wanted to have the case layed out because they distrust the West?



if they were sincere they would have captured him held him and then said ok show us what you got or we will release him.  Not show us what you got and then we will go find him.


----------



## Tgace (Feb 16, 2013)

ballen0351 said:


> if they were sincere they would have captured him held him and then said ok show us what you got or we will release him.  Not show us what you got and then we will go find him.



Charming how trusting he is though isn't it?


----------



## ballen0351 (Feb 16, 2013)

Tgace said:


> Charming how trusting he is though isn't it?


  very trusting of the Taliban not so much of the US Govt.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Feb 17, 2013)

ballen0351 said:


> very trusting of the Taliban not so much of the US Govt.



Which one was the catalyst?


----------



## James Kovacich (Feb 17, 2013)

ballen0351 said:


> very trusting of the Taliban not so much of the US Govt.



I dint realize you were so trusting of the US govt. 

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## ballen0351 (Feb 17, 2013)

James Kovacich said:


> I dint realize you were so trusting of the US govt.
> 
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2



I'm not but I trust them more then I do the Taliban.


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 17, 2013)

billc said:


> Makalakumu...you could go over to Afghanistan yourself and meet with the taliban...sort of convince them that they should trust us...you might want to put your will together first though...



A good friend of mine did just that. He went after the Soviets left and he said you'd never meet a nicer people. They took him into their homes, fed him, and treated him well. Here's a total stranger on a backpacking trip around the world and here are your "monsters" acting very humanely.


----------



## James Kovacich (Feb 17, 2013)

There is a difference between the average Afghani and the Taliban. The difference being the Taliban is a political faction formerly within Afghanistan and now primarily in Pakistan. Your friend was probably there before the Taiban came to power.

The Taliban, alternative spelling Taleban, [7] is an Islamic fundamentalist political movement in Afghanistan. It spread into Afghanistan and formed a government, ruling as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from September 1996 until December 2001,
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban


Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 17, 2013)

James Kovacich said:


> There is a difference between the average Afghani and the Taliban. The difference being the Taliban is a political faction formerly within Afghanistan and now primarily in Pakistan. Your friend was probably there before the Taiban came to power.
> 
> The Taliban, alternative spelling Taleban, [7] is an Islamic fundamentalist political movement in Afghanistan. It spread into Afghanistan and formed a government, ruling as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from September 1996 until December 2001,
> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban
> ...



My friend traveled through Pakistan as well.  He traveled through India, Tibet, and China.  Essentially, he walked from northern Africa to Korea late 80s.  Simply amazing, I wish he would write a book.

The government propagandists like to draw distinct lines between people in order to make the "enemy" distinct for political purposes.  The truth is that humanity is fluid and borders are ephemeral.


----------



## MJS (Feb 18, 2013)

celtic_crippler said:


> No argument from me.



Agreed. Sadly, as nice as it'd be, I highly doubt we would ever see that happening.



> I haven't been fond of any president in my lifetime... and that's been a long time LOL. [/qute]
> 
> LOL!  Well, some have been better than others, thats for sure.
> 
> ...


----------



## James Kovacich (Feb 18, 2013)

Makalakumu said:


> My friend traveled through Pakistan as well.  He traveled through India, Tibet, and China.  Essentially, he walked from northern Africa to Korea late 80s.  Simply amazing, I wish he would write a book.
> 
> The government propagandists like to draw distinct lines between people in order to make the "enemy" distinct for political purposes.  The truth is that humanity is fluid and borders are ephemeral.



The only thing I was making a point about was that your friend probably didn't meet the Taliban. I agree, the Afghan people are good people as a whole. We have the largest US population right here in Fremont, Ca. We are not at war with them. We are at war Al Queda which resulted in going to war with their protectors the Taliban and currently they want their country back. Those good people will likely be losing all the freedoms they currently have. That part of the world isn't easily understood. 

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Makalakumu (Feb 18, 2013)

James Kovacich said:


> The only thing I was making a point about was that your friend probably didn't meet the Taliban. I agree, the Afghan people are good people as a whole. We have the largest US population right here in Fremont, Ca. We are not at war with them. We are at war Al Queda which resulted in going to war with their protectors the Taliban and currently they want their country back. Those good people will likely be losing all the freedoms they currently have. That part of the world isn't easily understood.
> 
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2



I don't think it's that simple.  Both the Taliban and AQ are creatures that the US government created and fed.  When the Soviets left Afghanistan, the creatures continued to be fed, but had little direction.  Then, the monster turned on us and on they people who live there.  

I think this kind of reckless foreign policy has to end.  Nothing the US does here can be viewed as good, IMO.  The government can fight the monster it created and kill innocents in the process, but none of this needed to happen in the first place.  The war will eventually end and I think it will just be another black eye for the US, unless the US can pivot on it's current course and change the foreign policy that created this situation.


----------

