[...] was back on Sept 5th that I posted about the Taliban vow of revenge for the Kundiz province bombing. During that time, New York Times journalist, Steven Farrell and [...]

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’ve noticed that the MSM has stopped providing the body/injury counts that they continually threw out when Bush was President.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

This emphasis on “civilian” casualties will be the precursor for a withdrawal of US and coalition forces from Afghanistan and Iraq. You cannot expect our Generals to fight and win an all out war with rules of engagement that call for pin point unachievable accuracy with zero collateral damage. The liberals will step up their campaign and it will be Vet Nam ll when the now grey beards 60s activists will leave the posh government or university tenured positions to once again spit on our returning troops. Or maybe they will have indoctrinated enough of their students to do the dirty work for them.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

The Taliban saw this as a win-win situation. They “encouraged the villagers to take the fuel just before the airstrike” for several reasons: in order to later recover for their own use whatever fuel the locals managed to steal; to try to prevent a NATO strike against “civilians” long enough to off-load all the fuel; and to create more ill will among the villagers toward the U.S./NATO forces. Besides, stealing isn’t stealing when you’re stealing from the infidels.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Hey — what is this “innocent civilians” BS — they were STEALING the fuel –

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Has anyone else noticed that since OweBama became president, that when airstrikes incurr a high death-count, it’s no longer “American Airstrike Kills XX Persons”, but “Nato Airstrike Kills XX Persons”

Like or Dislike: 0  0