Afghan Suicide bomber kills 10 children...'We gotta get outta this place.

Part of the title comes from a song out of another era, but it's very much current events we're having to face here.

What kind of evil and sick, twisted place does it require to see people strap a bomb on so they can go target something inside a densely populated area. Then, after that is accomplished, approach said target with children....10 of them...close enough to be killed by the blast? This isn't war. This is evil.

KABUL, Afghanistan -- A suicide bomber targeting an American patrol outside a busy market in eastern Afghanistan killed 13 people on Monday, including 10 schoolchildren who were walking nearby and two international service members, officials said.

Gen. Zelmia Oryakhail, provincial police chief of Paktia province, said the bomber was on a motorcycle and detonated his explosives at midday outside the market in Samkani district as American forces passed. He said a local school had just let pupils out for lunch.

Unfortunately, this isn't happening as a one-off and in isolation. It's a little late, but I suppose one could call this the annual Spring Offensive. It's a yearly event in Afghanistan and has been a draw for the locals since the 1970's. Well, a draw for some. A nightmare for others.

In recent weeks, Taliban insurgents have unleashed a wave of suicide bombers to hit government targets and international agencies in the country, and militants have been attacking police checkpoints in several provinces in a major test for the security forces of President Hamid Karzai's government.

Source

Now I can almost hear the running feet of the moral relativist crowd coming to make sure no one can ever forget, US forces also kill in collateral damage from things like drone strikes. So I'll cede the point right up front, in the OP. I'll also note there is a world of difference between an Air Strike and actually, personally, looking the people you are about to murder in the face. I don't support what the drone program has become, to be blunt, but that's apples to oranges.

This isn't about the US or what Allied/NATO Forces do. This is about suicide bombers murdering kids. This is what we need to either get serious about fighting (and that's just a bit late at this point), or get serious about leaving. The public talk in media is that the 2014 withdrawal date is solid and will be adhered to.

I'm afraid people will have to mark me in the highly skeptical column for that one.

US to Stay in Afghanistan after 2014

Allen: Afghans may need U.S 'bridging force' beyond 2014
(The Army Times also ran this. It's dated May 31st)

In another recent statement by former US Commanding General Allen,

WASHINGTON — The former top U.S. commander in Afghanistan called on the White House Friday to announce how many troops it intends to leave in that country after 2014.

Retired Gen. John Allen said Afghans need certainty on how many U.S. troops will stay behind after the majority complete their withdrawal by Dec. 31, 2014, before they will choose to side with the Afghan government or the Taliban.

Source

...There would seem to be some serious uncertainty. My vote would be none, 0, zilch and the big goose egg for how many Americans are 'left behind' in that place when the bulk of force that can protect them gets pulled out toward the end of the year.

Now, America won't be lonely because we won't be alone.

British troops to stay beyond 2014 in Afghnistan

The nations that fight together, stay together? How about just the nations who bribe together?

The CIA Gave Karzai Bags Full of Cash for Over a Decade

Turns Out British Spies Were Giving Bags of Cash to Karzai, Too

and of course, a little thing like publicity to corruption should never stand in the way of good (ahem) foreign policy. The show must go on, after all.

Karzai: CIA promises to continue cash payments

...but that really doesn't solve the problem. Karzai is on about 9 US bases for the long term while Congress hears testimony of 10,000 or more troops staying behind in tactical roles and security for other US interests. Who can we find to command such an effort? Is there a direct blood line for Military commanders from General Custer? I believe it may be fitting.

However, ultimately, this is about a place where people blow themselves up, killing a few within the assumed target while murdering 10 school kids....as just another event in general daily life across Afghanistan.

It's madness on a stick and we really, really do need to get out of that place. The month of May saw over 1,000 deaths related to fighting across Iraq, to point to our other recent "success". Afghanistan will never be any better than we see it today, by our being there...anyway. Only bad comes from this point, IMO. Afghanistan is a land, it's said, where Empires go to die. History bears that out. Afghanistan is a place that doesn't forgive weakness or fools. We're showing foolish weakness left and right, IMO.

The end of the year is too long and even an Embassy in that land locked nation is too much to leave behind for how vulnerable it will leave Americans. Some other recent events don't need a repeat for lack of support, IMO.

I actually think they may just make more progress with less troops.....
The roll em over and tuckem in attitude with have to be replaced with vey intelligent social and military
activities.
A little more cunning and a lot less brute force will be required to keep things on some kind of track.....
zthestay behind force should be SOCOM led i think.

reply to post by stirling


I think that's assuming the Taliban are suddenly very nice, very generous and very tolerant when we no longer have the force to stop them, outright, from over-running a United States facility. Right now, they know if they came very close to success (and they've tried several times by reports), they'd get hell itself coming from all directions, from all the bases in range. If they got away with it, somehow, they'd be hunted to the ends of that country.

When we're down to few? Well... They better have damn good defenses. The Russians had many and still found themselves in a literal state of siege inside their own bases. That's pretty hard to do to US forces .....at the moment. That's what I'm afraid will change. They've patiently waited us out, like they said they'd do in 2001/2002 when the war began. They were right too. I didn't believe it and thought they were arrogant cusses at the time...but they turned out right. They survived and we're giving up. It sucks seeing the enemy call the outcome over 10 years in advance.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


As long as there are people who hate their enemies more than they love their children this will never stop.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Part of the title comes from a song out of another era, but it's very much current events we're having to face here.

What kind of evil and sick, twisted place does it require to see people strap a bomb on so they can go target something inside a densely populated area. Then, after that is accomplished, approach said target with children....10 of them...close enough to be killed by the blast? This isn't war. This is evil.

While I totally agree that this is appalling, disgusting, and just plain sad I must ask what is the difference between this and our government targeting 1 "insurgent" in a densely populated are, and killing 20 using a drone?

This IS war. War IS evil.

All of the bombings, from all parties, need to just end.

reply to post by unphased


Oh, I would say there is a WORLD of difference, as the OP states, between an Airstrike and a personal, look them in the face, suicide bomber that is fanatic and crazy enough to not just knowingly murder children...but do it in a huge blaze of glory.

I think it was last year the media had started on the 'kick' of calling them "Homicide Bombers" after someone told them that even Islam doesn't think highly of suicide. No religion seems to. So, That's 2 strikes before they get there. Something tells me Allah won't be a smiling fellow when some of these animals arrive for their virgins. Just a hunch.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by unphased

 

Oh, I would say there is a WORLD of difference, as the OP states, between an Airstrike and a personal, look them in the face, suicide bomber that is fanatic and crazy enough to not just knowingly murder children...but do it in a huge blaze of glory.

I think it was last year the media had started on the 'kick' of calling them "Homicide Bombers" after someone told them that even Islam doesn't think highly of suicide. No religion seems to. So, That's 2 strikes before they get there. Something tells me Allah won't be a smiling fellow when some of these animals arrive for their virgins. Just a hunch.

Suicide is forbidden in any case is Islam, true.

.... how does that make this more appalling..? dead children is dead children. both parties are equally as demented. drone operators refer to targets as 'bug splats'... is that any more dehumanizing than looking at someone and killing yourself along with them...?

maybe drone operators should commit suicide too..

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


You must be wrong! Because terrorists ONLY target those evil Americans! /Sarcasm

I hope everyone who sees this thread OP realizes that terrorists are terrorists because they're crazy and will kill ANYONE no matter what and that foreign forces within these countries do not create more terrorists.

reply to post by unphased

Well, like I said in my OP.. This isn't about US, UK, German, Russian, Australian or little alien people killing innocents. It's about just one army killing innocent people on this thread. The Taliban / Al Qaeda.

I don't mean to sound sharp, but I actually dedicated a % of my OP specifically to avoiding this very moral comparison and relativism.

These days an American cannot seemingly observe anything, about anyone, anywhere else on this planet without someone jumping up to shout 'but but but you do it tooooooo!'. Umm... Okay, so that makes it alright? Murder, Mayhem, depravity and evil of all sorts is good to go because somewhere, an American ass did something somehow comparable...if looked at just so, in the right light?

If they didn't use their only sports stadium in Kabul to execute women and others considered "undesirable" to the Taliban fanatics, maybe there wouldn't have been such glee in obliterating everything they stood for back then. Unfortunately, the job wasn't finished and we didn't let the Northern Alliance just run the war their way, as local Afghans and likely the only people who really had any right to, anyway.

So.. We're left with two legged animals who figure the chance to get a few Americans and maybe even an Afghan is worth the murder of nearly a dozen school children on a public street. It wasn't even going for an important Officer or General. I could understand trade-offs. It's no better...but understandable. Just slaughtering kids for a random attack of pure opportunity? Bahhh... Animals.

Nope... I don't see the relativism here. I really don't...aside from that need some have to neutralize everything done by others in the world ...by pointing to us first, last and always. Enough of it, really.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by unphased

 

Well, like I said in my OP.. This isn't about US, UK, German, Russian, Australian or little alien people killing innocents. It's about just one army killing innocent people on this thread. The Taliban / Al Qaeda.

I don't mean to sound sharp, but I actually dedicated a % of my OP specifically to avoiding this very moral comparison and relativism.

These days an American cannot seemingly observe anything, about anyone, anywhere else on this planet without someone jumping up to shout 'but but but you do it tooooooo!'. Umm... Okay, so that makes it alright? Murder, Mayhem, depravity and evil of all sorts is good to go because somewhere, an American ass did something somehow comparable...if looked at just so, in the right light?

If they didn't use their only sports stadium in Kabul to execute women and others considered "undesirable" to the Taliban fanatics, maybe there wouldn't have been such glee in obliterating everything they stood for back then. Unfortunately, the job wasn't finished and we didn't let the Northern Alliance just run the war their way, as local Afghans and likely the only people who really had any right to, anyway.

So.. We're left with two legged animals who figure the chance to get a few Americans and maybe even an Afghan is worth the murder of nearly a dozen school children on a public street. It wasn't even going for an important Officer or General. I could understand trade-offs. It's no better...but understandable. Just slaughtering kids for a random attack of pure opportunity? Bahhh... Animals.

Nope... I don't see the relativism here. I really don't...aside from that need some have to neutralize everything done by others in the world ...by pointing to us first, last and always. Enough of it, really.

Ok so clearly your concern isn't dead children... It's children killed by "THEM" and not "US"..

Whatever floats your boat..

reply to post by unphased


Now that's an outright hateful thing to say, and to an extreme.

My concern is about the willingness to murder kids. If you are suggesting United States Forces have KNOWINGLY dropped explosives into areas with kids all over the place or have KNOWINGLY decided to slaughter almost a dozen kids so some 'ho hum' average Taliban militant could be hit...please, tell me with a cited and documented example. "I heard somewhere...' isn't documented.

I was being nice about not outright calling you on this before ..because I flat don't believe you when you say Americans have dropped high explosive weapons into densely populated areas in a similar fashion, knowing full well kids would die and doing it over...and over...and over again as an established military tactic.

Prove it or drop it. .....as I've asked now three times, counting the op, to avoid the American bashing garbage on a thread that I wrote specifically, soley and with narrow focus to the actions of the Afghan Militants.

You're welcome to start your own Anti-America bash thread. This isn't the one. However, please feel free to complete your thought with support to your claims. That I do very much want to see...since you've already stomped right across my thread anyway, totally ignoring what the OP post said. :shk:

*I VERY rarely go through the trouble of actually asking a direction be taken on a thread I write. Very rarely. When I occasionally do? I really am serious and not writing it directly into the op just for fun. The 'Joy of America Bashing" lately has me about sick to death of it entirely...and with a viciously short reaction to it. Must *EVERY* thread include SOME way to crap on the United States? Seems so ...for some people.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by unphased

 

Now that's an outright hateful thing to say, and to an extreme.

My concern is about the willingness to murder kids. If you are suggesting United States Forces have KNOWINGLY dropped explosives into areas with kids all over the place or have KNOWINGLY decided to slaughter almost a dozen kids so some 'ho hum' average Taliban militant could be hit...please, tell me with a cited and documented example. "I heard somewhere...' isn't documented.

I was being nice about not outright calling you on this before ..because I flat don't believe you when you say Americans have dropped high explosive weapons into densely populated areas in a similar fashion, knowing full well kids would die and doing it over...and over...and over again as an established military tactic.

Prove it or drop it. .....as I've asked now three times, counting the op, to avoid the American bashing garbage on a thread that I wrote specifically, soley and with narrow focus to the actions of the Afghan Militants.

You're welcome to start your own Anti-America bash thread. This isn't the one. However, please feel free to complete your thought with support to your claims. That I do very much want to see...since you've already stomped right across my thread anyway, totally ignoring what the OP post said. :shk:

*I VERY rarely go through the trouble of actually asking a direction be taken on a thread I write. Very rarely. When I occasionally do? I really am serious and not writing it directly into the op just for fun. The 'Joy of America Bashing" lately has me about sick to death of it entirely...and with a viciously short reaction to it. Must *EVERY* thread include SOME way to crap on the United States? Seems so ...for some people.

Smh how is me calling out the almost daily atrocity of the bombing of children "America bashing"????

You mean to tell me that you don't believe that children die as a result of our FREQUENT, SUPPORTED, and DEFENDED drone bombing of something like 5-9 countries...??? Even Obama acknowledged that like last week...

Still not sure how I'm "America bashing"...

reply to post by unphased


Oh, I think I made it really clear, did I not? Almost 20% of the op, dedicated to asking, politely, to hold the Moral relativism for another thread? Naww...You can't respect a simple request..then 2 more direct and progressively more assertive requests to please.... keep to the topic. That's sad.

I guess what I was discussing recently with someone else is true. There really can't be a pro-American thread without someone crapping on it right now. There can't be a thread looking at the wrongs of other nation's military without the US being drawn into the conversation as being worse, every single time. as if we really *DO* own and control the whole planet with peace and love the only rule before we showed up. If only....

You know, I wouldn't be so ticked over it...if you hadn't stomped into this, directly and 100% against everything the OP post said. Basically, what was asked didn't matter....... The thread didn't matter. Making America the moral comparison was too important to show any degree of topic respect, whatsoever.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Ahem, "the moral relativist crowd"? How many suicide bombers were blowing up kids in Afghanistan BEFORE the US went in to "get" Bin Laden? Or before the gas corps decided they really needed to put through a pipeline that the Taliban had nixed? Or was it to guarantee the safety and security of "our" opium poppies?

Doesn't matter. Strike a match and drop it into dry tinder and there just may be a firestorm, there may be some blowback that scorches your own fanny. So are you going to blame the tinder? Are you going to blame nature for the wind kicking up?

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. But who thinks one inch ahead of what they want RIGHT NOW.

Excuse me, OP, but what constitutes "apples to oranges" when it comes to murdering un-armed civilians?

I, as well as anyone else with a sense of moral integrity, will never condone or make excuses for the murder of anyone; period.

You're a joke. "This is about suicide bombers murdering kids."

Our drones are MURDERING kids, too!! Murder is murder, it doesn't matter who does it or how, a dead child is a dead child and condemning one act of murder while ignoring another is the epitome of American ignorance

The moral relativist crowd? Are you serious right now? So, speaking out against the murder of children by drone strikes makes me a label you can use in an attempt to slander me. Wow, how mature and bigoted you must be.

Drone strikes murder children in the Middle East: *chirp* Man I can hear dem moral relativists runnin' already!
Suicide bomber murders children in the Middle East: "Oh my God the inhumanity! This isn't war, this is EVIL! Oh those poor souls, oh how my heart yearns for those innocent children.

You see that double-standard you're playing on? Probably not, after all, murdering children with bombs on the ground is oh so much different than murdering children from the sky.

I've heard it all now.

The terrorists are up against an enemy too big to destroy. So really this whole thing IS about hate. They hate more than they love. They'll sacrifice everything just to strike back at the US.

They can't win and they can't love, so they fight with careless regard.

They're like a general that never knows when to surrender or to stop.

But maybe the US is guilty of this too. We want to nation build and don't know when to stop. After shock & awe and the initial ground invasion in Iraq and the capture of Saddam, they should have just walked out. They should not have stayed there. But they let their fears get the best of them. They heard the cries that if we walked away Iraq would collapse into civil war and terrorists would be breeded and all this hell would spread across the middle east and eventually reach the US.

And this is really the thing that's the problem. What're we trying to do with this? To kill Saddam? We did that. To stop terrorism? How're we going to stop terrorism?

Objectives have to be concise and achievable. In world war 2, the main objective was to stop hitler and prosecute the nazi's. We did that. But how're we going to stop terrorism?????

The goal of fighting terrorism is too ambiguous - too loosely defined.

so, like Palistien was there any of this before the white man got there?

PS
America bashing would be were Obama drone bombs a wedding in his own country not just that of an Alie like pakistan

After the times that the SAS were caught dressed as Muslims settting IEDs, or after the inside job of 911, or after the news that the US funded installed ALCIADUH in Libya and is now trying to do so in SYRIA ( where the US allies there are famous for eating the still beating hearts of the soldiers they kill) one can NEVER be sure a bomb was actually set by a Muslim...

In the absence of PROOF one can only rely on hate to tell them so with such certainty...a requirement of proof BTW which is supposed to be a cornerstone of the "AMERICAN WAY of JUSTICE" and which is obviously a MYTH

getting out is not the answer.

when we leave afghanistan, with in six months to a year the taliban will be in charge again, and then the beating and killing of their own will start all over again, just like before we invaded. they took over after the soviets left, and had the whole country running scared of them.

just look at iraq, that country was not ready to govern themselves, and they are killing one another in droves. the government there has no control of the sunnis or the shias, and they are gonna keep on killing till one or the other is gone. now they might stop long enough to join up and fight some one they both don't like, but they will be right back at it when they leave.

how long did they allied forces stay in germany and japan before they left. if iirc it was 4 and 10 years respectively.
and that was in countries that were no where near the radical beliefs that iraq and afghanistan are.

it is the responsibility, of each and every country that went in those two countries to stay and help then establish a effective government that can handle internal strife and rebellion and somewhat safe living conditions for those who do not want to fight and die in such horrid conditions.

we the western allies, went in. now we the allies need to fix it.

Originally posted by hounddoghowlie
getting out is not the answer.

when we leave afghanistan, with in six months to a year the taliban will be in charge again, and then the beating and killing of their own will start all over again,

quess you missed the recent thread " how many cops does it take to beat a woman " ( in the US )?

and if the OP doesn't want any "America bashing" in defence of the people they cause jush injustices upon, please ask him to ask the americans to become unabashable

reply to post by hounddoghowlie


The question I have in your point, which I generally agree with, is what do we do then? I do agree that leaving will throw the country back to the people who spent a decade terrorizing the hell out of the civilian population and basically just shooting whoever didn't follow their directives and edicts quickly enough. Women learning to read? Death. Women trying to work? Death. Men opposing the Government? Death. Beard not long enough? Well..depends on who caught them as to whether death would follow.

It was hell between the Soviets leaving with the CIA leaving right behind to let Afghanistan fend for itself with a wish of good luck...and 2001 when we came back. No questions there and the world watched it happen. Many of us watched it live and in reports at the time it was happening. Watching the women shot through the head like it was entertainment in the sports stadium by Taliban people was ....evil.

Still... We're in a lose/lose right now. We're projecting weakness like a 2 year old who doesn't know where to go or what to do. I mean, on one hand, we're drone hunting the Taliban while trying to talk peace with them on the other? Who thought that would end well? Karzai is our pet poodle, paid with bags of cash on a regular basis that I'm sure go straight to the Afghan treasury, right?

What is there to save..and with what? Unless we just start ALL over and take Kabul ALL over again to start from scratch ...and we'd likely have a revolt back home before that was allowed to happen.


I'm honestly curious Hounddog, what would your idea be to find a viable way through this mess?