Afghan sniper hunting US marines

[Eejit]

You know whats much more likley than either of these?

Trained by living in a country thats had an internal war for the last 40 years. He's probably been shooting since he could hold a rifle.

Guess it sucks to be a US Marine in Afghanistan a bit more than usual at the moment.

Hell, even trained by shooting wolves back when he was a shepherd in the Urals. Er, I mean goatherd, Hindu Kush

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Actually I wouldn't be suprised if he was trained by the CIA.

He's probably just a local yokel with a really good aim. As far as the Taliban- we're fighting the middle east's version of "rednecks" there (country boys in their president's words)

 

[lord_raken]

Its never a good thing when our soldiers get killed. Even if the war they are in is questionable. You can question a war without hopping for the deaths of our soldiers. (sick B17#h). Our current strategy has a focus on building schools and rural infrastructure.

And we aren't invaders. We are working with the Afghan government to go after the Taliban. That is the goal. The Taliban was destabilizing the Afghan government and so we stepped in to stabilize (and go after Al Qaeda... which isn't really in that country any more). A stable middle east helps us because we get oil from them. The situation is complicated... but defending of a sniper that's killing American soldiers is pretty F@*king sick. Unless you have proof that this guy is going after soldiers who committed war crimes or raped his sister or something like that. Even then they need to be tried in court d... not assassinated.

We invaded Iraq... we didn't invade Afghanistan. Some see us as invaders but we are their with the cooperation from the Afghan government. Its a joint effort.

 

[T-6000]

Its never a good thing when our soldiers get killed. Even if the war they are in is questionable. You can question a war without hopping for the deaths of our soldiers. (sick B17#h). Our current strategy has a focus on building schools and rural infrastructure.

And we aren't invaders. We are working with the Afghan government to go after the Taliban. That is the goal. The Taliban was destabilizing the Afghan government and so we stepped in to stabilize (and go after Al Qaeda... which isn't really in that country any more). A stable middle east helps us because we get oil from them. The situation is complicated... but defending of a sniper that's killing American soldiers is pretty F@*king sick. Unless you have proof that this guy is going after soldiers who committed war crimes or raped his sister or something like that. Even then they need to be tried in court d... not assassinated.

We invaded Iraq... we didn't invade Afghanistan. Some see us as invaders but we are their with the cooperation from the Afghan government. Its a joint effort.

And yet Many afghans see the new Afghan government as very corrupt, and they fear them more than the Taliban. In fact, when NATO forces took control of a village from Taliban forces the Villagers said that they sided with the Taliban because they feared the Afghan Police more. They also see U.S. and NATO forces as foreign occupiers. And it certainly doesn't help when UAV strikes and Air strikes kill civilians.

http://news.antiwar.com/2010/08/27/nato-kills-six-children-in-afghanistan-air-strike/

http://news.antiwar.com/2010/08/27/nato-kills-six-children-in-afghanistan-air-strike/

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/08/...te-stryker-soldiers.html?story_link=email_msg

http://news.antiwar.com/2010/08/21/nato-strikes-kill-three-afghan-civilians-three-police/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...17/AR2010081703130.html?wprss=rss_world/wires

And these are just some examples of the mess in Afghanistan right now. It isn't only the Taliban that we're fighting, it's also other militant groups. Time and time again, I have heard Afghan civilians wanting NATO and U.S. forces to just leave (or some have given up hope and just want all of Afghanistan to burn) and how things in Afghanistan haven't gotten better. I have no love for the Taliban, I never did even when the U.S. Government supported them. But how can the Afghans support NATO and the new Afghan Government when the Afghan government are very corrupt and seen as unfavorable? But weather it be the new Afghan government or the Taliban who will win, the real loosers will be the Afghan people.

Edit: Damn, I told myself that I wouldn't be involved with any discussions on Afghanistan, since it's such a 'hot' topic and I've personally seen many threads about it online exploding into flame wars (especially with people calling each other "traitor"). I guess I can get a bit too carried away with these things sometimes.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Whatever government you put in place there is going to be FULL of corruption and cultural ignorance. I'm sorry but it's just the nature of the region. I'm not talking about the Middle East as a region but Afghanistan / tribal Pakistan specifically. I've come to learn through people who've been all over the middle east that I know and secondary media that even the rest of the middle east views that region as a little backwards. Not necessarily from sharia law and such but mainly from ethnic clashes and extreme corruption of local and national gvt. Severe lack of infrastructure, and a battle between ruling by either Taliban religious extremists or drug cartels.

It'll always be that way, whether or not the Taliban is in charge or some other leader. There will always be extortions, bribery, and robbery taking place BY the government there. The sooner our leaders recognize that as well the better.


Compare to Iraq. Whether or not you agree with the wars or not is not what I'm talking about. Iraq as a nation itself is doing so much better than Afghanistan. And they even have problems with corruption and such, but nowhere NEAR the scale Afghanistan does. It's because they have fairly decent infrastructure even after 7 years of war, and a functional educational, fire dept, health, and police system.

 

[T-6000]

Whatever government you put in place there is going to be FULL of corruption and cultural ignorance. I'm sorry but it's just the nature of the region. I'm not talking about the Middle East as a region but Afghanistan / tribal Pakistan specifically. I've come to learn through people who've been all over the middle east that I know and secondary media that even the rest of the middle east views that region as a little backwards. Not necessarily from sharia law and such but mainly from ethnic clashes and extreme corruption of local and national gvt. Severe lack of infrastructure, and a battle between ruling by either Taliban religious extremists or drug cartels.

It'll always be that way, whether or not the Taliban is in charge or some other leader. There will always be extortions, bribery, and robbery taking place BY the government there. The sooner our leaders recognize that as well the better.


Compare to Iraq. Whether or not you agree with the wars or not is not what I'm talking about. Iraq as a nation itself is doing so much better than Afghanistan. And they even have problems with corruption and such, but nowhere NEAR the scale Afghanistan does. It's because they have fairly decent infrastructure even after 7 years of war, and a functional educational, fire dept, health, and police system.

Unfortunately, it's true. There's the old saying that "Power attracts the very people who shouldn't have it in the first place." I think the primary problem is that the culture of the Afghans is that they aren't thrilled with a central government, and Afghanistan is a bit of a unique nation as it's mainly a tribal based nation. Currently Iraq does have some problems internally (especially with the tensions between Kurds and Iraqis, and to an extent the Shi'ites and Sunnis) but at least it has some form of central government (though perhaps a bit flimsy). Hell, noone has been able to conquer Afghanistan officially, except for Alexander the Great (My (in)Famous ancestor).

Interestingly, over here in Missouri there seems to be some tensions between Iowa and Missouri. I have no idea what the real reason is, as I have always gotten a vague (and stereotypical answer) answer. Over here alot of people bash Iowa, and when my brother attended College up in Ottomwa, Iowa many people bashed Missouri. One of them bashed my brother for being from Missouri. I always wondered if this was from the civil war days that kinda hung around, but again just a vague answer. I always joked with my brother that if we had no central government and if both states were independent then both Iowa and Missouri may be at war with each other.

 

[Dan]

We should have gone about it like Sean Connery did it in The Man Who Would Be King. Find one tribes leader, tell them that you will defeat all their enemies. Defeat their enemies, then unite them together, and defeat their enemies. Continue until the religious monks try to kill you. Then coopt them into heading your new government.