A Majority of Americans Support This??

[Chicopee John]

Anger mounts as US troops kill 4 Afghans on bus

 

 

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan – Afghans burned tires and chanted "Death to America" after U.S. troops fired Monday on a civilian bus near Kandahar, killing four people and wounding more than a dozen. Afghanistan's president accused NATO of violating its commitment to safeguard civilian lives.

 

The attack enraged Afghan officials and the public in Kandahar, the Taliban's birthplace, and dealt a blow to U.S. and NATO efforts to win popular support for a coming offensive to drive the insurgents from the biggest city in the south. NATO expressed regret for the loss of civilian lives and said it was investigating.

 

Nearly 200 Afghans blocked highway where the shooting occurred, burning tires, firing weapons and chanting "Death to America" and other slogans. They also called for the ouster of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, a Kandahar native who has been appealing for the people here to support the U.S.-led campaign against the Taliban.

 

"The Americans are constantly killing our civilians and the government is not demanding an explanation," protester Mohammad Razaq said. "We demand justice from the Karzai government and the punishment of those soldiers responsible."

 

There were conflicting accounts of the shooting, which took place before dawn in the Taliban-infiltrated Zhari district along the main highway linking Kandahar with the western provinces of Helmand and Nimroz.

 

NATO said the bus approached a slow-moving military patrol from the rear at a high speed. Troops opened fire after the driver ignored flares and other warnings — including flashlights and hand signals — to slow down, NATO said in a statement. It confirmed four people were killed, adding the alliance "deeply regrets the tragic loss of life."

 

The alliance statement did not identify the soldiers' nationality, but witnesses and local Afghan officials said they were Americans. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they did not want to create problems with the NATO command.

 

One of the survivors, Rozi Mohammad, told The Associated Press at Kandahar hospital that the bus had just left a terminal when it pulled over to the side of the road to allow an American convoy to pass. Shooting broke out as the third or fourth American vehicle passed by, he said.

 

"They just suddenly opened fire. I don't know why. We had been stopped and after that I don't know what happened," said Mohammad, his left eye swollen shut and his beard and clothing matted with blood.

 

Karzai, who has often criticized the NATO force for endangering civilians, condemned the attack, adding that "this shooting involving a civilian bus violates NATO's commitment to safeguard civilian life."

 

"We take this incident very seriously," said Kandahar provincial Gov. Tooryalai Wesa. "We want to know who was responsible and have them held to account under the relevant rules and regulations."

 

Wesa said it was important to clarify what happened for "the sake of the American presence, for Afghanistan, for Kandahar and for the security forces."

 

Kandahar, a city of about a half million people, is nominally under government control, but the Taliban have stepped up infiltration, staging attacks and intimidating inhabitants.

 

Three suicide bombers attacked an Afghan intelligence compound in the city Monday, wounding 10 people, officials said. One of the bombers was captured, they added.

 

Nevertheless, much of the public anger was directed Monday against foreign forces as word of the pre-dawn shooting swept the city.

 

"These foreigners have their enemies, but killing Afghans is not the answer," said Abdul Hadi, who sells homemade herbal remedies in a public market. He said international forces should publish a schedule of their patrols so Afghans can keep out of the way.

 

"Better yet, I would like to see them leave Afghanistan," he added.

 

Haji Zahir, who runs a transport firm, said it was time for U.S. and other foreign forces to withdraw from the country.

 

"They say they want to bring security. It is all lies, lies. They kill Afghans. That is not the way to bring security," Zahir said.

 

The top NATO commander in Afghanistan, U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, issued strict guidelines last year limiting the use of force in an effort to reduce civilian casualties and curb public anger.

 

At least 2,412 Afghan civilians were killed in fighting last year, an increase of 14 percent from 2008, according to the United Nations. But the U.N. found that the percentage of civilian deaths attributed to NATO and Afghan government forces had dropped. About two-thirds of the civilian deaths were a result of actions initiated by the insurgents, including ambushes, assassinations and roadside bombs.

 

Nevertheless, civilian deaths remain a source of friction between the Afghans and the international forces.

 

Earlier this month, NATO confirmed its forces were responsible for the deaths of five people, including three women, killed Feb. 12 in Gardez, south of Kabul.

 

An Afghan government report said U.S. Special Forces attacked the wrong target and sought to cover up the mistake by digging bullets out of bodies, according to Afghan investigators who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak with the media.

 

Also Monday, five members of a single family were killed and two wounded in a roadside bombing in the Bala Buluk district of the northwestern province of Farah, according to provincial spokesman Ahmad Farid Ayubi. There was no immediate claim of responsibility.

 

___

 

Associated Press writers Rahim Faiez, Slobodan Lekic and Christopher Bodeen contributed to this story from Kabul.

 

[DieHardBrownsFan]

Lets be blunt. Afghanistan is a shit hole country. All the leaders are crooks and the populace is tribal. We should concentrate on getting as many Al Queda as we can. Maintain bases and make sure the Al queda don't gain training camps there again. Other then that there is really nothing we can do. We damn sure ain't going to make Afghanistan a democracy. It's really not a even a country. The government in power is a sham, and will probably always be a sham. If we were to pull out however; you can bet your life savings that the Taliban would be in power in a matter of weeks, maybe days.

[osusev]

Karzai is corrupt and we should not have validated his election.... however he is the only Pashtun "leader" that the tribal groups MIGHT consider..... other than the Taliban which are in power right now because the PEOPLE want them in power in each of those valleys.....

 

Lets be honest..... nothing we do unless we stay their forever is going to change the people.... we dont have the money to build that entire country nor the will power......

 

This is all PR and our soldiers are paying for the blunder that Bush started and Obama is playing the political game on continuing

 

The Taliban will be back in power sooner or later......... We are just trying to find a way to do it without destabilizing nuclear pakistan

 

[Mr. T]

Do we have anymore minuteman missles leftover? We should dismantle one over that pile of crap.

[Westside Steve]

" The blunder that bush started"

So are you telling us that you were against the invasion of afghanistan from day 1?

Those who love to point out that there were no weapons of mass destruction in iraq, seem to overlook the fact that o b l is no longer in afghanistan.

Come on peace movement, at least b consistent.

 

( Come on now Heck, isn't that what the taft hartley amendment was supposed to stop?)

WSS

 

 

 

[Chicopee John]

You guys missed my point.

 

Where is the 'outcry' from the Left?

 

Where is Ms. Sheehan?

 

Where is the call of "American Soldiers are Terrorists"

 

Where are big mouths and pea brained Rosie O'Donnel, Tom Hanks, Whoopie Goldberg, Sean Penn, etc.

 

Heck says that the majority of Americans support this war (the implication being that the majority of Americans did not support Bush's War)

 

Their silence is deafening.

 

 

When Obama talks about Change, I guess he means changed interpretations not actions.

 

[Chicopee John]

Karzai is corrupt and we should not have validated his election.... however he is the only Pashtun "leader" that the tribal groups MIGHT consider..... other than the Taliban which are in power right now because the PEOPLE want them in power in each of those valleys.....

 

Lets be honest..... nothing we do unless we stay their forever is going to change the people.... we dont have the money to build that entire country nor the will power......

 

This is all PR and our soldiers are paying for the blunder that Bush started and Obama is playing the political game on continuing

 

The Taliban will be back in power sooner or later......... We are just trying to find a way to do it without destabilizing nuclear pakistan

 

 

Let's get this straight Sev: Iraq is Bush's War. Afganistan is Obama's War. Plain and simple. Look at Obama's own statement.

 

Do you support the war in Iraq? The war in Afganistan?

 

[VaporTrail]

If we still believe bin Laden and Al Qaeda has a major presence there, then I'll continue to support us being there.

[osusev]

Let's get this straight Sev: Iraq is Bush's War. Afganistan is Obama's War. Plain and simple. Look at Obama's own statement.

 

Do you support the war in Iraq? The war in Afganistan?

 

 

Are you F@#$#ing kidding me? WHO ordered the invasion of Afghanistan? WHAT president was their for over 5 years? Obama has been in office for not quite ONE year? I like how you people suddenly are trying to shift responsibility.... funny

 

Steve seriously? FROM day ONE I have been against a massive land invasion in Afghanistan...... some of us have served and been over in that region of the world..... I have friends STILL there........

 

Since DAY one I have labeled Osama and his cronies CRIMINALS not a NATION........ You dont invade a nation over criminals..... especially one that is tribal and has a uncontrolled mountainous border region that the Russians bled over for years trying to control....... and a border with a Nuclear nation that its own citizens has to get a special passport into part of its own country to travel in......

 

Obama shifted back away from the obvious Oil grab and failed Neocon policies.... to a place that is DESTABILIZING NUCLEAR Pakistan who also if destabilized affects NUCLEAR India.......... Obama's war..... yea he took office this year and now its his total responsibility...

 

You people quite frankly are simple if you listen to talking points.... open up a book for gods sake and learn a little. This is all about REGIONAL stabilization...... you know like Krygyzstan where we have our massive russian converted air base supplying our troops that just was overthown...... REGIONAL stabilization..... THAT BUSH in fact destabilized with some stupid Nation building theory........ Dumb just like parroting talking points.

[heckofajobbrownie]

So the question you're asking is if Americans support killing Afghan civilians? I'll go out on a limb and say that no, I don't support that. I don't think most people do.

 

What's your point? There's not enough outcry from the left? Well, okay.

 

And funny that you bring up Cindy Sheehan, because she was out in Washington two weeks ago protesting Obama's Afghan policy, chanting "Bush, Obama, same old drama!" So if you're complaining that she's not consistent, I guess you were wrong.

 

But who cares what Cindy Sheehan does anyway?

 

I really don't think this thread has a real point. Not one worth making anyway. Unless you want to pretend that the entirety of the Democratic Party is made up of peace activists, like Steve does.

 

If you want to get mad at people for reacting differently to the Iraq War than the War in Afghanistan, feel free. But they probably should.

 

And that's coming from someone who doesn't like our Afghan policy. I think it's a mostly lost cause, and an expensive one. And it results in the deaths of far too many innocent people.

 

But don't let me stop you from getting mad at Cindy Sheehan. Or "peace activists." I really don't care.

[osusev]

Obama has to own anything MOVING forward not the fact we were stuck there in the first place..... As for Al Qaeda.,..... at this point its an ideological movement that is worldwide with independent Cells....

 

Every minute we build massive bases in their countries.... and tinker with regional politics playing whatever side is inconvenient and not hold the Israelis to the same standards as we do the Iranians...... Every time we drop a bomb or an errant bullet that kills a mother, brother, father, son, daughter, child, cousin, friend, aunt, uncle............. or demolishes a house or neighborhood we are recruiting for these undeveloped, low income, low education empowered ideological movements backed up by Religous ideology.........

 

We drive these vehicles and buy these plastics that are driven by oil produced by that region......... we have MASSIVE bases in a region that we only take resources from......

 

In the real world there are international regional politics that have nuclear proliferation consequences.... some of your forget that it was Pakistan's lead scientist who proliferated nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea, Libya etc.......... The region is very unstable and Pakistan had a military dictator that we backed for years...........

 

So yes John Obama now owns the regions problems he inherited from that buffoon Bush and his equally stupid Neocon stupid christian advisors . Its not about just ONE country........

 

But you guys keep yammering its almost comical how funny you people parrot PR talking points with little to no understanding of what the reality is.

[Mr. T]

Sorry heck I did not mean to thank you. that thank you goes to Sev.

 

Anyways Sev you make some good points.

 

IMO we need to stop lolly gaggin around in afghanistan and start blasting the shit out of the enemy,(make an example) we will have collateral damage and their will be loss of life for those who dont understand we are in the middle of a war. And this war will not be won with a bunch of liberal biased media pukes wanting to disarm our military.

 

Thank God Obama already won his nobel award, maybe he can go ahead and do what needs to be done to win this thing. And wont have to worry about all of the peace nicks who are wanting to take away the strength of our military and smear our fighting men and women to where we have hippies spitting on our soldiers like we saw during the 60's and 70's.

 

 

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

Wow, that's as fresh as the day it was written, T. In 1966.

 

Maybe you can close off this thread, too. You know, now that you've owned it.

[Mr. T]

Someone should of had a vasectomy in 1966, maybe that would of stemmed off all the stupidity that you spew.

[osusev]

T its rare you and I agree or think on the same wave length.....

 

I hope Obama pushes for the damn Taliban to get back into power with the express understanding IF they harbor criminals we will just drop a bomb on them while they sleep. I am tired of our people dying for PR....

 

I dont give a damn who started it at this point but more that we need to finish it PR and the "win" be damned... A win to me is our soldiers coming HOME to their families and their country not dying overseas.

 

IF Al Qaeda wants to get frisky I hope Obama and our intelligence/law enforcement arm uses the military like the Israelis did after Munich.... kill them all anywhere by any means but dont go invade some country.

 

Any more this subject sends my blood pressure rising because I know our people are dying for PR.

[Westside Steve]

And funny that you bring up Cindy Sheehan, because she was out in Washington two weeks ago protesting Obama's Afghan policy, chanting "Bush, Obama, same old drama!" So if you're complaining that she's not consistent, I guess you were wrong.

 

But who cares what Cindy Sheehan does anyway?

 

That's the point Heck.

Nobody does now.

And she's no more right or wrong than ever.

But a few years ago she was your (The Democrat party) Joe The Plumber.

 

And I'm disappointed you didn't bite on the Taft Hartley gag.

 

WSS

 

 

[Westside Steve]

Steve seriously? FROM day ONE I have been against a massive land invasion in Afghanistan...... some of us have served and been over in that region of the world..... I have friends STILL there........

 

Then you must not have posted those thoughts very loudly here.

I don't recall any outcry against "that idiot" Obama "and his cronies" escalating this one.

Like Heck says he campaigned on it.

Nancy Pelosi threatened to defund the war once they won the house.

Alas, you guys said, the evil Bush wouldn't allow it.

Now?

 

Now you Dems brag about how successful the Bush plan was in delivering a free and democrratic Iraq to the region.

 

You just have to appreciate the irony.

That's all.

 

BTW the real "talking point" was 6 years of "Bush should have focused on Afghanistan."

WSS

[Chicopee John]

You missed - likely ignored - the salient points, Heck.

 

Several years ago, somebody supporting our troops or supporting the effort in Iraq was accused of supporting terrorists, murderers, etc.

 

Now, it seems to me, when these same acts are commited in Obama's War, they are quietly dismissed as bad and unintended consequences of this worthy war effort.

 

You guys overlook these actions because they aren't linked to Bush. Whatever happened to the "General Betrayus" newspaper ads and chants that used to flood the airwaves?

 

The difference about Cindy Sheehan is that she is not being forced down our throats by multiple media. If fact - and I know you remember this, whether or not you will admit it - she was strong-armed into NOT protesting Obama's War. Kudos to her, at least, for showing consistency and integrity.

 

You don't agree with something so you state that the thread is meaningless.

[heckofajobbrownie]

That's the point Heck.

Nobody does now.

And she's no more right or wrong than ever.

But a few years ago she was your (The Democrat party) Joe The Plumber.

 

And I'm disappointed you didn't bite on the Taft Hartley gag.

 

WSS

 

Yes, she was our hero. We watched her every move. So true.

 

As for this, "Now you Dems brag about how successful the Bush plan was in delivering a free and democrratic Iraq to the region."

 

Who says that? I can't think of a single person who says this. (Because it's not really true - election and democracy are two different things.) I know a lot of people who enjoy that things have gotten better, but not many - or even one - Democrat who thinks the whole enterprise was worth the cost.

 

All this is based in is that you're upset that people were mean to Bush when he wasn't a very good president. And now some of those people are mad because others are mean to Obama because they don't think he's a very good president. It's all just homerism.

 

We don't have to point it out every day. We can move on now.

[Westside Steve]

Yes, she was our hero. We watched her every move. So true.

 

Yes. It is.

 

 

We don't have to point it out every day. We can move on now.

 

So six years is the cutoff point.

OK

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

You missed - likely ignored - the salient points, Heck.

 

Several years ago, somebody supporting our troops or supporting the effort in Iraq was accused of supporting terrorists, murderers, etc.

 

Now, it seems to me, when these same acts are commited in Obama's War, they are quietly dismissed as bad and unintended consequences of this worthy war effort.

 

You guys overlook these actions because they aren't linked to Bush. Whatever happened to the "General Betrayus" newspaper ads and chants that used to flood the airwaves?

 

The difference about Cindy Sheehan is that she is not being forced down our throats by multiple media. If fact - and I know you remember this, whether or not you will admit it - she was strong-armed into NOT protesting Obama's War. Kudos to her, at least, for showing consistency and integrity.

 

You don't agree with something so you state that the thread is meaningless.

 

John, I just think this is nonsense. Absolute nonsense. Someone supporting our troops was accused of supporting terrorists? You've got to be kidding me. Support for the troops in the field is the most universally held opinion in politics. People don't suggest that they're "terrorists" and "murderers". If you can name me one mainstream figure who accused the troops of this, be my guest.

 

People disagreed with the policy, and the reasons behind the policy, and yes, they didn't like the man or what he represented, or how he carried himself. And the longer the war went on, the more people agreed that this was not an idea worth the cost we were paying. A majority of Americans still hold that view.

 

The Afghan war has always been more popular with the American people, as they see it as the proper response to 9/11. But that support has slipped the longer this goes on, and Obama lost a lot of people on the left when he increased troops levels, even though that's what he campaigned on doing. However, his handling of Afghanistan is one of the issues he polls the best on.

 

I don't know how many people on the left you talk to, but up until a few weeks ago the complaints about Obama went like this - "Too close to Wall Street, health care is a mess and might not pass, and he's upping the ante in Afghanistan - what the f'ck?" You heard it everywhere. People were not happy.

 

As for Cindy Sheehan, yes, I don't think her story was worth the coverage she got. Same goes for Joe the Plumber. As for her being strong-armed into supporting Obama, I don't know anything about this. And I don't know one person who gives a shit about what Cindy Sheehan thinks enough to try and strong arm her.

 

Maybe you can fill me in on this. And then maybe we can talk about something that matters, and not Cindy Sheehan.

[Westside Steve]

Someone supporting our troops was accused of supporting terrorists?

 

Senator Kerry maybe?

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

You probably believe that, too.

 

These are wonderful discussions. Maybe I can now come back with how the right went nuts when a lone contributor to an open contest sponsored by MoveOn compared Bush to Hitler, but now people compare Obama to Hitler all the time - Glenn Beck even says we're headed that way! - and no one on the right says a thing!

 

It'll be so enlightening.

[Chicopee John]

You probably believe that, too.

 

These are wonderful discussions. Maybe I can now come back with how the right went nuts when a lone contributor to an open contest sponsored by MoveOn compared Bush to Hitler, but now people compare Obama to Hitler all the time - Glenn Beck even says we're headed that way! - and no one on the right says a thing!

 

It'll be so enlightening.

 

 

To use YOUR evasiveness, Heck, name one mainstream source.

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

Glenn Beck isn't a mainstream source? He suggested that Obama is going to start a Nazi-style domestic security force (because he's an idiot), rolls footage of Nazi Germany and says that's where we're headed under Obama and the progressives. He does it all the time.

 

And if you wanted to snag me for being inconsistent, shouldn't I be inconsistent? I used the examples of non-mainstream people, one of the left, and some on the right, both upset about the same thing.

 

Like I said, this is tremendously unimportant and boring. If you want to be upset that you don't think enough liberals are upset about civilians getting killed in Afghanistan, go right ahead.

 

As I remember, it was just the other day when I was being told by a few people on the right in here that my concern for civilians getting killed was liberal whining, to "cry them a river", and that I should understand that shit happens in war.

 

So clearly, you're really, really upset at people who take civilians getting killed lightly.

[Westside Steve]

You probably believe that, too.

 

These are wonderful discussions. Maybe I can now come back with how the right went nuts when a lone contributor to an open contest sponsored by MoveOn compared Bush to Hitler, but now people compare Obama to Hitler all the time - Glenn Beck even says we're headed that way! - and no one on the right says a thing!

 

It'll be so enlightening.

 

 

You're right Heck.

I'm sure it was just that one occurrence.

 

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=612

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

I'm not saying it was one time. I'm saying that was the incident everyone made hay about. They referenced it for months.

 

If you guys wants to talk about the fringes, here's my take, and then you can have the rest of this discussion on your own: both parties have a lunatic fringe that's hardly worth listening to. However, the ignorant right-wing fringe makes up a much larger portion of the Republican Party than the ignorant left-wing fringe makes up the Democratic Party.

 

I think that's fairly obvious, and the polls bear that out. There's simply no corresponding level of backwardness on the left, where people believe things that are barely or categorically untrue en masse. One side has some, the other side has far too much.

 

This board is a perfect microcosm of this.

[Chicopee John]

I'm not saying it was one time. I'm saying that was the incident everyone made hay about. They referenced it for months.

 

If you guys wants to talk about the fringes, here's my take, and then you can have the rest of this discussion on your own: both parties have a lunatic fringe that's hardly worth listening to. However, the ignorant right-wing fringe makes up a much larger portion of the Republican Party than the ignorant left-wing fringe makes up the Democratic Party.

 

I think that's fairly obvious, and the polls bear that out. There's simply no corresponding level of backwardness on the left, where people believe things that are barely or categorically untrue en masse. One side has some, the other side has far too much.

 

This board is a perfect microcosm of this.

 

Interesting about those who consider themselves members of a 'Tea Party'. Generally, they are as educated and at the same level of economic condition as those who do not belong to a 'Tea Party'.

 

They do skew white but other measures of socioeconiomic condition simply do not skew 'stupid' compared to the population at large. Clearly these folks are a small - very small - percentage of the population.

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

I don't think it's true that the completely misinformed/uninformed wing of the Republican Party is small. In poll after poll, large percentages of them believe things that simply aren't true, or reject things like evolution. It's become a very anti-intellectual party. That's not to say that they all are, but that too many of them are to be a vibrant party based on ideas of how to best govern the country and address its problem. It's become more of a cultural grievance party, where disaffected whites, usually from specific regions, come to fear things together, both real and imagined. If you don't believe me, just go through the topics posted in here. It's almost always fear-based, and usually terribly misinformed.

 

As David Frum worries, "I am really and truly frightened by the collapse of support for the Republican Party by the young and the educated."

 

There are simply far too many people in the Republican Party who are completely content putting up candidates, like Bush and Palin, who don't know much about the world, and don't care to learn.

 

Of course, Palin is markedly dumber and more ignorant than Bush was, thought they're equally inarticulate. But we really thought Bush would be the bottom, and then you crazy assholes went even lower. You're doubling down on not just stupid, but crazy.

 

You honestly wanted to make that woman vice president of the United States. It boggles the mind.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Again, you guys don't think intelligence and grasp of complicated issues matter. Well, maybe you do, John, but Steve proudly proclaims that it doesn't matter who you put in office. It's a frightening idea, especially when you consider that Steve isn't one of the crazy ones in here. (Just one of the grumpy.)

 

STEPHANOPOULOS: You've now met with President Obama many times. At least 15 meetings and phone calls.

 

MEDVEDEV: Sixteen times.

 

STEPHANOPOULOS: Sixteen. Okay, I knew it was 15. I wasn't sure about the 16. What do you make of Barack Obama the man?

 

 

MEDVEDEV: He's very comfortable partner, it's very interesting to be with him. The most important thing that distinguishes him from many other people -- I won't name anyone by name -- he's a thinker, he thinks when he speaks. Which is already pretty good.

 

STEPHANOPOULOS: You had somebody in your mind, I think. (LAUGHS)

 

MEDVEDEV: Obviously I do have someone on my mind. I don't want to offend anyone. He's eager to listen to his partner, which is a pretty good quality for a politician. Because any politician is to a certain degree a mentor. They preach something. And the ability to listen to their partner is very important for the politician. And he is pretty deeply immersed in the subject, so he has a good knowledge of what he's talking about. There was no instance in our meetings with Mr. Obama where he wasn't well prepared for the questions. This is very good.