Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

[Med911]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

Med:

Your sources are absolute garbage because they are framed by their biases, promoting a specific agenda. In many cases, these “sources” have not even stepped in KP much less FATA. I am neither claiming nor implying what the Americans intend to do, I am talking about what they have DONE. I am not some armchair quarterback “Analyst” sitting in the US of A, reading biased articles and drawing conclusions, like that nonsense West Point assessment that you posted. I am FROM the region, I have attended the namaz e janaza of little school children, I KNOW names of men and women who have perished in the drone attacks. I have seen the drones flying above with my very own eyes. So don’t write paragraphs to me about how the US is trying to minimize casualties. They see us nothing more than ragheads that are better off dead – I’m sorry to see other Pakistanis falling under the same twisted perspective.

I don’t support the Taliban, but when it comes to terror, the US has become an efficient killing machine.

The problem with you sir, is that you dilute your better judgement with your raw emotion. Thats where you bias arises from. You agree that the US doesnt intentionally target civilians. And the sources you claim are garbage say the same. Infact, the sources agree with you, but somehow, they are wrong in stating what you yourself believe, that the US does not target innocents.

I dont understand what your actual point is. I dont want to waste my time writing paragraphs, so lets break this down into to simple terms.
This is your entire argument consists of as far as I understand it.
The Taliban are bad.. YES

The Taliban kill innocent people? Yes.

Should they be allowed to continue such killings? No.

Should we fight terrorists? Yes

Who should fight the Terrorists? You dont know.

How should they be fought? With ZERO casualties.

The Pak Army could do the job, but would mean many death, and much destruction and death. Thats ok to you.

The drones do the same job without risking any lives, and are far more targeted.

But you dont support this.

Now before you accuse me of being some heartless monster, ofcourse we all feel for those killed, but how many people have actually died? You have gone to janazas, but have you ever gone to the Janazas of the children killed by those who have died in suicide bombings? How many innocent people have been killed unintentionally by those drones, and how many people have died as the promary target by Taliban?

Lets get something straight, just because you are from the region, does not mean you can monopolize on the emotion of this whole tragedy. We all know someone who has died in this war. You may feel terrorized by the Drones, but everyone in Pakistan feels terrorized. You cant go to the market without feeling the terror of a potential suicide bomber. You need to place the blame of this not on the US, or anyone else, but on the Taliban themselves.

Now one could either say, lets not fight this war at all. Or one could lets fight this war till those guilty are brought to justice. Now understand that you cannot fight this war without casualties. This is a reality and you will have to accept it. Now who should fight this? The Army, but they will cause far more problems. The drones do a far better job, and with far fewer casualties then the Pak Army would. Like I said, its a cold calculation, but this is the reality.

[Med911]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

@picoico

So let me get this straight...Western forces have every right to say "oops" if they mistakenly target some poor sap, and kill all his 8 year old children...but this gangster (was it taliban?) is somehow different because it was deliberate. The only major difference was the factor of a screw up. At the end of the day, some poor soul is left one child less...so it's of no comfort to victims that they were infact not the intended targets...indeed, were somehow being "protected' by those who committed the atrocity.

The difference is nominal. One is an a-hole, and brash about it. The other is an a-hole, and apologetic about it. Not the point. Just ask the victims.

No the difference here is that one commits a genuine mistake and is sorry about it. The others intentionally targets innocents, which they regard as non innocents, and say if they really were innocent then Allah will forgive them.
One is a clumsy a hole, the other is vindictive, blood thirsty, psychologically twisted MoFo who will kill anyone he deems worthy of death, and do so with glee.

[pak-one]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

^

Med,

I condemn the murder of innocent civilians regardless of motivations, justifications and the double talk that the US and her allies have presented. I do not believe that the Terrorist label is the exclusive province of the Taliban – it is a well known fact that the US is as guilty of spreading terror through these drone strikes as the “terrorists” these strikes purport to target.

Your rhetoric is as hollow and empty as GWB’s claims of WMDs in Iraq. Your beloved and supposedly impartial sources like the NYT have printed the article listed below. Then again, if I believed the NYT, the US would be greatest nation on earth.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/12/world/asia/12drones.html?_r=1

C.I.A. Is Disputed on Civilian Toll in Drone Strikes

WASHINGTON — On May 6, a Central Intelligence Agency drone fired a volley of missiles at a pickup truck carrying nine militants and bomb materials through a desolate stretch of Pakistan near the Afghan border. It killed all the militants — a clean strike with no civilian casualties, extending what is now a yearlong perfect record of avoiding collateral deaths.

Or so goes the United States government’s version of the attack, from an American official briefed on the classified C.I.A. program. Here is another version, from a new report compiled by British and Pakistani journalists: The missiles hit a religious school, an adjoining restaurant and a house, killing 18 people — 12 militants, but also 6 civilians, known locally as Samad, Jamshed, Daraz, Iqbal, Noor Nawaz and Yousaf.

The civilian toll of the C.I.A.’s drone campaign, which is widely credited with disrupting Al Qaeda and its allies in Pakistan’s tribal area, has been in bitter dispute since the strikes were accelerated in 2008. Accounts of strike after strike from official and unofficial sources are so at odds that they often seem to describe different events.

The debate has intensified since President Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, John O. Brennan, clearly referring to the classified drone program, said in June that for almost a year, “there hasn’t been a single collateral death because of the exceptional proficiency, precision of the capabilities we’ve been able to develop.” Other officials say that extraordinary claim still holds: since May 2010, C.I.A. officers believe, the drones have killed more than 600 militants — including at least 20 in a strike reported Wednesday — and not a single noncombatant.

[Med911]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

@pak-one

^

Med,

I condemn the murder of innocent civilians regardless of motivations, justifications and the double talk that the US and her allies have presented. I do not believe that the Terrorist label is the exclusive province of the Taliban – it is a well known fact that the US is as guilty of spreading terror through these drone strikes as the “terrorists” these strikes purport to target.

Your rhetoric is as hollow and empty as GWB’s claims of WMDs in Iraq. Your beloved and supposedly impartial sources like the NYT have printed the article listed below. Then again, if I believed the NYT, the US would be greatest nation on earth.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/12/world/asia/12drones.html?_r=1

C.I.A. Is Disputed on Civilian Toll in Drone Strikes

WASHINGTON — On May 6, a Central Intelligence Agency drone fired a volley of missiles at a pickup truck carrying nine militants and bomb materials through a desolate stretch of Pakistan near the Afghan border. It killed all the militants — a clean strike with no civilian casualties, extending what is now a yearlong perfect record of avoiding collateral deaths.

Or so goes the United States government’s version of the attack, from an American official briefed on the classified C.I.A. program. Here is another version, from a new report compiled by British and Pakistani journalists: The missiles hit a religious school, an adjoining restaurant and a house, killing 18 people — 12 militants, but also 6 civilians, known locally as Samad, Jamshed, Daraz, Iqbal, Noor Nawaz and Yousaf.

The civilian toll of the C.I.A.’s drone campaign, which is widely credited with disrupting Al Qaeda and its allies in Pakistan’s tribal area, has been in bitter dispute since the strikes were accelerated in 2008. Accounts of strike after strike from official and unofficial sources are so at odds that they often seem to describe different events.

The debate has intensified since President Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, John O. Brennan, clearly referring to the classified drone program, said in June that for almost a year, “there hasn’t been a single collateral death because of the exceptional proficiency, precision of the capabilities we’ve been able to develop.” Other officials say that extraordinary claim still holds: since May 2010, C.I.A. officers believe, the drones have killed more than 600 militants — including at least 20 in a strike reported Wednesday — and not a single noncombatant.

With all do respect sir, its only rhetoric to you, because you mix raw emotion with actual logic. I could explain my point of view to you, but you will simply dilute any argument with your own emotional attachment to the issue.
The problem here is you dont seem to understand the actual point im making, so you claim its rhetoric out of convenience, not having to actually think about the point at hand.

You seem to not understand what this debate is even about.

I DO NOT and NEVER HAVE claimed that civilians are NOT killed in such attacks. I simply do not believe that the US targets these civilians intentionally.

I BELIEVE the US is doing its best to avoid casualties.

I do NOT believe the US is villainous nation, with evil intent. Nor am I foolish or Naive enough to believe the US is benevolent. I simply try to see this issue in a non biased and logical manner.

The NYT, LAT, are considered legitimate sources the world over. This is not my opinion, this is fact. If you arent willing to acknowledge these as being legitimate, as they are by other intelligent and unbiased individuals, then I doubt any source will be enough to satisfy you.

Your opinion, based on the your own experience, is irrelevant as far as this debate goes. That you have been to Janazas is unfortunate, but it is irrelevant in determining the motives of the US.

My opinion in simple terms is this. The Taliban are monsters, and they must be fought. Pakistan has lost sovereignty because of them. In this context, the Drones are a necessary evil. Infact, if you want to defeat the Taliban, with the least amount of casualties and destruction, then the Drones are our best option. If you want to see yourvillage destroyed, you people forced to live as refugees in their own country, and countless people to suffer, then by all means, deman the Pak Army do the work the Drones are doing.

The report you cited does nothing but give credence to the fact that civilians have died in these bombings. But we already knew that. But consider the alternative and weigh your options. I think you will agree that the drones are the least destructive.

[pak-one]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

*With all do respect sir, its only rhetoric to you, because you mix raw emotion with actual logic. I could explain my point of view to you, but you will simply dilute any argument with your own emotional attachment to the issue.
The problem here is you dont seem to understand the actual point im making, so you claim its rhetoric out of convenience, not having to actually think about the point at hand.
*

Sure I hold raw emotions -- its my countrymen and at times extended family members that are being killed. We're not talking about Martians here, these are Pakistanis and I am not going to just speak strategically.

Even if we return to pure strategy and geopolitics: Now that the US is looking to leave Afghanistan, guess who will be left holding the bag again? Pakistan. Except that we have multiplied our enemies by 100x by doing the bidding of the US.

**
You seem to not understand what this debate is even about.

I DO NOT and NEVER HAVE claimed that civilians are NOT killed in such attacks. I simply do not believe that the US targets these civilians intentionally.

I BELIEVE the US is doing its best to avoid casualties.

I do NOT believe the US is villainous nation, with evil intent. Nor am I foolish or Naive enough to believe the US is benevolent. I simply try to see this issue in a non biased and logical manner.
**

This debate is about the protection of Pakistani sovereignty, this debate is about the extrjudicial murder of civilians in FATA, and this debate is about an undeclared war on Pakistan. I could care less whether US is doing its "best" to avoid casualties and whether its a "good" nation or not. You speak of logic and naivete but let me just say this:

• Pakistan is under attack from the US, its civilians have been killed by these drones and it has been vilified as a terrorist safe haven. Are these facts or not? No emotions involved, just statements of fact yes?

Then, what is our incentive to work with US/NATO? Some of the "terrorists" are fighting US/NATO or Kharzai's illegitimate regime, so we should let them. TTP recieves funding and support from external sources, so we need to shut them down. Same goes for the CIA and other intel ops who are looking to spy not only on our military installations but nuclear ones, maybe the next time a Raymond Davis is caught, we find his dead body in the outskirts of Lahore in a ditch. THIS is ROBUST Pakistani nationalist response to the current mess, not playing lapdog to American interests.

**
The NYT, LAT, are considered legitimate sources the world over. This is not my opinion, this is fact. If you arent willing to acknowledge these as being legitimate, as they are by other intelligent and unbiased individuals, then I doubt any source will be enough to satisfy you.

Your opinion, based on the your own experience, is irrelevant as far as this debate goes. That you have been to Janazas is unfortunate, but it is irrelevant in determining the motives of the US.
**

Again WHO decides if NYT, LAT is legitimate? I need names and people. Yes, I am not willing to accept them because I have seen the reality from my own eyes. Nothing beats the situation on the ground. NYT, LAT doesn't even send their own reporters into FATA and you expect me to believe their sources?

As for the motives of the US, they are quite clear: In Iraq they wanted oik, in Afghanistan/Pakistan, they want puppet regimes to secure an energy corridor, blunt Iranian/Chinese influence, and further their neo-colonist ambitions at the expense of indigenous sovereignty.

**
My opinion in simple terms is this. The Taliban are monsters, and they must be fought. Pakistan has lost sovereignty because of them. In this context, the Drones are a necessary evil. Infact, if you want to defeat the Taliban, with the least amount of casualties and destruction, then the Drones are our best option. If you want to see yourvillage destroyed, you people forced to live as refugees in their own country, and countless people to suffer, then by all means, deman the Pak Army do the work the Drones are doing.

The report you cited does nothing but give credence to the fact that civilians have died in these bombings. But we already knew that. But consider the alternative and weigh your options. I think you will agree that the drones are the least destructive.**

Funny, if the Talibans of Afghanistan were monsters, why did we ally with them for 8-10 years? Also that period was a period of relative calm. What you and the Americans do not understand is that the Taliban WILL be back in power as soon as the US leaves Afghanistan. Do you think its smart fighting them for another decade?

Pakistan created this mess by allying with the US post 9/11. Love them or hate them, but the Talibs made a PRINCIPLED stand in claiming to protect OBL. Principled stands -- something that is not in the vocabulary of the beyghairat Pakistani leadership.

[Med911]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

*With all do respect sir, its only rhetoric to you, because you mix raw emotion with actual logic. I could explain my point of view to you, but you will simply dilute any argument with your own emotional attachment to the issue. The problem here is you dont seem to understand the actual point im making, so you claim its rhetoric out of convenience, not having to actually think about the point at hand. *

Sure I hold raw emotions -- its my countrymen and at times extended family members that are being killed. We're not talking about Martians here, these are Pakistanis and I am not going to just speak strategically.

Even if we return to pure strategy and geopolitics: Now that the US is looking to leave Afghanistan, guess who will be left holding the bag again? Pakistan. Except that we have multiplied our enemies by 100x by doing the bidding of the US.

** You seem to not understand what this debate is even about.

I DO NOT and NEVER HAVE claimed that civilians are NOT killed in such attacks. I simply do not believe that the US targets these civilians intentionally.

I BELIEVE the US is doing its best to avoid casualties.

I do NOT believe the US is villainous nation, with evil intent. Nor am I foolish or Naive enough to believe the US is benevolent. I simply try to see this issue in a non biased and logical manner. **

This debate is about the protection of Pakistani sovereignty, this debate is about the extrjudicial murder of civilians in FATA, and this debate is about an undeclared war on Pakistan. I could care less whether US is doing its "best" to avoid casualties and whether its a "good" nation or not. You speak of logic and naivete but let me just say this:

• Pakistan is under attack from the US, its civilians have been killed by these drones and it has been vilified as a terrorist safe haven. Are these facts or not? No emotions involved, just statements of fact yes?

Then, what is our incentive to work with US/NATO? Some of the "terrorists" are fighting US/NATO or Kharzai's illegitimate regime, so we should let them. TTP recieves funding and support from external sources, so we need to shut them down. Same goes for the CIA and other intel ops who are looking to spy not only on our military installations but nuclear ones, maybe the next time a Raymond Davis is caught, we find his dead body in the outskirts of Lahore in a ditch. THIS is ROBUST Pakistani nationalist response to the current mess, not playing lapdog to American interests.

** The NYT, LAT, are considered legitimate sources the world over. This is not my opinion, this is fact. If you arent willing to acknowledge these as being legitimate, as they are by other intelligent and unbiased individuals, then I doubt any source will be enough to satisfy you.

Your opinion, based on the your own experience, is irrelevant as far as this debate goes. That you have been to Janazas is unfortunate, but it is irrelevant in determining the motives of the US. **

Again WHO decides if NYT, LAT is legitimate? I need names and people. Yes, I am not willing to accept them because I have seen the reality from my own eyes. Nothing beats the situation on the ground. NYT, LAT doesn't even send their own reporters into FATA and you expect me to believe their sources?

As for the motives of the US, they are quite clear: In Iraq they wanted oik, in Afghanistan/Pakistan, they want puppet regimes to secure an energy corridor, blunt Iranian/Chinese influence, and further their neo-colonist ambitions at the expense of indigenous sovereignty.

** My opinion in simple terms is this. The Taliban are monsters, and they must be fought. Pakistan has lost sovereignty because of them. In this context, the Drones are a necessary evil. Infact, if you want to defeat the Taliban, with the least amount of casualties and destruction, then the Drones are our best option. If you want to see yourvillage destroyed, you people forced to live as refugees in their own country, and countless people to suffer, then by all means, deman the Pak Army do the work the Drones are doing.

The report you cited does nothing but give credence to the fact that civilians have died in these bombings. But we already knew that. But consider the alternative and weigh your options. I think you will agree that the drones are the least destructive.**

Funny, if the Talibans of Afghanistan were monsters, why did we ally with them for 8-10 years? Also that period was a period of relative calm. What you and the Americans do not understand is that the Taliban WILL be back in power as soon as the US leaves Afghanistan. Do you think its smart fighting them for another decade?

Pakistan created this mess by allying with the US post 9/11. Love them or hate them, but the Talibs made a PRINCIPLED stand in claiming to protect OBL. Principled stands -- something that is not in the vocabulary of the beyghairat Pakistani leadership.

We all have raw emotions. But allowing your emotions too overtake your better judgement is a recipe for disaster. Its people who can control their emotion and look at things logically who succeed. A simple reading of history would tell you that. Even Islamic history would teach you that emotion should not take precedence over wisdom and logic.

Pakistan had lost sovreignty a long time ago. No Pakistani soldier would dare step foot in Taliban controlled areas without and entire contingent to back him. To say Pakistan is has lost sovereignty due to the drones is disingenuous. The reason the drones are flying is because these areas are no longer within Pakistans sovereignty.

Who decides the NYT and LAT are legitimate? The world. The fact that even you quote them when their opinion suits your interests. For example, when the NYT questions whether the claim that civilians have not been killed, you use that to support your claim. Sources that are bias and not worthy of being quoted are instantly outed. FOX news for example, among others. You dont like what they say because the truth doesn't fit your narrative.

Pakistan is NOT under attack from drones, and its not civilians that are being targeted, it Taliban. The very same Taliban that are killing Pakistani civilians. We know the crimes of the Taliban. Do you have any source to support what you claim?

The Taliban are monsters, not because I say so, but because they are. Their actions speak for themselves. These beasts are the enemies of Pakistan and humanity. That we were allied with them is because our leaders are fools and badmash. They are no different from the beasts they created. Now those beasts are attacking their masters, and innocne t Pakistanis are caught in the middle. If the US is doing us a favor of eliminating these monsters, why should we stop them?

America lost 3000 innocent people on 9/11. Funny how when its your people who die, you are the first to rise in their defense, but the US is expected to lie down and accept the deaths of of her people?
Did you thnk they wouldnt come after the Taliban who support these Arab terrorists? And what would you have the Pakistanis do? Pakistan had no options, and to think otherwise is foolish.
The Taliban took a princiled stance, but their principled stance lead to the deaths of Thousands of people all in the protection of OBL, who ended up death anyway. Such is fate of those who are prideful. Pride is a sin and it lead to the destruction of a nation.

[pak-one]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

**We all have raw emotions. But allowing your emotions too overtake your better judgement is a recipe for disaster. Its people who can control their emotion and look at things logically who succeed. A simple reading of history would tell you that. Even Islamic history would teach you that emotion should not take precedence over wisdom and logic.

Pakistan had lost sovreignty a long time ago. No Pakistani soldier would dare step foot in Taliban controlled areas without and entire contingent to back him. To say Pakistan is has lost sovereignty due to the drones is disingenuous. The reason the drones are flying is because these areas are no longer within Pakistans sovereignty.
**

Pakistan lost its sovereignty the day it allied with the US. That conjecture but fact. This is not our war to fight, we have made enemies with people for no reason. Sure 9/11 was a horrible and tragic act of terror, but WHY should we continue to have our soldiers/civilians killed over an act of terror that had NOTHING to do with us? Besides, they found and killed OBL, the US needs to leave the region and leave Pakistan in peace.

**
Who decides the NYT and LAT are legitimate? The world. The fact that even you quote them when their opinion suits your interests. For example, when the NYT questions whether the claim that civilians have not been killed, you use that to support your claim. Sources that are bias and not worthy of being quoted are instantly outed. FOX news for example, among others. You dont like what they say because the truth doesn't fit your narrative.
**

I did not quote them, I mocked their coverage...indeed NYT and LAT is seen as legitimate until they start retracting their stories and spreading lines. Also, the world is larger than the Anglo-sphere that you claim to represent. They are a tool of the US hegemony.

**
Pakistan is NOT under attack from drones, and its not civilians that are being targeted, it Taliban. The very same Taliban that are killing Pakistani civilians. We know the crimes of the Taliban. Do you have any source to support what you claim?
**

...and the Taliban that are killing Pakistani civilians are funded by external sources..hint, it all leads back to the US and others. It doesn't matter if the drones do not target civilians in EFFECT they are killing civilians. I could care less about what the INTENTIONS are, I am talking about people losing their lives. Who decided to make Pakistani lives so cheap. Imagine if the Mexicans started drone attacks on Southwestern borders states like Texas, Arizona, since the US was "harboring gangsters and other criminals" would the US allow that? I don't think so.

**
The Taliban are monsters, not because I say so, but because they are. Their actions speak for themselves. These beasts are the enemies of Pakistan and humanity. That we were allied with them is because our leaders are fools and badmash. They are no different from the beasts they created. Now those beasts are attacking their masters, and innocne t Pakistanis are caught in the middle. If the US is doing us a favor of eliminating these monsters, why should we stop them?
**

So you do admit to the hypocrisy of Pakistan? Playing both sides.

**
America lost 3000 innocent people on 9/11. Funny how when its your people who die, you are the first to rise in their defense, but the US is expected to lie down and accept the deaths of of her people?
Did you thnk they wouldnt come after the Taliban who support these Arab terrorists? And what would you have the Pakistanis do? Pakistan had no options, and to think otherwise is foolish.
The Taliban took a princiled stance, but their principled stance lead to the deaths of Thousands of people all in the protection of OBL, who ended up death anyway. Such is fate of those who are prideful. Pride is a sin and it lead to the destruction of a nation.**

If its eye for an eye then watch your back for retribution. Taliban will be back in power in Afghanistan, and the US will be in bigger trouble. I hope that this circle of violence comes to end, but it sure doesn't seem like the US has learned its lesson, so don't be surprised of these wackos try to target the US again...then what? Will the US take over Afghanistan AND Pakistan?

Their stand was still more principled than the shifty and beyghairat Pakistani leadership -- which pays lip service to sovereignty and is allied with the US, yet still protects its Taliban assets throughout FATA/Baluchistan. Pakistan's double game has been up for years and I am sorry to see the innocent civilians playing fodder to this nonsense.

[Himalaya]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

@pak-one

Pakistan lost its sovereignty the day it allied with the US. That conjecture but fact. This is not our war to fight, we have made enemies with people for no reason. Sure 9/11 was a horrible and tragic act of terror, but WHY should we continue to have our soldiers/civilians killed over an act of terror that had NOTHING to do with us? Besides, they found and killed OBL, the US needs to leave the region and leave Pakistan in peace.

I hate saying this so close after Independence Day but Pakistan never lost its sovereignty when it alied with the USA. It has never really been an Independent country. The whole power structure, elite is subservient to Western interests. The British left behind a system which no longer needed theri physical presence to rule them. Th only thing that changed is the Master.

The Americans, NATO, UN etc cant leave Afghanistan now. If they left there will be more turmoil. Afghanistans sovereignty has long since vanished and to be honest since the taliban have gone out of power, there is some light at the end of the tunnel there. In some ways American presence in Afghanistan is a good thing as it keeps neighbouring countries from interfering away.

It is very easy to criticise American presence in Afghanistan but at least they were man enough to stand up to the Taliban whose policies cannot even be Islamically justified. The Taliban were not in power because the people wanted them but simply because a neighbouring country wanted to solidify its influence there. Afghanistan is no better since 2001 but at least people no longer equate Talibanism as the true interpretation of Islam.

[pak-one]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

I hate saying this so close after Independence Day but Pakistan never lost its sovereignty when it alied with the USA. It has never really been an Independent country. The whole power structure, elite is subservient to Western interests. The British left behind a system which no longer needed theri physical presence to rule them. Th only thing that changed is the Master.

The Americans, NATO, UN etc cant leave Afghanistan now. If they left there will be more turmoil. Afghanistans sovereignty has long since vanished and to be honest since the taliban have gone out of power, there is some light at the end of the tunnel there. In some ways American presence in Afghanistan is a good thing as it keeps neighbouring countries from interfering away.

It is very easy to criticise American presence in Afghanistan but at least they were man enough to stand up to the Taliban whose policies cannot even be Islamically justified. The Taliban were not in power because the people wanted them but simply because a neighbouring country wanted to solidify its influence there. Afghanistan is no better since 2001 but at least people no longer equate Talibanism as the true interpretation of Islam.

I am not sure we were immediately subservient to Western interests, the elites may have swapped the UK for the US as the masters, but things were still in flux.

I find Pakistan's stance towards Afghanistan to be hypocritical, on the one side you have propped up an extremist regime to further your interests, yet you dump them when your master US decides to declare war on them (not referring to YOU, personally). Like them or hate them, but the Taliban's stance (brutality?) has been consistent and they WILL be back in power after the US leaves.

Also, I guarantee that the US and NATO will leave, only a question of when.

[indik]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

the day taliban will come to power , india will come under fire of jehadis from afghanistan , pakistan , and other countries , pakistan govt is not equipped physically and mentally to stop them , bad days are ahead for india,ironies of international geopolitik.

[Med911]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

@pak-one

**We all have raw emotions. But allowing your emotions too overtake your better judgement is a recipe for disaster. Its people who can control their emotion and look at things logically who succeed. A simple reading of history would tell you that. Even Islamic history would teach you that emotion should not take precedence over wisdom and logic.

Pakistan had lost sovreignty a long time ago. No Pakistani soldier would dare step foot in Taliban controlled areas without and entire contingent to back him. To say Pakistan is has lost sovereignty due to the drones is disingenuous. The reason the drones are flying is because these areas are no longer within Pakistans sovereignty. **

Pakistan lost its sovereignty the day it allied with the US. That conjecture but fact. This is not our war to fight, we have made enemies with people for no reason. Sure 9/11 was a horrible and tragic act of terror, but WHY should we continue to have our soldiers/civilians killed over an act of terror that had NOTHING to do with us? Besides, they found and killed OBL, the US needs to leave the region and leave Pakistan in peace.

** Who decides the NYT and LAT are legitimate? The world. The fact that even you quote them when their opinion suits your interests. For example, when the NYT questions whether the claim that civilians have not been killed, you use that to support your claim. Sources that are bias and not worthy of being quoted are instantly outed. FOX news for example, among others. You dont like what they say because the truth doesn't fit your narrative. **

I did not quote them, I mocked their coverage...indeed NYT and LAT is seen as legitimate until they start retracting their stories and spreading lines. Also, the world is larger than the Anglo-sphere that you claim to represent. They are a tool of the US hegemony.

** Pakistan is NOT under attack from drones, and its not civilians that are being targeted, it Taliban. The very same Taliban that are killing Pakistani civilians. We know the crimes of the Taliban. Do you have any source to support what you claim? **

...and the Taliban that are killing Pakistani civilians are funded by external sources..hint, it all leads back to the US and others. It doesn't matter if the drones do not target civilians in EFFECT they are killing civilians. I could care less about what the INTENTIONS are, I am talking about people losing their lives. Who decided to make Pakistani lives so cheap. Imagine if the Mexicans started drone attacks on Southwestern borders states like Texas, Arizona, since the US was "harboring gangsters and other criminals" would the US allow that? I don't think so.

** The Taliban are monsters, not because I say so, but because they are. Their actions speak for themselves. These beasts are the enemies of Pakistan and humanity. That we were allied with them is because our leaders are fools and badmash. They are no different from the beasts they created. Now those beasts are attacking their masters, and innocne t Pakistanis are caught in the middle. If the US is doing us a favor of eliminating these monsters, why should we stop them? **

So you do admit to the hypocrisy of Pakistan? Playing both sides.

** America lost 3000 innocent people on 9/11. Funny how when its your people who die, you are the first to rise in their defense, but the US is expected to lie down and accept the deaths of of her people? Did you thnk they wouldnt come after the Taliban who support these Arab terrorists? And what would you have the Pakistanis do? Pakistan had no options, and to think otherwise is foolish. The Taliban took a princiled stance, but their principled stance lead to the deaths of Thousands of people all in the protection of OBL, who ended up death anyway. Such is fate of those who are prideful. Pride is a sin and it lead to the destruction of a nation.**

If its eye for an eye then watch your back for retribution. Taliban will be back in power in Afghanistan, and the US will be in bigger trouble. I hope that this circle of violence comes to end, but it sure doesn't seem like the US has learned its lesson, so don't be surprised of these wackos try to target the US again...then what? Will the US take over Afghanistan AND Pakistan?

Their stand was still more principled than the shifty and beyghairat Pakistani leadership -- which pays lip service to sovereignty and is allied with the US, yet still protects its Taliban assets throughout FATA/Baluchistan. Pakistan's double game has been up for years and I am sorry to see the innocent civilians playing fodder to this nonsense.

The Taliban made an enemy of the United States and Pakistanis helped create the Taliban. The Taliban are monsters. They are moraly and ethically corrupt, They are murderers, they are criminals, they are defacing Islam, if we werent at war with them before, im glad we are fighting these beasts today. The Taliban need to leave Pakistan and Afghanistan all together, and then there will be peace.

You cannot say the LAT and NYT are unreliable when they are supporting what you claim, that civilians are dying in this conflict. If your opinion is valid, in your estimation, then logically, any source that supports and validates that truth (as you see it) is reliable.
In mocking them, you actually proved their credibility.
And they retract stories BECAUSE they are legitimate and reliable. When a story turns out to be wrong, then sources such as thes retract earlier stories that they know to be false.
Also, the original story I posted stated that the US is trying to avoid casualties, not that casualties do not occur. The stories you site claim that such casualties are higher then reported. This isnt refuting the fact that the US tries to avoid civilian casualties, but that those casualties that have occurred are higher then estimates show.

We all know Pak govt are hypocrits. But that does not change the fact that the Taliban are animals, and they deserve to be killed. Pak govt be damned, at this moment, the problem is with these terrorists. And if the US is succesfully targeting them, then lets support them.

I agree with you, the war isnt going well. But that doesnt mean that these murderers should be allowed a free pass. Justice dictates thats such criminals be taken down. Islam teaches us no less. Why should we not support the deaths of terrorists and criminals such as these?

[picoico]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

@Med911

No the difference here is that one commits a genuine mistake and is sorry about it. The others intentionally targets innocents, which they regard as non innocents, and say if they really were innocent then Allah will forgive them. One is a clumsy a hole, the other is vindictive, blood thirsty, psychologically twisted MoFo who will kill anyone he deems worthy of death, and do so with glee.

Mistake? It's not a mistake if it's contstantly repeated with the same vapid response/aplogy. It's an accepted operational reality at that point...

[Med911]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

@picoico

Mistake? It's not a mistake if it's contstantly repeated with the same vapid response/aplogy. It's an accepted operational reality at that point...

War is an ugly thing, but sometimes its a necessary thing.
Perhaps such casualties do not occur in the fantasy land you live in, but this is the real world.
And what would you like them to do after innocents are inadvertently killed while taking out murderous terrorists, not say anything at all? Whats more grotesque, Taliban who kill people purposely and without remorse, or the US which despite trying to avoid civilians, has killed civilians by accident and apologized?

[Dude111]

@TLK

this is not just sad, its making me mad ..

Yes why take this out on an INNOCENT CHILD??

Very sad

[pak-one]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

@Med911

The Taliban made an enemy of the United States and Pakistanis helped create the Taliban. The Taliban are monsters. They are moraly and ethically corrupt, They are murderers, they are criminals, they are defacing Islam, if we werent at war with them before, im glad we are fighting these beasts today. The Taliban need to leave Pakistan and Afghanistan all together, and then there will be peace.

You cannot say the LAT and NYT are unreliable when they are supporting what you claim, that civilians are dying in this conflict. If your opinion is valid, in your estimation, then logically, any source that supports and validates that truth (as you see it) is reliable. In mocking them, you actually proved their credibility. And they retract stories BECAUSE they are legitimate and reliable. When a story turns out to be wrong, then sources such as thes retract earlier stories that they know to be false. Also, the original story I posted stated that the US is trying to avoid casualties, not that casualties do not occur. The stories you site claim that such casualties are higher then reported. This isnt refuting the fact that the US tries to avoid civilian casualties, but that those casualties that have occurred are higher then estimates show.

We all know Pak govt are hypocrits. But that does not change the fact that the Taliban are animals, and they deserve to be killed. Pak govt be damned, at this moment, the problem is with these terrorists. And if the US is succesfully targeting them, then lets support them.

I agree with you, the war isnt going well. But that doesnt mean that these murderers should be allowed a free pass. Justice dictates thats such criminals be taken down. Islam teaches us no less. Why should we not support the deaths of terrorists and criminals such as these?

My point is: Either Pakistan develops a coherent national defence and security strategy or just give up and be honest with itself: It is an American colony with beygahirat leaders. What if I told you that Pakistan is still supporting and harboring certain Taliban assets to THIS DAY, what are you going to do about it? Where is this clean break you speak of? I say, fine hate the Taliban and lets eliminate them, then lay out your post US/NATO Afghanistan strategy? Lets talk in concrete terms.

If you had read the NYT article, you would know that its talking about the POSSIBILITY of the civilian death toll being higher than expected -- its not doing presenting it as a fact. Any newspaper without a local bureau is suspect, particular when NYT works hand in hand with the US Intelligence establishment.

[Med911]

Re: Militants hang 8-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan

My point is: Either Pakistan develops a coherent national defence and security strategy or just give up and be honest with itself: It is an American colony with beygahirat leaders. What if I told you that Pakistan is still supporting and harboring certain Taliban assets to THIS DAY, what are you going to do about it? Where is this clean break you speak of? I say, fine hate the Taliban and lets eliminate them, then lay out your post US/NATO Afghanistan strategy? Lets talk in concrete terms.

If you had read the NYT article, you would know that its talking about the POSSIBILITY of the civilian death toll being higher than expected -- its not doing presenting it as a fact. Any newspaper without a local bureau is suspect, particular when NYT works hand in hand with the US Intelligence establishment.

I agree... Pakistan does need a coherent national defense. It does not have one in place.
Meanwhile, the Taliban are murdering our people, and destroying our way of life.
The Pak govt is to corrupt and too incompetent to do anything about it.
The US is successfully targeting these terrorists. And thus we should support them.

That civilians die, is a given. I dont know what the US source is, but then you dont know whether they have or not. Usually, the information the give is verified by a source. For example, the Pakistani Army official who acknowledged that the US does not target civilians and has been successful in targeting criminal Taliban.

Now instead of thinking of how many people have unfortunately died because of these drone attacks on terrorists, you should think of how many people have been saved by their deaths.

I have not heard of the NYTs being in the hands of intelligence agencies, yet you present this as fact. Where is your evidence?