June 17th, 2010
12:20 PM ET
soundoff (162 Responses)
  1. Val

    I believe that the strategy is not a perfect one, however it is a winning strategy. It's just going take some time for it to work. The name of the game: patience.

    July 11, 2010 at 6:34 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Rick McDaniel

    There can be only one successful strategy.........total elimination of the Taliban.

    June 23, 2010 at 11:21 am | Report abuse |
    • Rick from LA

      You annot fight ideology with guns and bombs, it's like trying to elminate an odor by stabbing it with a butter knife. You have to eliminate the cause of the odor and then vent the room. Ask you self what is that cause and how do we address that? Hint even nuclear missile will not stop it.

      June 24, 2010 at 1:21 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Jen

    give money to the enemy and starve our own people cutting unemployment, ss, medicare..money that we paid in...that is what spending cuts mean? Instead we fund other countries and their welfare!

    I would rather spend my tax money helping people here at home, FIRST.

    June 22, 2010 at 7:23 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Skin

    You should all go back into your trailers and return to whatever wrestling match you were watching

    June 22, 2010 at 4:38 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Smith in Oregon

    Is the U.S. strategy working? NO
    The only hopeful successful strategy is to follow the troop pull-out in July 12 months from now.

    June 22, 2010 at 2:23 am | Report abuse |
  6. Sweetpea

    We all have friends and relatives over there fighting for this god forsaken war.. I dont see any point of dragging our US soldiers though this any longer.. They have families here in the US and our american families are been ripped apart.. for what ?? > for the lawmakers and Obama to sit back and say..worthless words." Is the strategy working"..
    The answer is NO!.....We have tax dollars working for them over seas. American Tax dollars . Our hard earned money we pay..Working for another country...and Our American soldiers and their families deserve that money to help pay thier medical bills and the extendant health care.We as americans need to stop and pay our respects to the military men who.. watch our front line .. for the USA. Stop and think.. Lawmakers, Politians,and Pres. Obama. Send OUR TROOPS HOME!!

    June 22, 2010 at 1:16 am | Report abuse |
  7. Dick Pepper

    Is this War working? This Just in – NO!

    Where is Bin Laden, how many years are we at it now, nearly a Decade, I thought the Mission was Accomplished during the Bush regime.

    This War is a Joke, and a insult to the Men and Women who are still fighting in it. I feel bad for them, because most people don't give a crap about this War.

    June 21, 2010 at 6:59 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Adam

    We simply need to get out of there. Does it say anything to anyone that armies throughout time have not been able to win a war there? We need to get out of Iraq, as well. We're not doing any good there. How dare we be so audacious as to think that anyone else anywhere wants American-style democracy. Hell, it hasn't been working out for us so well the last twenty years, why dump it on another poor bunch of saps?

    June 21, 2010 at 9:59 am | Report abuse |
  9. whybs on twitter

    All we want is Osama's head served on a plate!🙂

    We don't care about your religion!

    June 21, 2010 at 8:14 am | Report abuse |
  10. Stanton SC

    The industrial/military complex of the USA has always, and will always need a war to survive. Right now, it is Afghanistan. With the voice of the powerful lobbyists in DC sounding far stronger than that of those who oppse this war, there will be no end to it. That will only come when the outcry equals what happened in the '70s against the Viet Nam war. In the meantime, more will die....on both sides...the innocent and the not so innocent.

    June 21, 2010 at 7:11 am | Report abuse |
  11. Eric

    US STRATEGY DEFINITELY NOT WORKING!!!!

    Americans should prepare to accept hundreds of U.S. casualties each month in Afghanistan during spring offensives with enemy forces.

    The dire forecast was made by retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, an adjunct professor of international affairs at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, in a periodic assessment of political and security issues he has conducted in the war zone since 2003.

    “What I want to do is signal that this thing is going to be $5 billion to $10 billion a month and 300 to 500 killed and wounded a month by next summer. That’s what we probably should expect. And that’s light casualties,” said McCaffrey, who is also president of his own consulting firm in Arlington, Va., and has conducted numerous trips to the war zones to assess the political and military challenges at hand.
    McCaffrey, a three-time recipient of the Purple Heart medal who also earned the Distinguished Service Cross twice during combat in Vietnam, told Army Times that “people are shocked when I add the numbers up,” but what he’s discussing, he said, is not significantly higher than what is being suffered by U.S. in Afghanistan now.

    His reports are compiled with information gathered in theater and from research conducted beforehand. McCaffrey traveled to the war zone for this report as an academic from West Point at the invitation of theater commander Gen. David Petraeus, commander of Central Command, and Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the operational commander in Afghanistan, he said.

    June 21, 2010 at 6:38 am | Report abuse |
    • Val

      Counterpoint. You're casualties rates are a bit inflated. I looked on a website and found some interesting information. There was a casualty rates for all the years we been in Afghanistan per month for all Coalition troops in the county . I looked at the worse year so far for the troops, 2009, and found out that the worse month for that year was August with total casualties of 77 . Though 77 troops killed is saddening to anyone, this is not the record s you predict. Though I expect casualties to rise during the year, based on the data, I don't expect them to be anywhere in the "300 to 500 killed and wounded" range as you say. I feel it would be in the 80s, 90s, possibly low 100s, a terrible price pay (it's terrible even if only one person dies), but nothing like the predictions you are making. The website I found this at is: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:qXuuSx_WjXAJ:www.icasualties.org/oef/+casualty+rate+in+afghanistan&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

      June 21, 2010 at 6:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • Eric

        Val, seems like you have a comprehension problem. The casualty rates mentioned in my post are that of Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who served in the United States Army for 32 years and retired as a four-star General. At retirement he was the most highly decorated serving General, having been awarded three Purple Heart medals for wounds received in his four combat tours – as well as twice awarded the Distinguished Service Cross, the nation's second highest award for valor. He also twice was awarded the Silver Star for valor.
        McCaffrey traveled to the war zone for this report as an academic from West Point at the invitation of theater commander Gen. David Petraeus, commander of Central Command, and Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the operational commander in Afghanistan.

        Casualty rates you are getting are doctored as publishing the true casualty figures will only give the Taliban a propaganda victory.

        June 22, 2010 at 3:52 am | Report abuse |
      • Eric

        website of report from Gen. Barry McCaffrey: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/01/army_casualties_010410w/

        June 22, 2010 at 5:07 am | Report abuse |
      • Val

        Eric,
        You say this is doctored, but you have no evidence of that, do you? I can't speak for or against this general you mentioned, but judging for what I know about Afghanistan, I do not agree with his casulty rate. I'm not willing to make judgement on anything I don't fully understand...as I hope anyone else would.

        June 22, 2010 at 12:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        Furthermore Eric... you have claimed on several occasion that as many as 60 NATO troops and dozens of ANA/ANP were killed in ONE DAY... and have yet to provide me concrete evidence of that, despite me asking you (for a month now) to prove it.

        Nobody is saying this war is going great. In fact, it's at a tough point. But coming on here saying that we have 60 troops dying today and 20 tanks being destroyed per day ("tanks" aren't even on the ground, you moron) simply makes you look ignorant.

        June 22, 2010 at 1:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        And another real quick point Eric... according to you, hundreds of troops have been dying a week over there since early Spring. Now all the sudden you give me an article saying that the worst has yet to come... and we might see that over the summer? I thought you said that it's already happening... now your article tells me it COULD happen in the summer? Doesn't really make sense there, pal.

        June 22, 2010 at 2:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • Eric

        Val...General McCaffrey has traveled to the war zone for this report and therefore has an indept understanding of the situation on the ground, so how can you, someone who doesn't "fully understand" and has not set foot on the war front dispute the General's assessment?? Amazing how ignorance makes one arrogant to dispute the assessment of an experienced and knowledgeable General.

        Steve, the mushroom, you need to attend extra english comprehension classes. The general said:
        " “people are shocked when I add the numbers up,” but what he’s discussing, he said, is not significantly higher than what is being suffered by U.S. in Afghanistan now." you comprehend what "now" means.
        To show how much in the dark you are......Don't you know it is summer now in Afghanistan and haven't you heard that June is the deadliest casualty month for the coalition exceeding all other months. Wake up you guys!!!!

        June 24, 2010 at 9:26 am | Report abuse |
      • Rick from LA

        What kind of casulties are people looking at? Injured or dead? 77 dead but hundreds injured enough to be hospitalized before being returned to their unit. If a IED explodes under a MRAP, even though the soldiers inside are still alive, they would be severely injured by the tramatic forces exerted on their body. Theoretically you can say there were no casulties, but that crew is still out of action while they are put into traction and are treated for severe concussions, possible hearing loss and perhaps paralysis. If they are not combat able they are a casualty.

        June 24, 2010 at 1:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • Onesmallvoice

      Let's just hope that you're right,Eric.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:56 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Dwight

    The walk of shame is coming to the USA. I've seen it before and it's called "Vietnam". No way can the USA walk in honor.

    June 21, 2010 at 2:31 am | Report abuse |
    • Val

      This isn't Vietnam, let me introduce you to Afghanistan. Despite the fact that both wars (Vietnam and Afghanistan) are similar, they are not the same hopeless bed for America. We were fools in Vietnam. We were supporting an unfair, oppressive government, we had forget how to fight in an insurgent enviroment, and our troops were giving up hope. Now, we are better off. We fight for national survival, a just cause for going into war, we had retaught ourselves how to defeat the rebels on their own turf, and there is no draft, meaning the troops that are over there, are there to giving their 100% to win this. "The walk of shame is coming to the USA"? Well, I believe we are walking off that path as shown by the fact we are WINNING this war, admittedly slowly.

      June 21, 2010 at 4:59 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Dwight

    No way will the USA win. No way. Soon the USA will do the walk of defeat.

    June 21, 2010 at 2:29 am | Report abuse |
    • Val

      That's not true. It IS possible for the United States to win this war. All we have to do is fight it right...and believe that we can win it. A lack of spirt and faith among troops and citizens that wars their country are in can be won was one of the biggest reasons why those wars are lost. If anything, that's what Vietnam should have taught us. Don't loss faith or we keep losing.

      June 21, 2010 at 4:48 pm | Report abuse |
      • Eric

        DREAM ON Val dream on!! The US WILL face a very humiliating DEFEAT!!!

        June 22, 2010 at 4:04 am | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        Eric... for sake of the argument, let's just say the US does lose this war and pulls out in haste in 2011... then what? Assuming you really are an Afghani (which I still doubt), do you plan on living in peace and harmony, with beautiful mountain sunsets? I don't get people like you. You pretty much show your support for the Taliban, then in 10 years after the supposed "defeat" of NATO... when some former faction of the Taliban kills your Mom because she forgot to wear her burqua that day, maybe you can remember this moment and say "damn, I was stupid back then."

        June 22, 2010 at 1:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • Onesmallvoice

      I hope you're right,Dwight.It seems that's the only way this war will end just like Vietnam did.The sooner,the better.

      June 22, 2010 at 3:53 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Val

    Riza, it is better than "disrespecting whole country", but it is worse than calmly and nicely saying what you think. No one would want to listen to you if you are profane. If you want to convince people that you are right, reason with them. Tell them why you feel a certain way and how you got to your conclusions. The insurgents in Afghanistan were unable to use reason and that's a reason why they use fantastical messenges, tactics, and sucide ers. Being irrational only cause problems, even if you are right. If there is any lesson we should learn for Iraq and Afghanistan is that you can't simply do the right thing, but you got to do the right thing for the right reasons.

    June 20, 2010 at 5:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • Eric

      "......you got to do the right thing for the right reasons.".....Yeah like going into Iraq and Afghanistan and stealing their natural wealth!!!

      June 21, 2010 at 4:07 am | Report abuse |
      • Val

        Through I certainly question our invasion of Iraq, I do not question our entry in Afghanistan. We ARE NOT in Afghanistan to steal anyones wealth. We are there to stop evil people from doing evil things to civilians. For example, 9/11.

        June 21, 2010 at 4:39 pm | Report abuse |
      • Eric

        The Afghan people or the Taliban were not invovled in your 9/11. The Taliban had eradicated poppy from Afghanistan and this affected the drug lords who control the White house. Also it is common knowledge now that Afghanistan has +-$1trillion of natural wealth. Ask yourself who is behind 9/11...can a bunch of amatuers, playing with flight simulators, carry out such maneuvers with a plane that even experienced pilots cannot???

        June 22, 2010 at 4:02 am | Report abuse |
      • Val

        No, Eric, the Tailban had nothing to do with 9/11, but they harbor those who did.

        June 22, 2010 at 12:16 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Former Soldier

    Most have good comments, though I believe this is what should be done.
    First – Pray for Our Country, Politicians, Generals, Soldiers and Voters
    Politicians – you let the dogs loose on them, now let go of the leash and let the Generals do their jobs.
    Generals – you "know" what needs to be done short of tactical nuclear strikes, go do it.
    Voters – we all have the right to free speech, do so in a non-violent way P.S. DON'T TAKE IT OUT ON OUR SOLDIERS
    Soldiers – God Speed and do the right thing when you can and do what you were trained to do.

    June 20, 2010 at 9:36 am | Report abuse |
    • Live From Kandahar

      hmmm hmm Drink Beer!!!

      June 20, 2010 at 4:58 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ernie Beatty

        You mean with us Tea Partiers,don't you???

        June 20, 2010 at 6:44 pm | Report abuse |
  16. i_am_muslim

    "I am a Muslim"
    Kill me and call it
    "Collateral Damage"
    Imprison me and call it
    "Security Measure"
    Exile my people and call it
    "New Middle East"
    Rob my resources, Invade my land,
    Alter my leadership and call it
    "Democracy"

    June 19, 2010 at 9:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jaybob

      Here's my problem, dude-

      I don't have a grudge against Muslims in particular. I have a grudge against people who have perverted their religious beliefs to do horrible things. Let me illustrate, however, what people think:

      When we kill Taliban and Al-Qaeda, people start screaming about Americans killing Muslims. If you make this proclaimation every time some sadistic psychopath with a Koran and a home made bomb gets what he deserves, it drives people to think "All Muslims are terrorists".

      How about when bad guys die, you say "wow, they killed a bad guy who thought he was doing Allah's work".

      We're not killing "Muslims", we're killing "Terrorists". People like you seem to insinuate that the two are interchangeable. In other words, don't expect anything less than the association between the two if you say those things.

      June 20, 2010 at 11:04 pm | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        I totally agree with you, Jaybob. Maybe if the Muslims actually stood up against the few (maybe less than 10 percent) in their religion that have hijacked Islam and turned it into something that it's not... maybe then will the perception of Islam change and it can actually be accepted as a "religion of peace" on the world stage.

        June 23, 2010 at 10:45 am | Report abuse |
    • whybs on twitter

      We just want Osama's head served on a plate!🙂

      I don't give a hoot as to what your religion is!

      June 21, 2010 at 8:12 am | Report abuse |
    • Daniel-2

      Extremely well put,i_am_muslim.

      June 21, 2010 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
  17. Val

    CBCalif
    Replying to your last comment to me. I know your exprience in Vietnam was a one, but considering your last comment I think you are relating your exprience too much to Afghanistan. It is easy to compare Vietnam and Afghanistan and find similarties between there and here. But the reality is that after we suffered Vietnan, our military has relearned the vital lessons about insurgecy and war. I think you should put some faith in the restoration and refitting of our military after the Vietnam war.

    June 19, 2010 at 8:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • Eric

      The US army has learnt nothing from Vietnam. They will suffer a worst DEFEAT in Afghanistan!!!

      June 21, 2010 at 4:03 am | Report abuse |
      • CBCalif

        This from someone who referred to the Taliban as a "rag tag militia?"
        During the last 50+ years, those rag tag militias, i.e insurgents / terrorists in many parts of the world have changed the face of warfare and quite often nullified the power of conventional military machines – forcing everyone to fight on their terms. Just like the German military essentially did in World War II.
        No matter what one thinks of their societal actions, brutal morals, etc never underestimate or underrate your enemy and think of them as rag tag ... especially when they have stood up to, survived, and continued to fight against foreign powers as long as have the Taliban and Company. If you really play the game, that philosophy will put you the path to a body bag.
        I don't necessarily believe he will, but the Taliban can be defeated if Obama and Company is willing to send the necessary number of men to Afghanistan and allow them to spend enough time there. It took 500,000 French soldiers (including their Algerian regiments) at least five years to clean out most of no more than 50,000 Algerian insurgents (who were rag tag in nature), and then the French left anyway when De Gaulle took power. I'm sure someone will comment on the reference to the French Army.
        Read if one wishes "Modern Warfare – A French View of Counter Insurgency" by Roger Trinquier. It is available on the web for free in the form of a paper published by the US Army Command and General Staff College a couple of decades ago and was originally published by Trinquier in 1961 after he retired from the French Army.
        Also, for your edification, the South Vietnamese lost to the North Vietnamese long after the Americans were withdrawn. The strategy employed by the US Presidents (Johnson and Nixon) was certainly faulty and led to that withdrawal, but while "we" were there, for all the good it did, we never lost a battle to the VC or North Vietnamese, for whom I have great respect.

        June 21, 2010 at 8:38 pm | Report abuse |
      • Eric

        If you compare the two forces, the Taliban and the coalition, in terms of manpower and equipment the Taliban will seem to be a rag tag militia. But in terms of purpose and faith the Taliban are the superpower. If you go back in history you will see that many a small force has defeated a mighty forces and in Afghanistan history will repeat itself!!!!

        June 22, 2010 at 4:30 am | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        Eric... I don't care how much "faith" the Taliban has and how that relates to being a superpower or not. The fact of the matter is they are a rag-tag set of cowards and thugs who use NATO's idiotic rules to their advantage by hiding behind civilians and intimidating people to accept their strict version of Islam. They've killed more civilians 10 fold than NATO has, and could care less who they kill as long as they get their way.

        You obviously want NATO out of Afghanistan... but what will happen if they leave in haste? You think there will be peace and stability? Try 30 more years of war when your favorite Taliban decide to splinter off and fight each other like the bunch of animals that they are. Have fun with that.

        June 22, 2010 at 1:51 pm | Report abuse |
      • CBCalif

        Small guerrilla forces, or in today's vernacular insurgents, defeat western style armies only because the leaders of western countries have allowed themselves to be fooled into fighting on the enemy's terms. Counter Insurgency is a border line foolish game. It requires employment of hundreds of thousands of troops and years of effort. It certainly requires many more troops than Obama has sent to Afghanistan.

        The South Koreans provided two army divisions (White Horse and Capitol) and one Korean Marine Brigade in Vietnam and were given their own TAOR (Tactical Area of Responsibility). No reporters were allowed in that area, they didn't rely on South Vietnamese troops, and the only Americans were military liaison officers and Air and Naval Gunfire Control Officers to insure they received any needed support of that nature. It didn't take them long to clear their area of NVA an VC. They had a kill ratio of 25 to one, almost three times that of American troops.

        I personally knew some of the American liaison Officers. The Koreans succeeded not by winning the hearts and minds of the local population , but instead but instead by killing the enemy and their supporters. If a village or house was supporting the VC or NVA, after ambushing them the ROKs returned to the village and eradicated it – all the men, women, children, and animals. They cut the heads off dead VC and NVA and left them on poles along the road. If the ROKs suffered casualties and captured any VC or NVA , they hung them upside down from a tree and flayed them. Brutal, but it didn't take the ROKs long to pacify their area. They didn't play counter insurgency and fight the enemy on his terms. They forced the enemy to fight on their terms. The NVA began to avoid the Korean areas.

        The Russians did the same things to the rebels in Chechnya. After chasing them all over the place and loosing men, the Russians finally laid siege to the rebels in Grozny. It was interesting to watch on TV. They surrounded the city, brought up artillery, and pounded the city into submission. Far more brutal than how the Israelis dealt with Hamas and their supporters in Gaza.

        The Sunnis in Anbar province did't begin to help the Americans because they were upset at Al Queda. They changed sides because they saw what the Marines did to their brother insurgents in Fallujah. Surrounded the town, used artillery, armor, and air support, and took the town block by block killing about 600 to 700 insurgents and laid out their bodies on the ground for the world to see. The Marines later moved against Ramadi and the Sunni insurgency was over.

        Guerrilla / Insurgent forces can be timely defeated, but not if a country relies on a strategy of Counter Insurgency. In that case a country better be willing to send hundreds of thousands of troops and spend five to ten years on the effort.

        June 23, 2010 at 2:34 am | Report abuse |
  18. ShareFacts

    Nothing will work in Afghanistan. We have to bring our troops back home. I suggest everyone to watch a recent interview by Congressman Dennis Kucinich on Afghanistan. He speaks the truth,

    Google "Dennis Kucinich "There Is NO Military Solution!"

    June 19, 2010 at 6:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Val

      True, there is no PURE military solution to the war. The answer is a mixed humanitarian, political, economic, and military coming last. Also, ShareFacts, Dennis Kuchinich had been known to have "the strongest liberal" perspective in the Democratic Party and he wrote a resolution, in March, that would required all our troops by the end of this year. I don't know if this would have been a conditional withdrawn, but it does seem that Kuchinich is bias against the war completely, regardless of it being won or lost. That's not someone you should take advice about the war. (Though I like his ideas for the environment.)

      June 20, 2010 at 10:04 am | Report abuse |
  19. SOD 369

    I want to know EXACTLY what is the goal of the U.S. in Afghanistan? At first I thought it was to find Bin Laden. I don't think they will ever find him. So what is the point of being there other than that, I ask? If we cannot answer this question than we should get out.

    June 19, 2010 at 1:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Gary Johndro

      Actually the point our being has a duel purpose,one is to build an invisible empire and the other is to weaken Islam.

      June 19, 2010 at 1:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Val

      I'm glad you asked. Yes, orignally our doing in Afghanistan is to destory al Qaida and capture bin Laden. However, Afghanistan is only a part of a global effort to waging a war on ism. In Afghanistan only, the goal(s) are:
      1.) support local government and citizens

      June 19, 2010 at 9:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • Val

        2.) prevent insurgants and ists from using Afghanistan as a harbor
        3.) ensure these goals are meet strategically

        June 19, 2010 at 10:04 pm | Report abuse |
  20. Cyrus Howell

    I am a former member of the 178th Infantry of the Illinois National Guard.
    When the Korean War started there were only two active divisions in the US Army. This all Black unit was sent to Korea as cannon fodder when the Chinese crossed the Yalu River. The all Black 178th took 90% casualties as front line combat troops. Most had been World War II veterans who joined The Guard to supplement their family incomes. They died for America. They didn't say no. Whey didn't whine and complain.
    Once again the Pentagon is shamelessly using the Guard and Reserve for repeated and extended tours of Asia.
    The reason the Pentagon does this is because they cannot get people to sign up and enlist to do their evil deeds.
    America no longer believes the Pentagon bullzhit.
    Take my advise. Go into the military as an officer or officer candidate or forget it.
    There are fewer aspiring heros these days.
    Remember one thing. The Vietnam War ended when American soldiers stopped fighting.
    They went out in the bush, smoked pot and the told their Cos the radio had been damaged.
    " Juanito, Step on that Son of a Bich again. Break that antenna off."
    Dick Chaney knew a military "draft" was not going to work. I knew soldiers who shot at their own battalion commander's helicopter. After 10 years, the American soldier shut down that war.

    June 19, 2010 at 10:46 am | Report abuse |
  21. Cyrus Howell

    Of course it is working. The strategy is to keep the United States military establishment going, and war profiteers making money. Maybe we can visit your country next on our road trip.
    The Taliban have no homes and no wives. They are not going anywhere The don't live in those caves for nothing.
    GET BIN LADEN – GO HOME.
    People, the Pentagon tried to assassinate " the Most Decorated American Soldier" of the Korean War. Wounded 14 times, he was even awarded Turkey's highest military decoration. The Pentagon is capable of any evil. They use you for a pay check in any way they want. Why the surprise?
    They can get the American flag out of my face before I ram it up their azzes.

    June 19, 2010 at 10:17 am | Report abuse |
    • Cyrus Howell

      I knew a guy who was a sargeant major at 29 1/2 years old. Three tours of Vietnam.
      I convinced him not to leave the Army. He wanted to quit after Tony Herbert (another Green Beret) wrote about the Pentagon's attempt on his life. All of 7th Special Forces were ready to "retire" after they read his book, SOLDIER. They had to make their own personal decisions.
      At the beginning of the Gulf War General Schwartzkopt had to be talked into using Special Forces on the first mission of the Iraq War. Norman said, "I don't trust them." Norman is a nice guy, but what he didn't know was Special Forces no longer trusted him or the Pentagon. They try to kill The Most Decorated American Soldier of the Korean War – Washington and the Generals flushed your patriotism right down the toilet. Chaney and Wolfowitz were at the Pentagon then.
      One Admiral at the Pentagon blew his brains out because Washington discovered he wore a decoration he had never won. That was common practice in Vietnam. No medals – no promotions. You don't get promoted within six years you are automatically out of the military.
      I remember one major from battalion walking into a line company HQ (and Saigon) and telling the company cleric, "See if we had and fire fights this month. If we did put me in for a bronze star."
      Shades of Radar O'Reilly.

      June 19, 2010 at 11:09 am | Report abuse |
    • Onesmallvoice

      You nailed it,Cyrus!

      June 19, 2010 at 7:31 pm | Report abuse |
  22. Eric

    • 10 Polish sildiers killed in Ghazni
    • 10 US-Nato vehicles destroyed in Ghazni
    • 11 ANA sildiers killed in Helmand
    • At least 20 US/Nato soldiers and ANA soldiers killed, one tank, 4 vehicles destroyed
    • British tank blown up in Helmand
    • 3 British soldiers killed, several injured
    • NATO offensive driven back in Kandahar
    • NATO tank exploded in Kandahar
    • Boldak blast kills 15 ANA soldiers
    • ANA commander killed in Zabul
    • ANA military outpost overrun in Laghman
    • Taliba destroyed NATO five logistical and military vehicles in Kandahar
    • Oil tanker burned down in Nangarhar
    • Ali Shang district comes under attack in Laghman
    • 4 ANA soldiers killed as their vehicle blown apart in Wardag
    • District center comes under attack in Parwan
    • British tank destroyed, 6 soldiers killed in Helmand
    • Blasts in Zabul kill 9 ANA soldiers
    • Canadian tank blown apart in Kandahar
    • Taliban kill 11 ANA soldiers, destroy five vehicles in Zabul
    • US base attacked in Marjah

    US STRATEGY IS DEFINITELY NOT WORKING!!!

    June 19, 2010 at 6:57 am | Report abuse |
    • Jerry

      Having fun 'copying and pasting' BS are you?

      June 19, 2010 at 12:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Steve

      A disclaimer to all sensible people... this Eric guy is a fool, and what he posts is not true. He's just trying to stir up anti-Americanism because he has no life. Please don't believe what he says. If soldiers are killed, the coalition announces it within a few days.

      June 19, 2010 at 3:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • Eric

        This Steve guy is a mushroom.......thrives on being kept in the dark and fed crap by the embedded (in bed with the army) media. The invitation is still open, take the next plane to Afghanistan and come and see for yourself the facts on the ground!!!

        June 21, 2010 at 3:46 am | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        Sure Eric. Maybe we can have an arm wrestling match to settle our differences, too.

        June 22, 2010 at 1:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Onesmallvoice

      Well put,Eric.

      June 19, 2010 at 7:28 pm | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        No, not "well put" onesmallvoice. I could say that 100 people landed on the moon yesterday in search of helium 3, all while the Gulf Oil spill is being cleaned up properly. If it's LIES... then it is not "well put."

        June 20, 2010 at 5:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • CBCalif

      Regardless of whether the above list is accurate, and without knowing the time frame covered, but assuming solely for the sake of argument (arguendo) it is accurate, this list merely shows that the enemy is fighting back. Would you expect otherwise. The fact that the Germans achieved numerous tactical battlefield successes during 1944, especially in the Ardennes Forrest (Battle of the Bulge), didn't mean the Allied strategy was not working. It obviously did work. The enemy always achieves some tactical successes, that is why men die in war, aircraft are shot down, tanks are destroyed, etc. There is no correlative relationship between minor tactical battlefield successes on the enemy's part , regardless of how numerous, and the conclusion that their opponent's (in this instance NATO's) strategy is not working.

      June 20, 2010 at 1:40 am | Report abuse |
      • Eric

        You are comparing the German army to a rag tag militia such as the Taliban. Get real!!!!

        June 21, 2010 at 3:50 am | Report abuse |
  23. Leer

    The US is starting to wonder if our Afghan strategy is working ? Did it ever work ????? I would say just leave Afghanistan, and let them pay us, handsomely, to come back to develop their almost inaccessible oil / mineral resources – which will then then be used to help finance a few more generations of banditry, murder and mayhem over there.

    June 19, 2010 at 6:04 am | Report abuse |
  24. dealwithit

    For anyone that thinks that they know what they're talking about when they've never been to a combat zone and thinks that we should pull out is outright pathetic. Coming from a combat veteran who has been to afghanistan i know what its like there and for all the tree hugging, drug using hippies out there you just need to keep your opinion to yourself because us soldiers are tired of it let us be and let us do our jobs we're fighting for people like you so you have the right to complain about other things not what we're doing to keep you alive and live another day on U.S. soil so deal with it...

    June 19, 2010 at 1:56 am | Report abuse |
  25. Zogelt

    Seems to me that the US should have bombed Afghanistan with kindness after 9/11- that would have completely undermined the Taliban and their propaganda about the US. BUT, first the US is controlled by right wing war profiteers which made anything other than a military response political suicide. Secondly, the unjustified war against Iraq complicated matters by making US actions appear to be based purely on oil and anti-muslim sentiment. Its too late now of course to win hearts or minds in that region. fFurthermore, the manner in which American has conducted the campaign, focusing on a strategy focusing on minimising US casualties at the expense of Afghani caasualties means that there will be an ever growing anti US resistance. There is no evidence that the US can win against these odds. The challange is to prevent Pakistan from sliding the same way as Afghainstan- but I doubt the US has a sufficiently light touch to support a anti-al quida government without that support providing them with the kiss of death.
    Basically the game is over- its just a question of when the political will is united sufficeintly to bring the troops home.

    June 19, 2010 at 1:34 am | Report abuse |
  26. Atal

    Well i wonder why some of you are so ignorant. A vast majority of the population in Afghanistan suffer from the attrocities of Al Qieda more than any other nations does....Moreover, many of these Al Qaieda members are not even Afghans....Terribel indeed is.......

    June 19, 2010 at 1:03 am | Report abuse |
  27. Karl

    One last word from me.Making an deposed leader who was kicked out of a country for corruption the leader again was a big mistake.Karzai is not a real ally.The people don't like him and don't trust him.He is said to be considering making up with the taliban.not good.

    June 18, 2010 at 11:12 pm | Report abuse |
  28. Karl

    If you want to win, take all the civillians to one side. Make sure they are all unarmed.Put them in camps for a short period of time and kill anyone who is not in the camps.

    June 18, 2010 at 11:04 pm | Report abuse |
  29. Karl

    You can't push you ideals on another race of people just because they don't agree with your policies.I don't have an answer for this,but way to many civilians are killed over there.They can't even have a wedding ceremony without getting killed.Not only that you can't win over anyone when you treat them all like dirt in their own country.I keep hearing that they are all evil people.They look upon us as the evil people.And the only freedom we give them is freeing their souls from their dead bodies.It is an unwinnable war unless you kill everone.If that happens heaven help you.God won't forgive you.

    June 18, 2010 at 11:00 pm | Report abuse |
  30. Val

    I think everyone, both who agree and disagree with the war in Afghanistan, should take some time to go to their public library and take out the book "Airpower in Small Wars: Fighting Insurgents and ists; BY: James S. Corum and Wray R. Johnson". I read it and find it very informatative about these kind of guerrilla wars we fight today. If you are unsure, try this link to read a short summary and comments about the book: http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/corair.html

    June 18, 2010 at 10:59 pm | Report abuse |
  31. Mitch

    we simply need to win over the people..its just that. clearly after 9 years you would think that we'd have learned that by now we cant do this on military power alone. yes that has to be a part of it but a lot smaller part

    we have to stop threatening these people and start being there friend..that may even mean letting them establish there own government and not forcing so much of our democracy down there throats.

    we need to learn tolerance and peace and teach it to them or we will just keep pushing them away

    plus it wouldn't hurt to shore up those mountain borders and knock out a few major instalations without the entire country knowing about it

    June 18, 2010 at 8:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Val

      I second that motion. It is fair to say guerrilla wars, historically, can only be won with any degree of certainty with support of locals. That's what our whole strategy is or should be aimed at...the loss of public support for the insurgents. Only then can victory in both Afghanistan and Iraq can be attained.

      June 18, 2010 at 10:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • Eric

        Local support for the Taliban have increased a thousand fold, that is why after nine years they have a presence in over 80% of Afghanistan. Whereas there is minimal local support for the America/Nato.. The only ones that support America/Nato are the corrupt Afghans and the drug lords!!!

        June 21, 2010 at 4:14 am | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        Sure Eric. Keep hiding behind the civilians, too.

        June 22, 2010 at 1:41 pm | Report abuse |
  32. Jabbar Mohmand

    The strategy is not working. The strategy should be based on the economic integration of Afghanistan... It should start building infrastructure, factories, etc... When people will realize the fruits of these policies, they will leave militancy.. One more fault in the US strategy is the neglecting of Pukhtoons.. The US when attacked Afghanistan, the Northern Alliance cooperated with them, and they reaped all the benefits. But the Pukhtoon, the actual mighty people, the supporters of Taliban, were neglected and killed at large. But they have always been in history. They have the Jewish-like qualities and traditions. Some of their tribes are believed to be Jewish descendants. They should be taken into trust for stability in Afghanistan.

    June 18, 2010 at 8:02 pm | Report abuse |
  33. Mel

    No of course its not working. It has never worked before and it won't work now! Didn't Obama say that his goal was to start removing troops in 2010?? Where has that promise gone? More troops in Afghanistan when barely 20 yr old men are getting slaughtered for no reason, innocent civilians are getting killed including children and families. How many times have we heard in the news that this disruption in Afghan lives have reduced the terrorist network that lives within the city and around the Middle East, not to mention around the world?? We get reports that have intelligence "assume" that there are terrorists in a village so they bomb the whole place down to "realize" that what they did bomb down were families and innocent passersby. In so far, this war has cost the US more money that it should have ever invested in it in the first place, placing us in deep fiscal crisis and has not only ruined Afghan lives, lives of the men and women in the service, and every tax paying citizen here in America .Putting more troops is a disgusting display of the government trying to flex their power, basing their assumption of victory to an already proven failed military plan.

    June 18, 2010 at 3:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • Val

      You know Mel, I want to know where you get your information from because you seem just to jabbing off without caring if you are correct or not. Perhaps you had confuse Vietnam with this war because gathering what I know about the war in Afghanistan, we don't villages where we SUSPECT ists to hide. What do you think we have ground troops for? Not to sit around and do nothing. We send in the Special Forces, Marines, etc. and they investigate the village, ask the locals if there was any trouble. If they find any insurgants, they take them out and continue their presence in the village and try to convice the locals to give up the support for the rebels. There is no careless of bystanders or civilians, we use precision in this type of warfare, not run around with our heads chopped off, pulling the trigger. Maybe you should look into this subject more carefully before saying such things because they might not be true at all.

      June 19, 2010 at 4:21 pm | Report abuse |
  34. CBCalif

    When the US finally pulls its troops out of Iraq that country will return to its past practices. There will be a military coup, perhaps a civil war between Shiites and Sunni's , the Kurds will move for independence, the Christian Iraqis will continue to be driven out, etc. Our strategy will have been a costly failure. The same will happen in Afghanistan. We will have local tactical success to the degree that the numbers of US and other NATO troops allow, but after redeployment of our troops out of Afghanistan control of the country will return to local warlords and their armies, to the Taliban and their forces, etc. A type of civil war will occur and the weak central government will be destroyed. Its soldier will return to their local areas and fight for war lords or their Taliban. This country needs to examine its strategic objectives in that country. Former Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Krulak, has made the correct assessment of the situation, but is being ignored due to the temporary ascendancy of the Counter Guerrilla (new term – Counter Insurgency) types in the military and government. Obama is correct only in one aspect, putting a time limit on our involvement – presuming that is what he did, unless he pulls a Lyndon Johnson and gets the country sucked into fighting a costly, useless long term war based on a failed strategy.

    June 18, 2010 at 2:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Val

      "There is going to be a military coup"? You are saying that as through the future is written in stone. I know looking in history that countries like Iraq and Afghanistan are prone to military uprisings, but I think it is a bit more complex than that. Those "tactical victories" we gained in those countries may have an lasting impact on the people of those regions, making a civil war bit more differcult to happen. Should these countries far back to their old practices, I believe that the roles will be reverse, and a military coup will be opposed by insurgents friendly to NATO and US.
      And responding to your earlier comments, I'm not saying we should make decisions about these wars simply based on the feelings of our members of the armed forces, we should make a decision as a whole country. What I am saying is that we should seek advice from people who are fighting these wars and are experts of those war, and make a decision knowing what they know.

      June 18, 2010 at 10:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • CBCalif

        As you noted, the essence of counter insurgency / counter guerrilla warfare is the need to win the hearts and minds of the people. A requirement that consistently appears to apply to the members of the armed forces of the nation or side this country by political necessity supports.
        The North Vietnamese had their hearts and minds in their struggle and had no need of outside moral support. The South Vietnamese on the other hand did not have their hearts and minds in the struggle. The Taliban and other Muslim extremists similarly will give all to win, but not so those soldiers and other temporarily serving the probably corrupt Karzai Administration. I don't know if he personally is corrupt, but it certainly appears he can't control the corruption that is endemic in that part of the world. When push comes to shove, absent the presence of out forces, his soldiers will not willingly lay down their lives for that government. The Taliban's soldiers will so die willingly.
        One evening, in1965 several of us Navy Officers were drinking and conversing with South Vietnamese Air Force Officers in the Officers Club at NAS Pensacola. We respectfully noted how long they had been fighting and were good naturally kidding them about the last coup in their country and the new General running their world. These were well educated men, upper class, all A-1 pilots. Among the best they had. Their boss was General Nguyen Cao Key, probably the best General in the South Vietnamese military. A real fighter. After a few drinks even officers talk too much. I asked them by name whether they liked (respected) their generals. They noted they had no respect for any, by name, as they were all corrupt except for Ky, but he was only one and could not make a difference. So I finally spoke up and asked them which Vietnamese general they did respect. To a man they answered "Giap." Giap I m sure you realize then commanded the North Vietnamese Army. We Americans all looked at one another in amazement and as we left the bar someone aptly noted, This war is over for them (the South Vietnamese), they have lost. It is only a question of when. I remain very good friends with a number of former South Vietnamese Captains and Majors and they all make the same type of statement, that their commanding generals and political leaders were corrupt and their men wouldn't give their all for them, but the North Vietnamese would give everything for their leaders.
        When you watch the Afghan or Iraqi soldiers on television look at their facial expressions, look into their eyes, notice their often timid posture and then note how different (stronger / tougher / determined) our boys look. The Afghans especially have the dejected look members of most South Vietnamese units had on their faces. By civilized standards the Taliban and their supporters are evil, , barbaric, etc., but they are not perceived as corrupt. We can't turn the hearts and minds of the people to support the Central Afghan government when the people know they are corrupt, that they will probably flee shortly after we leave, and all probably believe that US forces will begin to rapidly withdrawal on the Obama established date. Just like for the Vietnamese, that war is over for them, its only a question of timing and our withdrawal.

        June 19, 2010 at 4:44 am | Report abuse |
  35. Val

    The truth is that we can win the Afghan War. We just have to have faith in our troops, have patience, and have our minds set on victory, not defeat. You don't help anyone if take a defeatist stand on this war. Yes, war is terrible, so why make even worse by saying we should just give up? None of us have to fight this war, so stop complaining. If you care about our troops, if you really want to support the troops, tell them that you support their cause they are fighting for each day over there. This isn't other Vietnam, don't make this war one.

    June 18, 2010 at 1:45 pm | Report abuse |
  36. 1986-1988

    Please read Bob's note on MIG's pilot interview – that is the summary on the situation.
    Please no swearing – the truth is painful...

    June 18, 2010 at 1:27 pm | Report abuse |
  37. Val

    I believe we need to make a major push in psychological operations. The Afghan War is a war of minds, hearts, and souls. The locals are either in support of the terrorist or are scared to speak up against them, so we must convince them that supporting the Taliban is immoral, wrong and against their best interest. For those who are simply scared, give them courage, give them a reason to fight, and back up all the way. They are NOT impossible to get along with. They are just as human as we are, capable and incapble of what humans can and can't do. It just takes one step at a time.

    June 18, 2010 at 11:45 am | Report abuse |
    • ImNoExpert

      That falls into the category of "winning the population", and some of the more recent stories here on this blog suggest that what you're advocating is beginning to be put into practice by the Marines, who have apparently begun mingling with the locals. Look back a few pages, you may be able to find something on it.

      June 18, 2010 at 11:51 am | Report abuse |
      • GMVan

        With all due respect, what is mentioned here and in Val's post is wishful thinking. To your face Afghan people will smile, accept medical help, enjoy perhaps food distribution but let's face it... they don’t want us there to determine their lives. They are never going to have a Burger King, a McDonalds, nice schools or for what it's worth reliable water- and electricity supply to hook up a nice HD TV or a dishwasher....at least not in the near future. Perhaps in Kabul and Kandahar city but elsewhere? We live in totally different worlds! They can't afford it – or just don't buy our sort of society that we all think everybody wants..! Every Afghan person that assists NATO troops knows that when the troops leave most people are going to see them as collaborators and returning Taliban will never forgive them ( Taliban hung a 7! year old boy just this week for spying). You cannot win a war if you cannot win over the people. It's a reality that, just as in the past, was a fact in Indonesia, Algeria, Vietnam (and the Soviets had to deal with in Eastern Europe) we have to face that, and should have realized it to begin with since even the US Independence struggle came forth from the same aspirations for freedom and self-determination. You may be the most powerful country in the World but you cannot determine what people should think, believe, or like to aspire to. If you want to achieve that all you can resort to is an occupation and a dictatorship. It’s an unwinnable war. As with Israel and the Palestinians, you can only win this by accepting and talking to your (perceived) enemy. That's my opinion.

        June 18, 2010 at 4:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Live From Kandahar

      Oh no.. more Puzzle Palace workers..... And Bob what's the Good Idea Fairy have for us next....

      June 20, 2010 at 4:55 pm | Report abuse |
  38. GMVan

    You can only win if you've win the people to your cause. Many Afghans might hate the Taliban but even more so hate foreign occupation and other countrys dictating and imposing their beliefs. They fought this over thousand years: way longer than de whole existence of the USA. You cannot 'liberate' just a happy few that might, for the time being, agree with you or that just benefit from the current situation, and supress the rest. lessons learned in Vietnam: Just killing more and more people does not quite seem the solution te me.

    June 18, 2010 at 11:04 am | Report abuse |
    • ImNoExpert

      I agree, besides outright slaughtering the entire population, the effective method for beating an insurgency is to win over the people, therefore cutting off the support base for the insurgency and "sapping it" so to speak.

      I would imagine trying to win over the majority of a population that was conditioned to hate all westerners will take time, but if some of the recent stories are to be believed, we're beginning to make headway towards connecting with the people.

      The very fact that we have to be in this war at all is depressing, given how long and drawn out it is. But the fact is that we're there now and we should finish what we started. If we leave before the Afghani gov't has been stabilized, then it is likely the Taliban or another group will seize power and be emboldened by the USA's "defeat"; we could be right back there in just another few years, fighting the same war over again. It is in my opinion that no matter how much this war hurts, we need to finish it with a stable Afghanistan as the outcome.

      June 18, 2010 at 11:33 am | Report abuse |
  39. sbs

    well this what America want. do they think they can control people and world so easily? it can never happy, many kingdom has tried it. the failed. they better mind their business and deal with other nations justly. all this domination will never come true. this is not the first time, America has history of destroy and run.

    June 18, 2010 at 10:30 am | Report abuse |
  40. Eric

    • 6 Afghan soldiers killed in Nimroze
    • 10 NATO soldiers killed in Badghis
    • 4 American soldiers take losses of life and injuries in Logar
    • 2 British tanks destroyed in Helmand
    • 10 killed as two Nato vehicles destroyed in Ghazni
    • 6 Afghan soldiers killed in clash with Taliban in Kabul
    • Taliban clash British troops in Helmand
    • 9 killed, five hurt as five Nato vehicles destroyed
    • 5 Afghan soldiers killed in Kunar
    • 4 NATO soldiers killed, two wounded in Gerisk battle
    • 4 American soldiers killed in Marjah
    • 3 Afghan soldiers killed as vehicle blown up in Nangarhar
    • Two killed as Afghan army post attacked in Parwan
    • 11 American and their Afghan counterparts killed or injured in Taliban attack
    • 5 American soldiers killed as their foot patrol attacked in Wardag
    • US military base attacked in Kunar
    • 5 Afghan soldiers killed, two vehicles destroyed in Wardag
    • 8 Afghan soldiers killed in Ghazni
    • 5 killed as Afghan army vehicle hit roadside bomb in Kunduz
    • Several US soldiers killed as their two tanks destroyed in Wardag
    • Khwaja Omari district comes under attack in Ghazni
    • 6 Polish soldiers killed as their tank destroyed in Ghazni
    • Two US tanks destroyed in Helmand
    • 6 American soldiers take losses of life and injuries in Helmand
    • Three NATO tanks eliminated in Farah
    • 2 ANA soldiers surrender
    • Blast in Ghazni kills 7 Afghan soldiers

    NO US STRATEGY NOT WORKING!!! Get out now and save young American lives and taxpayers dollars!!!

    June 18, 2010 at 9:14 am | Report abuse |
    • Steve

      Lies.

      June 18, 2010 at 10:16 am | Report abuse |
      • Jerry

        True, it is all just low quality BS propaganda. For me the general rule is if it looks like its been 'copied and pasted' it generally has.

        June 19, 2010 at 12:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        Jerry... true, especially when it's copy/pasted from a pro-jihad website. This Eric guy is a fool. It amazes me that some people will actually believe that kind of propaganda.

        June 19, 2010 at 3:28 pm | Report abuse |
      • Eric

        Americans should prepare to accept hundreds of U.S. casualties each month in Afghanistan during spring offensives with enemy forces.

        The dire forecast was made by retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, an adjunct professor of international affairs at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, in a periodic assessment of political and security issues he has conducted in the war zone since 2003.

        “What I want to do is signal that this thing is going to be $5 billion to $10 billion a month and 300 to 500 killed and wounded a month by next summer. That’s what we probably should expect. And that’s light casualties,” said McCaffrey, who is also president of his own consulting firm in Arlington, Va., and has conducted numerous trips to the war zones to assess the political and military challenges at hand.
        McCaffrey, a three-time recipient of the Purple Heart medal who also earned the Distinguished Service Cross twice during combat in Vietnam, told Army Times that “people are shocked when I add the numbers up,” but what he’s discussing, he said, is not significantly higher than what is being suffered by U.S. in Afghanistan now.

        His reports are compiled with information gathered in theater and from research conducted beforehand. McCaffrey traveled to the war zone for this report as an academic from West Point at the invitation of theater commander Gen. David Petraeus, commander of Central Command, and Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the operational commander in Afghanistan, he said.

        June 21, 2010 at 6:36 am | Report abuse |
    • Val

      You complain about the losses to our military this war has so far cost us. I believe you say, "Get out now and save young American lives and taxpayers dollars!!!". But I must wonder...did you ask the soldiers who are fighting this war what they believe what they should do and what they want. Try that. Ask a Afghan vet. You might be surprised that they are not willingly to give up the fight as much as you do. Putting myself in their shoes, I would have considered a slap across the face for all the fighting and losses I suffered in this fight. But this is what I think. I have just as much idea what the soldiers on the battlefield believe as much as you do.

      June 18, 2010 at 11:52 am | Report abuse |
      • CBCalif

        Even though, based on my experiences, I understand your feelings, as a former Navy Officer who served in the Vietnam Theater multiple times, I must tell you that this nation does not, and can not, determine its military and political strategy and define its strategic objectives (military or otherwise) based on the feelings of the members of its military. Our military serves its political leaders. They define our nation's strategic objectives without consideration of the feelings of our military. I personally know how much anguish that can bring to members of the military and certainly did to many of us at different times in different situations resulting in loss of life due to the objectives and limitations on our operations set by Lydon Johnson, McNamara, et al, but that is the essence of a democracy such as ours. Better democracy than a military dictatorship.

        June 18, 2010 at 2:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Riza Haider

      stop nonsenses please.
      Do you have any source, if yes, please provide URL. don't just write useless info which have no source.

      June 18, 2010 at 11:23 pm | Report abuse |
  41. Gogo Boy

    The only strategy that's working is the rising of the death toll. Go to the fallen ones list and see the age and face of the soldiers. Mid-age is about 25. What the hell are they doing there?

    We should adopt a new strategy: Babyboomers soldier only.

    Sent soldier more than 40 year on the front. I don't think they will agree to walk in a mined land like if there were nothing, to please the afgan people. The'll be more reluctant to follow imbecile orders and so on. Maybe the war will finally get the turn it deserves.

    June 18, 2010 at 8:17 am | Report abuse |
    • Joanie H

      Good idea Gogo Boy!!! Better yet send the politicians and their sons and daughters. Bet it will end quickly or different strategy altogether. The "TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT" (which means we have rules and they don't) would be really interesting. I thought WAR was WAR not a dance or obliges. WE can't shoot at guys dressed up as women even if it is obvious. We can't bomb or shoot over here but they are firing from there....go figure. The past wars other than Vietnam was WAR people died, innocent people died. I don't want anyone to die I want our men and women home!!! Maybe the politicians need the WAR DEAD ANNUAL to be sent to them to look at while they rest in the posh beds and live in their Ivory Towers. Sorry but I have looked at those faces, buried a young friend and my sons have been or are in the military. One is over there now.

      June 18, 2010 at 1:48 pm | Report abuse |
  42. In Kabul

    The strategy is working, but it will take time. What we have to change is the perception that we are invaders. We have to convince the Afghans and the rest of the World that we will leave when the government of Afghanistan is able to govern itself and the nation.

    My headquarters is training the Afghan Army and Police. Read more at ( http://www.ntm-a.com )

    June 18, 2010 at 4:47 am | Report abuse |
    • A.khaliq

      And your's is also working. lets see the strategy of the creater of all workers and all workings,and lets see how do civilizations fall?

      June 18, 2010 at 5:44 am | Report abuse |
    • Gary Johndro

      If you're right,then we're on our way to building the glorious American Anglo-French Empire but if not,Islam will prevail and that will be a grave blow to Obama and all the other right-wing thugs in Washington!

      June 18, 2010 at 6:58 am | Report abuse |
      • ImNoExpert

        >Obama
        >right-wing thug
        >nonsense about some warmongering conspiracy

        ....you trolling me, bro?

        June 18, 2010 at 11:16 am | Report abuse |
      • Val

        I'm pretty certain sure our doing in Afghanistan has nothing to do with us building a "glorious American Anglo-French Empire" nor destory Islam. That's a terrible idea.

        June 18, 2010 at 9:40 pm | Report abuse |
  43. Daur

    @ BOB well bobby Alexander was not able to fight with the pashtun tribes no one ruled on Pashtuns =Afghans he might have controlled the other ethnic groups but not the pashtuns . Alexander wrote a letter to his mother and told her that mother i am in a place where every man is Alexander.

    June 18, 2010 at 3:41 am | Report abuse |
    • Larry Valecia, Calif.

      If Alexander won... Why are we fighting them now???

      June 21, 2010 at 3:20 pm | Report abuse |
  44. ChairmanMao

    Try another "Shock and Awe". LOL

    June 18, 2010 at 12:42 am | Report abuse |
  45. ShareFacts

    Is the U.S. strategy working?

    Noting will work in Afghanistan. Taliban will keep on fighting till every single International forces are out of Afghanistan. They are fighting on ideology and no one can beat ideology.
    Ideology being they are occupied and have to get rid of occupation forces. Till then fight will keep going.

    I think its time we need to mind our own business and bring troops home.

    June 17, 2010 at 10:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • A.khaliq

      Afghanistan=vietnam and USA(UNO)=? answer is:USSR

      June 18, 2010 at 6:07 am | Report abuse |
    • ImNoExpert

      @ ShareFacts

      >think its time we need to mind our own business

      we were doing that, and then two planes killed 3,000 people in Manhattan.

      Anyway, I really don't think pulling out is a good idea if we haven't secured the area. If we just leave now while the gov't isn't stable, the chances of it falling back into the hands of an oppressive regime will be very high, and we'll just be back here fighting the same war again in a decade or so, with the Taliban and other anti-US groups/states emboldened by our defeat. Everything about this war sucks and I wish we didn't have to go in there to begin with, but unfortunately, we're there now, and I don't think the problem will just go away because we choose to ignore it. We have to finish what we started, no matter how painful it is, since the potential alternative is worse.

      June 18, 2010 at 10:42 am | Report abuse |
      • Kitten

        The US never quietly stayed home to be wakened by 911. Its foot prints are all over the place. Every dominant military power took advantage of its strength to plunder its neighbour (oil etc.) and stopped only when the cost of military adventures bankrupted them. 911 is a consequence of the ME policy especially the blind support of Israel in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians since 1947. Get out of the ME, stop interfering with other people business and peace will return. For instance, in 1953, Mossdegh was democratically elected president of iran. When he nationalized the oil fields of BP (the same BP in gulf oil leak), BP asked the CIA to kill Mossadegh and install the Shah who promptly returned the oil to BP. And you are surprised of the Iranian politics? Same everywhere. Afghanistan will be the new Vietnam. Get out now and cut the losses.

        June 23, 2010 at 7:47 am | Report abuse |
    • Larry Valecia, Calif.

      If they keep losing their Leaders the way they are.... Sooner are later we will win!!!

      June 21, 2010 at 3:19 pm | Report abuse |
  46. ShareFacts

    Is the U.S. strategy working? Nope it failed badly. Marja did not work like we wanted and now we have no strategy, since we know if we try the same in Kandahar it will fail to. Taliban now control 80% of Afghanistan. They will not give up, they are winning..

    No matter we like it OR not, If we want to end this conflict in Afghanistan, we have to get help from Pakistan, so they can force Afghan Taliban to get on with negotiations with USA.

    We have already tried alone for 9 years alone and its not working..

    We will have to accept the fact that Pakistan Army / ISI will never let India get into any role in Afghanistan..because they do not want to get encircled by india from both sides..

    As soon as we realize above, we can we out of this mess in Afghanistan..

    June 17, 2010 at 10:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Larry Valecia, Calif.

      That is your opinion!!! As long as they get the Afghanistan working more and more of the fighting themselves and get the Enemy a smaller place to fight we are winning!!!

      June 21, 2010 at 3:17 pm | Report abuse |
  47. JKF

    No-– the strategy is not working, because it violates every principle of warfare- the strategy is not designed to work!Afghanistan and its allies have come very short and are in fact engaged in a war of attrition; much the same as the USSR did. The war can not be just won in Afghanistan, it starts with the Pres taking his rethoric and translating it into actions- either war or withdraw..... WAR- Start by cutting all the lines of communications that the terrorist use= stop the Afghan/Pakistan traffic – control the border and so on.. Stop telling the terrorist what will be your next move- in the past announcing operations and their objectives was a serious crime.... etc, etc, etc Every aspect of the current operational direction, points to attrition, more losses of valiant soldiers with absolutely no prospects of gaining the upper hand in this conflict. It all boils down to a lack of serious review and committment to destroy the terrorists, their suppliers, their trainers and their supporters- frankly at the current rate of loss of stability, in Afghanistan, the forced withdrawl is not far away! The high leadership needs to stop pretending that they are out to destroy the enemy by sacrificing young american and other young NATO lives. Wars of attrition are not sustainable, nor should they be sustained!

    June 17, 2010 at 8:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Steve

      I generally agree. The war is not being fought the way it should be. This is an operation where our soldiers will walk into the front portion of a compound, asking smiling Afghans if they need any provisions... while their relatives and friends plant IED's in the back yard. We have drones that can monitor the hot spots from the skies... so WHY NOT get them over there to bomb the ones who are planting the IED's? I'm sure it happens sometimes, but not nearly enough. Once the Taliban sees that anyone reaching into the ground to put some type of container in gets blown to bits... you'll see the number of IED's diminish.

      The strategy isn't working because we're violating basic fundamental principles of warfare. You DON'T announce what you're going to do next so that the enemy can hear. I understand that limiting civilian casualties is important, but maybe the civilians should start giving up the Taliban and grow a pair to actually end this war. What do any of you think is honestly going to happen if NATO pulls out in haste? You think there will be peace and harmony in Afghanistan? HA... try 30 more years of bloodshed.

      This is Afghanistan's 1 opportunity to dig themselves out of the "worst place in the world" status.

      June 17, 2010 at 10:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • CBCalif

      JKF is correct. Historically, Counter Guerrilla War or Counter Insurgency has succeeded only when the military used brute force on those employing a guerrilla warfare style strategy by destroying their towns, destroying their food supplies, killing or enslaving their families – civilian populations, and by occupying / repopulating the contested land with one's own population as the US or Spanish did when combating the the native Indian populations of the Americas and Alexander the Great did in Afghanistan (Bactria). We succeeded in the Philippines against an insurgency by employing brute force (civilization by "Krags"), but later left. We need to fight wars on our terms, relying on our strengths not on the enemy's terms as we are doing in Afghanistan. As a former Vietnam era Navy Officer I have never been a supporter of Counter Insurgency Warfare, and neither are most former Marine and Army Officers that I know. Our military success comes from being able to continually apply massive explosive power on the enemy, not trying to convince them we are their friends. We and they are not friends and I also believe that will not succeed. As previously, the influence of the failed Counter Guerrilla types will fall from ascendancy in the US military and be replaced by conventional warfare experts and we will return to employment of common sense military doctrines.

      June 18, 2010 at 1:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • Val

        Counterpoint. Historically, guerrilla warfare had NOT been won by the use of military force. In the kind of warfare we are currently engaged in Afghanistan can not be surpressed by brute tactics...as the Russians used in Afghanistan before us. As a matter of fact, military operations are secondary in guerrilla warfare. The primary goal is politcal, moral, and humanitarian operations to win the hearts and minds of local citizens. I think you should read "Airpower in Small Wars: Fighting Insurgents and Terrorists
        James S. Corum and Wray R. Johnson". It is enlightening.

        June 18, 2010 at 3:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Larry Valecia, Calif.

      As long as they keep moving them out of the territories!!! They are winning... Sooner are later they will have know where to hide!!!

      June 21, 2010 at 3:15 pm | Report abuse |
  48. Daniel-2

    Riza Haider,
    Why don't you and Bob get a room?

    June 17, 2010 at 6:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • Onesmallvoice

      Very funny,Daniel.But in the light of a very unfunny and oscene war,we can all use a laugh out of life.But do you have to upset all these right-wing fools who like this war???

      June 17, 2010 at 7:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • Val

        I sure hope nobody likes war. I sure don't. War is a terrible enterprise. It cost lives, it cost money, and, if we lose it, it cost us a good amount of pride and respect. Wars should only be fought when it is absolutely necessary and for no other reason.

        June 18, 2010 at 9:36 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cyrus Howell

        Was that fools or TOOLS?

        June 19, 2010 at 11:17 am | Report abuse |
  49. Bob

    Reporters once interviewed a Russian MIG pilot, they asked him how to defeat those people. His reply was," Napalm the valleys ans tactical nuke the mountain tops." The sad thing is, he's right. Historically there has only been one army to conquer that region of the world. It was not the British for they had sent a 10,000 strong force to rule Afghanistan, The afghani's left one alive to return to britain. The only army to ever defeat those people was alexander the great. You know how he did it? Killed every last one of them. History should repeat itself. because this war will never end if we keep dancing around.

    June 17, 2010 at 2:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Onesmallvoice

      Wouldn't that make NATO look awfully bad if they did what you just advocated here?

      June 17, 2010 at 3:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Riza Haider

      @Bob, Go fffuucckk yourself !
      How about if Afghans come to UK and kill you all one by one to solve all interfering between countries ?
      STFU !!!

      June 17, 2010 at 5:36 pm | Report abuse |
      • Jaybob

        They would if you let them. I agree with Bob.

        If you want to end the fighting there, reduce each and every mountain to a pile of smoldering rubble.

        But America is better than that. We don't do that to people, we kill the bad guys and go home. That's the way it is supposed to work.

        The truth is, we should have charged in and annihilated each and every last trace of Taliban in Afghanistan and spat on their graves before we even bothered with Iraq. Afghanistan should have been a free nation by now, had we done what we were supposed to do.

        June 18, 2010 at 12:11 am | Report abuse |
    • A.khaliq

      Only the brave holy jewish soldiers can defeat these ignorant,illitrate,uncivilized and sourceless living things?

      June 18, 2010 at 5:58 am | Report abuse |
      • EISH5

        Israel ambushes unarmed research vessels very well. Remember their cowardly attack of the USS Liberty? Of course you don't.

        June 18, 2010 at 9:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • Onesmallvoice

        The Drones hovering overhead will take care of those obscene backward taliban terrorists.

        June 19, 2010 at 9:15 am | Report abuse |
    • ImNoExpert

      @Bob:
      >Historically there has only been one army to conquer that region of the world.

      Selucid Empire had it for 25 years after Alexander the Great
      Mauryan Empire had it for ~120 years after that.
      It changed hands a lot until the first century AD.
      In the 1st Century, the Kushans had it until the 3rd century
      Changed hands alot between Persians and others and was Islamisized during this time.
      In the 1200's, the Mongols under Ghengis Khan took it over, and it was later taken again by Timur when he established his dynasty.
      In 1500's, the Mughal Empire ruled it until about the 1700's or so.

      And you can wikipedia the rest until the last two centuries or so when they became the "Empire's graveyard" that everyone thinks they always seemed to be.

      June 18, 2010 at 10:32 am | Report abuse |
    • Val

      I don't believe that's the solution to the war...far from it. The world will see that as an act of ruthless violence and will want quick action against us. That path will only ensure more destruction and death than what is going on in Afghanistan.

      June 18, 2010 at 11:35 am | Report abuse |
    • Joanie H

      Bob is right. But who really wants to do that, right? There is a constant stream of "terriorist, extremest" being cultivated generation after generation...to end it you have to kill them all. I think we need to leave their country to them and protect our country over here. WE are not the global police (or are we) and we do not have to right to force ourselves on other countries. I think the death toll of casualities has exceeded the 911 and I think the death toll of the "enemy" has exceeded the death toll of 911 so end it already!!!

      June 18, 2010 at 12:23 pm | Report abuse |
      • moshpit

        Your wishful thinking sounds wonderful, but is woefully forgetful that 9/11 happened here on US soil, not over there. The reason the Nazis never made it to American shores in force was a proactive approach to deal with the threat. Your way led to the destruction of the WTC. Non-interference is an ignorant policy that comes back and bites you every time. Had we not abandoned Afghanistan after the Soviet invasion was over, 9/11 would have never happened.

        June 20, 2010 at 6:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Darrel

      Naaaa, You need to study a little harder, Alexander was turned back eventually as well. I think you will find Genghis Khan is the only one that truly left a gene pool by annihilation in Afghanistan and religion is the only conqueror . All national armies failed and Timur (a relative of Genghis) wiped Christianity and other religions out by annihilation up to the baltic states.

      During the 7th century, Arabs brought the religion of Islam to the western area of Afghanistan and began spreading eastward. Although some accepted the new religion along the way, others refused to abandon their old faiths. Prior to the introduction of Islam, the area of Afghanistan was inhabited by people of various religious background, which included Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, Shamanists, Jews, and others. The Kabul Shahis began losing control of their territories to the Muslim Arabs, and their Kabul capital was conquered by the Saffarids in 879. The Samanids extended their influence to Khorasan and south into parts of the Afghan tribal areas in the 9th century, and by the late-10th century the Ghaznavids had made all of the remaining non-Muslim territories convert to Islam, with the exception of the Kafiristan region. Afghanistan at that point became the center of many important empires such as the Saffarids of Zaranj, Samanids of Balkh,[61][62] Ghaznavids of Ghazni, Ghurids of Ghor, and Timurids of Herat.

      The region was overrun in 1219 by Genghis Khan and his Mongol army, who devastated much of the land. For example, his troops are said to have annihilated the ancient Khorasan cities of Herat and Balkh.[63] The destruction caused by the Mongols depopulated major cities and caused much of the locals to revert to an agrarian rural society. Their rule continued with the Ilkhanate, and was extended further following the invasion of Timur (Timur Lang) who established the Timurid dynasty.[65] The periods of the Ghaznavids,[66] Ghurids, and Timurids are considered some of the most brilliant eras of Afghanistan's history because they produced fine Islamic architectural monuments[44] as well as numerous scientific and literature works.

      In 1504, Babur, a descendant of both Timur and Genghis Khan, established the Mughal Empire with its initial capital in Kabul. By the early 1700s, the region was controlled by several ruling groups: Uzbeks to the north, Safavids to the west and the remaining larger area by the Mughals or self-ruled by local Afghan tribes.

      The tribal border region of Pakistan were all part of Afghanistan that the English kept and gave to Pakistan when they divided the country. This is why Pakistan doesn't want a strong Afghanistan, they may ask for it back

      June 18, 2010 at 8:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cyrus Howell

      No one ever got the Serbs out of the mountains in 2,000 years.

      June 19, 2010 at 11:14 am | Report abuse |
    • Larry Valecia, Calif.

      The way we are doing is better by killing their leaders!!!

      June 21, 2010 at 3:13 pm | Report abuse |
  50. Onesmallvoice

    Hopefully not.The less successful NATO is,the sooner we can get out of there as we are morally obligated to do the same as we did in Vietnam.

    June 17, 2010 at 1:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Val

      Judging by your comments, it seems like you don't want America and NATO to responsible about its war in Afghanistan. That is a disasterous approch to this situration. Your approch is immoral, irresponsible, and sadistic.

      June 18, 2010 at 11:31 am | Report abuse |
    • Joanie H

      I would think by now no one who have to ask the question whether "it" is working in Afghanistan. Of course it isn't and of course it won't and it never was or will. But our young men and women keep dying and the war keeps going on and the rediculous question of "whether it is working..." keeps popping up. Americans are so tired if it all in so many ways. We all fear it will never end. I bet if Obama wants to be re-elected he might want to seek out the END to "it". PLEASE can someone END it?

      June 18, 2010 at 12:18 pm | Report abuse |
      • Onesmallvoice

        Yes,Joanie H,he can end it and may want to do so,but it's quite dubous that the right-wing fanatics will stand for that.And as the Tea Partiers have their right-wing candidates elected to office this fall,that will become much more difficult.

        June 18, 2010 at 2:24 pm | Report abuse |
      • The Taliban have to fight during the hot summer months

        This is of course peak fighting season. Fighting in the winter is near impossible for the Taliban, the mountains are frozen, it's impossibel to fight in the winter unless you have hi-tech gear like the USA Marines. So, yes, fighting will grow intense in hot months, and then go away in winter. It's all routine.

        June 19, 2010 at 11:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • Josian

        what "The Taliban have to fight during the hot summer months" said is right i was in Iraq and even wit all the winter gear is was cold and nobody wants to go out... summer will be hell down range its always like that.

        June 20, 2010 at 8:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • repsycler

        God will, in his own time!!!!!

        June 22, 2010 at 7:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • Nikki

      Yes, fighting increases in the summer months and the fact that it is routine is the exact problem. At this point we should be putting a dent in the routine, instead we have a major initiatives that move Taliban from one location to another and then we move them from that location to yet another, but they never really go anywhere. It's a futile fight, with no end in site because the US doesnt want to be the ones to walk away. Instead we will continue to to move in the same circle over and over. The men are tired and moral and motivation is down. My husband is currenlty in Afghanistan and will be home in less than 2 weeks, and the sad part is they are performing mission up until the day they get on a plan to fly home to there family...they are being run ragged to the bitter end and then sent back out 12 months later...only to live the same exact experience with no improvements from the last time they were deployed. There are times when pride can be ur worst enemy...this is one of them...

      June 20, 2010 at 1:48 pm | Report abuse |
      • Sam

        It is sad. I hope all this ends soon.

        June 23, 2010 at 2:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • whybs on twitter

      All we want is Osama's head served on a plate!🙂

      'til then, we'll sock it to you, Taliban & Al Qaeda!

      June 21, 2010 at 8:17 am | Report abuse |
      • Sam

        That will give us alot of ego boost rite. But at what cost? Our economy is going down the drain. We have huge loans on our heads and yet we are spending billioins each year for last 10 years to find that head of OBL. How many men have lost their lives already to find that one head? 1000+

        Why not use the same money spend in Afghanistan and Iraq to build infrastructure in USA which is in a bad shape

        June 23, 2010 at 2:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • DP

      I don't understand how people can just expect us to be capable to up and leave Afghanistan. If we do, the Taliban will take back over. Al-Qaeda would move back in, using Afghanistan as a staging area for global terrorism again and after the next 9/11 style attack we would have to go back over there and start from square one. This war didn't start over politics, as was the case in Vietnam, it started becuase we asked the Taliban to give us Osama, and they declined several times. The defended and actively protected Osama Bin Laden.

      June 21, 2010 at 9:47 am | Report abuse |
      • Z

        I did see in CNN news that w. Bush told Pakistan. There will be war in Afghanistan. And that was before 9/11.

        June 21, 2010 at 11:34 am | Report abuse |
      • Slidereader

        Agree with you. The notion that President Obama intended a short stay is a canard; he never contradicted his predecessor on this one and assuredly never promised a swift victory. Likely, increased military activity will be required. Unlike Vietnam, this is not a jungle war. It can be won.

        June 21, 2010 at 6:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • Larry Valecia, Calif.

      Your wrong there... The sooner we start winning the sooner it will be over!!! Because that would mean that the Afghanistan's can take care of themselves!!!

      June 21, 2010 at 3:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • Larry Valecia, Calif.

        Z: If Bush would have kept the troops there instead of starting the Iraq war... It would have been finished a long time ago!!!

        June 21, 2010 at 3:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Larry Valecia, Calif.

      UN Watch Rips UN Human Rights Council for
      "Year of Inaction & Double Standards"

      Click Here to Watch Video

      As the UN Human Rights Council completed its 4th year, delegates heard testimony from UN Watch on the past 12 months of council reactions to violations worldwide.

      The Past Year: Inaction and Double Standards
      UN Human Rights Council, 14th Session,
      Delivered by Executive Director Hillel Neuer, 15 June 2010

      Mr. President, in Article 1 of the Vienna Declaration, the States assembled here committed to protect all human rights. Is the Council living up to this obligation? Focusing thematically on the right to life, let us consider one example from each of the past 12 months:

      • June 2009—Tehran. Hundreds of thousands gather peacefully to protest a questionable election. The government responds with brutality. Dozens are killed, hundreds injured, thousands arrested.
      • July—China. Troops fire on Uighur protesters; 200 killed, 1700 injured.
      • August—Russia. Two aid workers killed in Chechnya, government complicity suspected.
      • September—Yemen. Government warplanes bomb a refugee camp, killing 80.

      This Council’s response? Silence.

      • October—Iraq. A terrorist attacks a mosque, killing the imam and 14 others.
      • November—The Phillipines. Fifty-seven opposition activists massacred.
      • December—Iran. Renewed protests meet with bullets, beatings and arrests; 10 killed.
      • January—Pakistan. One hundred and eighty-two civilians killed in 42 attacks.

      This Council’s response? Silence.

      • February—Afghanistan. A Taliban attack kills 18, injuring 32, including doctors.
      • March—Nigeria. 500 Christians slaughtered in religious killings.
      • April—Kyrgyzstan. Troops fire on demonstrators; 84 killed.
      • Finally, May. Libya executes 18 foreigners, without due process.

      Mr. President, faced with these and other gross violations of the Vienna Declaration, what was this council’s standard response? Silence. No resolutions; no urgent sessions; no investigations. Nothing.

      Yet two weeks ago, when Israel defended itself against violent Jihadists on the so-called humanitarian flotilla, we witnessed another standard—a double standard.

      Suddenly the council sprang into action, with an urgent debate, a resolution condemning Israel, and yet another investigation where the guilty verdict was declared in advance.

      Meanwhile, in this session, not a single resolution has been adopted for 191 other countries.

      Mr. President, is the right to life, as guaranteed under the Vienna Declaration, being protected?

      No—on the contrary. And millions of victims are paying the price.

      Thank you, Mr. President.

      Click H

      June 21, 2010 at 5:41 pm | Report abuse |