October 3rd, 2011
04:35 PM ET

The Afghan war 10 years later: A look at the numbers

During the past 10 years of war in Afghanistan, thousands of  troops have died and thousands more have been wounded.

A look at the statistics from the war reveals some broad and basic trends: The casualties have increased steadily every year, with a jump in the past three years of the war, a sizable number of the troops who have died are relatively young and many of the casualties have occurred in the southern part of Afghanistan.

For an in-depth look at U.S. and coalition casualties in Afghanistan, visit CNN's Home & Away visualization

Here are some of the statistics from the Afghan war:

- More than 2,700 troops from the United States and its coalition partners have died during the 10 years of war in Afghanistan, according to a CNN count.

- Troops from at least 26 countries have died in action in Afghanistan, according to a CNN count.

- Of that total, at least 1,780 are U.S. servicemen and women, according to a CNN count.

- Britain has the second-highest number of fatalities with 382 killed. Canada is third with at least 157 killed.

- At least 41 servicewomen have died in Afghanistan, according to a CNN count. Of that total, 31 are U.S. servicewomen.

- More than 14,000 U.S. troops have been wounded in action, according to the Pentagon.

- Since the conflict began, the number of casualties has risen by the year, with a significant jump from 2008 to 2009.  At least 296 coalition troops died in 2008. It nearly doubled in 2009 when 517 coalition troops were killed.

- The year with the highest number of fatalities thus far has been 2010, when 711 troops died.

- The worst month for fatalities was June 2010, when 103 troops died in action, according to a CNN count.

- Many of the troops killed in Afghanistan are between the ages of 19 and 29, according to a CNN analysis of the data. More 21-year-olds – 244 thus far - have died than any other age.

- Roadside bombs have killed at least 1,143 troops in Afghanistan, according to a CNN count. It is  the leading cause of fatalities. Small-arms fire has killed at least 365 troops and at least 232 troops have been killed in helicopter crashes.

- The southern provinces of Helmand and Kandahar, home to some of the fiercest opposition to the presence of U.S. and coalition forces and the birthplace of the Taliban, have the highest casualty rates per province. Most of the deaths have occurred in those southern provinces and the mountainous eastern provinces that border Pakistan.

soundoff (301 Responses)
  1. Lord Mrdal By


    October 14, 2011 at 2:36 am | Report abuse |
  2. alena

    jimmy nobody said this was a game now i admire what are nation does for us im just writing my friend to get him offline

    October 7, 2011 at 1:45 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Jake

    What is war good for?
    Absolutely nothing!

    War, It ain't nothing but a heart-breaker
    War, Got one friend, thats the undertaker
    War has shattered many young men's dreams
    Made him disabled, bitter and mean
    Life is but too surely precious, to spend fighting wars each day
    War can't give life, it can only take it away!

    October 5, 2011 at 8:41 am | Report abuse |
  4. Hasan

    The way this article is being written, It seems the American Servicemen & Women are a different race. And they are above all the ordinary humans that have died in this mindless war. How many civilians have died, in respect to that amount I would say the army casualty is like a drop of water in a sea. If you Americans want to have a safer life by eliminating terrorists, You should have done it through your pet dog CIA. And buying the oil from Iraq would have been a better option rather than the war. How do you so called civilized Americans sip your coffee sitting at a cozy chair and talk about the war, when millions & millions of children and women are dying and suffering each and every moment of their lives. I ask you civilized peoples?

    October 5, 2011 at 6:58 am | Report abuse |
  5. Dilshad Khawaja

    As an American citizen, I am proud of our military might fighting for our safety in the in Afghanistan, and Iraq. Report of this nature really puts every thing in perspective. I thought the report should also mention about the sacrifices that military and the ordinary people in those countries. They are paying huge price for the freedom they hope to get one day. No one can predict that future even after 10 years.

    October 5, 2011 at 12:08 am | Report abuse |
    • Faisal

      Another show of blind vision. .

      It's time for all of us as Americans to come out of fools' paradise and realize where the country and especially the economy is heading, due to these immoral and unjustified wars. Thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have died in these two wars. These wars are creating more enemies for US than friends and eventually making us less safe than we were ten years ago.

      For Afghans fighting a war against foreign invaders has become the way of life but for Americans it's $300 millions per day. Better open our eyes now before it's too late.

      October 5, 2011 at 1:13 am | Report abuse |
      • SOR2011

        How can we have an easy lifestyle without taking other countries' wealth?

        October 5, 2011 at 3:43 am | Report abuse |
      • Dale

        Thanks to military might and knowhow the Pakistani's and Afghani's have emerged from the stone age ever so slightly. Through hands on example the people have learned that technology is a good thing and the wonton refusal to teach and foster economic and agricultural growth has stunted the tribal people of these countries. This wrong will take a huge effort to right.
        Yes there are a lot of victims but the US Military does not victimized the innocent. The men who shall be held responsible as history will dictate are Asif Ali Zardari and Hamid Karzai. You can't keep your country literally in the dark, hide known terrorists and just generally "say one thing and do nothing" and expect to have the world to sit by and do nothing right along with you.
        Keeping your population uneducated and unprotected is not Age Old Tradition it's dangerously stupid. Health and wisdom is a valuable commodity they will never have because they have a skewed definition of what a civilization actually is.

        October 5, 2011 at 2:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • babu123

        why so many americans are so stupid can not see that they not going to win this war.naver get out now before anther poor boy (American) loose his life.

        October 6, 2011 at 7:25 am | Report abuse |
    • Jesus

      To me it ain't for your safety or any one else's In America, but a bad and selfish act of power misuse. Afganistan locates thousands of miles from America, but only hundreds of miles from sreal. They had never been a treat to you in the first place but to the jews. And all those young misused american soldiers died for the Jews while it was made to look like they did it for you. You have high supply of ignorance.

      October 5, 2011 at 3:32 am | Report abuse |
  6. Blogson

    Send Obama and Panetta to the fighting "lines" in Afghanistan and the war would be finished immediately.

    October 4, 2011 at 11:46 pm | Report abuse |
  7. eddie russo

    They mentioned all of the casualties that America, Canada, and Europe made for the sake of corps, and banks...dont forget war is business...But poor afghans are the major loosers here, first US used them to defeat the USSR, now the US using them again for their benefits,, that's all nothing else. PLEAE CNN WHY DONT YOU MENTION HOW MANY POOR AFGHANS LOST THEIR LIFES.

    October 4, 2011 at 9:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      The Iraqis are losing pretty big too and they are still dying just because they are not front page news does not mean the dying and killing and our presence there is not a continual thing.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:48 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Jared

    What makes a hero a hero is the action and intention behind the act committed that deemed him or her a hero. We are getting confused about the difference between arguments though. One argument is against the US government as a whole and another argument that is separate but unfortunately combined when talking about military use in governmental tactics is the argument about loyalty and honor to our fallen soldiers. The military is supposed to make what they are fighting for look like honor and glory. That is the sole point in being able to lead armies and control territory. If that sense of passion was not there then how could anyone fight for anything or anyone? The unbearable truth that will eventually come out and unfortunately be accepted is that we have no business doing what we, as the country as a whole, are doing. As horrible as it may seem, the truth is we should not be continuing a fight that you can't even really fight against. Congress has many underlying reasons behind this war and much of it comes to the effect of greed, money, and power. Oil is one very small example of a cause of wanting some sort of ally with these countries we have successfully took over and are slowly handing back. As for the war itself against terrorism, how can we win a war against a belief? We are not fighting a country, we are fighting a stance and a cause. We cannot simply go out and squash the cause with power and force, not matter how much we would like too. Cover up the mess and make anyone who raises questions and concerns look like they are attacking the fallen soldiers and being dishonorable and unpatriotic are useful tactics that our government has done before and is doing now and probably will do again in the future. We need to stop fighting among ourselves and come together in some sort of agreement and respect different beliefs and then maybe we can do something about this whole mess.

    October 4, 2011 at 9:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10


      October 4, 2011 at 9:50 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Rooster

    I have served almost 20 years in the Marines and have served serveral deployments and have sacrificed in many other ways throughout the years (just like my peers) and I have to say that we do not consider ourselves heros. We volunteered to serve because we, individually, think it is the right thing to do for our own personal reasons. If we are ordered to combat, then we do so not because we want to but because we know it is part of our job. We are not war mongers but alpha males. As the sayings goes "Mess with the best, die like the rest" or "Mess with the Bull and you get the Horns".

    October 4, 2011 at 9:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      My family is military and has been since WWII-to be honest some of the military has alpha males but a lot of beta and even delta males and females are in there too–you know the ones who eventually wash out or go AWOL or end up raping and killing civilians? True alphas are disciplined and never, ever veer from or undermine the objective–there is a difference between an alpha (who is a leader and not just strong) and so much meat. I know some alpha's in the military but there are a lot of others and in all of that, when the bullets start flying–even alphas can be taken down by friendly fire or in an chinook accident. Here's the thing–whatever you have to do –do it–but your place is not the only place wars are fought or decided–civilians have a job too and one of them is when to pull mad and hungry leaders back who think NOTHING of sending humans to die for crazy objectives as long as it is not them or theirs.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:55 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Philip L

    Despite liberal cries to the contrary those doing the most dying are white kids from middle class families.

    October 4, 2011 at 9:18 pm | Report abuse |
  11. Terry

    Who cares? Our military assures us that we will be in Afghanistan fighting out political war there way past 2014. There will be an unlimited number of fresh casualties to whine over and feel sad about for another decade or two minimum. Hey if our Generals work it right, we can be there for another 60-70 years easy-just like Korea which is 100% capable of defending itself, but where Uncle Sucker is happy to keep poring those tens of billions down the rat hole year after year after year building their schools, and roads, and bridges while not building or rebuilding ourr own friggin infrastructure!!!!!! Nothing like a perpetual stte of war to feed the profit mania of our military industrial complex, right?!?!

    October 4, 2011 at 8:55 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Erik

    I would like to thank CNN for using the word 'casualties' instead of 'heroes'. We should actually be using the word 'victims' to describe the war dead. If you control the language, you control the argument. Using the word 'hero' for the dead is attaching a positive connotation to something that is wrong - the war. Actually, it's not even a war. It's an occupation. We haven't declared war since WWII. Just like Vietman, Afghanistan will be another long, dark story in America's history. When you occupy a country for over 10 years now, and we are no safer than we are before, there are very few heroes here. Only dead victims from a failed war from a failing government.

    October 4, 2011 at 7:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • RonnieReagan

      While one might agree with you on Iraq, as far as Afghanistan goes, you betray the memories of over 3000 of your countrymen that died on 9/11 and the thousands more that have been killed or injured to ensure our enemy does not return to American soil. You don't deserve the freedoms they preserve for you to enjoy back here at home. Coward.

      October 4, 2011 at 8:06 pm | Report abuse |
      • Erik

        Are you implying that the 3000 people who died on 9/11 were heroes? That's stupid - they were victims. All I am saying is that using the word 'hero' attaches a positive spin on something that may or may not be worth dying for. If you control the language, you control the argument. if you control the argument, you can control/affect an outcome. If we all just started using the word 'victim' to describe the war dead then at least we can start the process rolling by attaching the appropriate negative connotation to this war.

        October 4, 2011 at 8:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        heros save people–most of the people who died in the towers and elsewhere were not heroes they were victims and the people sent to two wars to fight countries not even involved in the attacks were soldiers or if we are less charitable–they were pawns–but they were paid pawns and fighting pawns and I think that is the same as soldiers.

        October 4, 2011 at 8:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scott

      They are heroes! Almost 6 million more Afghan children go to school now than before the war. Education means peace.

      October 4, 2011 at 8:26 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Education means peace? are you on drugs? Seems to me–bombs mean death–tell us how many more Iraqi and Afghani children are DEAD due to us destablizing both countries and then I will tell you how they who died will NEVER get an education–what makes you think they will be taught anything to do with peace or that will involve liking or accepting us?

        October 4, 2011 at 8:31 pm | Report abuse |
      • PeaceWisher

        Education means PEACE? Then Bush, Obama and rest of Americans must be eduacted well

        October 5, 2011 at 1:38 am | Report abuse |
    • Bert

      Hey Erik, I guess you dont consider the 1780 plus dead and the many more that are wounded heroes. And you write this while sleeping under the blanket of security that is provided by our armed forces. I guess you've never served in the military because there are those of us that serve that are against the war. But we do so anyway because we feel it is our duty and obligation to give something back to the nation that allows us to live free.

      October 4, 2011 at 8:39 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Bert–I know that there are soldiers serving honorably even though they personally are against this war–you do what you have to–but when people protest what our government is doing it is not against the soldiers–it is against the people who would use the soldiers to do dishonorable things in the name of war and hide behind "freedom" or doing it for democracy"

        In 2007 when Mubarak began to kill the voters who were trying to vote in the opposition, our State Dept was asked why we did not say anything since he was murdering his own people (they were voting for the Muslim Brotherhood) and this is what our State Dept said " Better a dictator in power who is sympathetic to the United States than a democracy that is not" So you see–we are not for freedom or democracy those are our catch words to gloss over our true position–we are for what ever status quo or means that further our interest even if it means putting a despotic Shah of Iran who butchered his own people in power, or arming and keeping people like Marcos in power or Noriega or Saddam or arming the Taliban–we DON"T CARE what they do to their own people–as long as we get what we want–we only bring out the "noble cause " position when we have to show our hand and must act then we say it is for Democracy even if that is the furthest thing we have in mind.



        October 4, 2011 at 8:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Victor

      This is not war, this is a battle for U.S. and the World future.
      They will always considered as Hero because they are Heroes.
      They fight for World balance. They fight for Afghan freedom.
      They fight for someone else life and freedom.
      They fight for God.

      They are Heroes.

      October 4, 2011 at 8:58 pm | Report abuse |
      • George Patton

        Come on Victor, you know better than that. They're fighting for the politicians in Washington and big U.S. Corporate interedts to exploit Afghanista's resources and definately not for God any more than the Russian were!!! Nobody can be so naive as to post what you did above!!!

        October 5, 2011 at 2:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • Dale

        I would liek to see Queenbee get an education in a Muslim country, that's a very tough task.

        October 5, 2011 at 3:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ryan

      Queenbee.... Exactly what oil are we fighting for in Afghanistan...?

      October 4, 2011 at 9:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • Jared

        This one is especially interesting
        ** http://www.rethinkingschools.org/special_reports/sept11/16_02/rich162.shtml **

        These above sites are talking about the tremendous amount of oil reserves found in Afghanistan... just some good FYI !!

        October 4, 2011 at 9:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        No oil in Afghanistan –the oil is in Iraq which is why we built the largest embassy in the world there and probably will never leave despite what each leader says on tv. Afghanistan is our strategic military foothold it is a great place to base missles to initiate strikes in both the Middle East and towards Russia. aghanistan is an excuse–we need a foothold for the oil and to ensure access by way of presence–and we will just happen to be in the region to be able to establish an offensive position against Russia and use this war as our rationale for military build up and bringing in more hardware and arms while saying we are innocent of trying to attack or prepare for a possible attack of Russia.

        Bush made our motives pretty clear and he also made clear that he said we would leave to placate both countries and US citizens but one had only to see the embassy we spent hundreds of millions to build to recognize we are not going anywhere.

        Oh yeah and BTW–Obama is not going to move us out either–but neither President or the one coming anticipated we could not afford this gambit we each thought we would have such a foot hold that we would exploit Iraq to pay for both wars and our presence–we may yet do that but we kid ourselves if we think anyone is buying we are there because more than we and our puppets want us there.

        October 4, 2011 at 10:08 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Glenn

    What about the folks that died as a result of US invasion? Interesting that there are no statistics about Iraqi or Afghani deaths.

    October 4, 2011 at 7:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • George Patton

      That's simple enough, Glenn. The right-wing news media don't want us to know about that since if we did, it might make the NATO forces look like the very heroes that they're not any more than the Russians were!!!

      October 4, 2011 at 8:00 pm | Report abuse |
      • Read a Book

        Read up on the way the Soviets filled Afghanistan with mines and used helicopters to gun down villages full of people. Then compare that to NATO's current rules of engagement and humanitarian efforts made by US troops to dig wells, build schools, and give food and blankets to the civilians who largely stand by while Taliban and Al Qaeda forces plant bombs in their roads.

        October 4, 2011 at 8:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Given our own many contributions of arms and tech and training to the Taliban–we reap what we sowed and we have no one to blame so much as ourselves and still we meddle and still we never learn.

        October 4, 2011 at 8:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • Read a Book


        There was no Taliban prior to 1994. We supplied to Mujahadeen with the ability to defend itself from Soviet forces.

        I suppose we should have just sat by while the USSR took over the world, one helpless nation at a time?

        October 4, 2011 at 9:01 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Read–it is a fact that the CIA created the Taliban–we reap what we sowed–Lords of war–we armed and trained them to fight that we now fight what we created has a sort of twisted justice to it–when you fight proxy wars and use other people or countries it stands as a kind of poetic justice when the monster you create eventually attacks its creator that's all and we all know who the the Taliban is and whence they sprung and they have "American interference " writen all over them. (which you just admitted to while you try to deflect)

        Sort of like Saddam has "American former pawn and the Shah had "American Lackey" written all over them–and they all were monsters of our own making which later we paid a price for–unfortunately the people they oppressed paid a bigger price which is why most countries we install leaders in have populations that neither like or trust us though they may try to use us

        October 4, 2011 at 9:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Plural. InvasionS we invaded two countries to the tune of over 3 billion a month now–and we wonder why we have debt problems.

      October 4, 2011 at 8:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Did you actively protest both wars, Glenn? Or are you late to the table?

      October 4, 2011 at 10:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • babu123

      Glenn are they human? well not like Amricans. poor Muslim ,Afghani, palestinian Iraqi have any velue? shame on people who kill innocent and they proud.

      October 7, 2011 at 9:48 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Warren

    This war is both useless and unnecessary and only a fool would say otherwise! Moreover, we have absolutely no right at all even to be over there as that country belongs to the Afghans and not us! Most of all, this idiotic war has nothing at all to do with any of our rights or freedoms let alone national security. The right-wing politicians in Washington are trying to sell us on this idiocy, nonetheless!!!

    October 4, 2011 at 7:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • JohnMacD

      Isn't it interesting that some how the numbers of deaths of Afghanistan citizens is rarely mentioned.
      They have suffered decades of invasion. They are not imperialistic or war mongers like their enemies.
      Their only crime for centuries has been their religion.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • Brad

        A distinction needs to be made between the majority of Afghan people and the Taliban (and al Qaeda to whom they gave succor). The Taliban, if you've read or seen anything in the past 20 years, are nothing if not war-like, or worse than war-like as they have committed terror attacks, thrown acid in women's faces who have tried to go out alone or seek an education. And al Qaeda.... well, do I really need to tell you that they attacked the US and us (I'm Canadian and I consider their attack to be on all of us who hold freedom dear), and their tactics are all about terror.
        So we are completely justified in attacking al Qaeda and the Taliban and continuing to do so, so long at they are a threat. The Afghan people are suffering at their hands, not ours. And the vast majority do not want to live under Taliban rule.
        Finally, all our soldiers are heroes, fallen or otherwise. A hero is someone who puts their life on the line to protect us, and that's just what everyone of them has done.

        October 4, 2011 at 8:36 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        For at least 2 centuries the west has talked about how the Middle East wants to invade, conquer and convert Christians to Islam and we have believed them. # of times a Muslim country has invaded the west since the 1880s-0–number of times the west has invaded Muslim countries for conquest or occupation–at least 7 counting our present actions. Number of times they were successful in taking over the muslim countries– The thing is we say they are the bogey man but under close inspection –we are the monsters who invade and so...why does our citizenry keep believing they are after us when we go there to invade, bomb and occupy? Convenient excuses–Inconvenient truths.

        October 4, 2011 at 8:37 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Gee Brad–last I read, 19 Saudis and 2 Yemenites attacked the US–the Taliban just took credit for it and laughed about it–speaking of which–funny or ironic isn't it–we arm Saddam with weapons to fight Iran and give him Apache helicopters and WP and he uses it against the Kurds in 1988 our very own Rumsfeld and Cheney under Bush Sr DEFEND those actions–then we arm, train and give tech to this group called the Taliban –we make them what they are today–then we defend them because we want them to fight the Soviets–Later–we either have no more use for them or our monster babies turn against us–then... the same people who defended them and MADE them the powers they are wants to fight them–of course all of this costs lives of our soldiers and the people in those countries–funny isn't it- Cheney dodged every war he could have been in. Bush was AWOL part of the time and Rummy was never in danger–they are stateside–they make a mess–they make a bigger mess then they do a bout face and use american lives to clean up the mess they made–well–that is war.

        What is the sad part is not what Cheney or Rummy or even Bush did–it is how easily people like you fell for it and still fall for it and NEVER EVER see the GAME, the EVIL of it or the fact ordinary people pay the price for the dullard moves of a few. So bone heads bomb us–bigger bone heads laugh–then we go and kill off a lot of people and brag about kids going to school in Afghanistan–how many died? How many had intact families before we showed up? How many now have dead moms or dads or sisters or cousins or bombed our villages because we showed up?

        Speaking of throwing acid on women–that is often done in South America and the Carribean and British Guyana too–in fact I was warned to cover up if I went to British Guyana because I had the kind of looks which would make the other women throw acid on me. So it is not just there–are we ready to reform the world now? Seems to me we have enough problems right here at home–enough so that we should not be giving money or succor or anything else to anyone else–we should stay home–MIND OUR OWN BUSINESS AND FOR ONCE CLEAN UP OUR OWN HOUSE FIRST. How about that?

        October 4, 2011 at 8:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Hey Brad–if the Taliban were on our side and were sympathetic to our goals –we as a country would NOT CARE what they did to their own people and we might even give them the means to do even worse stuff like we have done for the shal of Iran, for Marcos in the Phillipines, like we did for Noriega before we turned against him and like we did for SAddam until we decided his wanting to tie his oil to the Euro (he proposed this in 1990) was NOT in our best interest. See–evil despotic leaders are okay to the United States and we don't really care what they do to other people (which is why we gave Israel shrapnel cluster bombs for civilians in their fight against Lebanon) if they are on our side–but if they are not on our side–then all bets are off and they are portrayed as "evil monsters" even if WE are the masters who created and trained the monsters–we are hypocrites as well as liars and our goal is our way–nothing more and nothing less–we are not noble–we would be better as a country if we did not Germany did in WWII and just embrace our inner monstrosity. At least it would be more honest.

        October 4, 2011 at 9:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        No–a hero is one who does put their life on the line and succeeds in protecting or saving us–but can a person be a hero if they protect us from something we do not need protection from? If you save a swimmer from drowning by diving into the water on top of them and getting them in a choke hold and pull them to shore only to discover your actions broke his neck–are you a hero OR are you a bungler and a menace?

        October 4, 2011 at 9:05 pm | Report abuse |
      • Dale

        If everyone in the world was an atheist we would have any conflicts???? That sounds pretty stupid doesn't it.

        October 5, 2011 at 3:18 pm | Report abuse |
  15. sybaris

    This is all stupid.

    The troops are not fighting for your freedom. They're not keeping terrorism from happening in the U.S.. You cannot kill your way out of this war. This is not WWII. The best thing to do is get out, reinvest the war dollars in homeland security and restructure our foreign policy so as to diffuse the hostility towards the U.S.. Nobody has to bend over to the Middle East or kowtow to the Taliban.

    October 4, 2011 at 7:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dan from Detroit, MI

      Good posting, sybaris. Thank you.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Candace

      Good post. You should work for the state department or homeland security.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • Faisal

      I completely agree. Thank you

      October 4, 2011 at 8:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • magmore

      There are signs of intelligent life in the US . Thanks .

      October 4, 2011 at 8:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      But then sybaris–THAT has been the truth since 2001 but Americans did not see it that way–this late in the game we are committed to a momentum and an idealogy that even if it is a lie–the many of us who said and did NOTHING may have left it too late to stop or change course now–and all you –KNOW WHO YOU ARE–when we speak about present Iraqi deaths or Afghani deaths–this is the same war a lot of you sat still for or did not protest or may even have supported–you do not cease to own it just because you changed your mind–if you were FOR either war in the beginning (2001) you also bear responsibility for all those deaths still happening–you can't pretend like you were for the mayhem and carnage and now like a boring play–you want to change the channel. If you were for it –if the civilian deaths bother you–then add them to the pile–being okay with one death is no different when those deaths become millions–a murder of one makes a murderer so many means just a bigger murderer.

      October 4, 2011 at 10:18 pm | Report abuse |
  16. hi

    ironic how where not at war. we have never delcared war. they way we have it set up is so that if war was declared the prisedent has all the power. now its congress disading whats happing. love how we put the blame on the president.
    also what this falls to metion is that where doing more good then bad ... just saying

    October 4, 2011 at 7:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      NO–the irony is how many soldiers and civilians are dying and how much money is being siphoned away... and how many villages and cities are in ruins caused by a war we insist we are not having. That is irony and sort of a BIG LIE. huh?

      October 4, 2011 at 9:22 pm | Report abuse |

    anyone remember little boy and fat man?????

    October 4, 2011 at 7:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Now, Reality–YOU are confused–Our soldiers and our country's official position is we are there to save and protect the Afghan and Iraqi people–try to see how bombing them with nukes would sort of make a big lie of that position.....

      October 4, 2011 at 9:23 pm | Report abuse |
  18. Flunkymomo

    What about the fatalities of innocents in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Iraq? Don't they deserve to be mentioned?

    October 4, 2011 at 7:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • ry

      U mean the terrorists who strap HIV filled blood to their kids bodies and strap a small bomb onto them so if the shrapnel doesn't kill the soldier he/she will at least be condemned of sickness. No I think we can leave those animals out for now. Have fun in the UAE this Christmas.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:32 pm | Report abuse |
      • Glenn

        @ry, it sucks that people like you exist.

        October 4, 2011 at 7:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • Rana Fahd

        ry, i wish i can see you.

        October 5, 2011 at 3:35 am | Report abuse |
  19. to bad this is a lie

    the true death count amongst americans is about 20,000 so far the military hasn't released these numbers becuase this would call for a revolt to washington

    October 4, 2011 at 7:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dannon

      You are a tool... That would mean of the 90,000 there more than a quarter were killed. Congrats, you are an idiot.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      hmmm... right.... totally forgot that when my unit got back from iraq we lost noone... holy lord you are a tool

      October 4, 2011 at 7:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dale

      It takes a special kind of person to take aim at another human being and pull the trigger to end a life. It's a whole different story when you are exterminating your own population and sleeping like a baby at night. Remember the Kurdes?
      What about the American service men who are so screwed up from the useless slaughter that they feel the only thing left for them is suicide?

      October 5, 2011 at 3:31 pm | Report abuse |
  20. Jennifer

    Either bring them home or let them do what's necessary to get the job done.

    October 4, 2011 at 6:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Faisal

      And before we ask them to get the job done, let's the define the job that needs to get done.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:27 pm | Report abuse |
      • ry

        kill the sickos who like to hijack a plane you or your loved ones might be on.

        October 4, 2011 at 7:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        ry: that would be people from Yemen and Saudi Arabia and in our 10 years of fighting no one in office has EVER suggested we go after the countries who supplied both the finances and the terrorists. But that's America for you.

        October 4, 2011 at 10:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Erica

      And what's necessary? Killing civilians?

      October 4, 2011 at 6:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • ry

        Civilians comes from the root word civil. You believe they are civil. Ah! Go cook some dinner.

        October 4, 2011 at 7:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • Yago

      How many Afghan Civilians kill? or too embarrassed to mention it?
      How much higher will be the cost in Human lives to build those pipelines out of the Caspian Sea???

      October 4, 2011 at 6:45 pm | Report abuse |
      • Dustin

        It's nice how you imply that all civilian casualties were the result of coalition forces. It's also nice that your sympathetic towards the side that straps bombs to kids and mentally handicapped people and then have them blown up in public areas. But ofcourse everything is for oil and our government has never done anything noble in its history, right? You're a joke.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • awnser to your stupid question

        its better there civilians getting caught in the cross hair then our civilians man so americans are retarded

        October 4, 2011 at 7:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Dustin–the civilian casualties since 2001 are the fault of the US. We invaded and destablized BOTH Iraq and Afghanistan. Our actions enable war lords, the Taliban and insurgents to gain a foot hold and thrive and to recruit others from Jordan,
        Pakistan and other places. Fighting against what many perceived as an imperialistic invasion was the rallying cry to create even more terrorism./

        No matter how noble we try to paint our wars–the facts are we were warned that this would happen and that the ensuing deaths and turmoil would be the result and ultimately would be OUR FAULT for starting the process. Consider that many people who are now dead or many torn families who lost loved ones to our bombs or fighting or insurgents or crime now–were alive and well under their respective oppressive regimes–we may have meant well but we brought carnage and chaos and no amount of "we meant well" or lollipops or jackets or schools for the living can change the deaths that began and cascaded due to our invasions.

        it only means something to us so we can sleep at night–I can guarantee if you ask anyone who suffered or who lost loved ones in the past 10 years what started it all–they will say it was the US invasion and they will only be telling the truth. This is what was meant by "you break it you bought it" (famous words before the war by Powell) it means if we start the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and they all go to FUBAR–every act that follows whether by our own hand or by hands we loosed through being there and destroying their infrastructure is not only our responsibility–but ours to fix-IN fact EVERYONE seems to realize this but a few Americans.

        We OWN this–we even own all the death and mayhem the people are loosing on each other–we own it because we set the events in motion which allowed the criminals to thrive, the insurgents to move in and the Taliban to attack from the sidelines. WE DID IT. US. The USA–and if we are not mature enough to not only realize that but take responsibility for it–then all those lessons about "consequences they tried to teach most of us from kindergarten on–are for nought.

        it is sort of like buying a gun and bullets and leaving them lying around–nowadays if you do that and do not lock the gun up and kids get ahold of it and kill someone–the parents are held responsible–they may not have been the ones to pull the trigger but they set everything else up to the point that their actions created the potential for all else to happen. Same with war–we invaded–and the destruction of a local military and police and infrastructure created chaos–one of them is suicide bombers? Well our azzes should have thought of that too–we broke it–Both these clusterf–ks are ours.

        October 4, 2011 at 10:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      We want to liberate and protect the "people " there, THAT is the job–so what do we do when the people we want to liberate and protect are the ones fighting us?

      Maybe we need to catch that clue–when people do not want our help we should stop trying to...who am I kidding–we are NOT there to protect or liberate anyone–we want to conquer Aghanistan and control Iraq and they don't want that so they fight us–and we have a problem understanding them not wanting us there because?????????????

      October 4, 2011 at 6:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • to bad this is a lie

      to bad this is a lie the death toll for americans is actuall arround 10-20 thousand deaths the real numbers arn't being released for fear that we would march to washington.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Gee–Jennifer what job is that? Former and present soldiers say it is to save, help and protect Afghanis–so how do they do that and get out of there since the people fighting are just ordinary citizens too and they can't tell them apart? Cute statement–stupid iwhen said in 2004–stopooopid to say it now. When what we profess to be (saviors and heros ) is diametrically opposed to what some of the citizenry want –death, destruction and a "win" there is only a conundrum and NO answer–try to play on the same team as the military–"save, protect and help Afghanis–who do not even want us there– so now..HOW can they get THAT done and leave?

      October 4, 2011 at 9:28 pm | Report abuse |
  21. Sayema

    When I opened thestory I thought wewould betalking casualties on both sides. Isn't thatfair enough? What about the collateral damage and civilian deaths?

    October 4, 2011 at 6:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jacks

      They don't talk about those numbers because the numbers are staggering compared to coalition deaths.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • ry

      Because no one actually cares about those people, and dont pretend you yourself do either. you just want to try to be on the right side. U dont give a shet about them.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:38 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Try to understand: NOT everyone is for this war or was EVER for this war-some do care about people they do not know and have protested our involvement and justification since day 1–no matter who was CIC who was in office or how many Americans wanted blood but did not cared which Muslim country's they spilled. Just because YOU don't have the capacity to care does not mean others do not–some can look beyond themselves.

        October 4, 2011 at 9:31 pm | Report abuse |
  22. Warren

    Sorry Folks this is war and it is a low death rate, I am in the military. I have lost friends, but only 2,700 died over 10 years of war that is low. We lost that in the 1st hour of D-Day. I hate war because I have fought in it, but sometimes you have to fight. If we go into a full global conflict, then you might have to fight and get off those high horses.

    October 4, 2011 at 6:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Faisal

      Yeah. It's a small loss for you but for the families of those servicemen who are killed in this war, the opinion will be totally different.

      Not to mention 2 trillion dollars that we have spent on these wars that drove the country to bankruptcy.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:25 pm | Report abuse |
      • Warren

        Yes like I said I have served and lost friends, I know and about the 2 trillion where were you did you vote take a little responsibility for your part in the empire. It is sad to hear folk say this and that democrat, republican, yet they were not there they did not serve. Save this sob story for someone else, I have cried for fallen Service members who were my friends. I have lost over 9 friends. What did you lose and what was impacted for you. Did you have to ration your calls at the MWR or on Roshan and SAT phones. Have you been motored or rocketed? If not you have and still live in lala land and lastly you all wanted tax cuts, and did not even demand war bond to pay for this war. Most of you were asleep at the wheel and now you feel guilty or just repeat what you hear on TV or what you read on the web.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Warren–I've got two kids in the military–but even I know–we had no business attacking either Iraq or Afghanistan and we are losing because our motives ARE NOT PURE. We are lying–we are not there to liberate or any noble cause if we wanted retaliation for 911 we would have attacked the countries the terrorists came from and got financed through–Saudi Arabia and Yemen–but we did not. When we fight in less than noble causes it is YOUR job to blindly do what you are told but as citizens who are not fighting but ARE voting, it is our job to make sure your fighting is NOT in vain and your cause is not ignoble. Enough death on our hands–time to come home–fight them here–our war–then our fight on our turf. Kind of tacky to fight other wars in other lands when we are not even fighting the ones who attacked us.

        October 4, 2011 at 7:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • SSG Kelly

        Okay 2 trillion so you say! Lets talk about the well over 2 trillion in less than 5 years for the support of welfare in our country. I'll split the difference and give you 1/3 need it and cant work,the other 2/3 can work and do not need it. So before you sit there as a couch quarterback and critique our military you should try to visiting Afgan or Iraq and see first hand what we (the US Military) actually do on the frontline. I promise you, that you will have another view.

        October 4, 2011 at 7:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      how can you say "low death rate when we do not even know what that is–and before we talk about us helping the Afghanis why don't we ask them if they want such a loss of their civilian lives to give them what they NEVER ASKED US FOR?

      October 4, 2011 at 6:58 pm | Report abuse |
      • Warren

        I know what lost of life is, but do you. You have a cell phone, how many people were killed in the Congo for that they did not ask for it. Do you drive a gas car; see how we can play this game all day. You are a part of an Empire as you think that you’re good some of your actions are ambivalent and let to repercussions that you do not even understand. Yet like Al Pacino said in Scarface..You need the bad guy..look in the mirror folks, you are the bad guy sometimes.

        October 4, 2011 at 7:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Hey Warrren–I know I am part of an empire and I know that though many Americans are good or wish to be good that as a country we are behaving like MONSTERS and are evil. But I can look that in the face and discuss it–can you? And yes I drive a car, rarely use a cell phone and do not yet understand the connection to those things and being in Afghanistan though I can see why we went to Iraq (to get a foothold where the oil is) but we still our monsters for lying about why we are there and for attacking a country that had done nothing to us (should have gone After Saudi Arabia) SEE how that works?

        October 4, 2011 at 9:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      We should of pulled out many years ago. None of these kinds of wars produce any good for USA. All we get are young men and women killed, maimed, and emotioally scared for life. I was in the Army during Vietnam. Same thing just a different generation.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:05 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        ..and more and more we get the mask pulled from our face soooo far that even WE get to see what we really are.

        October 4, 2011 at 9:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      NOt a low death rate for the civilians–you know the people our military says is the reason we are in Afghanistan to rebuild, protect and save? IF that is our objectives then the number of them who died is relevant. Dead people are all people we failed to protect and/or save

      October 4, 2011 at 9:33 pm | Report abuse |
  23. Faisal

    The souls of the founding fathers of America are crying blood over these wars without a legitimate cause

    October 4, 2011 at 6:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Here's the thing...HOW many of us marched or protested the war all these years since 2001–did you? I did. How many went to WAshington and risked jail or being pushed around and spat on by those hells angels vet guys on bikes? Because the horrible thing is–a lot of people against this war and the Iraq war were ALL FOR IT under a different President. Those of you like that are HYPOCRITES and LIARS and you lie mostly to yourselves. But there are those of us who have protested our country's actions from the very beginning–NOT because of political bent–but because we always thought we were smarter, better and more decent than this–then we saw our fellow Americans behave like a mindless, vengeful mob–mindless because most did not even consider who harmed us was NOT the same as who we were attackikng andn vengeful because the jibes and remarks of a few (bin Laden and the TAliban) was enough for us to make several countries pay for it never mind where the hijackers really came from or were financed from.

      For those who really snapped out of it–Kudos–for those who are just against this part of the war because it is the Dems presiding–you are hypocrites and for those who are beginning to realize we have no true justification for either war–welcome to the club and I don't care how many cell phones we own or how much oil we use–things have to make sense and most of all–our leaders need to quit lying to us-if we are killing for oil–then say so–and if we are killing for strategic dominance say so–we are imploding from all the lies and the horrible struggle of trying to live up to an image that only we believe in now–the world sees us for who and what we really are and we are not pretty or even likeable–and we let our government do that to us. And yeah, I protested, marched got spat on, got on lists and got followed and video'd –you betcha. Because I could not just sit still and do nothing and say nothing–and I'm still protesting Bush–Obama –the evil is still the same. Some wars are meant to be and have to be fought–neither of these were those wars.

      October 4, 2011 at 9:47 pm | Report abuse |
      • Faisal

        I protested in 2003 in San Francisco before the Iraq war was started but at that time I always felt sidelined by the over whelming majority of Americans who were blinded by war hysteria and Fox News propaganda.

        October 5, 2011 at 1:43 am | Report abuse |
  24. Afghan

    Civillian deaths due to war since 2001

    October 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • idea guy

      We have been there ten years, just like the Russians before they gave up and left. When will will learn, just as they did, that these people cannot and will not be controlled by outside powers. If we wanted to really control them, their poppy fields would have long ago been dusted and killed.

      October 4, 2011 at 5:39 pm | Report abuse |
  25. F. Daniel Gray

    Well, billy and raj, you wrapped it up for me: "the president had declared war and send a few planes with atomic bombs..." "US would have saved trillions, saved lives, and would be a fitting reply for the terrorists..."

    Even if such is thought to be amusing, or satire, I know it represents a sizeable number of people who, in a variety of ways, agree with those "suggestions." However, I don't advocate censorship of such remarks, for, how else can we know what hatred of humanity looks like. After all, such feelings in my country surrounded the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Not to speak of Dresden, Cologne, Essen, etc. And, it explains why we continue to pay the price in an adventure where we will not prevail. Walt Kelly's cartoon, Pogo put it succinctly: "we have met the enemy... and he is us." It is WE who are the terrorists, who will not be "successful."

    October 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm | Report abuse |
  26. Disgusted

    Where are the stats showing the lost lives of innocent, peaceful citizens in Afghanistan? How skewed is our view, we invade their country, cripple their children, and dont even mention it in an article showing just how much of a violation to humanity this "military conflict" has been. Disgusting.

    October 4, 2011 at 5:04 pm | Report abuse |
  27. Bob Marley

    How funny is that 26 countries with the latest technology, night vision, equiped with high quality missles cannot win a war against dark age cave men. 10 years thats alot. Between the age of 6 to 10 years old kid who lost his mother or father or a family member, he is now about the age of 16 to 20 and ready to fight.

    October 4, 2011 at 4:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Any TRUE student of war and history knows that invasions are successful through fire power BUT a war can never, ever be won until the locals accept the rule and domination of the invaders. The problem with our war in the Middle East is that we failed to recognize that every successful war requires the civilian population to accept domination and in turn WORK on the side of the invaders. When they do–we usually make some of them our mouth pieces or puppets and others get rewarded for collaborating.

      But a collaborator IS a traitor to his own country and if we leave they are killed by the rest. The problem in the Middle East is that we have ignored that NO European nation (or Russia or China) has EVER defeated the people in the middle east–that is because the rule in war is submit or die.

      Middle Easterners take our trump card away from us when they take the fear of dying away from us. Our weapons and soldiers say "submit or die" and they return with:

      A. We would rather die than submit
      B. WE will kill anyone who collaborates with or benefits from you
      C. We will take you with us if we can
      D. We will fight you for cents and make you waste billions

      Here is the real problem–what does the local population do if they say "submit or we might kill you and the rebels say "if you submit we will not only kill you, we will destroy your town, your village, your family, your mosques and YOUR memory? Who wins?

      The ordinary ME is caught between a rock and a hard place–but we really need to ask ourselves why we are there. We started all of this when Saddam said he would link his oil to the Euro and therefore drive up the price of oil for us–we needed a foot hold.

      We cannot leave or we will not have afoot hold–but the price is driven up anyway–but that is not the only reason we are there–we also came to get market share–we need people in the ME to buy all our old stuff that neither Europe or we or anyone else wants–we need to put them to work, then sell them our old tech and stuff–we can't sell that to parking lots or dead people which is why killing and/or nuking is not an option.

      We are a victim of our own delusions about war and our excess of power–they beat us simply by not giving in and not letting their people give in–all they have to do is stay put and occasionally strike out at us–that costs very little–after all it is THEIR HOME.

      On the other hand the USSR and we have to spend BILLIONS and must stay vigilant and it is NOT our home–so we get bankrupted and try to maintain and every now and then they kill some people and ensure we cannot say we have a victory. Remember we need them alive to buy and work and put new McDonalds and pepsi plants there–so how can we win?

      KNOW THIS–no war is EVER won as long as the people resist. They have to give in. People in the Middle EAst know this and so many do not EVEr give in.

      October 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm | Report abuse |
      • John Donkey

        Or there is always the alternative of exterminating the local population and replacing them with your own settlers, a la the American West

        October 4, 2011 at 6:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • Pinku

        Wish the US lawmakers thought like you.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        John–our own settlers would not increase market share–it be just us in the wrong place and if we did do that you would be dead if you settled there even a nuke cannot simply level those mountains and so they would hide in them and come out to kill any on their land–why are we there, again? Want to live Gaza style?

        October 4, 2011 at 7:04 pm | Report abuse |
  28. liam

    The fact is... the problem is in Pakistan...THAT is where the trouble is comming from, and until we have the b@lls to go in there and wast the place...the war WILL not end. that is where the radicals are living...THAT is where we need to focus our efforts.

    October 4, 2011 at 4:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Just before my kids enlisted I went on line and viewed not only fatalities but also cause (yes you could find all of that online) what I discovered was some surprising and not so surprising things of my own–this was as of 2009:

      1. the branches with the greatest number of casualties was the Army, followed by the Marines, then the Navy then the Airforce

      2. The five military fields most likely to result in death: in order of most killed: infantry, security forces, civil engineering, pilots, intelligence

      3. To four causes of death with the first having resulted in the most deaths: Friendly fire (yes we kill most of ourselves), bombs, actual combat, pilot error

      The gist I got is that our soldiers are not that well trained and mostly (over 75% of who died is listed as our soldiers accidently (or on purpose)–shooting their own) the "enemy" is responsible for fewer than 15% of casualties and we actually lose a lot due to plane loads or helicopter loads going down.

      Of course my own informal survey was in November of 2009 and did not consider or calculate escalations in Afghanistan. But there it is–it is not only a question of why we really are there–it is also a question of are our men and women really trained to be there? When over 75% is due to soldier error or a scared soldier shooting at anyone when there is a skirmish including his fellow soldiers around him–you gotta wonder.

      October 4, 2011 at 5:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • ChaosSix

        Please provide the source for your statement that 75% of US casualties are the result of friendly fire. I'd be interested in seeing what it is, as my information, from ISAF's own reporting, puts the cause of death overwhelmingly as enemy action with IEDs leading the list.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:04 pm | Report abuse |
  29. hstryrpeats

    Its not how many Americans are dying in Afghanistan, it's WHY? Alexander the great, the British Empire (3 times), the Soviets, and now the USA are there? And for what? In order to understand the problem in Afghanistan think of it as everyone who lives there LOVES football. In their culture its ok to kill over a football game as long as you support either the AFC or the NFC. You can also change what league you belong too at any time. The USA is betting on the football games and trying to stop people from killing but since its only football, no one wants to stop or turn on their family members except for revenge or greed. The USA will never stop football in Afghanistan and it will still be there after we leave.

    October 4, 2011 at 4:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • 2011cnn2011

      REPLACE 200,000 TROOPS WITH 200,000 DRONES....

      October 4, 2011 at 4:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • LLBD

        That makes sense. Get our people out of harms way, and use drones.....good idea!

        October 4, 2011 at 5:44 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        YOU–guess how much 1 drone costs....now imagine how many we actually have ...not even a thousand.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • amanda

      Interesting analogy!

      October 4, 2011 at 4:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • matt

      That Afghan football game only starts whenever they get invaded, If CNN had also put the statistics for the Civilian casualities in afghanistan, i bet your comment would have been completely different. USA invaded millions in retaliation to 3000 deaths in WTC. Imagine how we would resoponded to hundreds of thousands of casualities if we were in the position the afghans are today...

      October 4, 2011 at 5:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        It's obvious how pathetic and thin skinned we are as a people and a nation–most countries lose hundreds of thousands to wars and natural disasters–we can't let go of a death of 3000. And people are still trying to rewrite or refight or hold grudges for a Civil war NONE of them EVEr fought in.

        We can dish it out but the world has learned just how much we cannot take it–we tell anyone we harm to "suck it up" yet we cannot even let a country prosecute one of our citizens without screaming, crying and trying to impose our version of justice on their system.

        the name of individuals like that is usually BULLIES–but when it is a country? We are despised and at the same time scorned around the world–and it is the fact we continually are in everyone's business and have one set of rules for the world –another set for ourselves. Last time I was in Europe was not very pleasant–the mask has slipped–we are not the good guys–no matter how much we stroke our own necks and tell ourselves how wonderful we are. America is full of a-holes and THAT is a global consensus except here at home.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • matt

      There is no such thing as 72 virgins, it's something that US media uses to redicule muslims. If i am a person of reason then i would ask myself why did the fever for 72 virgins all of a sudden hightened among afghans right after they were invaded...in the first week of invasion more than 20 thousand tons of explosives were dropped on a nation the size of our texas...islam has been around for centuries, where was the desire for 72 vergins before....

      October 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      You are not correct. We are not trying to stop them from killing each other because we care. We are trying to stop them from killing each other because as long as the fighting continues WE cannot claim any kind of military victory.

      When a country (us) is the catalyst for war–then ALL ensuing violence is usually blamed on their actions. The United States are the catalyst for both the Iraq and Afghanistan war–any additional acts of violence as a result of our invasions is perceived as our fault. WHY? Because it was our invasion and bombing that destablized the status quo in the first place and began that first slide toward chaos and failed infrastructure.

      So in extrapolation–the deaths after 2003 in Iraq are OUR FAULT even when insurgents did the killing (there would have been no insurgency if we had not destabilized the country) and the deaths after 2003 in Afghanistan are our fault. WE can say we hate the Taliban–the world knows we trained and armed them to fight the soviets so we created this mess–and when we routed them–we inherited the chaos our routing caused. Cause and effect or to repeat Powell:

      WE BROKE IT __WE OWN IT–and all the deaths from it too.

      October 4, 2011 at 5:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • Faisal

      Patrick, With due respect, your comments show your ignorance about the faith practiced by one fourth of the human race. Once you get some basic education about Islam, I will be more than happy to be involved in an intellectual discussion with you.

      October 4, 2011 at 5:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      I thought they had an expose in 2008 which revealed the CIA made up both the 72 virgin nonsense AND the Taliban as a group–in fact it was proven we are responsible for the prowess and power of the "Taliban"

      But I digress–okay–I'm thinking of the WTC towers AND I am remembering that of the 21 hijackers–19 were from Saudi Arabia and 2 from Yemen–those countries were reduced to ruins by us, right?

      Bin Laden and his family were from Saudi Arabia and as late as 2006 we found out that banks in SA and Yemen had funded the attacks and money was still being funneled to terrorists from Saudi Arabia–we took care of that right?

      When they grounded all flights why were Saudi royal families (including Bin Laden's kin allowed to fly out?)

      Why was the FBI and others told to stand down when they attempted to stop the flights?


      October 4, 2011 at 5:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Please don't pretend we are in Afghanistan to prevent them from killing themselves–if we go back to your football game analogy-then let's say they played their football with a goat bladder because that was all they had–but then WE came along and said –"hey–don't use a bladder use this (AK 47) and blow their heads off in fact due it to the Soviets there and hey–we'll show you how to do that–then we think we have done a funny–until we go in–and now they have even more (AK47s–because once the Soviets leave they are more than happy to outfit them against us–payback is a motha) and we wonder why the reception is so "poor"

      Word to the wise–NOt everyone believes us when we say we "are only trying to help" and begin that by bombing the hell out of people–when they play football that costs us our soldier's lives–they are really saying "we don't want your kind of help –get the hell off our football field"

      October 4, 2011 at 5:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • mat

        queenbee, your comments are indeed enlightening, you just gave a history lesson through only a few lines and i am pretty sure there are some who might be totally confused by it due to their lack of awareness, it's so unfortunate that in a country so advanced we have very few who think like yourself with logic and reasoning...people are so uninformed that they have absolutely no idea what the world is like beyond our borders...

        October 4, 2011 at 8:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Don't forget our eternal meddling in the middle east and funding Israel with weapons, tech and money and taking sides and being biased when stuff went down–even when Israel was wrong...that got on the ME's nerves too.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:07 pm | Report abuse |
  30. Bob MOrris

    According to George Bush: 'This will not be another Viet Nam '. Well it sure is something else then.

    October 4, 2011 at 4:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • heyheyhey

      According to obama, he's going to bring the troops home....yea right

      October 4, 2011 at 5:06 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Obama is a political animal and as such is a consummate liar–but besides that –he said home from Iraq HE never meant and said he intended to STAY in Afghanistan and fight

        October 4, 2011 at 5:58 pm | Report abuse |
  31. BigEd

    we have learned nothing except how to put our men danger over and over again for nothing

    October 4, 2011 at 4:40 pm | Report abuse |
  32. billy

    so..if I added that right.. 1,800 military died.
    is the afeganistan better today?
    is iraq better today
    ok..maybe nobody these two to be better BUT .... is usa better?

    October 4, 2011 at 4:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • NoName

      agreed, stupid ass was, but we had to do something,..remember the 911 ?

      October 4, 2011 at 4:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Maybe.. we should have targeted Saudi Arabia and Yemen–you know the ACTUAL countries that the hijackers came from and funneled money from?

        October 4, 2011 at 6:09 pm | Report abuse |
  33. What was that???

    durka durka

    October 4, 2011 at 4:12 pm | Report abuse |
  34. billy

    only one question: if on 09/12 one day right after the towers were down in NYC the president had declared war and send a few planes with atomic bombs wouldn't be easier and better than these 10 years ?

    October 4, 2011 at 4:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • Raj

      Billy, you are absolutely right.
      US would have saved trillions, saved lives, and would be a fitting reply for the terrorists.
      US has smart people and dumb Gov.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:37 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Do either you or billy have an inkling about nuclear winter or wind currents or shall I say it? do you even know why we may not want to destroy the gulf or contaminate all of that oil we need? You don't really think we invaded Iraq because some Saudi Arabians and Yeminites crashed planes into our towers do you?

        October 4, 2011 at 6:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • Faisal

      Yeah. But once that is done, all the rules of engagement are gone and it would have created an open field for anyone in the world to use nukes against anyone. This would have not only endangered the American nation but the entire human race.

      I hope our policy makers do not have such stupid thinking as you seem to have.

      October 4, 2011 at 5:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      It would have been worse–the fact that the majority of the oil reserves would be on fire and inaccessible forever would pretty much have stripped us of means to deliver goods, fly and the markets would have crashed–then when the radiation began to affect life in the oceans and even drifted here and the cancer levels began to spike due to that–consider YOU would not have wanted to be around eating contaminated fish while suffering from cancer with no way to get to the the hospital which was powered by candle light anyway–in your goat cart–since there would be no gas for your car. Putz

      October 4, 2011 at 6:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mohammed

      What would they nuke 'slush for brains'? Nukes are good against large fighting forces to deplete their capacity to fight. Nukes are good against industrial centres to reduce the capacity of making weapons. the people in Afghanistan fight with just a few dozen here and there and a hundred here and there. There is no industry, they buy or dig up old stuff. Whats nuking a village gonna do? It wouldnt hurt their fighting capacity at all because their capacity is already low anyway. they're just a bunch of people in pajamas and slippers. This is why you and people like you are not in power, youre too stu-pid.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:20 pm | Report abuse |
  35. jim

    Actually, relative to population, Canada had more casualties than anyone except the US. We (Canada) were fighting way out of our weight class on this one. I hope our American friends and neighbors appreciate it.

    October 4, 2011 at 3:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      I am a US Marine and I fought right beside the Canadians, trust me we appreciated everything they have done. We are brothers in arm.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • What was that???

      Are u kidding me??? You Fen people in Canada think you are the best. If you can not fight in the war then stay at home with the other girle countrys. My god you have some chip so say something like this. We should sent our RED CROSS and a few Boy Scouts up to Canada and kick thier butt and take over them.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • please

        You should use your name when you post things like that, so you can only be speaking for yourself. Thank you Canadians and the other nations that help us fight this battle.

        October 4, 2011 at 4:18 pm | Report abuse |
      • realamerican

        fu#king retard. Everything he said is true – read a fu&king book or something.

        October 4, 2011 at 4:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • Art

        You must be a Bush supporter. Also a bit of a Moron. I'll bet you couldn't find Canada on a map or any other country for that matter.

        October 4, 2011 at 5:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      I'm noting that the ones to suffer the most casualties are from the ones whose primary language is English. (French Canadians not withstanding)

      October 4, 2011 at 6:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      I would thank the Canadians for their help–but I don't think we should have been in either country. If we wanted to get the ones who did 9/11 we would have taken our hypocrisy masks off and attacked and took over Saudi Arabia and Yemen since the hijackers all came from those 2 countries (19–Saudis and 2 from Yemen). Then we turn around and attack some people for gloating about it and Bin Laden is from a royal Saudi house too.

      that is like getting a pie shoved in your face and as a big bully you turn to attack who did it–but see it is someone you suck up to so instead you take it all out on the two kids to the side who happened to laugh. Yeah THAT's a safer bet–or at least we thought it was until we hit both the little kids and they began to double team our azzes.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:31 pm | Report abuse |
  36. bailoutsos

    Seem to have left out how many Afghan cilivans have died.

    October 4, 2011 at 3:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • Pash

      thank you for making my point.

      October 4, 2011 at 3:50 pm | Report abuse |
      • tim

        casualties goes both ways.... when a terrorist goes into a crowded place and detonates his truck and kills 10's or hundreds of people (this happens almost daily) that counts to the total casualties. that 1.5 number you're getting isn't just the US mistaken or troops having melt downs.

        October 4, 2011 at 4:04 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        tim–the facts are they still downplay the local casualties and THOSE ARE OUR FAULT TWO. If you open a door that lets a bull destroy the china shop–you can squeak forever how you did not do that- and it was the bull's fault–but the SOURCE is always considered.

        who opened up this Pandora's box in Iraq or Afghanistan–the United States did under George Bush.

        Were the Iraqis and Afghanis suicide bombing their countrymen before this? Not to any great extent? So why do they do it now?

        BECAUSE OF US? YOU DON'T SAY? WE DESTROYED THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE FORCES WHO KEPT ALL OF THAT IN CHECK? Why... Then.... that makes US responsible for all the hell that has broken loose now–cause WE started it ALL and are too stupid to care about the results except to ourselves? Special punishment and place in hell for the unrepentant.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • What was that???

      Who give 1 cr*p over them and their people. I was there ..... they would kill you and your family in a blink of an eye. And you want to feel sorry for them. Think of all the people that we lost on 9/11. Wake up my friend ,,,, this is a HOLY WAR and it will not end until they kill all of us or we kill all of them. Time to grab a gun a pick a side.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        consider they would not try to kill YOU if you did not have YOUR AZZ in their country. Cause effect–same thing you would do if a foreigner invaded the states.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:23 pm | Report abuse |
  37. Ray Minnesota

    So sad to see these numbers Afghanistan, Iraq, and other places in the world.
    Major credit belongs to former president Jimmy Carter for bringing about the Islamic Fundamentals to power in Iran 1978 thus setting stage for all we have seen ever since. Unfortunately, this is just the beginning.

    October 4, 2011 at 3:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Did Carter put the Shah in power because the start began with THAT AcT on the ME front THAT and continually pretending to be the arbiters of "peace" while we showed unembarrassed bias for one side or the other. Nothing good EVER comes from meddling.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:24 pm | Report abuse |
  38. NoTags

    All we are doing in Afghanistan is wasting precious lives and 4-6 billion dollars a month.

    Take the time to watch; w w w dot pbs dot org/wgbh/pages/frontline/kill-capture/
    for a true picture of what is happening in Afghanistan. The part beginning at 39:55 of the video is especially interesting.

    October 4, 2011 at 3:42 pm | Report abuse |
  39. Pash

    1.5 million civilians have been killed in the war with Afghanistan and Iraq. i feel like a criminal for paying for these wars when this many civilians get killed, on top of that the lies our government tells us just to go to war. Iraq was uncalled for. Afghanistan was uncalled for. who asked the US to help with freedom? why go to afghanistan? osama? HA! look where they found osama! im not infavor or wars. US gives over 3 billions of dollars in aid to israel, for what? when there are millions of starving kids, families, homless soldiers who have came back from war to nothing, not even the government helping them. stop these unnecessary wars and stop killing young soldiers and civilians overseas.

    October 4, 2011 at 3:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mladen Sudarevic

      Pash........You know, you can always move somewhere else. I hear Mexico has nice climate.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:00 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Hey! Wait–aren't we planning to attack Mexico if and when CHINA ever does something to us? That is how our rationale works, right?

        October 4, 2011 at 6:33 pm | Report abuse |
  40. Grushenka

    "232 troops killed in helicopter crashes" Why? Engline failure? Weather? Shot down by RPG's? I wish the author had given a little more detail.

    October 4, 2011 at 3:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • tim

      combination of component failure/outdated and RPG attacks. i mean black hawks have been used since 80's and both chinooks and huey's since Nam .... both of which have been in the news lately. the black hawk that went down in the osama raid was component failure and the the chinook that was shot down by RPG carried over 30-40 people all which died in a single crash.... the only new transporter we have is the Osprey... everything else is just upgraded with newer technology but same old engines

      October 4, 2011 at 3:15 pm | Report abuse |
      • Mouth Breather

        seems to me that an RPG would cause lots of "component failures" all at once...................

        October 4, 2011 at 3:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        When I was doing my stats for this in 2009 the #1 cause of crashes was component failure–what else can we expect from multimillion dollar machines?

        October 4, 2011 at 6:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • eliavaa

      What about the CIVIL SERVANTS and CONTRACTORS???? Please do not forget their contribution!!!!

      October 4, 2011 at 3:39 pm | Report abuse |
  41. terry007

    The war for the NATO troops will be over if the supply route for them thru Pakistan is cut off. We should keep all payments to Pakistan frozen and they can stop our supply lines to the land locked Afghanistan. That will stop further body bags from coming home. All sides will be happy.

    October 4, 2011 at 2:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • Me

      Except you're wrong; the US has been utilizing Pakistan less and less for supplies in the past couple years. Only about 30% goes through the country now, which obviously isn't anything to snub your nose at, but also not what it once was.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:36 pm | Report abuse |
  42. Courious

    Lets compare this to the number of people that die from drugs, or alcohol. At least these men and woman died trying to make lives better for other people.

    October 4, 2011 at 2:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • I will quit smoking

      Good one buddy

      October 4, 2011 at 3:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • T. Baggins of the Shire

      Did you get the impression from this article that these soldiers died in vain or something?
      P.S. Some of the people that have died from alcohol and drug abuse were decorated combat veterans. Do they count?

      October 4, 2011 at 3:39 pm | Report abuse |
      • eliavaa

        Did they? Which ones? I'm just curious.

        October 4, 2011 at 3:41 pm | Report abuse |
      • T. Baggins of the Shire

        My brother for one (Iraq vet – DUI fatality 2009) and my uncle for another (Vietnam vet – liver failure from chronic alcohol abuse 1994). I'm sure there are many, many more.

        October 4, 2011 at 11:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • 777

      see "Shane" below

      October 4, 2011 at 3:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • George

      My @$s they're fighting to make life better for others. They couldn't care less for the afghans or iraqis. If they could they would kill them for sport. Lots of true stores out there of pure murder by soliders. Jut look at how many people suggest we just nuke the place or degrade the population through their comments. There are probably some soldiers that are in it to help others. But the vast majority would kill civilians in a heartbeat if they could get away with it. They're there for fun, for adrenaline, for the rush, for the image of being a soldier. Not because they actually agree with or live by any higher principle.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        George–most are there because they get deployed. Most kids do NOT want to go there to kill or risk dying but when they sign up to get that college money–they have to do whatever they are told and that includes going to Iraq or Aghanistan and shooting a gun. I've got kids in the military and am from a military family FEW are there or want to be there–there are some but most are decent kids who are as scared to be there as we are to send them.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • George

        Last I heard we have a volunteer army. They arent forced to do anything. They chose to enlist. Because they are doing it for education or what ever crap doesn't take away from the point that they wouldn't think twice of murdering civilians if they could. In fact doing it for education just proves the point that they arent in it for morals or principles of honour. Theyre in it for image, for the image of honour. When your in a situation where your honour would be displayed most wouldnt have it, they'd murder with no problem. Just look at how many videos there are of soliders laughing while they are killing insurgents. They ENJOY it. It dont matter how bad insurgents or terrorists are. is NOT honourable.to enjoy killing someone. Those same people that laugh will come home and say, I dont want to kill but I did what I had to do. Yea f'n right. You wanted to kill and enjoyed it. You want to walk around like some hero and be seen as a hero. They lie to themselves, they have no principles.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Nope most are not there for image. What image–so azzholes like you can look down on or castigate them. Before you mouth off about intolerance of the soldiers to others and why they are there take a good look at yourself–you are an embarassement–not because you are against any war but because you try to distill complex things and motives down to sound bites and things you can rail against as if you are a simpleton and in so doing demean ALL SIDES in the process.

        October 4, 2011 at 7:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      If you think we are really there to make life better for anyone–you probably missed how all of this started. We had no concern for a "better life for Iraqis or Afghanis before 911 and THAT is not our concern now–it was an is a military foothold and access to oil –it will not change and if you have any doubts in 2007 when Bush was fighting so many saying we should leave he said "if we leave we would be leaving 1/3 of the world's oil in the hands of terrorists"

      He was right–BUT never make the mistake of taking propaganda to heart–we are there for our own interest we KILL for our own interests and anything else is to make Joe Public be able to sleep well at night and not know he is a low and greedy killing S.* B–hey, it's what we are–we might as well own up to it and just accept it.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:39 pm | Report abuse |
  43. craig

    You would think that since over 75% of Troops killed have been by road side bombs that our Govt/Military would do something to prevent that. For being in a war for 10 years, 350+ soilders being killed by small arms is very very small, yes its 350 too many but we need to find a better way or soloution for finding these IEDs

    October 4, 2011 at 2:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • John Dowling

      Do you really think the military/govt. hasn't tried to prevent/counter roadside bombs (IED)? There is an entire organization with millions in funding to address this enemy tactic. You must realize that the number of coalition troops in AFG is small compared to the size of the country; our enemies are crafty; and their tactics change once we implement changes to counter them. It's a dynamic battlefield. While we not always been quick to figure this stuff out, it "ain't" easy given the magnitude of the problem. God Bless our Troops!

      October 4, 2011 at 3:13 pm | Report abuse |
      • craig

        i totally agree with you, I kno theres a whole division geared towards this, n that the "enemy adapts" but you would think that if this is their "main" way of fighting back, with all the technology n what we have learned from the past after 10 years we would have come up with something better than dogs, n sweepers....maybe im wrong

        October 4, 2011 at 3:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • @ John and Craig

        You both make excellent points but for my 2 cents I think that because the enemy uses crude, rude and primitive tactics our response needs to be crude, rude and primitive. Whatever works, really.

        October 4, 2011 at 3:38 pm | Report abuse |
      • @ John and Craig

        and i realize that what we're doing isn't really working..................

        October 4, 2011 at 3:39 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        When a military is almost all high tech–it is very difficult to people who do not fight on the same terms–our military and the hardware was invented to counter balance the weapons we knew other countries of like means were developing–this would be the movement of large amounts of troops and hardware in plain sight and using tools and communications we developed tech to disrupt.

        What the Afghanis and Iraqis are doing is the same as what any group who is outnumbered does–the west ,makes the mistake of thinking there are "rules to war" (which they made up) and that all those in the club have to agree to them.

        They forget all the people who they never let in the club do not have to follow the rules and do not have the means–so the stupid talk about them having to have uniforms or march or what weapons or how to KILL is ridiculous–when life and death is at stake not everyone thinks they should follow the rule book–esp when that book is stacked in the advantage of one of the authors.

        so here we are much like we were in Vietnam–our problem is we fight a war physically and with PR and our PR is always that we are there to save the day and the locals–so we have a hard time fighting an enemy who is the local.

        for the past 80 years or so our image has been everything–it gives us a kind of self esteem that no amount of military might or money can–we were supposed to be the good guys.

        Even when we were not the good guys we could put on a front that most Americans insisted on adapting and believed in–until the Vietnam war–we could not win that one without destroying our image so in the end we left (no nukes there)O

        This is another one we cannot win without destroying our image and our self esteem is taking huge blows–not just because we can't get the job done–but because the mask has slipped so much that none but the really delusional thinks we mean well and are the good guys–the rendition, torture and concentration camps began to show us and the world who we really were and we found out there are some among us who do not care if we are Evil as long as WE win–then there are others who realize we are monsters and begin to think about what if someone did to us what we are doing to Iraq and Afghanistan

        In the end, we cannot win without destroying many–and even that would be hard due to all the caves within mountains people could hide in and our bombs and tanks can neither get there or bunker bust easily–so what do we do?

        Well we are supposed to win the hearts and minds of the locals–but people who are bombed and invaded are usually ever really won over–what do we say? Uhm, don't mind that I killed your kids and your mom–you can vote now and here–have a bic pen on me? THINK about it.

        The problem for Obama and whoever comes after–we have no true or noble reason for being there and our fake reasons are all falling apart and we are running out of money.

        October 4, 2011 at 7:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Army Juggernaut

      The military has been working on counter-IED since the war started. Many technological advances and innovations have been made as a result of the ever increasing need for counter-IED. The biggest hurdle we face in counter-IED is that everyting we do is reactive. We adjust what we do, and create new devices, machines and vehicles around the current threat. The enemy evolves faster than we do because creating IED's is not rocket science. And making them more effective than yesterdays bomb is not rocket science. VS what is required to protect or defeat these bombes which requires a much bigger degree of sophistication. It's not as simple as strapping on more armor, as there is always a compromise some where else.

      We could do a better job at countering IED's and the Taliban resistance as a whole if we where allowed to fight like soldiers and not like a police force. Problem with this is that the American public can not stomache what would be required to completely crush the Taliban. Complete domination with brutal force and little prejudice, they way we are taught to fight. But even then, it's still not the right answer because yo ucan't win hearts and minds by completely obliterating the entire country and excepting more collateral damage as a result.

      I'm all for moving into a country and stopming the @#$% out of them for harboring terrorists that carry out attacks against our nation but I'm strongly opposed to nation building. Soldiers are not trained to nation build, we are trained to bring a nation to its knees.

      October 4, 2011 at 3:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10


      October 4, 2011 at 6:45 pm | Report abuse |
  44. Carl

    What about the civilian casulaties. CNN you are no better than the propoganda news machines used by third world countries and regimes.

    October 4, 2011 at 2:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mladen Sudarevic

      Carl, good point. what about civilian casualties......Taliban in Afghanistan is killing poor and innocent people by thousands. As someone who had spent fair ammount of time in both Iraq and Afghanistan I can assure you that all precausions are taken to minimize civilian deaths. Yes, I said minimize, because enemies of United States often use civilians as cover. I assure you, men and women serving in today's military are very professional and do their best to improve lives and future of both Iraq, Afghanistan, Horn of Africa and other hot spots in this world.

      War is nothing but politics by the means of force. Don't like it? Do something about it! Vote for someone else, move out of country, do more than voicing your opinions on forums. I bet you get mad after this response and do nothing about it. Better yet, blog about it....maybe someone might care.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      You KNOW we are never honest about civilian casualties. Remember in 2004 when Amnesty International and the International Red Cross put the Iraqi civilian death toll at over 100,000 and
      Bush said it was less than 10,000 did you read Newsweek in 2004 when they found out that our "official counts of Iraqi dead did not include anyone who could not produce both a birth and death certificate or Prove they died when allied troops were bombing or shooting? They also elected to not count those who died of later wounds, who died of starvation or disease or crime due to no police–NONE of those were allowed to be counted. That was in the first few years of the war–it has not gotten better since then. Even when it was discovered that we had used WP against civilians (same as Saddam used against the Kurds–which we also provided to him in 1988 a long with apache helicopters) and over 2400 died of burns and asphyixiation including women and children–we did not count those who did not go to a proper morgue–well NONE of them did–and people cannot usually find birth certificates or go to designated morgues during fighting or bombing. SEE how we work. And for those who say WE are monsters–why yes–we are–but we have been monsters for almost 10 years now and some of you are only now realizing this?

      October 4, 2011 at 7:36 pm | Report abuse |
  45. Adam

    Where are the statistics about the Afghan civilians killed? Why is this just about American/European troops?

    October 4, 2011 at 2:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sybaris


      Because the article is about troops killed not civilians.

      Read much?

      October 4, 2011 at 2:45 pm | Report abuse |
      • Gina

        You don't have to be so mean. Your displaced anger would be better taken out on a punching bag.

        October 4, 2011 at 3:05 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Can you tell us where the CNN article about the killed civilians for this or the Iraqi war are?

        October 4, 2011 at 7:38 pm | Report abuse |
  46. hstryrpeats

    Its not how many Americans are dying in Afghanistan, it's WHY? Alexander the great, the British Empire (3 times), the Soviets, and now the USA are there? And for what? In order to understand the problem in Afghanistan think of it as everyone who lives there LOVES football. In their culture its ok to kill over a football game as long as you support either the AFC or the NFC. You can also change what league you belong too at any time. The USA is betting on the football games and trying to stop people from killing but since its only football, no one wants to stop or turn on their family members except for revenge or greed. The USA will never stop football in Afghanistan and it will still be there after we leave.

    October 4, 2011 at 2:25 pm | Report abuse |
  47. shane

    OMG! HELLO! Look up the statistics for alcohol related deaths each year in the US. Each year its 10 X or greater then amount of deaths in Afghanistan in the entire 10 years. Look up the stats on Drug related deaths. How about Accidental deaths. One soldier dying is too many, but its war! Compare the numbers to prior wars and this numbers is nothing to cry about. I lost my friends Mike Uvanni and a college mate (Mike Evarts). I want this war to stop like most everyone else, but it should stop for the real reasons, not becuase of the number of deaths.

    October 4, 2011 at 2:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • meemee

      Using this comparison is not the way to justify casualties in war. It is warped thinking and even immoral to justify death and war because some others are killed due to other problems in our society. I heard this same justification when I was young, by parents trying to justify the 200+ a week deaths of young men in Vietnam. Such rationalizations were and are sick and betray a basic darkness and evil in the excuse for unnecessary death in unnecessary wars.

      October 4, 2011 at 2:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bill

      Your analogy besides being offensive is flawed and stupid. The number of alcohol related fatalities in the US is large because of the raw number of Americans who drink.The percentage of Americans who will drink alcohol this month and die because of it is a relatively small percent while the number of US Soliders in Afghanistan who will die is a fairly large percent. It is the same misguided and moronic thought process that makes people say "more people die in cars accidents than motorcycle accidents" true as a raw number but the number of cars is significantly greater and when the percentages are adjusted accordingly their is no comparison.

      October 4, 2011 at 2:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      It should be fought for real reasons too not for bs tripe like we are there to protect anyone.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:39 pm | Report abuse |
  48. domokun

    Why are we still there???? Bring out troops home, NOW! As an American citizen, I demand an immediate withdraw and termination of funding to Pakistan.

    October 4, 2011 at 2:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • RayJacksonMS

      Because the real terrorists are still in Pakistan and since the idiot Bush ignored the real war on terror to please daddy for the very first time we have to handle the threat now. Since invading another country is out due to lack of funds we have to be as close to Pakistan as possible.

      October 4, 2011 at 2:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • AmericanSoldier

      And as an American Service Member I say STFU. I have spent over two years scattered across Iraq and Afghanistan and I have seen the change in these people. You sit at home on your couch and judge the men and women who make impossible decisions EVERY DAY, whether its the President giving the green light to a covert op or the Lt on the ground deciding to action the follow on targets. The ramifications from these decisions can decide weather young men and women live or die, but the cost of not making any decision is far greater. Pull your head out of your rectum and stand tall and be proud that you live in a country where men and women will VOLUNTEER to go forward and fight your battles for you.

      October 4, 2011 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • Grant

        It is a wasteful and futile war. Your own personal willingness to serve in it doesn't make it any less so. Your possibly dying in it would make it even worse. That's what people are saying – no more waste of lives when there's nothing to be gained or lost at this point. There is no disrepect for soldiers.

        October 4, 2011 at 2:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • Gina

        I support our troops and that's why I don't support this war. They are not fighting for my freedom, they are fighting for a lost cause, sending soldier after soldier in there is not gonna solve anything.

        October 4, 2011 at 3:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • nagromyrneh

        I respect you and honor you. However, as a veteran of the Vietnam "conflict" notice I did not call it a war. After 10years and 50,000 servicemember lives they are still under communist control. The same holds true for the Muslim Middle East. Once we leave they will still be Muslims and they will still be fighting amongst themselves and the radical right wingers er uh US party affiliation sound familiar? will continue to threaten the US. Still lives lost needlessly.

        October 4, 2011 at 3:41 pm | Report abuse |
      • Jim

        The people that argue these topics have not seen what you have, they cannot possibly understand what it is like to hand out food and clothing in the morning and fight for your life in the afternoon-and carry wounded civilians into American Surgerical facilities in the evening, WHY because they sit on their fat ass drinking Starbucks while they figure out some way to evade taxes,run up needless debt and burn our flag in the sake of freedom,oh and by the way was paid for by the blood of our forefathers who FOUGHT for there freedom from the opressive just so the future Young adults would have the freedoms that they enjoy today... So to all the jump on the band wagon people that cannot stomach what needs to be done shut the #$%^&* up and keep reading your trash tabloids drinking your mocha latte's.We will fight for you its what we do.......Love America or leave it !!

        October 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        nagromyrneh–it is a long standing American tradition to NEVER call the wars we lose–war–something to do with our sense of self esteem we like to think we lost or gave up on conflicts but never lost a war–of course the rest of the war and in particular the Vietnamese know differently.

        October 4, 2011 at 7:43 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Jim: would there be a need for your clothing and food or would they be dying in such numbers if we had never gone there? We are like the arsonist who starts a fire then gets mad when people comment on the blaze and the damage it does and don't commend the arsonist for turning fireman and fighting the fire that HE STARTED.

        October 4, 2011 at 7:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • billy

      I agreee , problem is that they postpone it as much as they can because there is no job for nobody

      October 4, 2011 at 4:33 pm | Report abuse |
  49. JOE

    What else can be said? George W. Bush, Dick Cheyney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condaleeza Rice: The war criminals of the 21st century. Your faith awaits you at the ICC in tha Hague and I hope you dogs rot in hell.

    October 4, 2011 at 1:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • ANDIE

      And who are you to past that judgement?

      October 4, 2011 at 2:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sayonara

      Agree 1000%

      October 4, 2011 at 2:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • alfred hussein neuman

      US causalities by year – over 61% under Obama, but that is never mentioned because the MSM will do everything to support Obama.

      2001 12
      2002 49
      2003 48
      2004 52
      2005 99
      2006 98
      2007 117
      2008 155
      2009 317
      2010 499
      2011 354

      October 4, 2011 at 3:38 pm | Report abuse |
      • nagromyrneh

        Remember the serge insisted upon by the military when Obama took office? Obama inherited the misguided military leaders. It did result in the assassination of Osama Bin Laden It was only supposed to take a couple of weeks but typical military they are still trying to make it work before being withdrawn. We are also killing higher level insurgents lately by drones into Pakistan from Afganistan. Another reason the troops are there. Increase presence and increase casualties It is the nature of the beast.

        October 4, 2011 at 3:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • James

        Obama increased troop strength because thats where we should have been focusing on after 9/11 not Iraq, bozo the clown.

        October 4, 2011 at 6:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        alfred–please don't forget the over 4500 that died in Iraq under Bush–they were American soldiers sent to die for a despots dream–too...

        October 4, 2011 at 7:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • BlameBushAgain?

      Do the math and blame the right people. Bush was president for 8 years, and during that time 630 servicemen died in Afghanistan. Obama has been president for almost 1000 days and during that time 1170 servicemen have died in the same conflict...and you call Bush a war criminal? What does that make your fuhrer, Obama?

      October 4, 2011 at 3:59 pm | Report abuse |
      • Barbara's Bush

        GEORGE W!!! I told you to stay off the computer!!

        October 4, 2011 at 5:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Over 4500 Americans died in Iraq during that time–dead is dead right?

        October 4, 2011 at 7:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Andie–a good percentage of the world has THAT judgment–what happens when we ignore the geneva accords and attack countries without provocation –we have no halo–we are NOT the good guys anymore. Accept that.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:48 pm | Report abuse |
  50. Gortman

    One number conveniently missing from that article: Afghan civilian men, women, children, etc., killed as "collateral damage"...a number I think would likely dwarf the others over a ten-year span.

    October 4, 2011 at 12:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • Zinger

      That's because no one cares about them. I know I sure as heck don't.

      October 4, 2011 at 12:18 pm | Report abuse |
      • MattGMD

        You don't care because you are likely a sociopath.

        October 4, 2011 at 2:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        just remember the worm turns, zinger. When China or some other force comes due and our land is turned into FUBAR and you and your family are forfeit or being killed–remember that right is not your coin, nor decency or compassion or tolerance or even intelligence–so that when we get back what we dished out and we are repaid in spades–you can remember it is nothing more than you did and felt for others....

        October 4, 2011 at 7:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sarah

      That's exaxtly what I was thinking – tin fact I thought the article was going to be about the civliiam casualties. Thank yo ufor makting that point

      October 4, 2011 at 1:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jason

      Yeah, they should have included civilian deaths caused by the insurgents too. It would certainly have dwarfed anything NATO has accidently done. Yep, thats right, NATO does all it can to prevent civilian deaths and injuries while the insurgents do what they can to cause those deaths. Do you even know what NATO does if they caused civilian death and injury? Time you got off your high-horse and looked into the reality of warfare, collateral damage has always been a part of war and always will be. Before you post something so ignorant and uninformed, look into the history of the conflict and ask yourself if you honestly believe NATO forces target civilians. BTW, the numbers of civilian deaths and their causes are available on the UN reports website.

      October 4, 2011 at 2:06 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        But Jason–
        We ARE responsible for the civilian deaths too–because it was our invasion and attacks and destroying of infrastructure which created the environment in both Iraq and AFghanistan–we planted the seed and the harvest is ours even if it is all weeds and out of our control–all this death was not going on under Saddam and the TAliban–in fact a lot of people have died because of our intervention that had managed to navigate the nightmares of their local leaders–but it took the USA going in an bombing and installing our puppets and tearing up cities so even policemen and local militial were dismantled to turn it into chaos.

        When Colin Powell said "We break it we bought it" THIS and the tragedy of all the civilian deaths is what he meant–we may have thought we had a right or obligation to do good –but the man who starts a fire to keep warm yet burns down a forest is still the cause of the fire–even if what he meant and what he personally did was just the impetus. We started it–we are the BLAME and history will record that no matter what we blog. Because the world both knows and condemns us for it.

        October 4, 2011 at 8:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      It will not dwarf the dead in Iraq–let's stop parsing the numbers it is making too many of you forget we are responsible for over a million dead civilians in 2 wars we started without provocation–while Saudi Arabia and Yemen (the countries the hijackers of 911 are from) have yet to even face sanctions.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:53 pm | Report abuse |
  51. Merritt Swift

    We should have just destroyed and contaminated for all time the poppy crops.Other than that consider bombing the Saudi populace that cheered harder than any other psychos the 9\11 attacks.

    October 4, 2011 at 12:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      We seem to think killing more or spreading the carnage is the answer when we cannot even handle the outcomes of Iraq, and Afghanistan and stand to start crap with Pakistan too. We should have attacked Saudi Arabia in the beginning–once we knew that 19 of the 21 hijackers were from there and that the funds for the attacks were funneled through there and still were being funneled as late as 2006–but they were friends of the Bush's and we all know how cronyism works.

      October 4, 2011 at 7:55 pm | Report abuse |
  52. India

    Honesty, I can't think of anything to say except that the loss of loved ones is simply profound and unthinkable. I support our Military and their families but can think of not one thing that was worth dying for in Iraq or Afghanistan. I wish I could. Stop the wars now. It should be illegal, and probably is, for our military to be used for any purpose other than defense of and on US soil. I'm so incredibly sorry for the families who have lost loved ones and for the countless thousands of individual maimed both physically and emotionally. There really aren't words.

    October 4, 2011 at 11:12 am | Report abuse |
    • Anonymous

      Did you forget that we were at peace until the terrorist the Taliban supported decided to attack US? Did you forget the taliban were given time to turn Osama and his group over to us?

      You don't know why we are fighting? Clean out your ears and wipe your eyes. Our military was used to respond to those that attacked us.

      October 4, 2011 at 4:45 pm | Report abuse |
  53. +++++++

    YAY! That stupid video is GONE!

    October 4, 2011 at 8:59 am | Report abuse |
  54. Annie

    Daddy Warbucks rules!

    October 1, 2011 at 4:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Annie

      at the cost of lives lost........................

      October 1, 2011 at 4:29 pm | Report abuse |
  55. don

    You should have mentioned the cost in Billions of dollars of this war at the start and also the WAR machine companies making Billions in profit.

    October 1, 2011 at 10:17 am | Report abuse |
    • nagromyrneh

      I think that figure is in the trillions now. Raise the debt ceiling for more death and destruction. Obama abides by what the military wants and gets assailed by the Repukes that say he didn't do it fast enough or he had no business going there ie Libya. The poor man just can't catch a break. But Perry wants to go to battle in Mexico so I guess his choices are not all that bad.

      October 4, 2011 at 3:51 pm | Report abuse |
  56. Jason

    If your country ends with a stan then you should you should take this helpful tip, gtfo of such a ridiculous environment.

    October 1, 2011 at 10:13 am | Report abuse |
  57. Cassandra Chu

    um... how many ways can the American People say "BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!"

    October 1, 2011 at 10:11 am | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Our leaders know they can ignore us–because when we should have said don't use our troops for fighting wars based on lies–we did nothing and like they say–it is like toothpaste out of the tube–it is easier to give away much power than it EVEr is to get it back–so we let the big dogs out and now it is not our call when/if they ever come home–maybe the American people will be careful when they unleash the dogs of war next time and do not let some lying leader lead them into war with people who did nothing to us. (yes I remember 911 and I REMEMBER it was 19 Saudis and 2 Yemenites who attacked us no matter what a few people in Afghanistan claimed AND I also remember that in 2006 we found out that the Saudis were still financing terror cells and KNEW it–so WHO was our enemy and who should we have attacked?

      October 4, 2011 at 10:56 pm | Report abuse |
  58. roy

    A war Geo W Bush company and Chaney should pay for. This country gets 0 return for money and lives wasted there.
    We will leave when we get a politican and company sharp enough to say enough is enough.

    October 1, 2011 at 9:40 am | Report abuse |
    • alfred hussein neuman

      This is Obama's war now, along with Iraq. He can't vote "present" on this.

      October 4, 2011 at 3:41 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Npe–babies born to the holes that birthed them–Obama may try to help "raise these brats of war–but they will FOREVER be the spawn of Bush and Cheney as will the financial bailout of 2008. I'm an Independent–people may inherit other people's Fups but the f-er upper is still the person who started it–BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSH! LOL Obama gets an F for not bringing the troops home when he said but Bush gets the Hitler award for genocide and the 3 stooges award goes to him, Cheney and Rumsfeld.

        October 4, 2011 at 10:59 pm | Report abuse |
  59. Tewrobert

    Afghanistan is just one big black hole we put money in with no return of any kind.........Except dead soldiers

    If we wasnt there we would be somewhere else....

    October 1, 2011 at 9:17 am | Report abuse |
  60. terry007

    It appears the US will leave Afghanistan ultimately, just like the Brits left in the last century, just like the Russian left in 1989 and the US left Vietnam in the 1970s. No lessons learned from all this. It is a proxy war in the region by the non-muslims in the country. When the foreign forces will leave, the AFGHANS CAN SETTLE THEIR OWN FATE.

    October 1, 2011 at 8:24 am | Report abuse |
    • Islander66

      You can't compare the Brits and Russians to what is going now. The Brits and Russians were attempting to control the country, and take it over. This missions is not at all about taking over the country, it is about helping Afghanistan stabalize and rebuild.

      October 1, 2011 at 9:34 am | Report abuse |
      • Allen

        The USSR was not attempting to take over Afghanistan when they were there. They were propping up the Afghan Communists uner Barbuk Kamal. The USSR had 0 interest in annexing Afghanistan.

        October 1, 2011 at 12:05 pm | Report abuse |
      • MattGMD


        October 4, 2011 at 2:16 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        But.. that Can't be why we are there–they were stable before we got there–our bombing and invading made it worse never better. We should have known the result of our invasion and routing of the ruling people would be mayhem–that we did not means we underestimate the power of how people feel about MEDDLING UNINVITED FOREIGNERS.

        October 4, 2011 at 8:06 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Help Afghanis "stablized and rebuild what our bombs and invasion destabilized and destroyed? THAT look good on paper? Because it sounds like a dam–ng cluster f–k to me–AND our fault.

        October 4, 2011 at 11:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jym Allyn

      The USSR has NOT left Afghanistan. Heroin addiction is now even bigger of a problem in Russia than alcoholism. The Russian mob is now the primary customer for Afghan heroin and Russia has a major economic interest in the war continuing so that it can maintain its drug profits.
      The "solution" to our war in Afghanistan is to turn the country over to 300,000 Chinese PeaceKeepers since China has the available military, finances, technical expertise to develop the rare-earth minerals in NE Afghanistan, and the cultural skill at dealing with insurgencies that we don't have.

      October 3, 2011 at 1:06 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        iT WOULD BE FUNNY... If we did leave China to handle our mess and they just turned it back over to the taliban–would make us look like prize p-–ys and fools huh? we are NOT there for noble reasons and never were–we went in for pay back we stayed to prove we could and now it is a mess and we look like the 3 stoogies on both war fronts.

        October 4, 2011 at 8:08 pm | Report abuse |
  61. S R Wakankar

    This war in Afganistan has been the longest one and it raises some questions never asked or analysed even for argument's sake.The issue in question is Arab Islam, not Islam, both being different to each other.The ancient tradition of India's Hindu Islam is the Real Islam; the Arab variant is altogether different.This vital point, we have not yet understood.Islam is an old tradition which begins with the Holy Books of the East the Vedas which are in Sanskrit, the ancient classical language of India.This AfPak region is the birthplace of India's Hindu Islam which got converted to Arab Islam in the middle ages due to Arab/Muslim Imperialism.This Arab Islam is "for the Arab, by the Arab, of he Arab".Its frame or canvas is Arabia only.Pan-Islam is sheer imperialism.Can whole world be turned into Arab?Allah is universal, but Muhmmed and Koran are not, they are Arab/Arabic.They are meant for the Arab.To apply them over whole world is imperialism.India's Hindu Islam does not do this.It is liberal, non-Jehadi,democratic,tolerant, non-violent, and most of all, not anti-West at all.It exixts with perfect peace and harmony with the West.It has no civilizational clash with it.So India-or better if we call it South Asia or even better if we address it as Non-Arab Asia- its Hindu Islam is the most Real Authentic
    Islam.We have to make a difference between Islam and its Arab variant which has become such a problem today.Let us go back to Hindu Islam, ie Non-Arab Islam of Non-Arab Asia and AfPak is its original home.The Vedic Islam,not Koranic or Arabic, but Sanskrit and Vedic.This Islam wil solve our problem.Let us enter into this line of discourse. It will change the tide and give it a new dimension.These AfPak people originally belong to India's Hindu Islam but due to medieval anti-Indian Arab/Muslim Imperialism got converted to Arab Islam and became such a fanatic lot.They were not fanatic initially.Arab Islam has made them so.If we go into the span of Asia Before Islam,we would find a totally different scenario.We have to go there;only then we would find the solution to this terrorism problem.Why Pakistan has become home to World Terrorism?This is the basic question.Whole AfPak region is Old India.India's Old Islam is the KEY to solve his problem.Thanks.

    October 1, 2011 at 12:43 am | Report abuse |
    • anon

      very informative – I learned something today.

      October 1, 2011 at 11:52 am | Report abuse |
    • Jayj7

      I think you could add that the way Arab Islam became a worldwide menace was the Saudi's spending about 80 Billion dollars over 40 or so years to sponsor schools worldwide that teach their brand of hatred and little else.

      October 1, 2011 at 1:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • larvadog

      anon – you didn't actually learn something. Wakankar's post is BS. His view of history, especially Islamic history and Arab history, is skewed as only an Indian's view could be. Example – He talks of an "Arab variant". There is no such monolithic religion as an "Arab variant" of Islam. Islam began in Arabia with Mohammad due to his receiving revelations. He did not borrrow it from India and create some "Arab variant" of which Wakankar speaks. In its early history Islam spread out from Arabia TO India and many other "nations" during conquest, all the way to Spain and Africa and Afghanistan and the border of China.

      October 4, 2011 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Faisal

      Wakankar, Your theory of hinduislam and arabislam simply reflects the ignorance about muslim faith. I myself is a muslim who was born and brought up in south asia and I never heard anything in Islam that is even closely related to hinduism.

      The main source of the teachings of islam (practiced by muslims in India, Middle East, Europe, US or elsewhere in the world) is Quran and since Quran was revealed about 1400+ years, not a single word (or a letter) in this book has changed. The Quran you can find in museums, written 1000-1400 years ago is exactly the same Quran you will find in a mosque in California, Bombay, London, Karachi or Tokyo.

      The use of the terms HinduIslam or ArabIslam is simply a reflection of lack of knowledge about Islam and possibly a naive attempt to spread disinformation about a faith that is being practiced by one fourth of the human race all over out the world.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:23 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        Hinduism is polytheistic (worship many gods) as with Christianity–Islam is monotheistic (Allah like Yahweh or Jehovah is another name for what is called the one true God) though each faith approaches it differently (ie Jewish, Islamic and Christian) all three monotheistic religions agree that Hinduism or the worship of many gods is blasphemy and anathema to their faith. the Hindu Islam stuff is bs. Islam is supposed to be a religion copted from the people of Ishmael who was the disowned first son of Abraham–When Sarah made Hagaar leave with the child she told her to have with Abraham God promised from Ishmael's loins would "rise a great nation". Since God also promised that the seed of Abraham would be his people–it stands to reason that the Muslims actually comprise the lost tribes of Israel (children of Abraham) after all Ishmael is the half brother of Isaac and Sarah's actions caused that family to created and then to be broken up after she became pregnant.

        What a blow to the US who believes that they will be blessed if they chum up with Israel only to find they have offended God by massacring the other descendants of Abraham? Just WHO is that "greatest country and richest country in the world mentioned in the book of Revelations (18th chapter) who was the most powerful but will be destroyed in the space of one hour because the blood of her war victims cry for vengeance from their graves?

        We may in for a world of hurt–and we remain unrepentant–but that is a part of the prophecy too.

        October 4, 2011 at 11:12 pm | Report abuse |
  62. nugha

    i wonder what exactly will end the war, for the US? will it be the number of terrorists killed? and, as of aulaquis death, that makes osama, ilyas kashmiri, and him. its sickening. including zawahiris claim that "alquada only kills innocents" (well, that of course lies in whom they define innocent)

    September 30, 2011 at 8:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • jim

      It will only end when a president decides to do what we did in Vietnam, declare victory and run like hell!

      October 1, 2011 at 8:18 am | Report abuse |
    • saytheword

      The end will be blurred with the beginning. The beginning will be marked with a massive military base erected in the middle of Afghanistan that will house thousands of troops and tons of military equipment in order to control, er uh, spread democracy in the middle east.

      October 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm | Report abuse |
  63. krm1007




    “Since Sep 11, 2001, 21,672 Pakistani civilians have lost their lives or have been seriously injured in the war against terror.

    The Pakistani Army also has lost 2,795 soldiers while 8,671 soldiers have been wounded. More than 3.5 million have been displaced while the country has lost $68 billion due to terrorism.

    Despite sacrifices, Pakistan was still engaged in 'the war for world peace”.



    September 30, 2011 at 8:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dan from Detroit, MI

      That's where the problem lies. The leaders of Pakistan need to tell the right-wing thugs in Washington just where to get off and seek a peaceful settlement with their Taliban leaders and eliminate that country's dangerous dependence on US foreign aid. I guess that that won't happen any time soon since these thugs in Washington have the Pakistani leaders in their pockets!!!

      October 1, 2011 at 8:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Pakistan has played both sides setting up camps and housing our enemies–but to be honest–our puppets in Afghanistan and Iraq also play both sides–are problem is that we expect people we buy or install to be on our side–and being Middle Eastern or Islamic they expect to do what is expedient no matter which side they are on–because according to their religion (as it also is in Judaism) to dupe or trick or cheat one not of the faith is not a sin.

      October 4, 2011 at 11:20 pm | Report abuse |
  64. Dan from Detroit, MI

    It seems like the U.S. and it's NATO henchpeople haven't learned a thing over the past ten years. Even the Russians were finally able to read the handwriting on the wall after 8 years or so and wisely pulled out i 1989. But then again, Barack Obama seems to harbor a great vendetta against the Muslims and wants to hurt them as much as possible and he's been only too successful in that endeavor. Enough is enough!!!

    September 30, 2011 at 7:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • a_boy_to_a_man@yahoo.com

      If US wants to be free, destroy all Arabs both good and bad... even the good ones today will turn bad tomorrow like al-Awlaki, is was born in the State and raised there but later became and enemy.. kill them all

      October 1, 2011 at 7:51 am | Report abuse |
      • Gary Johndro

        I'm with you, YABBA-DABBA-DABBA-DOO!!!

        October 1, 2011 at 9:56 am | Report abuse |
      • Garret Truelove

        Yeah, you're an idiot. 1.5 billion muslims, millions in the United States, and you want to wipe them out like Hitler tried with the Jews. You are as stupid and small minded as such. I do hope you die a painful and slow death, alone. I bet you make your parents proud with such hateful speech.

        October 4, 2011 at 12:38 pm | Report abuse |
      • truefax


        October 4, 2011 at 1:18 pm | Report abuse |
      • nagromyrneh

        The term that comes to mind now is uneducated redneck or perhaps white hooded KKK? Not much difference there is there?

        October 4, 2011 at 4:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • truefax

      Well his dady did abandon him and his moma.

      October 4, 2011 at 1:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      I think Obama is trying to appease the Republicans and is trying to prove he can be as diligent about going to war as the best of them.

      October 4, 2011 at 11:21 pm | Report abuse |
  65. .

    and we thought Viet Nam was an abomination...................we learned not a thing.

    September 30, 2011 at 5:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • mv

      we learned that the vietnamese are much better fighters than the afghans.

      October 4, 2011 at 6:11 pm | Report abuse |
      • queenbee10

        ..and we learned that with all of our high tech we still can defeat neither–so what does it say, again?

        October 4, 2011 at 8:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • queenbee10

      Actually, we learned the Vietnamese were an anomaly–We were the abomination to them–we came into their country unbidden to help France and we thought like usual we could divide and conquer from within turning people against each other and having some of their own kind be our puppets and work for us (we also did this to Africans during slavery (got some to slave or sell slaves to us so we could point out they helped to–and we did it to the Native Americans–and the English or the West did it in Indonesia and in India and in every place the west took over and ruled–we woo a few from the groups we conquer and promise them our kind of riches and power if they will help us rule their brethren –BUT we do not understand either the ties or the code of the Middle or Far Eastern people–so all of our "games" keep boomeranging back on us–we cultivate lackeys as pawns only to find out they have been playing both sides–we think Pakistan turns on other Muslims and we expect our puppets in Iraq and Afghanistan to do our biddingp-but we fail to understand their own kind of game–where "they pretend to give in " for their own ends and yet fuel and help both sides.

      WHY would they do that? Pretending to give in stops our offensive attack and allows them a respite and to recoup–but they promise their brethren they are not really giving in and how they really hate us and will destroy us–because when we believe they are ours we allow them a little bit closer–close enough to suicide bomb or get money and weapons from–and we think we are the smart ones.

      The same thing happened in Vietnam–we learned that the people we deluded ourselves into believing we were saving–hated us and worked to send their babies strapped with bombs to kill us and that we could not really tell friend from foe–and those who consorted with us got murdered or we had to air lift them and the babies we made out of there or they all would have been killed–what we did not learn is how to undermine them–unlike the Indians or Africans or even many South Americans it is not enough to appeal to their greed because their creed is there is no dishonor in deceiving people like us–so they take from us, smile at us, pretend to be grateful and humble in front of us and plan to kill us, attack us and bomb us–How many of our soldier's last sight was of a person in the village they thought of as a friend or they befriended spitting on them or turning them over to insurgents? We will never know–but understand this war like the Vietnam war is different-Just like in America we blame and target people of color and it is easy to recognize them and single them out–people in the Middle EAst and Vietnam target people from America and it is easy to single them out and blame them-and given we did go over there and bomb and kill and maim and imprison–it is not a hard or unfeasible step for them to go from smilling and pretending to accept or like us to helping to plan a raid or our demise-it is not personal–just like all the death and destruction and mayhem we have given them for the past 10 years is not personal–we have few individual beefs we do our dirty deeds for a greater cause–well guess what–so do they–and unlike us, they can always tell themselves that it was we who started it and that they do what they must to defend themselves or pay back the invaders and in case a lot of you do not know this–WE are the invaders who killed their families and bombed them and destroyed their country–as for their own people who kill and bomb them–they do it so that none can be comfortable with consorting with the enemy–the word is–anyone who collaborates with us–not only is game to kill-but so are their families, the places they worship–their kin, their village–THAT is how they keep the rest from giving in or accepting us–they do not bow down not because all are indomitable–but because no matter what we do to them –if they give in the rebels/insurgents/Taliban/Al Qaeda among them will do much worse and will do it to their entire clan. Can we top that kind of barbarism and still win the hearts and minds of people?

      And since when do invaders EVER win the hearts and minds of people they harm? Nobody who harmed MY family could EVER win my heart or mind or be forgiven for what they did to me and mine–why expect them to be any different? Ah yes? Because many Americans are idealistic and because they are so naive that they cannot imagine the other side of the coin. We imagine and expect others to forgive and accept things we, in the same place never would.

      October 5, 2011 at 12:13 am | Report abuse |
    • Don

      Here ya go.

      October 10, 2011 at 12:02 pm | Report abuse |