It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NATO strikes fuel tankers in Afghanistan, many dead

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:13 AM
link   

NATO strikes fuel tankers in Afghanistan, many dead


www.reuters.com

KUNDUZ, Afghanistan (Reuters) - NATO aircraft opened fire on hijacked fuel trucks in Afghanistan before dawn on Friday, killing as many as 90 people in an incident that could trigger a backlash against Western troops.

NATO said it believed the dead were all Taliban fighters, but it was investigating reports civilians were also killed. Villagers said their relatives were collecting fuel from the hijacked trucks and were burned alive in a giant fireball.

President Hamid Karzai's office gave a death toll of 90 and said an investigation team had gone to the scene.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:13 AM
link   
This story really illustrates how the Taliban are liars. The fuel tankers were hijacked...most likely insurgents would have the skill for this. When the tankers were bombed, all the people in the vicinity are now called villagers. Taliban don't have uniforms, so, such a switch is easy...everyone that dies from that team can easily call themselves civilians and be the relatives of someone after they are dead.

But this is where the lie is exposed...that villagers were freely allowed to take whatever fuel they needed and that the hijackers wanted nothing in return for what is probably a valuable commodity. So, the Taliban are Robin Hood now...steal from the rich give to the poor...?

The people standing around the truck...are obvioiusly criminals...as there is no way they thought the trucks or the contents was their personal property...and deserved the firey hell that engulfed them, but we must still be careful with who we kill.

If villagers don't want to die they need to stay out of the way.

www.reuters.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:26 AM
link   
No offense ofcourse, i posted that terrible story already. Makes me sick...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Oh well, i just read your whole post, you come to a very different conclusion.
How can you justify bombing two stolen fuel trucks? Bombs for thieves? That´s exactly the same thing the Taliban did, cutting off the hands of thieves. Actually it´s worse.
And i´m sure the NATO knew, there was a village nearby...


The people standing around the truck...are obvioiusly criminals...as there is no way they thought the trucks or the contents was their personal property...and deserved the firey hell that engulfed them, but we must still be careful with who we kill.

I can´t believe there are still people thinking like that.


[edit on 4-9-2009 by euleberlin]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by euleberlin
 


This IDK88 guy is obsessed with Afghanistan and the Taliban so much so he's frying his brain's ability to think objectively.

Great points! Someone steals a car let's fire bomb them? What the hell is wrong with people nowadays.........the military is insane in my opinion.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


I do believe the system of justice is much different in most parts of Afghanistan.

I'm appalled you came to such conclusions from just a story and the investigation isnt even complete yet. Save your judgment for something more important: like American or British Law. (where ever you live)



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by euleberlin

How can you justify bombing two stolen fuel trucks? Bombs for thieves?
[edit on 4-9-2009 by euleberlin]


Bombs for thieves? Really? They're just plain old poor innocent hungry saints trying to feed their starving family, aaahhhhh, pity party for the scum bags....

How about bombs for enemy supply lines? How about bombs for enemies passing out your fuel? These folks, who's families live in the same mud huts for 100's of years but cant identify strangers in there own villages are all "innocent" right?



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   


Around 200 to 250 villagers were believed to have gathered to help themselves from the tankers, said health minsitry spokesman Farid Rahid from Kabul


i do believe the very origins of the taliban are robin hood like.. Mullah Omar and his small band of Talib fighting against the corrupt mujahideen groups, they eventually take over the country... why do you suppose that is you think... public support. it seem entirely plausable to me that they had taken these two stolen fuel tankers to a village to let the populace siphon fuel from them... it is the people who suffer most, as always, from this war or any other one.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


Hmmm, someone steals something so they deserve to get blown up? Sounds as extreme as Sharia law if you ask me.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by TheCoffinman
 


Just for the record, lets not forget that Robin Hood was no Marxist. The people were over taxed. The gov't taxed the people into starvation and poverty. Hood stole back from the tax collectors and returned the peoples money to them.

I cant let you lefties steal this legend too....



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by euleberlin
No offense ofcourse, i posted that terrible story already. Makes me sick...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Oh well, i just read your whole post, you come to a very different conclusion.
How can you justify bombing two stolen fuel trucks? Bombs for thieves? That´s exactly the same thing the Taliban did, cutting off the hands of thieves. Actually it´s worse.
And i´m sure the NATO knew, there was a village nearby...


The people standing around the truck...are obvioiusly criminals...as there is no way they thought the trucks or the contents was their personal property...and deserved the firey hell that engulfed them, but we must still be careful with who we kill.

I can´t believe there are still people thinking like that.


[edit on 4-9-2009 by euleberlin]


and what do you think the taliban was going to use this fuel for?...putting gas in their cars to drive their kids to the mall? c'mon, if it turned out to be used in killing american soldiers, would you still have the same opinion.?

i'm not for killing civilians, but if the locals needed gas, don't you think they could have talked to the americans first before stealing it? the west has been going out of its way to improve relationships with the civilian population, and i don't think aquiring some gas from the west would be hard to do.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   

One had become stuck in mud by a village, and the fighters went to try to tow it when residents gathered to take the fuel and the crowd was struck.

source


With the fuel truck stuck in mud , removing the fuel would make it easier to shift. So perhaps it was borne out of necessity rather than charity that the Taliban allowed villager siphon-off fuel .
They were sitting ducks on that riverbank.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 02:25 PM
link   


and what do you think the taliban was going to use this fuel for?...putting gas in their cars to drive their kids to the mall? c'mon, if it turned out to be used in killing american soldiers, would you still have the same opinion.?

Ha, the german newspaper SPIEGEL just says, the Taliban wanted to do a terror attack with the two fuel trucks. Oh and the Bundeswehr says, there were no civilians killed, only "insurgents".
www.spiegel.de...



He said no ground troops had been involved in the attack. It was the largest strike to have taken place in the northern region of Afghanistan where German troops are at present. A NATO jet located the two tanker trucks along a river. "After it was determined that the insurgents were there, the local ISAF commander ordered the air strike," ISAF spokeswoman Christine Sidenstricker told reporters. "The tanker trucks were destroyed and numerous insurgents killed." ISAF is also assuming all of the dead were insurgents.



In reply to a question put to him during the press conference, as to whether the Bundeswehr would continue to maintain that there was no war in Afghanistan, the spokesperson said, "this is about a stabilization effort. It is a robust stabilization effort, and as such, necessarily includes some fighting."

You read right, here in Germany we´re not in a war, it´s about protecting Germany´s safety.

[edit on 4-9-2009 by euleberlin]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by IDK88



The people standing around the truck...are obvioiusly criminals...as there is no way they thought the trucks or the contents was their personal property...and deserved the firey hell that engulfed them, but we must still be careful with who we kill.

If villagers don't want to die they need to stay out of the way.




"deserved the firey hell that engulfed them"

Quite a disgusting statement.

Is that how you deal with "criminals" ?
------------------------------------------------



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
yahoo news


Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said the trucks were intercepted on their way from Tajikistan to supply NATO forces in Kabul. When the hijackers tried to drive the trucks across the Kunduz River, the vehicles became stuck in the mud and the insurgents opened valves to release fuel and lighten the loads, he said.

Villagers swarmed the trucks to collect the fuel despite warnings that they might be hit with an airstrike, Mujahid said, claiming no Taliban fighters died in the attack.


Wasn't robin hood attempt, just releasing the fuel to lighten the load, enough to attract civilians that led to their deaths. I blame it on the Taliban for being so nice.

 

mod edit, attempt to fix link

[edit on 5-9-2009 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by euleberlin
 


Another member told me that the Afghani people want to be ruled by Sharia...you are right that response to theft is like what the Taliban would do it seems.

I suppose people should be careful what they ask for. I posted the article because it must be a horrible way to die...but its really difficult to comprehend that the Afghani's have been fooled into being destroyed in this manner.

Those fuel trucks don't belong to them...that is theft...they were destroyed for it.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Zosynspiracy
 


In life their are consequences to your actions...do you think it is logical that we should be able do act freely without a response...should we be able to determine a fair response; the punishments for the crimes we commit?

I didn't say I agree with the response...but those people should have known that there would certainly be one.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


If foreign soldiers kill Afghans, they are outrage, if killed by Taliban they shrugg and accept it as Allah's will.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:31 PM
link   
When all of these wars were getting started eight years ago...I didn't think it was a good idea...I didn't think that the 70% of the public opinion in support of war knew what they were talking about. Well, I was right...you got your war though and now you realize that you don't like it.

Well it gets worse...I am just being realistic...all the good things that people are saying about the Taliban are false...they are leading these people to their deaths and they will die.

They brought us their to fight as a part of some scheme to take over the world and bring back their global Caliphate. But they failed and cannot surrender. Those people, the Afghans, are being led into a Pit and you, the bleeding hearts, get to watch it.

Just as certain as the noone did anything to save the Tamils, no one will save the Afghans. As far as I can see, America would be irresponsible to leave Afghanistan...Under no circumstance can that THING you love, that thing that has a gift for the Muslims in the next day or so, can be allowed to survive.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by IDK88
Those fuel trucks don't belong to them...that is theft...they were destroyed for it.


The trucks weren't bombed to kill the taliban, they were bombed because NATO didn't want the trucks to fall into enemy hands where they could be used against them. The fact that the trucks got stuck in mud was very unfortunate for the brave rebels who stole them.

They started to dump the fuel in an effort to get free of the mud, but when they did that villagers swarmed the area trying to grab fuel that they desperately needed. There was some pro-NATO idiot on the news who says it wasn't NATO's fault because Taliban doesn't wear uniforms, so obviously the crowd of desperate villagers swarming tanker trucks should be considered rebels and bombed from planes up in the sky that couldn't determine who their enemies were based on clothing anyways.

I've seen videos of NATO/American aircraft bombing large crowds of civilians before so this is not a big shock to me. I just feel more hatred that people so desperate for something as worthless to me as gas should have to die for their efforts to survive, especially by aircraft that had a zero probability of being attacked in self defense.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by IDK88


I didn't say I agree with the response...but those people should have known that there would certainly be one.



Excuse me ........

you said .....


The people standing around the truck...are obvioiusly criminals...as there is no way they thought the trucks or the contents was their personal property...and deserved the firey hell that engulfed them, but we must still be careful with who we kill.


The emphasis is mine ...... the words are yours .



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join