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: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


I figured that pilots would regret not bombing it had the Taliban gotten away with it. I've seen videos of large trucks that does massive damage when turned into VBIEDs.




posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TheCoffinman
 


The Taliban didn't win Afghanistan...it was given to them. That's why they didn't fight to keep it when the invasion came in 2001; as the real owner would have never fled his own home so as to save his life. Everyone knows that dying in exile is Hell and would just as soon die on his own property if he has the choice, which they did but chose otherwise.

It was a scheme that they were/are willing participants. Now they've been caught and so has everyone with them.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
The Taliban wouldn't have succeeded in taking over much of Afghanistan without the help of the Pakistanis. Where you think Taliban originated from?



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


They use the fuel to power their suicide vehicles, right. Does fuel have any applications for use in explosives?

Destroying that fuel probably saved a few thousand lives in Kabul or maybe Karachi or perhaps Tashkent or wherever the benevolent Taliban decide to send their murderers.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
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.


"Brave rebels".
What a hoot.


Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
There was some pro-NATO idiot on the news who says it wasn't NATO's fault because Taliban doesn't wear uniforms.......


That what happens when the enemy decides to wear civilian clothing and blend in with the civilian population and use them as shields. It's not NATOs fault if civilians get killed. ROE for NATO forces is pretty restrictive and tries to limit civilian deaths.


Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
I've seen videos of NATO/American aircraft bombing large crowds of civilians before so this is not a big shock to me.



Really? NATO got bored one day and just decided to bomb a bunch of civlians, huh? Right. I wonder if you have that same rightous anger when the Taliban decide to bomb a bunch of civilians in a marketplace?


Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

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.

I agree, it's pretty sad that the civilians were killed when they were just trying to get something to survive.

"Zero probability?" Never heard of a shoulder launched SAM, have you?



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


No, but the vehicles is the primary factor in vehicle borne improvise explosive device.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


the taliban fought for afghanistan:

en.wikipedia.org...(1996%E2%80%932001)

en.wikipedia.org...(1992%E2%80%931996)



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:49 PM
link   
I think this is indeed a lesson for Taliban and the Afghan people who support them [and gets all blended together] if the dont wear uniforms, or worse use "civilians" as shield and for public protest against NATO..The thugs stole the truck for maybe very naughty purposes, and the rest of the people wanted to steal the fuel as well, if they like Sharia law they shouldnt complain about this punishment..I applaud these actions for these Taliban are the lowest of the lowest with their cowardly IED's..I hope it was a good bonfire..



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by TheCoffinman
 


Sure they did, they care enough for Afghanistan that they were willing to allow the country to be bombed to protect one man.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


the taliban originated in the Helmand, Kandahar, and Uruzgan regions of Afghanistan. Pakistan was simply a source of recruits and money...

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


you have to understand the way they think... osama is a hero to millions and a symbol of resistance to western hegimony... osama has been involed with afghanistan since the 80's...



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheCoffinman
reply to post by deltaboy
 


you have to understand the way they think... osama is a hero to millions and a symbol of resistance to western hegimony... osama has been involed with afghanistan since the 80's...


Well then you overestimate his role in the 80's.Sure he is a symbol nowadays, but back in the 80's the Mudjahedin merely saw him as a rich foreign boy[another of these arabics] who only participated in an already won[one of the last] battle against the USSR..His role was really marginal back then..

[edit on 4-9-2009 by Foppezao]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by TheCoffinman
 


No it originated in Pakistan. Look it up.

Rashid, Ahmed (2000). Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil, and Fundamentalism in Central Asia



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 07:59 PM
link   
en.wikipedia.org...


The Taliban movement is headed by Mullah Mohammed Omar. Mullah Omar's original commanders were "a mixture of former small-unit military commanders and madrasah teachers,"[8] and the rank and file made up mostly of Afghan refugees who had studied at Islamic religious schools in Pakistan. The overwhelming majority of the Taliban movement were ethnic Pashtuns from southern Afghanistan and western Pakistan[9], along with a smaller number of volunteers from Islamic countries. The Taliban received valuable training, supplies and arms from the Pakistani government, particularly the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI),[10] and many recruits from madrasahs for Afghan refugees in Pakistan, primarily ones established by the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI).[11]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by UmbraSumus
 


Please forgive me...I wrote that this morning...should have re-read when I started back up this evening.

These particular Afghans are living a life of falsehood. That fuel doesn't belong to them...they know this...yet they took it. They say they desire Sharia and they received a response consistent with what they desire.

I am trying to act as an observer in this...I don't necessarily want to comment concerning whether the response itself was justified or necessary, but only that it did happen and that some Afghan's are bringing this upon themselves. Not just this event but this whole war.

It seems that they are fighting a war that they intend to win by swaying public opinion in their favor...I am stating that this is not going to happen and they will continue to experience the most ridiculous catastrophies and that no one can save them; only complete surrender can save them. This is not endorsement for what's going to happen, just a comment that this is going to happen.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by TheCoffinman
 


Yes, I am aware that they have a back story, which extols their historic effort and establishes them as worthy of emulation. That's for domestic consumption.

What I am saying is that no one captures anything without a powerful sponsor. The sponsor is the one that makes it happen. The Taliban received the place as a gift; probably with Saudi support as they were one of only 3 states that recognized their rule.

Even though he doesn't get much credit these days, there would be no United States of America without the support and sponsorship of Louis XVI. Or do you actually believe that a militia defeated the King of England?



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by TheCoffinman
 


Then they believe a lie. I may be able to find a thread that suggests there is no such person as Osama bin Laden or that Osama bin Laden is CIA...which would mean that the people of the region love a myth.

This mythical person is safe and sound according to people claiming to be close to him, while the people that believe in him bury their children.

A website claimed that bin Laden has a gift for the Muslims for Ramadan...I guess he's the homeless Santa Claus after all. But I bet it'll just be more calls for them to keep sacrificing their lives so that he can achieve greatnes.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


To some extent your right these people knew the tanker would be found and they knew it couldn't be allowed to escape.So when it gut stuck they figured the villagers would make a good shield.The problem is in an air strike theres no way to figure out if they were tali-ban or not.The Afghanis aren't stupid they blame the tali-ban and the government.The government gets the blame for not protecting the people the tali ban for causing deaths.



Mohammad Sarwar, a tribal elder in the province, said: "We blame both the Taliban and the government for this." Mohammad Omar, the provincial governor, said he believed half of those killed were militants, while Abdul Razzaq Yaqubi, his police chief, said 55 of the 90 dead were fighters. Four Chechens were among the dead.


In defense of the German's they could not allow 2 tanker trucks to fall into enemy hands that would have been enough of a blast to do major damage to Mazār-e Sharīf .In case you didn't know this is the 2nd largest city in Afghanistan that was taken by the northern alliance from the tali ban and they want it back. If memory serves me its about a 2 hour drive from where the tankers blew up and were obviously heading west from the fire base the Germans set up. They did the right thing you think these civilian deaths were bad imagine blowing these up in a major city.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


From what i gather , Afghani villages get visited by NATO Forces on week - Taliban the next .
I would imagine they walk a perilously fine line between appearing to give aid to the "enemy" ~ . Who`s the enemy ? it depends whos asking doesn`t it.

Muslim or not , nobody likes strangers telling them what to do .... be they foreign coalition forces or the Taliban enforcing their interpretation of Islam.

Many of these villages are isolated , if they are seen to collaborate with NATO forces , they have Taliban reprisals to deal with after the troops move on .
Its not a simple case of telling the Taliban to leave their village .There is no police to come to their aid .
Now picture your little boy standing behind you .... you and your villagers outnumbered and out gunned , nobody to rescue you ..... what do you tell the Fundamentalists when they make a request of you ?

Pragmatism wins out every time . These villagers are vulnerable .


The faces may be a different colour , the language a different dialect but one thing remains a constant .....its always the civilians that get shafted in any conflict zone.

I don`t envy there position.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:45 PM
link   

They use the fuel to power their suicide vehicles, right. Does fuel have any applications for use in explosives?


That's ignorant. Ever consider that they use fuel for their vehicles, especially those old clunkers obtained from the Soviets? Or did you even know they used vehicles...



"Brave rebels". What a hoot.


For one, I have to read through ignorant people calling them terrorists all the time. I just call them as I see them, they are fighting their imposed government so they are technically rebels now. They are brave because they have the balls to hijack NATO tankers.


That what happens when the enemy decides to wear civilian clothing and blend in with the civilian population and use them as shields.


I don't know what you people are smoking, but every time I see rebels in Afghanistan they are usually wearing distinctive camo duty gear and tactical vests. Plus they're usually holding a gun.

I'm sure they must have worn civilian clothes to do something like hijack a tanker. I'm also sure that American agents would wear civilian clothes to do the same.

And if you're so smart about this issue, then did you ever consider that these are fighters who own nothing and maybe they can't produce their own uniforms? It's like you expect them to not fight if they can't wear uniforms or something. Rediculous



"Zero probability?" Never heard of a shoulder launched SAM, have you?


You mean the FIM-92 Stinger, supplied by the Americans themselves in the late 70s? Yeah, a real threat to modern ground attack fighters



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join