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: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by UmbraSumus

Originally posted by IDK88
reply to post by UmbraSumus
 


So you do agree that the reason's why the Taliban/Al Qaeda clique cannot be explained by me based on how I reckon reality?




Look, this has slowly deteriorated ..... into this garbled brain fart .





Originally posted by IDK88

The Taliban and/or Al Qaeda can't win because it would be a violation of sub-atomic realities. On Earth as it is in Heaven...Ringing any bells in your massive brains? Since not many people have seen the relation between Quantum Mechanics and the structure of the Nation State...


Seriously man ......

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am certain that you IDK88 and HuckFinn are one and the same person.


It makes total sense...but I just joined this site.



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


Here we go...delusion is stealing fuel from a hijacked tanker in the middle of a war zone.



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 11:58 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 12:06 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by IDK88
They are not freedom fighters they are being led to their deaths and you support this?


Hell yeah I support it. I'd even be fighting for them if I didn't put Canada's interests ahead of my own. They are Afghans fighting for their country, they are not part of some American proxy government that will fail like every other conventional Afghan government.

Afghanistan was meant to be ruled by the people, and the US or any other imperial army will never conquer it. They've been beaten and raped and massacred and # on so many times in history that they know to only trust themselves and to fight off any invaders bringing "freedom" by bombs.

Afghanistan is a proving ground, and whoever will unite that country will be the rightful champion of the world (hopefully somebody understands what I mean by that). It will never be won by guns.


The Taliban and/or Al Qaeda can't win because it would be a violation of sub-atomic realities. On Earth as it is in Heaven...Ringing any bells in your massive brains? Since not many people have seen the relation between Quantum Mechanics and the structure of the Nation State...


Now we're getting all philosophical, eh? I don't know anything about quantum mechanics, but what I have figured out is that nation states have the same relation as an individual person. In fact, I believe that true and stable nations could (and should) have a single individual leader to represent everything their country stands for.

Sometimes I even look at countries as if they were people and I consider their personalities, strengths, relationships, etc. Consider what Afghanistan would be if it was a person, hardened in all aspects by constant fighting and totally against anyone trying to walk all over him.

[edit on 6-9-2009 by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


If you truly support the Afghans then you wouldn't support the Taliban.They are not freedom fighters by any means. Do you realize that 90 percent of women and 63 percent of males in Afghanistan think the Taliban is terrorists.The people in Afghanistan know who's there to protect them and it isn't the Taliban. Are you aware that there followers couldn't even fill a college stadium latest figures are they number between 3000 to 5000 members.Have you ever talked with anyone in Afghanistan or are you simply making stuff up?



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 

Not accurate that 90% of Afg people do not support the Taliban. 90% are the Taliban. The Taliban are muslims who want to enforce Sharia law. This is accurate for all 57 OIC countries.

Now there is a small minority of farmers who just want to grow poppies and support their families. But most importantly: Islamic principle that if an Islamic land is attacked, jihad becomes fard ayn, or incumbent upon every individual believer to join or to aid in any way he can



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Making stuff up? No, I just use common sense when I read the same news you do.

Taliban would not exist if it didn't have support from the Afghan people. Taliban helped create some infrastructure, some stability. They even eradicated poppy fields. They live by a code based on their religion, the same general religion that almost everyone else in the middle east believes in. Who am I and who are you to tell these people how they should be controlled? It is up to them to make that decision on their own, and the Taliban was the only organization that had it together enough to give Afghanistan a structure.

The US destroyed that structure in days by means of bombs. You call that freedom, to bomb people and then instill your version of government on them? That's imperialism, and imperialism is so 1938


Q

posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Maybe that's your national way of dealing, but things are different around the world. People like me are tough and honorable enough to only kill the person if they were trying to kill me first, we don't need unnecessary force to do unnecessary things to get ourselves into unnecessary situations.


Yes, that is our national way of dealing, and it has made your national way of dealing possible for many years. We use lethal force quite readily to defend our homes, lives, and property on both an individual and national level. I understand that this may be a foreign concept. Sorry to burst your bubble, but your "tough and honorable" approach will get you beaten, robbed, and/or potentially killed. If someone's breaking into YOUR HOME, honor is already out the window. The intruder has already dismissed your defensive capabilities and views your personal property as their personal property that simply hasn't been claimed yet. It isn't about your honor, it's about your stuff. When you pop out of the closet to ask this individual whether he's there just to rob you, or kill you, while exercising restraint from "unnecessary force", you're going to get a couple of holes in you for your gallant stand. Intruder makes off with your stereo, and your honorable self gets a free ride to the morgue, end of story. It happens every day.

I understand the gun laws are a bit different up there, and it's quite possible that neither you nor the intruder will have a firearm. In that case, I suppose you'd have to duke it out with moose antlers, or whatever passes for personal protection in those parts.

I'm not saying honor doesn't have it's place, or that Americans are all undisciplined cowboys popping off our six shooters at the slightest provocation. I'm saying that the moral code you seem to espouse by your statements could put you at a severe, and quite possibly fatal disadvantage. Unless you're in a boxing ring, there is no such thing as a "fair fight". (And even then you've got to watch for ear-biters like Tyson! lol)

...and for God's sake, please spare us the "different around the world" crap, if you would. It's not like Canada is some mythical land where everything's different--I've been there and it's pretty much the same-just colder and less friendly. I've met people from all over the world, and for all our differences, we all are basically the same in most respects.

Oh, and to "dooper"--I like the way you think. :0)



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by JJay55
 


Suggest you read more carefully it invalidates the rest of your post i didn't say they had 90 percent support of the population. You couldnt get 90 percent of any population to agree on anything. What i did say is 90 percent of women which is understandable in this case. The taliban definitely isn't going to garner there support.


PS there is little support for Taliban in Afghanistan except in southern region mostly do to the fact that the people have to live there and the Taliban have guns.In truth there support is from Pakistan all ways has been this is another reason the Afgans don't trust them.

[edit on 9/6/09 by dragonridr]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Making stuff up? No, I just use common sense when I read the same news you do.

Taliban would not exist if it didn't have support from the Afghan people. Taliban helped create some infrastructure, some stability. They even eradicated poppy fields. They live by a code based on their religion, the same general religion that almost everyone else in the middle east believes in. Who am I and who are you to tell these people how they should be controlled? It is up to them to make that decision on their own, and the Taliban was the only organization that had it together enough to give Afghanistan a structure.

The US destroyed that structure in days by means of bombs. You call that freedom, to bomb people and then instill your version of government on them? That's imperialism, and imperialism is so 1938

Yes, accurate on the Taliban infrastructure.

The US has no other choice. We aren't there to take over, just in defense in their backyard and not ours... which they want it to be. We are avoiding that scenerio. I don't think we are going to bomb and kill all the people and then move Americans into that country and take over... and claim the land. Not imperialism.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 05:25 AM
link   
Ok, here is a translated (by me, sorry for mistakes) statement of the german war minister Jung in a SPIEGEL article (www.spiegel.de...):



By very detailed operational reconnaissance over hours we had strong hints, that the Taliban hijacked the two fuel trucks six kilometers from our camp, to do a terror attack on our base in Kunduz. Because of that i think the decision of the commander (to bomb them - eule) was right.

Pretty difficult to make investigations over hours, when the attack took place 50 minutes after the trucks were hijacked... (1.40AM hijacked, 2.30 AM bombed)
A story by the Washington post states, that there was one informant responsible for the attack, i´ll translate the bit written by SPIEGEL, as i can´t read the original story (www.washingtonpost.com...).



The german base called an afghan informant, who stated, that the crowd around the truck were insurgents. Then the command to attack was given.

During the attack, commanded by the Bundeswehr, died 6 civilians, one child included. Governour of Kunduz, Mohammed Omar, told news agency AFP, that 54 people were killed, 48 of them carrying weapons. 15 humans were hurt, under them two Taliban.

Sure...

There are different numbers of casualties:
President Harmid Karzai speaks of 90 deads and injured.
Afghan home office: 56 dead Taliban, 10 hurt, including a child
Bundeswehr: More than 50 dead Taliban (Minister Jung: Only Taliban killed!)
54 yo village resident: 50 buried in Jakuba (the village hit), 70 buried in surrounding villages. Every family has victims. Whole families were eradicated.
Red cross: Exact numbers will never be determined.

Whom do you believe?


[edit on 6-9-2009 by euleberlin]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 05:55 AM
link   
OK two petrol tankers hijacked and destroyed, I presume they would have had some sort of escort, Say militia type private security , so lets tally up the manning level for this convoy. 2 drivers 2 helpers/guards, escorting vehicles, say 3, manned 6 guards per escort vehicle that makes roughly lets say 22 all in, any Taliban group would have to be at least 40 strong.. security took of with drivers and the Taliban were left with two tankers , Which they obviously did not know how to operate hence getting them bogged in.. Security calls the main German army base and informed that it has 2 fully loaded tankers heading its way .. You the Commander at said base what would you do ..??? just food for thought



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 07:53 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]


Next week it will be death for a stolen loaf of bread. Has it become so easy to call any group of people "Taliban" and simply bomb them? If these were your relatives would you have a reason to hate the occupying forces?



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Q
If someone's breaking into YOUR HOME, honor is already out the window. The intruder has already dismissed your defensive capabilities and views your personal property as their personal property that simply hasn't been claimed yet.


Yes, that is precisely what you have done and where they protest you simply bomb them into submission. Surely you can see what you have claimed.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


First of all somalia is divided between more than 3 parties... yes, the TFG, al-shabaab and hizbul islam were all once the ICU, but im assuming also so was ahlu suna wal jamaa. there is also somaliland speratists in the north and puntland seperatists in the north central region.. to think al-shabaab doesnt "exist" or that "al-qeda" dont exist your basing that off that news report a few weeks back saying al-qeda was a figmant of 9/11... something made up by the government to call the bad guys... when the group calls itself this and its soldiers and followers believe thats what they are in then doesnt that make it what it is.. they call themselves al-qaeda, they call themselves al-shabaab, in fact al-shabaab has even told al-qeda linked islamists to stay out of somalia..

www.time.com...

example: the yemen government denies that the saudi government is helping them by bombing houthi rebels and sending supplies to the yemen army, the saudis also deny this... BUT

www.liveleak.com...

There it is... conclusive evidence to say otherwise...

as for portugal and france owning everything before the english and spanish arrived... portugal never had thier hands in north american affairs, only south american affairs. i believe the original question involved the colonies.. not the entire united states. in that case yes, the french owned a good deal of american land, as did the spanish yet their influence other than place names lacked and up until the recent massive illegal immigration of millions of mexicans, spanish was hard to find outside of california and florida... you can find french influence in the creole/cajun lands in louisiana. alos would like to add that sweden and the dutch had colonies in new jersey, delaware and new york..



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   


Residents of Chahar Dara district in northern Kunduz province say more than 150 civilians were killed and 20 others wounded in Friday's air strike by NATO-led forces


www.rawa.org...



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by TheCoffinman
 


Well I am pretty certain that the Portugese had been traveling to the Americas, Africa and Asia for 100s of years before either the Spanish or the Pope knew anything...information concerning this place would have been considered Above Top Secret back then. Columbus happened to marry a Portugese woman who's dad was a seafarer and he acquired some Portugese maps...his "discovery" of America is a bad joke. The line the Pope drew outlining Spanish and Portugese realms was certainly a major theft first and foremost.

When you live in a world that happens to be heavily influenced by people who love murder, armed robbery and cover-ups as much as the Spanish and English did/do, then you're bound to not realize the obvious.

But this whole thing is becoming a bit tedious...as you seem to know more about other people's history than do they.

To stick with the topic...I'll just say that the conflict in Somalia and Afghanistan explain one another...as is the case with many issues and those people are just fighting against themselves. No such Imperial power exists.





[edit on 6-9-2009 by IDK88]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join