Taliban fighters getting killed by small arms and aircraft

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 09:17 PM
link   
These Taliban fighters were well fed and well supplied. Notice their faces look full, quite a departure from the normal image of Afghanis and Pakistanis that we are used to. Also, it would see that they are physically fit since they don't look fat, just well nourished. Also, notice the condition of their clothes and weapons, these soldiers are obviously well taken care of.

When compared to other videos that we have seen, these fighters seem to be very well trained, nourished and supplied. This leads me to believe that the Taliban is turning into a formidable foe. They seem to be getting stronger, though I would assume that this is their "cream of the crop" or special forces.

As far as the poster who commented on the age of some of the fighters, that doesn't mean anything as he could have been a commander. We too have older soldiers in command positions and in the NG and Reserves, we have older folks in much lower ranks.

Just my $00.02 worth. Anyway nice video, thanks for sharing.

--airspoon




posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by FearNoEvil
 


Obama never said he would be pulling out of Afghanistan, on the contrary, I believe he stated we should have put more resources towards the Afghan campaign.

He did say he would end the Iraq campaign, which I believe is scheduled to have combat troop pullout later this year.



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by one4all
 





TextWe cant live pure lives with the knowledge that humanities future is not secure without a global democracy. Every human on earth must be recorded and their names must be heard and written somewhere,just as their voices,EACH SINGLE ONE must be heard as loudly as yours and mine,it is OUR JOB TO ENSURE THIS HAPPENS BEFORE WE DIE OUR NATURAL DEATHS.


Bravo, its not popular, but it must be said. And you said it well.

Not many people here would agree with you, but if you read my sig, you will see a fellow human that actually believes in humanity and the SANCTITY of life.




And fighting is not the easy way as our governments are well aware,it is the hard way,if the money spent on the current war had been spent on initiating a global democracy using the fiscal impetuous of that much cash we would be half way there already.


And this is the sad truth. The waste of our resources is maddening. Why don't we transition to a defensive military, instead of continued development on offensive capabilities.

Its a shame, and a sham.



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ErEhWoN
 

You may be right. I'll do more research. I thought I remembered him saying he was planning to draw them down. Sorry if I mis-spoke.

I'm just pissed. Send Special Forces after Bin Laden. The Afghanistan war is BS.


Peace

ETA - Yeah, you're right, it was Iraq. Why am I still PISSED OFF? So, what the hell are we fighting for? This war is BS. Someone convince me I'm wrong.





[edit on 3-7-2010 by FearNoEvil]



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by LittleSecret
 


The two SRR troopers were moved to another location after being handed over to the militants. Do you know what there were doing to people at that station, electric drill torture, not a nice thing. They killed the police officer after being fired on for failing to stop at the VCP. Almost everyone who was working at that police station was corrupt, like most of the Iraqi police at the time.


Your argument is mute:



The Iraqi police were patrolling the area looking for suspected "terrorists" or "insurgents", and they noticed that the men were acting suspiciously. Suddenly, without warning, the suspicious men started shooting at people, but the new Iraqi security forces managed to capture some of them before they could escape. Obviously, if these men had not been caught, the mass media would now be reporting the incident as just another attempt by evil "terrorists" to create civil war in Iraq.

There have been a number of incidents in this area and throughout Iraq in which police and civilians have been targeted and killed by "terrorists" or "insurgents". But this is the first time that any of those responsible have been caught in the act, and it is now clear that at least some of them are working directly for the occupying forces, as many Iraqis have openly suspected all along.

A few days ago, in a statement unreported in the corporate mass media, Iran's most senior military official specifically linked the instability in Iraq with agents of the US and its allies: "we have information that the insecurity has its roots in the activities of American and Israeli spies."

The post-war violence in Iraq is always been blamed on "Islamic extremists" or "rival ethnic factions". Yet in the history of the country, nothing like this has ever happened before. The problems began precisely when the US and UK seized control.

The Iraqi police arrested the men and put them in prison. Unfortunately the police never had a chance to question the men and find out exactly what they were doing, because within minutes the UK sent in six tanks and an elite SAS unit to break their terrorists out of jail.

During the illegal prison break Iraqi officials were held at gunpoint, much of the jail was demolished, and all of the other criminals and insurgents were set free. The US and UK do not hesitate to use violence and terror to achieve their objectives, no matter what the consequences.

The official explanation for the illegal jail break is that somebody thought the British men might be taken away by a gang of Iraqi resistance fighters and never seen again. This is blatantly nonsense, of course, because the entire prison was entirely surrounded by British tanks and troops. With the full force of the British military at hand, the terrorists were rescued quickly and easily.

As further details emerge, the Western media increasingly presents conflicting reports about the nature and sequence of events, and the official British sources cited without question in mainstream news coverage are indicative of a classic disinformation exercise.

When local people saw what was happening the area began to erupt with angry anti-British protests.

www.theinsider.org...

If the entire prison was surrounded why did they think somehow these British terrorists were gonna be handed over to insurgents?

Why did they shoot people without warning?

Why did it so quickly vanish from the news?

Why wasn't the Iraqi side of the story mentioned in the news?

Media Blackout?



[edit on 4-7-2010 by LittleSecret]



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 





Yes, they did, and they damn well OUGHT to be tired of fighting. That's been going on there for decades, with no letup in sight. There are people there now, who are getting up in years, and have NEVER known a time of peace, not in their entire lives. You're one of them, just not there any more. Congrats on that, by the way.

The conflict started due to American proxy games in the region, two oppressive empires fighting each other using countries such as Afghanistan to play their little game.

Do you know why the UN was established? It was established to set the rule of their game played, and to avoid any accountability in regards to these oppressive empires. Heck why do you suppose they hold VETO powers?

Since the game started millions of lives have been effected, and millions of innocent have been killed.

The game was played in Iraq, hence the Qassim regime, in Afghanistan, in Iran, in Europe, in Africa etc.



There's ALWAYS a choice. Regardless of what you say about the "resistance", we both know who is at the core of that. No, not all "resistance" fighters are Taliban, and far fewer are al-Qaida, but that's the core, the source of the fighting, the source of the motivating ideology. If the resistance gave up on the Taliban, the "Empire" would have to find another excuse, or get the hell out of dodge. No two ways about it. The "Empire" went in ostensibly after the Taliban, and al-Qaida. Removing them from the picture jerks the rug right out from under us.

The source of fighting is not Taliban, nor Al-Qaeda, nor are they the motivating ideology.

Some Afghans are resisting because they have the belief in self defense. Some Afghans are resisting due to complete lack of law and order in the country, and the F'd up policies implemented and the double standard, and the lies.

You invade NZ, I'll say again, I'll resist with my last breath, and I will say if my fellow fighters die they will go to heaven, do you know why? Because of moral up boost, when you are fighting the world's most powerful killing machine who bomb villages and wedding parties, you need loads of moral support.



If you harbor anything against the CIA, it should be that it pulled out right after the Russians did, and left an abominable power vacuum in which the warlords and the Taliban flourished, and kept the war going on, but against each other, vying for supremacy.

No not the CIA, the whole government of the empire, they show double standard attitude, use terrorism, invade without any justification etc etc.

Even after USSR was defeated Russia was still in the game, they just changed names and logged back in.



There were those who argued against an abrupt pullout, and FOR assistance in rebuilding, but they got over-ruled by other elements who declared the job done, since the Russians were gone, and insisted on a pullout.

The Taliban came to power because there was no law and order, little girls and boys were being raped by war lords all around and that is sickening the least.

Read wikipedia on how the Taliban came to power.



Afghans suffered because of that short-sightedness, and still do.

No Afghans suffered because the world empires just won't leave it alone, always meddling in their internal policy.

Even after the Taliban became the government of Afghanistan, Russia was supporting the NA.



Yes, the Taliban played that well. You are of course aware that the Taliban at no time ever controlled more than 60% of Afghanistan, and were constantly at war with the warlords and the Northern Alliance. Look at Hekmatyar. How many times has he switched sides now?

The Taliban brought law and order which the Afghans needed after decades of war, and lawlessness. The US brought Afghanistan back to what it was, a lawless, corrupt, drug lab.

Once again, there was no resistance in Afghanistan within 4-5 year of invasion, why is that? The Afghans gave the empire a chance, because they were sick of fighting, but they saw that this empire was no better than the last, actually USSR was much better than this one, although their terrorism was not any better.



There WAS "resistance", but against the Taliban (created by the ISI, by the way, and so 'foreigners'), not "The Empire".

You mean there was invasion, not resistance?

The empire came and bombarded the country, but obviously until your children are under those bombs you would always defend the empire's actions, but obviously until it is your children who are being raped due to lawlessness, you will continue your support of the empire.



Indeed. Afghanistan has always been "corrupt" by foreign standards, but that really shouldn't apply internally, eh? If you guys are happy with it, then so am I. Drug production HAS increased, I believe, but the whole story isn't told just by that statement alone. The Taliban was against poppy growing, until they turned TOWARDS it to fund their war effort.

Somehow, the US and in particular the CIA gets the blame for that. Go figure.

Under the Taliban there was no corruption, this is even compared to foreign standards.

When the Taliban was in control, drug production was mute, and now that the US is in control Afghanistan became the drug lab of the world, the biggest producer.

For you to twist it and blame Taliban for drug production is absurd.



I will, and I'll sleep well, too. Alexander and Genghis keep the notion at bay. Afghans are tough, but NO ONE is invincible.


Yes arrogance usually blinds people. You see, Afghans are not invincible, but they have two things.

#1. GOD
#2. Unbreakable spirit

Even Russia wouldn't survive the wrath of the US with its intelligence, air power etc.

America has already tried every trick in the book to win the war in Afghanistan, and it seems it has met with the same answer, FAIL.

The Iraq resistance was defeated using the war tactic divide and conqor. The civil war which killed millions of innocent people was orchestrated by the US.

THE NATO recently tried the same tactic, it failed, that is why Gen. Stanley Mc... was fired.

Remember the bombing in a wedding party, immediately suicide bombers were blamed, and straight away the fingers started pointing towards the resistance?

Afghan witnesses said it wasn't a suicide bombing, they said our experience of war allows us to differentiate. The resistance denied any accountability.

IT failed miserably.

The US can keep trying, but it is running out of tactics, the propaganda machine is also failing due Websites like ATS, and ofcurse it never worked in Afghanistan because of their experience in WAR.

USSR used very similar tactics throughout the war, failed miserably.

Good luck to the human side of the conflicts, the soldiers of the empire who are fighting so they can go to college are the human side.

It is sad.

[edit on 4-7-2010 by LittleSecret]



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by LittleSecret

The conflict started due to American proxy games in the region, two oppressive empires fighting each other using countries such as Afghanistan to play their little game.


Well, of COURSE that was the reason!
I read the KGB intel reports. According to them, it was started because the Soviets instituted a socialist puppet government, which went for about a year as I recall, and some Afghans (rightfully so, in my mind - I don't much care for socialists either) killed about a dozen embassy staff by cutting their throats. That gave Russia the pretext to invade, in defense of their socialist "brothers" (the puppet regime) and the "glorious revolutionary People's Republic".

Are you trying to say the Americans set up the socialists there in "proxy games"? If not, how is it you can blame the Americans for the Soviet invasion?



Do you know why the UN was established? It was established to set the rule of their game played, and to avoid any accountability in regards to these oppressive empires. Heck why do you suppose they hold VETO powers?


Don't really know why the UN was created, and don't really care. The UN is a bunch of impotent wussies. Could neither fight nor negotiate their way out of a paper bag. A UN 'ruling' and a buck thirty five will get you a large cup of coffee at McDonalds here in the states. Better have the buck thirty five when you go, though, since the UN ruling alone won't cut it.



The source of fighting is not Taliban, nor Al-Qaeda, nor are they the motivating ideology.


Well, yeah, they are. They're the life of the party there. Take them out of the equation, and the "Empire" has to go away. Nothing left for them to do but rebuild, and it sounds like you just don't want none of THAT!



Some Afghans are resisting because they have the belief in self defense. Some Afghans are resisting due to complete lack of law and order in the country, and the F'd up policies implemented and the double standard, and the lies.


Self defense from what? Don't run with the Taliban, and you don't need to worry about getting jumped. Give 'em up, we go away. Pretty simple.

Now, there has ALWAYS been a lack of law and order in Afghanistan. That's just the way the warlords work. Even under the grand Taliban, the warlords were fighting and tearing things up. Taliban NEVER controlled more than 60%, and usually a good bit less, of the country, and the rest was controlled either by the Northern Alliance, or the lawless warlords. That's just a fact of life in Afghanistan.



You invade NZ, I'll say again, I'll resist with my last breath, and I will say if my fellow fighters die they will go to heaven, do you know why? Because of moral up boost, when you are fighting the world's most powerful killing machine who bomb villages and wedding parties, you need loads of moral support.


Relax. we ain't gonna invade NZ. They're not hiding bin Laden from us.

Fighters don't go to heaven just for fighting. That's absurd. When the time comes, it won't be enough to say "I killed this many people! Look at me and let me in!". It might be enough to say "I saved a life", though. One should never mix up his wars and his deities. Any god that's so weak he can't fight his own battles, and has to have puny humans fight them for him, is too weak a god for me to worry about.

No, fighters fight for their own, and war experience doesn't have much bearing on the afterlife. The most you can hope for is to say "I saved this life" or "I spared that life", and hope THAT'S enough. Probably ought to have a few more offerings, though.



No not the CIA, the whole government of the empire, they show double standard attitude, use terrorism, invade without any justification etc etc.


The justification in this case was the Taliban harboring our enemies, making themselves targets in the process. No terrorism needed on our part.



Even after USSR was defeated Russia was still in the game, they just changed names and logged back in.


I know. Iran was snoopin' around there, too. So was Pakistani ISI. At least the Russians had the decency to stay across the fence, and just hand stuff over to the NA.



The Taliban came to power because there was no law and order, little girls and boys were being raped by war lords all around and that is sickening the least.

Read wikipedia on how the Taliban came to power.


Don't need to read wikipedia. I already know how it came about. The Taliban was inserted from Pakistan by the ISI, who hoped to gain a controlling interest in the government of Afghanistan thereby. That's right, they were foreigners, at least at the top, before gaining any local recruits for the bottom. That's why the NA was shoving money into the mouths of dead Taliban on the push to Kabul. You know the customs, and why that was done.



No Afghans suffered because the world empires just won't leave it alone, always meddling in their internal policy.


Yeah, there's ALWAYS been a pretty high standard of living there.
Afghans have done a GREAT job without superpower interference. Actually, I'm with ya on that. Afghans want to live in mud villages, who am I to help 'em out of it? I guess you're right, the American pullout WAS the right thing to do back then.

I stand corrected.




The Taliban brought law and order which the Afghans needed after decades of war, and lawlessness. The US brought Afghanistan back to what it was, a lawless, corrupt, drug lab.


Yeah, they brought law and order around Kabul, and Kandahar, Jalalabad, and a few other places - assuming by "law and order" you mean "constant executions for trivial things".

The rest of the country, not so much. It was still pretty lawless. All in all, though, if that's the way Afghans like it (and it appears they do), just give us the Taliban, and you can get right back to killing your own, rape, plunder, murder and pillage. No skin off MY backside if that's what you want.



Once again, there was no resistance in Afghanistan within 4-5 year of invasion, why is that? The Afghans gave the empire a chance, because they were sick of fighting, but they saw that this empire was no better than the last, actually USSR was much better than this one, although their terrorism was not any better.


You can always call them back in after you give us the Taliban. I'm sure Najibullah would love to see 'em. Oh, that's right, he don't see much of anything any more, does he? Still, once we're gone, you can invite 'em over for a nice cup of chai, and I won't care a bit.




There WAS "resistance", but against the Taliban (created by the ISI, by the way, and so 'foreigners'), not "The Empire".

You mean there was invasion, not resistance?


No, I mean RESISTANCE. To the Taliban. That was the whole NA thing. Who was it that had Masud killed again, and why? I don't think it was his poppy fields...




Indeed. Afghanistan has always been "corrupt" by foreign standards, but that really shouldn't apply internally, eh? If you guys are happy with it, then so am I. Drug production HAS increased, I believe, but the whole story isn't told just by that statement alone. The Taliban was against poppy growing, until they turned TOWARDS it to fund their war effort.

Somehow, the US and in particular the CIA gets the blame for that. Go figure.

Under the Taliban there was no corruption, this is even compared to foreign standards.


I said corruption by FOREIGN standards, meaning the civilized world. There was PLENTY MUCH corruption under the Taliban. Especially in the areas not under the Taliban, or the NA.



When the Taliban was in control, drug production was mute, and now that the US is in control Afghanistan became the drug lab of the world, the biggest producer.


More to corruption than just drugs.



For you to twist it and blame Taliban for drug production is absurd.


Of COURSE it is.
Who's making profit from them? Don't give me a wiki, use real sources.




Yes arrogance usually blinds people. You see, Afghans are not invincible, but they have two things.

#1. GOD
#2. Unbreakable spirit


Let me know when your god starts twitching triggers. I might even go fight beside him, just to see if he's a better shot, and what he has for breakfast. Only thing my God ever did for me was get me out alive. I had to do my own fighting.

Afghans have spirit, I'll give you that. They never bothered to develop much else.



America has already tried every trick in the book to win the war in Afghanistan, and it seems it has met with the same answer, FAIL.


You have short books. I have some tricks of my own that would absolutely NOT fail, but I wouldn't try to fight a nice war like they are. Ask the Russians.



THE NATO recently tried the same tactic, it failed, that is why Gen. Stanley Mc... was fired.


Nah. He was fired over politics, the same thing that loses most wars, in the end. They shouldn't have hamstrung him to begin with, should have let him fight it like he really meant to win.



...The resistance denied any accountability.


Of course they did. Classic guerrilla tactic. Same thing went on in Cuba, Nicaragua, China, all over the world.



..., and ofcurse it never worked in Afghanistan because of their experience in WAR.


I know the Afghan experience of war. If it wasn't for the "Empire", they'd be speaking Russian by now.



USSR used very similar tactics throughout the war, failed miserably.


Soviets failed because they let themselves get pinned down to the bases, and buttoned up. US hardware and training did the rest, in Afghan hands. Cheer up. When the politicians force the US into the same situation, you win!

Otherwise, maybe not.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


You do know that two can play this game right? Afterall just because our government has banned and restricted videos and images of soldiers in bad light does not mean they don't exist.

For eg. lets start with this scared marine shouting on top of his lungs after coming under attack


and move on to this crying baby


or this one


Just look at the terror this guy has in his eyes






Or just do a search on theync for New IED Attack on US Foot Patrol 16/6/2010 which shows 4 US soldier being blown up with their OTV (the head gear) flying.

You should remember war is bad and death of anyone is not a matter to rejoice. Just because you cannot see the same kind of emotion on our side it doesn't mean they don't exist.

[edit on 4-7-2010 by EFGuy]



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by dizzylizzy
reply to post by Thepreye
 




Can you tell me which country treats women worse than the Taliban, or other Muslim states, allied or not to the USA or my country UK. Where else is stonning carried out.....for adultery.... or women forced to cover up from head to toe??

Yes women are treated badly throughout the world, but in most countries they have the law on their side.



So are you espousing a crusade against the entire Muslim world for women's rights or only the countries who have mineral wealth and aren't allied to the Empire.

What about the none Muslim countries in Asia where women are treated appallingly??

I totally support women's rights I just don't think killing them for freedom is the right way to go about getting those rights.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by LittleSecret
 



Well unless you have proof your talking BS.

[edit on 3-7-2010 by kevinunknown]


What else were two "British" servicemen doing with a car rigged to explode while dressed like Arabs it's obvious that's what they were doing, that's what special forces like the force reconnaissance unit are for.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 07:25 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleSecret
 


First of all your source it totally bias but that aside why would Task Force Black even have to bother carrying out false flag opps in Iraq when in 2005 Iraq was full of militants who were blowing themselves up every day. That point right there should be the end of it, however you are so blinded you can never accept the truth.

reply to post by Thepreye
 


I like how you talking about them, like you know what you’re talking about but you don’t even know their name “force reconnaissance unit” is actually called the Special Reconnaissance Regiment or SRR.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 07:48 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 




First of all your source it totally bias but that aside why would Task Force Black even have to bother carrying out false flag opps in Iraq when in 2005 Iraq was full of militants who were blowing themselves up every day. That point right there should be the end of it, however you are so blinded you can never accept the truth.

Dude, my source has its own sources, go read them.

Second, 2005 militants wasn't blowing themselves in the market targeting only civilians.

That is the point of this whole discussion dude, did you forget? A black op is not suppose to be exposed, so in 2005 imagine how many truck bombs the Special forces planted in the markets and blamed Al-Qaeda and the Iraqi resistance.

And the US was also accused of blowing up the Shia Shrine, that was the spark which started the civil war, and that was the whole plan, to divide and conquer.

Let them kill each other while we stay safe in our bases and then we come in.

Like WWII I suppose lol



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Here news update:



Five US soldiers have been killed after a convoy carrying supplies for the US-led troops was attacked by the Taliban militants in Afghanistan's Zabul province.


Remember how the Afghan resistance started attacking USSR supply convoys?

Ohh, the war experience helps, and the will power, and the moral.

The only has one, the war experience, none of the rest.

Ed€it to Add:

US moral:
More US soldiers commit suicide than killed in action


[edit on 4-7-2010 by LittleSecret]



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown

reply to post by Thepreye
 


I like how you talking about them, like you know what you’re talking about but you don’t even know their name “force reconnaissance unit” is actually called the Special Reconnaissance Regiment or SRR.


I like how you use your psychic power to ascribe my intent when writing about the SRR, I bow to your knowledge, I've only read of them once, actually in relation to this case, iirc, and perhaps some weirdness at an IRA funeral, but that's a hazy memory.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 08:27 AM
link   
This is one of those instances where you have brain washed yourself, you genuinely believing something is true when it is not. Go and read one of those book things rather than wiki and a bias conspiracy website. Even the sources in your source don’t back up any suggestion that SRR were carrying out false flag opps. 2005 was the height of the insurgency, they didn’t need to carry out false flag operations.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Thepreye
 


There is a change you’re getting confused with something called the Force Research Unit, who operated in Northern Ireland during the troubles. However SRR have been operating in Northern Ireland since about 2009. If you want to know more about FRU there is a fantastic book called “Stakeknife” by Martin Ingram and Greg Harkin, well worth a read.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by LittleSecret
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Here news update:



Five US soldiers have been killed after a convoy carrying supplies for the US-led troops was attacked by the Taliban militants in Afghanistan's Zabul province.


Remember how the Afghan resistance started attacking USSR supply convoys?


I recall Komrade Ivan's convoys having a spot of trouble in the Salang Pass. I also recall Ivan using Spetnaz stay-behinds giving the Muj a spot of trouble. How's things going in the Salang these days?



Ohh, the war experience helps, and the will power, and the moral.


Can't argue with that. One of Ivan's problems I see being repeated is micromanagement from the top down, not allowing local commanders enough autonomy to get the job done. Another mistake Ivan made that the US hasn't learned from is over-reliance on massive units against small, mobile, forces. Some of our generals don't have the stomach for a real war, and I can't deny it.

By the time the Muj had those big, bad units all locked down in their bases, the only thing going on in the countryside for the most part was Spetznaz units occasionally going out to hunt, but by then it was too little, too late. America is headed down the same road, true enough, but they're not there yet.

They ought to be sending out small units of SF types to make proactive contact, Then, dropping in larger reaction forces kept on standby for that very purpose, and doing all the resupply aerially, instead of trying to catch smoke in screen wire, and rolling supplies in in big, fat, ground hugging targets.

You can't tell conventional generals or politicians anything, though. They just can't hear anything beyond the next star or vote.



The only has one, the war experience, none of the rest.


You appear to be confusing troopers with conventional generals.



Ed€it to Add:

US moral:
More US soldiers commit suicide than killed in action


That tells me that your boys aren't doing as well as you claim, if the troops are doing a better job of killing themselves and each other off than the Taliban is.

Doesn't appear to be so much of a morale issue as it does Taliban that can't shoot straight.

Your "resistance" fighters have other problems in execution that I'd be happy to anyalyse for you, but I really suspect that, in common with American generals and politicians, they just can't listen to advice either. They could be MUCH more effective, just as the US forces could.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown

reply to post by Thepreye
 


I like how you talking about them, like you know what you’re talking about but you don’t even know their name “force reconnaissance unit” is actually called the Special Reconnaissance Regiment or SRR.


It sounds like he's getting something mixed up with Force Recon, formerly a US Marine unit.





new topics
top topics
 
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join


ATS Live Reality Remix is on-air in 4 minutes.
ATS Live Radio Presents - Reality Remix Live SE6 EP6

atslive.com

hi-def

low-def