9 US troops killed in battle in eastern Afghanistan, Taliban claim, page


Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 20-5-2012 @ 08:18 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL
www.presstv.ir...


Taliban militants claim they have killed nine US soldiers in an attack on a US military base in Afghanistan's mountainous eastern province of Khost near the border with Pakistan, Press TV reports.


The French pulled out just in time and then this happens. The report also mentions 8 that were wounded. Something just is not right with the US Forces security procedures. We don't know if it was the usual rogue afghan troop or something different. As more countries pull out, the US remains more and more isolated on this situation. Britain's public is very against the war and they may be pulling out eventually one may think, but the US signed a lease till 2024 lol


reply posted on 20-5-2012 @ 09:32 AM by Neocrusader
Dude I can't view your link

I was briefed Friday about a mass casualty attack that was claimed by the Taliban to have killed a number of us troops which was infact propaganda - no us troops were killed - it was 2 afghani police and 6 civilians ( may have been 7 )

Just looking to see if this is the same event
I know we don't often agree - but honestly I just want you to know the truth dude

Like when the Taliban attacked Kandahar air base
A quick break down
Al jazeera turns up at the gate cameras rolling just watching the gate
5 mins later a complicated attack took place on the north perimeter fence -
A tractor borne IED drives toward the fence line ( in order to punch an access hole for forcess on foot ) hit a bump and prematurely detonated

The supporting insurgents all kitted out with suicide vests and AK's emerged from their hidey holes ready to get inside the wire
They see that the fence hasn't been hit and proceeded to rush the fence in an attempt that one of them would detonate themselves of the fence so the others could get on the camp and carry out their mission
Anyways - right next to where they decided to try and blast this wall a platoon of Canadians were conducting some counter IED trainig in some dead ground ( out of view )
These Canadians proceeded to shoot the insurgents before they could accomplish this ( or again they suffered from premature detonation )
a small hole was created in the fence ( by flying debris )
And some insurgents arm landed inside the fence line
No coalition casualties no sufficient damage
But al jazeera with a Taliban statement reported hundreds of coalition troops dead,multiple aircraft destroyed, runways damaged beyond use ect ect

Take things with a pinch of salt dude
But I will extend a hand - if you ever want some info to help in your threads feel free to u2u me

But to add to this
The UN convoy hit in Syria this last few days
Has been supposedly claimed by AQ
bollox !!!
I was briefed Friday - no one has claimed responsibility and that islamics/insurgents/ whatever you want to call em were totally silent regarding this attack ?????
What better way to get UN support in Syria than a false flag on a UN convoy


reply posted on 20-5-2012 @ 03:34 PM by intrptr
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


I don't know about this attack. I do know this. The thing about Afghanistan is the terrain. There are but few roads leading in and around the passes. These are ancient routes used throughout history. They are well traveled. And have not changed for millenia. All the locals know about the choke points and the surrounding mountain perches that view the most vulnerable points. As a hillbilly Mujahideen mountain man, I have all day to sit up there and watch the comings and goings of supply caravans and "patrols". They have to pass by there sooner or later and when they do...

These guys will be waiting. Even a big rock is a lethal weapon once it gains momentum. The russians had the same problem. The valleys are steep and the gorges deep. Its a lot easier to shoot down at somebody than up. Its a lot easier to block a convoy by blowing up the lead and trailing vehicle on a single road that winds its way thru the mountains. Its harder to fly in the passes because the terrain and turbulence make it difficult to navigate. Let alone being shot at from the valley rims. The caves have been there for centuries providing safe refuge from even the most sophisticated sensors and bombs.

Lastly this is not a war. This is an occupation. You don't win an occupation. The people will always be against any occupying army. Wouldn't you? And they are patient. Time is on their side.


reply posted on 20-5-2012 @ 04:03 PM by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Neocrusader



Are you still having trouble with the link?

Here try it again like this:

9 Troops Killed

My Official source for casualties is icasualties.org. If it does not show up on there within a few days I will agree with you then.
edit on 043131p://5America/ChicagoSun, 20 May 2012 16:06:04 -0500 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 20-5-2012 @ 05:09 PM by Neocrusader
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL



Muchos gracias

I think it was my connection at the time
It's working fine now bud
I'll have a look see tomorrow, see if I can get some definative info
But it's looking like unlucky news reporting ( as can be the case with alternative news )
I'll post back here
Dependent on any classification of course but this is looking pretty open/shut kinda thing


reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 11:37 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Neocrusader



Yea I am still waiting, it just takes my sources a few days to post the casualties. They are still reporting deaths from 5-18. If they post deaths on 5-21 and skip over 5-20 it will mean that no one died on 5-20 and you are correct.


reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 11:45 AM by nahahh
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to
post by Neocrusader



Yea I am still waiting, it just takes my sources a few days to post the casualties. They are still reporting deaths from 5-18. If they post deaths on 5-21 and skip over 5-20 it will mean that no one died on 5-20 and you are correct.


So, if your source takes a few days to post the casualties, and you say they are still reporting deaths from 5-18...then, why does your title say 9? Are you trying to get a leg up on the competition? Star hoarding, perhaps? What is your MO-TI-VA-TION???


reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 11:55 AM by mr-lizard
www.presstv.com...

Taliban militants claim they have killed nine US soldiers in an attack on a US military base in Afghanistan's mountainous eastern province of Khost near the border with Pakistan, Press TV reports.


They added that eight US troops were also wounded in the assault, which allegedly occurred on Saturday.


That's all I can find. Even the site says 'alleged'.


reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 02:20 PM by Neocrusader
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL



Well no - sorry unless your source gives more details ?
If it just has a date period and total dead it's not going to indicate a specific number on a specific day ?
Or does it provide specifics ?

The lack of news on this should be bit of an indicator
Unless its SF/BB related

To the above poster these numbers are date periods



reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 02:22 PM by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Neocrusader



This is my specific source to confirm:

icasualties.org...

It provides all the details, inclusion name and branch or service, and date of death etc..
edit on 023131p://5America/ChicagoMon, 21 May 2012 14:23:00 -0500 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: Link fix



reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 02:38 PM by Neocrusader
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL



Cool cheers
Not a site I've ever visited ( or infact aware existed ! lol ) never needed it but will check it out shortly as ........... dum dum dum
i have wifi for a while
But I shall mark it for future use thanks


Edit - dude thats quite a site umm yeah

I hope you don't spend too much time there - that s##t will mess with your head

Reminds me of a time I HAD to do a week long D-day tour ( don't ask why )
Hated every moment
Standing on Omaha beach !
Like a f##king tourist !
Just felt wrong
I'll honour all that died there in my own way - not by walking on the spot of a massacre

But still I digres ( ah the perks of relative civilisation lol )

A good source

But ............do you really think it shows ALL US deaths ( or any nations for that matter )
Why would I say that ?
That means you could indeed be correct, 9 US dead - and that it could possibly, not be listed ( sf/bb/ ect)
What I'm trying to say is take EVERYTHING with a pinch of salt


edit on 21-5-2012 by Neocrusader because: Added
edit on 21-5-2012 by Neocrusader because: Auto

Pages:     ^^TOP^^