U.S. drone strike kills 30 pine nut farm workers in Afghanistan

[mauGR1]

27 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

No, of course i don't think that, and you are right, it would not be a great idea.

But recently US cancelled a nuclear treaty with you know whom, and one may get the impression that the US is not really cooperating much with other nations to achieve some durable peace.

..And, (sorry to quote myself) we don't hear very often of Chinese or Russian "intelligent" drones killing innocents, do we ?

[IAMHERE]

19 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Who happened to be hanging out with a bunch of pine nut harvesters? Because US intelligence is close to infallible?

Soldiers have many times in the past allowed off duty to go home and harvest the crops. I'm positive some Vietnamese farmers were  time gorillas. No reason to think these were full time all year around nut harvesters. Likely as not they are the enemy.

[ThaiFelix]

16 hours ago, Puchaiyank said:

Sad!  Terrorists or not...there is something quite extraordinary and evil about killing scores of people from miles above the earth while not making a sound...????

And cowardly!

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’ll name him.

 

So Morch finds humor in this tragedy.

 

 

 

No. More like finding the usual moralizing, virtue signalling and milking of human tragedy to be amusing.

The above included.

[ThaiFelix]

35 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

It's worth noting, lest it be lost in all the rhetoric here, that much of the planning by Al-Qaeda for the 9/11 terrorist attacks occurred in Afghanistan which Osama Bin Laden had used as his base of operations during many of those years.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning_of_the_September_11_attacks#Origins_of_the_September_11_attacks

 

And as best as I can tell, the very first notion for the 9/11 attacks began in Afghanistan in 1996 , which was when the Taliban effectively controlled much of the country. And continued up until the Sept. 2011 9/11 attacks and the resulting U.S. invasion of Afghanistan late in 2001 that ended the Taliban's rule.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

 

That's what the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan is about, for better or worse.

Oh I thought it was the opium trade.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, thaiguzzi said:

Rubbish.

That reason to fight the "war on terror" diminished years ago.

It is a very poor excuse.

It is why the USA has trouble convincing other, intelligent Western democracies to get involved.

There is only one reason they are there.

Just like everywhere else.

Money for the arms & war industry monster.

It needs feeding. Constantly.

 

"It is why the USA has trouble convincing other, intelligent Western democracies to get involved."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolute_Support_Mission

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolute_Support_Mission#Contributing_nations

[Morch]

1 hour ago, thaiguzzi said:

Why?

Why not let the Taliban rule?

They want to send their country back to the stone age and have weird religeous rules, who are we (or the US government) to say you can't and its wrong.

We saw how well interfering in Iraq and Libya went.

Let 'em get on with it.

It's their country.

 

The Taliban does not represent Afghanistan as a whole (well, inasmuch as there's even a "whole" when it comes to Afghanistan). So saying "it's their country" is somewhat misleading.

[Morch]

37 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

..And, (sorry to quote myself) we don't hear very often of Chinese or Russian "intelligent" drones killing innocents, do we ?

 

You hear more about things US, because things US are generally more open to scrutiny, and obviously there's the language thing.

 

Even so, quite a bit of appeared on Russian ways and transgressions during campaigns in the Caucasus, Syria and well...Afghanistan. I'm not sure China requires drones and such to clamp down on the Uighur.

[mauGR1]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

You hear more about things US, because things US are generally more open to scrutiny, and obviously there's the language thing.

 

Even so, quite a bit of appeared on Russian ways and transgressions during campaigns in the Caucasus, Syria and well...Afghanistan. I'm not sure China requires drones and such to clamp down on the Uighur.

Yeah, sure the US are open to scrutiny, have you ever heard of J. Assange ?

I never said Chinese and Russians are angels, if that can make you feel better.

[overherebc]

On 9/20/2019 at 11:04 AM, robblok said:

I wanna bet nobody will go to jail for this.. the US wonders why they lose the war on terror.. its because they create terrorist themselves. 

War is war, but, kill the right man they will recruit a replacement. Kill the wrong man they will get 10 volunteers.

[RoadWarrior371]

1 hour ago, mercman24 said:

US intelligence, ? what a kin joke, like the weapons of mass destruction, ? that never existed, which was an absolute lie, look at IRAQ now, just a war zone. never use to be, thanks to the US and UK (and others), all the drone videos i see, you can clearly see the *bandits* as they call them carrying AK47,s so where is the video they like to show off,  how many families are devastated now as the breadwinner is dead of injured, because some <deleted> with a joystick playing video games with innocents lives.

Cry me a river, Humpty.  If you want to make an omelette, your going to break a few eggs.  ????

[Morch]

52 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Yeah, sure the US are open to scrutiny, have you ever heard of J. Assange ?

I never said Chinese and Russians are angels, if that can make you feel better.

 

What I'm sure of is that you misrepresented my words. My version - "generally more open to scrutiny". Not fully transparent. Not fully accountable. Relative to other countries and armed forces, yes.

 

And do make up your mind. Either you want to use China and Russia as a deflection or you don't.

[thaiguzzi]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

The Taliban does not represent Afghanistan as a whole (well, inasmuch as there's even a "whole" when it comes to Afghanistan). So saying "it's their country" is somewhat misleading.

So, if it's not the Taliban (who are actually Afghan), then who does give better representation to Afghanistan.

The West's installed puppet government?

Why is it so critical to even be "involved"?

Is Afghanistan the US's new paranoid <deleted> version of "dominoes falling"?

[Morch]

1 minute ago, thaiguzzi said:

So, if it's not the Taliban (who are actually Afghan), then who does give better representation to Afghanistan.

The West's installed puppet government?

Why is it so critical to even be "involved"?

Is Afghanistan the US's new paranoid <deleted> version of "dominoes falling"?

 

Again, seeing the Taliban as the sole faction "representing" Afghanistan is a choice.

Nothing said about it being "critical" to be involved. Being involved is the current reality, and disentangling from being involved will almost definitely carry some negative consequences as well. Ignoring that is yet another choice.

 

[thaiguzzi]

48 minutes ago, RoadWarrior371 said:

Cry me a river, Humpty.  If you want to make an omelette, your going to break a few eggs.  ????

Ah, another gung ho, video game sniper.

The first time this type of "veteran of foreign wars" actually smells death or sees squashed brains on the side of the road from a m/c accident,  he'd win a vomit competition for his country.

As for "real" soldier stuff, ie bullets whistling past his head, he'd be the first to poop his pants.

Great post, hero.

 

 

[thaiguzzi]

2 hours ago, mercman24 said:

US intelligence, ? what a kin joke, like the weapons of mass destruction, ? that never existed, which was an absolute lie, look at IRAQ now, just a war zone. never use to be, thanks to the US and UK (and others), all the drone videos i see, you can clearly see the *bandits* as they call them carrying AK47,s so where is the video they like to show off,  how many families are devastated now as the breadwinner is dead of injured, because some <deleted> with a joystick playing video games with innocents lives.

Best post on this thread.

Thanx.

Exactly, re the current situations in Iraq and Libya.

2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

It's worth noting, lest it be lost in all the rhetoric here, that much of the planning by Al-Qaeda for the 9/11 terrorist attacks occurred in Afghanistan which Osama Bin Laden had used as his base of operations during many of those years.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning_of_the_September_11_attacks#Origins_of_the_September_11_attacks

 

And as best as I can tell, the very first notion for the 9/11 attacks began in Afghanistan in 1996 , which was when the Taliban effectively controlled much of the country. And continued up until the Sept. 2011 9/11 attacks and the resulting U.S. invasion of Afghanistan late in 2001 that ended the Taliban's rule.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

 

That's what the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan is about, for better or worse.

No.

I fail to see why ANY of the above is why the US has forces in the country in 2019.

Why not in 2029? or 2039?

Read my lips - whatever they do they will NEVER WIN.

It is unwinnable.

I am just surprised they don't realize this (well, no, i'm not actually)....

[muffy]

THEY WERE ALL Taliban 

[Sujo]

9 minutes ago, muffy said:

THEY WERE ALL Taliban 

Not according to the US.

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, RoadWarrior371 said:

Cry me a river, Humpty.  If you want to make an omelette, your going to break a few eggs.  ????

Can you tell the kitchen to hurry up with that? We've been waiting on that omelette for years.

[PremiumLane]

On 9/20/2019 at 3:57 PM, IAMHERE said:

Weren't these the same people that were dancing around their campfires when the Trade Towers collapsed ?  

So you think that these same people were somehow the same ones who were supposedly, and I use that word strongly, dancing when 9-11 happened, you really think that? 

 

Or, you think that because someone may have danced in Afghanistan at the time, then all Afghanistanis deserve it if the US government blows them up? I mean, think it through for a minute