2 Marines killed in Southern Afghanistan

59 posts

Flag Post

Why haven’t we left this god-forbidden country, yet? Seriously, now you may think I’m being disrespectful, but I do have a cousin serving for this country. We should just pack up and go! Regards to the family members…

http://news.yahoo.com/2-marines-killed-attack-southern-afghanistan-215838327.html

 
Flag Post

Packing up and leaving without fixing all the damage done seems like a horrible idea.

Edit: Yes.

 
Flag Post

What about the 12,500 to 14,700 civilians that have been killed by the United States and its comrades? Why don’t you talk about them? They seem insignificant to many, but they are human beings too. Men, women, children, who once led happy lives until war started again because of America’s need for oil leading to the deaths of their familiars, their friends. Why no regards to the family members… of civilians? Are they your enemies too? Defenseless, everyday human beings are now your enemies? Disgusting and jingoistic.

If you’re going to war yourself as a soldier, it is a potential consequence of your job. This is like if a sports player in an aggressive sport gets injured. That’s something to be expected, and it is your own fault for choosing this job.

The reason America doesn’t leave is for oil. Oil is a sustainable business for the Washington and Wall Street lobbyists who are in seek of monetary gain. Do they care of how they can achieve this oil and profit? No, once you make a large profit ethics goes out of the window for these Washington and Wall Street lobbyists.

Obama doesn’t want to leave for a couple of years, and Romney will extend the war period. So vote Obama for any hope of having less people killed.

Originally posted by TheLoneLucas:

Packing up and leaving without fixing all the damage done seems like a horrible idea.

Are you referring to all the damage done by the United States and allies?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JaumeBG:

What about the 12,500 to 14,700 civilians that have been killed by the United States and its comrades? Why don’t you talk about them? They seem insignificant to many, but they are human beings too. Men, women, children, who once led happy lives until war started again because of America’s need for oil leading to the deaths of their familiars, their friends. Why no regards to the family members… of civilians? Are they your enemies too? Defenseless, everyday human beings are now your enemies? Disgusting and jingoistic.

If you’re going to war yourself as a soldier, it is a potential consequence of your job. This is like if a sports player in an aggressive sport gets injured. That’s something to be expected, and it is your own fault for choosing this job.

The reason America doesn’t leave is for oil. Oil is a sustainable business for the Washington and Wall Street lobbyists who are in seek of monetary gain. Do they care of how they can achieve this oil and profit? No, once you make a large profit ethics goes out of the window for these Washington and Wall Street lobbyists.

Obama doesn’t want to leave for a couple of years, and Romney will extend the war period. So vote Obama for any hope of having less people killed.

Originally posted by TheLoneLucas:

Packing up and leaving without fixing all the damage done seems like a horrible idea.

Are you referring to all the damage done by the United States and allies?

What part of “war” do you not understand? No matter how precise and careful we are, civilians are going to be maimed. Especially when our enemy at the moment has no problem using them as human shields.

And yes. Obama has followed up just sooooo well on the “pull out of the war” promise.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by TheLoneLucas:

Packing up and leaving without fixing all the damage done seems like a horrible idea.

Originally posted by JaumeBG:

What about the 12,500 to 14,700 civilians that have been killed by the United States and its comrades? Why don’t you talk about them? They seem insignificant to many, but they are human beings too. Men, women, children, who once led happy lives until war started again because of America’s need for oil leading to the deaths of their familiars, their friends. Why no regards to the family members… of civilians? Are they your enemies too? Defenseless, everyday human beings are now your enemies? Disgusting and jingoistic.

If you’re going to war yourself as a soldier, it is a potential consequence of your job. This is like if a sports player in an aggressive sport gets injured. That’s something to be expected, and it is your own fault for choosing this job.

The reason America doesn’t leave is for oil. Oil is a sustainable business for the Washington and Wall Street lobbyists who are in seek of monetary gain. Do they care of how they can achieve this oil and profit? No, once you make a large profit ethics goes out of the window for these Washington and Wall Street lobbyists.

Obama doesn’t want to leave for a couple of years, and Romney will extend the war period. So vote Obama for any hope of having less people killed.

Originally posted by TheLoneLucas:

Packing up and leaving without fixing all the damage done seems like a horrible idea.

Are you referring to all the damage done by the United States and allies?

That’s not true at all. Romney has the same timetable set by Obama to withdraw all troops starting in 2014. Please provide sources before you say something untruthful especially when many troops have been killed because of Obama’s authorization of the surge in Afghanistan.

Obama is the one who surged troops in Afghanistan. He is not for Peace. Why was he so against torture of terrorist and terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay, yet he did not close it. That was another promise broken. Also, he’s a hypocrite. He’s against torture but sees no problem in using drones to kill suspected terrorists without trial. These drone strikes lead to the collateral killing of innocent civilians too. Obama also gave out the withdrawal date further endangering soldiers stationed there and innocent civilians. Al Qaeda will most likely lead a resurgent movement right after the last troops withdraw in 2014. This is yet again another unnecessary war.

Pretty disgraceful that you’re politicizing this.

 
Flag Post

And yes. Obama has followed up just sooooo well on the “pull out of the war” promise.

All he promised was to pull out of Iraq in his 2008 presidential campaign. What has he done since then? Killed Osama bin Laden and pulled out of Iraq.

What part of “war” do you not understand? No matter how precise and careful we are, civilians are going to be maimed. Especially when our enemy at the moment has no problem using them as human shields.

Yeah, maybe a couple of hundred makes sense. But to have more civilians killed than troops; to have more Afghan civilian killed than Taliban? It is appalling how they can just casually kill off so many civilians, with no regret and no news reports of them.

Oh, an American died? Damn, I’m so sorry, family, friends of this dude. He served justice in Afghanistan by killing heaps of civilians. May he rest in peace. *five days later* Family and friends of American soldier honour his death in funeral.

Oh, twenty civilians have died? Lol, we don’t give a fuck haha. It’s their own bloody fault… for living there! Amirite guyz, amirite?? Bloody afghans eh? News report: *crickets**five days later* *crickets*

The Taliban do not use them as human shields and the civilians in no way are in favour of Taliban. Some civilians do eventually become Taliban, but this is for one main reason: their family and friends have all been killed by Americans and the only thing they now want to do is, in vengeance, kill the American soldiers who killed them. However, the majority remain civilian and are always at risk of being killed, daily.

especially when many troops have been killed because of Obama’s authorization of the surge in Afghanistan.

So the Afghan War is all Obama’s fault, is it now? Let’s ignore the fact that George W. Bush began the war. Oh, it is not his fault—it is all Obama’s fault. Let’s blame the black guy. (Before jumping on me, I am being satyrical of these points of view and mocking them, not endorsing them.) No racism at all there, ae?

That’s not true at all. Romney has the same timetable set by Obama to withdraw all troops starting in 2014. Please provide sources before you say something untruthful

A source, out of many. Romney is not in favour of withdrawing 23,000 Americans before 30 September 2012. Also, the source clearly states: “However, he admits that his position could change depending on the counsel of military commanders, while leaving open the possibility of keeping combat troops in Afghanistan beyond 2014 should conditions change.” Ergo, he will easily change his policies should any “condition” modify and will extend the time period. It is quite easy for the conditions to indeed change. If it gets worse, then Obama would leave but Romney would stay; if it improves, both would leave; if it stays the same (i.e., quite bad as it is now), then Obama would leave and Romney would stay as the situation would be bad.

Obama is the one who surged troops in Afghanistan.

Refer to my point of you putting all the blame on Obama when, actually, the good ol’ George W began it all.

Why was he so against torture of terrorist and terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay, yet he did not close it.

Both Romney and Obama will do nothing about Guantanamo. So I will agree with you there that Obama is a hypocrite on this issue. (But then again, Romney will do nothing either.)

He’s against torture but sees no problem in using drones to kill suspected terrorists without trial.

Same as above: yes, Obama is a douchebag; but then again, Romney would do the same here.

Edit: anyway, I have to go to a mate’s house now. So if you see me not responding to this thread it is not because I have conceded, but because I am having a good time with a mate. Have a nice afternoon. Cheerio.

 
Flag Post

You can no longer blame whatever actions Obama takes in Afghanistan on Bush. Bush is no longer president. Obama is president and he’s the one who authorizes military actions there.

As for Mitt Romney’s position. The facts still stands, and he said he’s supportive of Obama’s policy of withdrawing troops by 2014 though he criticized the president for divulging the actual withdrawal date.

 
Flag Post

National statistics are 6,280 American deaths and 41,936 wounded since 2001.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war

or

Google United States military casualties of war.

 
Flag Post

Oh look people are talking about the casualty count in Afghanistan, and only the casualty count to describe all of what the US does in that country… again!

Save the fact that we’ve been doing a lot of work in maintaining infrastructure, acting as a voice of governance (one that isn’t a member of a theocratic guerrilla group), and generally making strides to improve the lot of the Afghanis lives, we’ve got soldiers there, and soldiers are just an example of the evil federal machine!

 
Flag Post

You could almost say it was the same thing in action, idiot. Because that infrastructure isn’t American, because the government isn’t American, because Afghani lives aren’t American lives, we see them as somehow inconsequential, whereas American soldier’s lives are our number one, first and last priority.

It is another classic example of nationalism gone bad.

 
Flag Post

I posted the global statistic to put the two deaths in perspective.
Those men weren’t bankers or bakers, they were soldiers.
I’m not judging their motives. God help their families.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JaumeBG:

What about the 12,500 to 14,700 civilians that have been killed by the United States and its comrades? Why don’t you talk about them? They seem insignificant to many, but they are human beings too. Men, women, children, who once led happy lives until war started again because of America’s need for oil leading to the deaths of their familiars, their friends. Why no regards to the family members… of civilians? Are they your enemies too? Defenseless, everyday human beings are now your enemies? Disgusting and jingoistic.

It’s sad that anyone has to die. It’s just the OP focused on the American deaths. Get over it.

If you’re going to war yourself as a soldier, it is a potential consequence of your job. This is like if a sports player in an aggressive sport gets injured. That’s something to be expected, and it is your own fault for choosing this job.

So it’s sad when a civilian dies, but not a solider? Arguably sadder when a civillian dies, but still, show some damn sympathy.

The reason America doesn’t leave is for oil. Oil is a sustainable business for the Washington and Wall Street lobbyists who are in seek of monetary gain. Do they care of how they can achieve this oil and profit? No, once you make a large profit ethics goes out of the window for these Washington and Wall Street lobbyists.

I swear to all that is holy, if I see one more fucking American teenager say that the reason why we’re in Afghanistan/Iraq is for the oil, I’m going to castrate every single one of them.

Before we invaded, we had literally no idea there was anything valuable in Afghanistan. There had been rumors, but it wasn’t until after we invaded that we found trillions of dollars of resources.
The oil in Iraq went to the Chinese.

None of these things are going to the Americans right now.

Hell, most of the time, the terrorists are killing more civilians than the Americans. It was only during the initial invasion that we caused massive civilian causalities. And we’ve been working to improve our weapons systems, so they don’t kill as many people by accident.

If I seem anger and bitter, it’s because I am. You’re the one politicizing the damn issue. If they didn’t have any ethics, we wouldn’t pour millions into weapons systems that are more precise and less damaging. We wouldn’t be pouring millions into EOD technology. We wouldn’t be pouring billions into infrastructure and aid. We would carpet bomb the fucking place to the ground (which we can do, by the way), then strip them of their resources and leave, colonial style.

Yeah, maybe a couple of hundred makes sense. But to have more civilians killed than troops; to have more Afghan civilian killed than Taliban? It is appalling how they can just casually kill off so many civilians, with no regret and no news reports of them.

You’re fucking portraying American servicemen as heartless animals, that want to kill civilians like they’re animals. You’re so far from truth, I’m just not even sure what to say anymore. If anything, the Taliban has proven far more willing to kill- they were practically genocidal and racist before we stepped in. Are they trying to minimize civilian causalities? No, they aren’t. Their entire strategy relies on killing civilians to prove that the Americans can’t protect them, or waiting for drone strikes. Who the fuck do you think was doing all of the suicide bombing? The random shootings, assaults on government buildings, schools?

 
Flag Post

God you ignorant kids. NO WE AREN’T THERE FOR THE DAM OIL. We first went to Iraq because Saddam was being a dickhead and attacking his neighbor countries, and he was being a douche dictator to his country, mind you this was BEFORE 2001. When the 9-11 happened, that gave them a justified reason to full blown INVADE Iraq. Now after We caught Suddam you think, oh it’s over right? Nope. Time to find Bin laden, let’s go to afghan. While we are there they get a notice “Hey guys there might be some weapons of mass destruction!!!!!!!!!”.

So Bin Laden gets found and gets killed. Also 0 weapons of mass boom booms were found. So why are we still there? To stop dickheads from gaining power hopefully prevent stuff like 9-11 from ever happening again.

Also Romney wants to invade Iran. That’s not good. Iran has a real army and airforce. They aren’t pussies that hit and run like Afghan taliban. Dunno anything about Syria.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Piple:

God you ignorant kids. NO WE AREN’T THERE FOR THE DAM OIL. We first went to Iraq because Saddam was being a dickhead and attacking his neighbor countries, and he was being a douche dictator to his country, mind you this was BEFORE 2001. When the 9-11 happened, that gave them a justified reason to full blown INVADE Iraq. Now after We caught Suddam you think, oh it’s over right? Nope. Time to find Bin laden, let’s go to afghan. While we are there they get a notice “Hey guys there might be some weapons of mass destruction!!!!!!!!!”.

So Bin Laden gets found and gets killed. Also 0 weapons of mass boom booms were found. So why are we still there? To stop dickheads from gaining power hopefully prevent stuff like 9-11 from ever happening again.

Also Romney wants to invade Iran. That’s not good. Iran has a real army and airforce. They aren’t pussies that hit and run like Afghan taliban. Dunno anything about Syria.

Can we do away with these lies. Romney does not want to invade Iran. Give a source or be quiet. Israel will probably invade Iran though, hope they can payback.

9/11 happened because we had U.S. bases on Muslim Holy Land in Saudi Arabia. Yet why don’t we invade Saudi Arabia and sponsor regime change? After all, they’re a monarchy and sponsor terrorism. It’s because we get oil there.

I agree though, we didn’t go into Iraq and Afghanistan for oil, we went for payback after what happened after 9/11. But that was a bad decision too. We squandered sympathies and only fostered more hate in the world. You cannot win a war on terror. Do you honestly think bombing the living daylights out of an Afghani village in search of militants or terrorists is going to succeed? That’s going to make the family members of innocent victims more sympathetic to Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization and they may actually join them. Training Afghanis have obviously failed. They are not loyal to America.

Bush and Obama are the same. Only one lies and goes in anyway. There’s nothing you can salvage in Afghanistan, we should just get out already.

 
Flag Post

I’ll be honest, I frankly don’t care very much how many middle-east civilians die in these wars. Sure, there humans as well, and it’s a huge tragedy they are being killed due to both sides, but I really don’t feel sad about it. Because I am an american, I care more about my fellow Americans being killed more, it’s been like that, and it will always be like that for most people.

I don’t think many Americans cared about how many German’s died at Omaha, or how many Japanese died at Iwo-Jima, unless they were saying how many of the enemy guys we managed to shoot in the head! And I’m sure the death toll at Stalingrad didn’t matter as much as the Americans lost in the Pacific.

 
Flag Post

The idea that war always includes civilian casualties is a sick and twisted coping method. Furthermore, there’s a fundamental lack of value for the individuals in these countries that is evident in all of our doings, and the public’s sentiments, as seen in the awful post just above mine. The fact that we are still detaining people we know for a fact have done nothing wrong in Guantanamo simply because we’re afraid of their now ripe anti-American sentiments is evident enough that there’s more than just failed precision happening. We shouldn’t be there, period. Backing out the wrong way will cost us more lives though, so that’s the only portion of the escape plan I tend to side with the generals on.

 
Flag Post

War always involves civilian casualties, it’s part of war. Either going back to the early days of war, where you would rape your captives, and than kill them, go to the Crusades where you burn everyone who isn’t your religion, or more modern day, where you wipe out a city block with a bombing raid, killing hundreds of civilians.

Cities arn’t built around protecting civilians in the event they get bombed, your going to have bridges, factories, air bases, and munition depots near a civilian population, which if war were to break out, would all be the targets of air raids.

It’s nearly impossible to fight a war, achieve military goals, defeat the enemy, and do all that without killing a single civilian. I don’t think there has ever been a real war where there were no civilian loses.

 
Flag Post

So we shouldn’t worry about it or make changes to minimize this potential problem, because who cares about brown people, right? We should never become complacent with civilian casualties. They’re undesirable, and a damn good reason to not go to war in the first place.

 
Flag Post

Civilian loses are lighter than they were 70 years ago. Because weapons, bombs, and artillery have become more precise, and accurate. (and we havn’t fought a World War since than, thank god) Think of how many more civilians would be dead, if we used B-17’s, and Lancaster Bombers, instead of Stealth bombers, and predator Drones.

But, sadly, a missile doesn’t know the difference between a armed militia man, and a innocent woman. Most of the time it’s the intel that causes loss of civilian life. Your intel tells your there is a platoon of soldiers in that bunker, turns out your intel was wrong, and it was filled with civilians hiding from resistance fighters.

Other times, you have crazy, evil people who don’t care about there own people, during the Gulf War, the government told civilians to hide in military bunkers, not civilian air raid shelters, or safe houses, but bunkers armed with Machine guns, and surface to air missiles. And there government fully knew these were being targeted by American aircraft. We didn’t know there were civilians in there, as we assumed they would be in air raid shelters, not Anti-Aircraft instilations.

The Army doesn’t go around gunning down civilians in the street, we don’t target civilians. they get caught in the crossfire, or we just don’t know they are there.

 
Flag Post

Agreed, minimising both direct and indirect civilian casualties should always be a priority. Minimising troop casualties on both sides should also be a priority, though second to the civilian one (because soldiers do sign up for this. They are professionals and know the risks).

EDIT:

The Army doesn’t go around gunning down civilians in the street, we don’t target civilians. they get caught in the crossfire, or we just don’t know they are there.

To play devil’s advocate for a second, there are some individuals in the military who do exactly that. There are procedures in place to root them out as quickly as possible, but some do escape the net until they do something monumentally stupid. One that sticks in my mind is where a soldier posted on youtube,a video of him and his buddies riding around sniping civilians as the civilians were driving past and the ‘hilarious’ results.

Yes, they are a vast minority, but these are the sorts of things that stick in the public’s mind when it comes to our armed forces.

 
Flag Post

Those guys are a large problem. I think all weapons should have little camera’s+mics that run non stop and keep overwriting their own memory unless they are fired. After firing these videos should be watched both by their direct superiors and a somebody from a selected group in the US. This would both get rid of the bad apples and help therapists with helping soldiers who have been mentally affected by combat. As a bonus some of these videos could be released to the family of those civilians who died as to show it was an accident.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thijser:

Those guys are a large problem. I think all weapons should have little camera’s+mics that run non stop and keep overwriting their own memory unless they are fired. After firing these videos should be watched both by their direct superiors and a somebody from a selected group in the US. This would both get rid of the bad apples and help therapists with helping soldiers who have been mentally affected by combat. As a bonus some of these videos could be released to the family of those civilians who died as to show it was an accident.

Though that idea would help, think of how many resources that would take, how many people would be needed to review every video, from every soldier, after every fire fight. You would have to upgrade every gun, and some might even have to be redesigned to hold the camera/mic. It’s just simply to much of a hassle, and not worth it for the results.

 
Flag Post

Make sure the soldiers know that when they fire their weapons in battle they will be court martial-ed later. Hamstring ourselves as much as possible.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by AirmanAlex:
Originally posted by thijser:

Those guys are a large problem. I think all weapons should have little camera’s+mics that run non stop and keep overwriting their own memory unless they are fired. After firing these videos should be watched both by their direct superiors and a somebody from a selected group in the US. This would both get rid of the bad apples and help therapists with helping soldiers who have been mentally affected by combat. As a bonus some of these videos could be released to the family of those civilians who died as to show it was an accident.

Though that idea would help, think of how many resources that would take, how many people would be needed to review every video, from every soldier, after every fire fight. You would have to upgrade every gun, and some might even have to be redesigned to hold the camera/mic. It’s just simply to much of a hassle, and not worth it for the results.

This is mainly a plan for the future so every future gun would be designed with this (many guns that are being designed right now already have the lens as it’s useful for shooting around corners or for infra red). Adding in the memory wouldn’t make it much heavier and a mic is available in a very small size. We also have very few soldier actually engage in combat compared to the total size of the military (this goes for most armies an army is being very efficient if it has less then 19 men needed to support 1 man in combat (mechanics cooks leader people at rest people in training)). A good way might even to be show these videos to people in training and ask them to warn somebody if they think the content of the videos is off.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by AirmanAlex:

Though that idea would help, think of how many resources that would take, how many people would be needed to review every video, from every soldier, after every fire fight.

Not many. You use an expert system to monitor them automatically, and flag up suspicious videos for observation by a human operator. It’s very similar to the system used for city CCTV.