May 18, 2006
Scores of Taliban Killed in Heavy Fighting
(Kandahar, Afghanistan) In unusually heavy fighting yesterday in southeastern Afghanistan, the Taliban suffered appropriately heavy losses.
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
From ContraCostaTimes.com:
Some of the fiercest violence since the Taliban's ouster in 2001 erupted across southern Afghanistan, with militants battling U.S. and Canadian forces, detonating car bombs and attacking a small village. Up to 105 people were killed, officials said Thursday.The attacks are considered to be the largest by the Taliban since 2001 and, based upon media reports, I'd say the aggressors took it in the shorts.Much of the violence occurred in the southern provinces of Helmand and Kandahar, where thousands of extra NATO troops are scheduled to deploy this summer to counter an increasing number of attacks from a stubborn insurgency.
The Taliban death toll from fighting Wednesday night and Thursday ranged up to 87, U.S. and Afghan officials said. Also, 15 Afghan police officers, one American civilian, a Canadian soldier and an Afghan civilian were killed in the attacks.
Notably, the Afghan National Police (ANP) demonstrated its ability to make the Taliban flee during the attack on government headquarters in Musa Qala in Helmand province. According to British military spokesman, Capt. Drew Gibson, the British helped evacuate casualties and let the ANP forces do the fighting to prove their abilities. I'm happy to relate that their performance was assessed as admirable.
From Interested-Participant.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
12:41 PM
| Comments (31)
| Add Comment
Post contains 235 words, total size 2 kb.
1
That Canadian casualty was a female Captain, tough loss.
Kevin
Posted by: Unclemeat at May 18, 2006 01:10 PM (9KbTL)
2
Even when the MSM reports positive news about the war on terror, they screw up (or slant) the details. This AP story makes it sound like additional NATO troops are being dispatched to counter a resurgent Taliban. BS. The NATO takeover from the US in the south of Afghanistan was planned and documented over a year ago, and is proceeding as scheduled. And the primary reason for the increased fighting in the south is a change in strategy by the coalition which kicked off with "Operation Mountain Lion" several weeks back, a series of offensives in the southern provinces designed to draw the Taliban out into open firefights, where they invariably get their martyrdoms conferred in large numbers.
Posted by: geobandy at May 18, 2006 03:10 PM (5jnES)
3
Wow, another tough military defeat for the leftards. I want to hear Murtha and other piece-O-shit traitors talk more about how we're losing.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 18, 2006 04:32 PM (0yYS2)
4
Does anybody else bother to use the links provided ? IM did you bother to read the whole article in the ContrCosta Times ? The Taliban attacked in a group of between 300 to 400. ummm Any cause for alarm in this ? Are the opposing forces stronger and more numerous than they were 2 years ago or one year ago ? Preliminary estimates so far this yearz point to still another record busting opium crop. IM in this type of conflict what do you think the best way of measuring "winning" or "losing" is ? A body count ?
Posted by: john Ryan at May 18, 2006 05:08 PM (TcoRJ)
5
300-400 apparently isn't enough. And yes we read the links provided. But just a little poking around on the net will reveal the information geobandy graciously provided, as the article so blatantly omits and you prefer to ignore. Articles like this are the result of "journalists" breaking news down into seemingly unrelated bits to make the bigger picture harder to see.
--------------------------------
Wouldn't it be a great day when the radical Muslims in the Middle East start undermining their jihadi troops with defeatist attitudes, bad press and harping on their every misstep while marching in the streets with signs saying OsamaBinChimpyHitler?
Oh wait ... that's our side.
Posted by: Oyster at May 18, 2006 06:43 PM (YudAC)
6
John, Just because you're a liberal, and thus a coward, and piss your pants at the mere thought of having to fight like a man, doesn't mean everyone else is. So what if they can cobble together three or four hundred? It just makes it easier to kill them. I'd like to see them get a few thousand together in one place so our guys can kill that many more. You liberals are just gutless, chickenshit cowards.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 19, 2006 04:56 AM (0yYS2)
7
A motion to extend Canada's deployment in Afghanistan barely passed 149 to 145 Wednesday night. The NDP ( near communist pro Castro anti America), Bloc Quebecois and most Liberals (anti American socialists), including key leadership candidates voted against it.
...Former Liberal prime minister Paul Martin was absent.
The vote is a political victory for prime minister Stephen Harper, who can characterize the result as an indication of the will of Parliament, while exposing divisions within the Liberal ranks.
Posted by: Dave K at May 19, 2006 05:10 AM (YaR8u)
8
TBH- I can't beleave the Afghan resistance has gone on as long as it has. Incredible. The deaths reported however were not all Taliban. It started a day prior with US troops opening fire on a group of protestors throwing stones at the US Consolate's motorcade. One thing begot another and a riot broke out the following day. The appearance of the Taliban is was just thier attempts to take advantage of the situation. They fled when they were engaged and unfortunately during this chaos most of the rioters were assumed to be Taliban and probably shot on sight.
To be blunt however, I really don't know how they would have been treated even if they were recognized to be simple enraged protestors. Thier law enforcement still opperates in a state of martial law.
I am very curious to know what the Taliban was going after while the cat was away. Any details released as to thier various objectives?
Posted by: Calist at May 19, 2006 05:29 AM (dybt/)
9
Well IM I post under my real name and my address is 250 105th Street. If I am home my motorcycle will be parked out front. Perhaps you might consider posting under your real name. . Here is another link that says that although 40 Taliban were reported killed only 14 bodies were recovered. As I posted before, proper analysis can only be done in an absence of emotion. http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=691678 IM as you probably are aware many people think that the worst insults that we can imagine are what we may think of as our own weaknesses.
Posted by: john ryan at May 19, 2006 09:23 AM (TcoRJ)
10
Hmmm. We kicked ass so bad in Vietnam and Somalia and are kicking ass so bad in Afghanistan and Iraq that we should immediately storm Iran!
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 19, 2006 09:32 AM (FCC6c)
11
Typical MSM spin. We kick Taliban ass, and that's evidence we're losing the war.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 19, 2006 12:21 PM (8e/V4)
12
Carlos MSM has only one agenda.... that is profit. MSM is a multi multi billion dollar industry. As for kicking ass in Afghanistan The attack on the town of MusaQala by a force of 300-400 Taliban resulted in about an even number of confirmed dead on both sides. The Afghan government claimed to have killed another 25 Taliban but had no other bodies to show, My personal standard is How many weapons were recovered ? http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=691678 I am very skeptical of ANY news story coming from the mideast, especially so from Afghanistan. Journalists and aid workers can not go out into the countryside to find out what is really going on. I always try to follow as many links as I can to try to get a more complete story.
Posted by: john ryan at May 19, 2006 01:30 PM (TcoRJ)
13
John, you're a liberal, and are thus safe to post your specifics because we evil conservatives and libertarians don't stalk people. I honestly don't give a damn where you live, but I don't want any stupid leftards knowing where I live, because flayed corpses and heads on pikes have to be explaned to the authorities, and I just don't have the patience.
Now please explain how killing the enemy is causing us to lose the war...
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 19, 2006 02:46 PM (0yYS2)
14
Isn't that Paris Hilton's address?
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 19, 2006 06:43 PM (FCC6c)
15
John Ryan: Have your muslim boyfriend use vaseline next time and it won't hurt so much. Thx for the address. I have some friends in the Bronx who will be by for your motorcycle. Second thought, its probably, a pink vespa.
Posted by: greyrooster at May 19, 2006 08:05 PM (AWtJU)
16
Hey Asshole: I just cross referenced your address. Your full of shit.
Posted by: greyrooster at May 19, 2006 08:08 PM (AWtJU)
17
Then it is Paris Hilton's address?
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 19, 2006 08:21 PM (FCC6c)
18
Poor greyroostdick ... he thought he had an al cheapo motorcycleo ....
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 19, 2006 08:24 PM (FCC6c)
19
Last gasp on who's.
Posted by: greyrooster at May 19, 2006 09:40 PM (AWtJU)
20
On mine, greydickroost!
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 19, 2006 10:15 PM (FCC6c)
21
No the bike is black a 1983 BMW I have owned it since 1988. Google maps have areal nice pic of my apartment building try looking there. As for you having friends in the Bronx always happy to meeet new people. They can also find me at my favorite bar Tap a Keg on Broadway between 105th and 104th. When can I expect them ?
Posted by: john Ryan at May 19, 2006 10:46 PM (TcoRJ)
22
Grey-dick-roost? What the hell kind of putdown is that? It doesn't even make bad sense! You made me read that drivel? Dammit boy, you can do better than that.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 19, 2006 10:57 PM (0yYS2)
23
IM I can not explain to you whether we are winning the war .... or losing the war. I can point out what I see are misconceptions about how other people are reaching those conclusions. Such questions as are the enemy gaining strength or losing strength ? When a force of 300-400 attack and hold a town for 8 hours and leave behind 15 bofies I can not see this as a great victory against the Taliban.
Posted by: john Ryan at May 19, 2006 11:00 PM (TcoRJ)
24
just a little cock fight with greydickroost, IM, so butt out! Go pick your own fight!
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 19, 2006 11:04 PM (FCC6c)
25
John, you need to read up on military strategy and tactics. Try Sun Tzu's Art of War, anything written by Vo Nguyen Giap, Mao's rehash of Art of War, and Clausewitz, if you can handle all the big words. There are lots of other good authors out there, so spend a little time learning about war before you talk about it. Here's a free lesson: Attacking an undefended town and holding it temporarily before getting beaten out of it can not be construed as a victory, or even a break-even, by any stretch of the imagination, no matter how badly you want the enemy to win. You're impressed by the fact that they could assemble three hundred terrorists to fight in one place at one time, and see it as a sure sign of victory, whereas our military sees three hundred enemies on the battlefield as a good day's hunting. People like you have never, do not now, and will never in the future win wars or protect civilization, or anyone for that matter, and your behavior is cowardly and unmanly, therefore your opinion doesn't matter.
Larry, you went to a public school, didn't you? It shows.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 20, 2006 07:44 AM (0yYS2)
26
Wherever I went to school one thing I learned was to call the BS as I see it!
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 20, 2006 08:56 AM (FCC6c)
27
>>>Carlos MSM has only one agenda.... that is profit. MSM is a multi multi billion dollar industry.
john,
on the contrary, there is little interference by the tychoons, and the Liberal editors and reporters have great leeway in their job as long as they still sell papers.
Nine out of ten MSM reporters are self-described Liberals who went into journalism to "make the world a better place". Translated, they have an agenda and it's Leftwing. They try not to be too obvious about it, but they truly can't help themselves. Come election time, however, they stop pretending entirely. It's a truism among Republican strategists that the Dems have a built-in handicap of about 10-15 percentage points over the GOP because of this MSM slant. You'd have to be blind, or a Liberal, not to see it.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 20, 2006 06:49 PM (8e/V4)
28
You call BS as you see it huh? Must be hell avoiding mirrors like that if you want to get anything done in the day other than standing around yelling BULLSHIT!!!
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 21, 2006 07:55 AM (0yYS2)
29
Today Sunday Fox news is also reporting 9 killed in the big battle the one with 300-400 Taliban http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,196360,00.html IM the town was defended. The attacking force seems to have lost 4-5 % If the Afghan government is seen by the inhabitants of that town as being unable to provide security then it will be a victory for the Taliban. Thank you for your reading suggestions Clausweitz seems a little for Afghanistan. My favorite precept in the Art of War was "Don't fight a battle you can not win"
Posted by: john Ryan at May 21, 2006 04:50 PM (sLN29)
30
The people of the United States have a choice in where they go for news. They have a choice in what newspapers to buy. Has anyone noticed a change in Fox's reporting of late (6 months) as the polls show what the feelings of the USA are in regards to the war ?
Posted by: john Ryan at May 21, 2006 04:56 PM (sLN29)
31
"...as the polls show what the feelings of the USA are in regards to the war ?"
I wonder what the polls showed in Nazi Germany in the 30s? Is right and wrong determined by the simple virtue of numbers? Where is the reasoning that because more people are on one side than another, that the larger group is more equitable?
Posted by: Oyster at May 22, 2006 05:34 AM (YudAC)
34kb generated in CPU 1.9064, elapsed 2.0759 seconds.
119 queries taking 1.5918 seconds, 280 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
119 queries taking 1.5918 seconds, 280 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
