Fighting rages in Afghanistan as Karzai urges restraint from NATO
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
Syria defiantly denies killings, as U.N. council meets
( 0 )
-
U.S. drones kill 5 militants in Pakistan
( 0 )
-
U.N. observers warn of Syria civil war after massacre
( 7 )
-
Obama on the defensive over spending, debt
( 18 )
-
Egypt's top candidates try to broaden support
( 1 )
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
-
- National Relief/Substitute Teacher - summer start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥275,000 ~ ¥300,000 / Month
-
- 営業パーソン
- 加治金属工業株式会社, Tochigi
- Salary: ¥240,000 ~ ¥350,000 / Month Negotiable
Order by Time Order by Popularity
23 Comments
Login to comment
0
adaydream
Gosh it's hard to stop an advance or even slow one down Karzai. The Marines will do their very best to not hurt those innocents that are still in their homes. But it's war.
I feel bad when civilians get hurt or wounded. Let's get this job done and come home. < :-)
0
some14some
We may soon read/hear : "Mission Accomplished" Part-II (this time by NATO)
0
Branded
"NATO forces have repeatedly said they want to prevent civilian casualties but acknowledged that it is not always possible."
"Civilians" best get the hell out of the way ! Karzai needs to stop flapping his gums about civilians and show more support for NATO troops. This is typical media management M.E. style.
0
admiraljohann
RAMBO!
0
stirfry
save those poppies !
0
smithinjapan
Branded: ""Civilians" best get the hell out of the way !"
Yes, 'civilians'; tough one to understand when they're all Afghanis, perhaps, but you can dig deep and try to fathom the concept. Do you think the Taliban are using themSELVES as human shields? And 'getting the hell out of the way' is not always as easily done as it is said. Come on, man!
That being said, I do agree that Karzai is a tool and flaps his gums, pandering to whatever audience has power at the time. In this case, though, he is merely trying to help save a few civilians, if possible.
0
Metaphile
I think he is concerned more about the poppy fields. Alot of civilian populations are situated near the fields. Someone has to tend to them. If the Taliban hide with in the population that means near the fields. The military at least on the surface has no orders to save the fields. Thus, they and the people are casualties of the battle. It also means Karzai' s brother an Opium lord will lose money. It is probably no surprise a large majority of the poppy produced is controlled by his brother. It pays to have family in government.
0
Kapuna
How about Karzai telling the taliban be more careful, when using civilians as human shields
0
stirfry
when, honestly, has fighting NOT raged in afghanistan ?
0
Sarge
"more needed to be done to protect civilians"
More needs to be done to wipe out the Taliban.
0
LIBERTAS
More need to be done to convince America to mind its own business.
0
Sarge
"More needs to be done to convince America to mind its own business"
More needs to be done to convince certain people that the scumbags that Americans are fighting would torture and kill them ( those who say more needs to be done to convince America to mind its own business ) without hesitation or remorse.
0
LIBERTAS
Sarge, let me introduce you to the concept of geography. USA....(remember Sesame Street?) over here.....and Afghanistan....over there!
If you (the USA) wasn't over there, they'd just leave you alone as they always have done. But your're not. You invaded their country over there, so they feel, justifiably so, compelled to send you back where you belong.
Which part of that don't you get? Why is it when YOU kill their families asleep in their beds without hesitation or remorse it's OK? But when they fight to defend themselves from an occupying army, it's not? You call it terrorism! But, Sarge.....the US is the invading and occupying force! (Remember Sesame Street.....over here.....over there!) It would be the reverse if the Taliban invaded Texas, but they didn't. You invaded Afghanistan, or don't you remember? This time around the US is the State Sponsor of Terrorism in Afghanistan! Hard to swallow isn't it?
0
LIBERTAS
Add to this, Sarge, one of my favourite common-sense quotations:
Michael Rivero, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Unfortunately, common sense is not that common.
0
kinniku
Michael Rivero is a conspiracy nut. As such, his opinions should clearly hold little weight.
The Taliban are not 'most Afghans'.
No, they sheltered al-Quaeda, the people that did attack the US.
Moderator: Readers, please focus your comments on what is in the story.
0
sabiwabi
One has to be very naive or deceptive to say that the US and other members of the coalition are in Afghanistan because of 911. 911 was just an excuse for destroying that country, which had absolutely nothing to do with 911. Those who are fighting NATO forces are very much justified to do so; and I wish them luck.
0
LIBERTAS
The unelected yet declared "President" Karzai, (whose nickname is the "Mayor of Kabul") obviously holds less and less sway in national politics in Afghanistan, as basically, the world and his country-wo/men simply ignore most of what he says these days, this issue being no different. He's just another of UNOCAL's oil buddies supervising a pipeline under construction. While his people die by the dozen by the drone.
0
kinniku
They are killing and blowing up Afghans and you 'wish them luck'?
From the article:
0
Sarge
"Those who are fighing NATO forces are very much justified to do so; and I wish them luck"
Poor sabiwabi still doesn't realize that those he is wishing luck to would torture and kill him without hesitation or remorse.
0
sabiwabi
You misunderstood, I did not wish luck to the NATO forces.
Who killed more Afghans? So many Afghans have been killed, and their country has been destroyed only for Western economic interests. No matter how much lipstick you put on this thing, it stinks. NATO, and especially the US, are the bad guys here.
0
kinniku
We did not misunderstand. You wished luck to the Taliban who kill and blow up Afghans and have been doing so for quite some time.
Randomly and indescriminantly using bombs and suicide bombers in crowed civilian areas like markets and such? The Taliban. Do you support these actions? You seem to when you wish them luck. This is not about Nato and the US. You have specifically wished good luck to a group the deliberately targets civilian areas.
Back to top