jump to last post 1-24 of 24 discussions (59 posts)

1,000 Americans Dead in Afghan

  1. theirishobserver. profile image57
    theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

    Today we are told that 1,000 American solidiers have now been killed in Afghanistan - was it worth it with more deaths to come....latest (1,000) solidier killed in Road side bomb....

    1. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Okay? Now, what COUNTRY are you actually representing here?

      Ireland or America?

      You use the word "WE" as though you have a say in what is to be done with American troops or military?

      Or are you referencing bring home your folk of Ireland?

      I see you post so many "American" subjects, and speak as an American? But, your profile claims "love" of Ireland?

      So, you can see the dilemma. hmm

      Just curious, please indulge me. hmm

      1. Ultimate Hubber profile image79
        Ultimate Hubberposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Easy cagsil, he just said that "Today we are told that 1,000 American solidiers have......"

      2. profile image0
        ryankettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        There are Irish troops in Afghanistan Cagsil, many of them with the British Army. Since the British army are fighting side-by-side with the Americans, I would say that an Irishman has every right to join Americans in their concern for the welfare of the coalition troops.

        1. Cagsil profile image60
          Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          It's a war. DUH!

          Concern for all life. But, war does take life. Accept it, move on. roll

          1. profile image0
            ryankettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Deleted

            1. Cagsil profile image60
              Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              What drug habit would that be you are talking about? roll

              Please do tell....

      3. profile image0
        Chasukposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I would interpret his "we" as meaning the readers and audience of the myriad media outlets reporting the statistics.

    2. prettydarkhorse profile image63
      prettydarkhorseposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      They should all be sent home ASAP

    3. nikki1 profile image55
      nikki1posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      May the thousands of our soldiers who died for there Country be represented in honor. Also, My guess our Honorable Obama meant our soldiers would come up alive and in hero status. Its a shame way too many unique dictators up there. Can't stop and realize how tech dumb they are acting. A community grows together when bonding and respect for one another is met. Partnerships all round.

    4. ehacker profile image58
      ehackerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Even it's matter to discus though we have to understand every action has
      same reaction!!!

      Because  They have crushed and crucified native people of  Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan  to occupy the natural resources...cause of that gaining reactions...It won't be ended until they stop invading...

  2. theirishobserver. profile image57
    theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

    Should we bring the lads home before more deaths

    1. nikki1 profile image55
      nikki1posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      IF our trained tropes could help them hire better dictators and help them clean there up the (mess) possibly we should bring them back home. And give them a huge welcome home party. They did GREAT!!

  3. MikeNV profile image70
    MikeNVposted 7 years ago

    Obama has pledged to bring them home... he doesn't really care if they are in body bags or in person.

    And what have we "won"?

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Obama "doesn't really care." I can't imagine anyone believes that.

      1. MikeNV profile image70
        MikeNVposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Obama pledged to end the war and when he took office there were 30,000 and now there are 100,000.

        It would be a lot harder to find non delusional people who think he does care than rational people who believe he doesn't.

        Obama is a fraud.

        And what are we winning?  Anyone care to explain that?  We are no safer, we are less safe.  We don't protect our borders and we continue to piss of the Muslim World.

        1. prettydarkhorse profile image63
          prettydarkhorseposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Obama is not a fraud and have respect for the President, -- the name

          1. SparklingJewel profile image64
            SparklingJewelposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            ...it's hard to have respect for the office of the president, when the man holding that office does not deserve respect...

            lefties need to wake up just like righties did...some anyway smile

            1. PrettyPanther profile image84
              PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Please explain to me how and when the righties "woke up."  GWB won by a larger margin in 2004 than he did in 2000 and yet I can't find anyone who admits to voting for him the second time around.  When did the righties "wake up" exactly?

              1. TheSituation profile image69
                TheSituationposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                I voted for him in 2004 and not in 2000.  Whatever you say about GWB, he was a man, he had balls.  When he said we were sending troops to hunt down the taliban, you felt like this was a posse in the old west....real...not some slick, greasy Chicago political machine. 

                Obama is obviously very intelligent, but I do not trust him at all.

            2. Ralph Deeds profile image70
              Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Opinions are like **sholes. Everybody has one.

              1. Cagsil profile image60
                Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                They certainly are. lol lol

          2. nikki1 profile image55
            nikki1posted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I'm with Prettydarkhorse on this. Our honorable Obama is doing everything he can. He too is some what limited. In my opinion this has to frustrate him as well. I agree that we should have other Countries like that. He did good. I also feel for him when he tries to do well he gets mocked. Its rather sad.

            1. TheSituation profile image69
              TheSituationposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              He is not even living up to the promises he made to his base.  I mean every politician is a liar, but much of what he ran on was "changing" how things were ran...

              HEALTH-CARE MANDATES

              STATEMENT: “We’ve got a philosophical difference, which we’ve debated repeatedly, and that is that Senator Clinton believes the only way to achieve universal health care is to force everybody to purchase it. And my belief is, the reason that people don’t have it is not because they don’t want it but because they can’t afford it.” Barack Obama, speaking at a Democratic presidential debate, February 21, 2008.

              EXPIRATION DATE: On March 23, 2010, Obama signed the individual mandate into law.

              HEALTH-CARE NEGOTIATIONS ON C-SPAN

              STATEMENT: “These negotiations will be on C-SPAN, and so the public will be part of the conversation and will see the decisions that are being made.” January 20, 2008, and seven other times.

              EXPIRATION DATE: Throughout the summer, fall, and winter of 2009 and 2010; when John McCain asked about it during the health-care summit February 26, Obama dismissed the issue by declaring, “the campaign is over, John.”

              RAISING TAXES

              STATEMENT: “No family making less than $250,000 will see any form of tax increase.” (multiple times on the campaign trail)

              EXPIRATION DATE: Broken multiple times, including the raised taxes on tobacco, a new tax on indoor tanning salons, but most prominently on February 11, 2010: “President Barack Obama said he is ‘agnostic’ about raising taxes on households making less than $250,000 as part of a broad effort to rein in the budget deficit.”

              RECESS APPOINTMENTS

              STATEMENT: Then-senator Obama declared that a recess appointment is “damaged goods” and has “less credibility” than a normal appointment. August 25, 2005.

              EXPIRATION DATE: March 27, 2010: “If, in the interest of scoring political points, Republicans in the Senate refuse to exercise that responsibility, I must act in the interest of the American people and exercise my authority to fill these positions on an interim basis.”

              BORDER SECURITY

              STATEMENT: “We need tougher border security, and a renewed focus on busting up gangs and traffickers crossing our border. . . . That begins at home, with comprehensive immigration reform. That means securing our border and passing tough employer enforcement laws.” Then-candidate Obama, discussing the need for border security, speaking in Miami on May 23, 2008.

              EXPIRATION DATE: March 17, 2010: The Obama administration halted new work on a “virtual fence” on the U.S.-Mexican border, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced Tuesday, diverting $50 million in planned economic stimulus funds for the project to other purposes.

              GUANTANAMO BAY

              STATEMENT: Executive order stating, “The detention facilities at Guantánamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than one year from the date of this order.” January 22, 2009.

              EXPIRATION DATE:  November 19, 2009: “Guantánamo, we had a specific deadline that was missed.”

              MILITARY TRIBUNALS

              STATEMENT: “Somebody like Khalid Sheik Mohammad is gonna get basically, a full military trial with all the bells and whistles.” September 27, 2006

              EXPIRATION DATE: Ongoing. “President Obama is planning to insert himself into the debate about where to try the accused mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, three administration officials said Thursday, signaling a recognition that the administration had mishandled the process and triggered a political backlash. Obama initially had asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to choose the site of the trial in an effort to maintain an independent Justice Department. But the White House has been taken aback by the intense criticism from political opponents and local officials of Holder’s decision to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a civilian courtroom in New York.”

              RECOVERY.GOV

              STATEMENT: “We will launch a sweeping effort to root out waste, inefficiency, and unnecessary spending in our government, and every American will be able to see how and where we spend taxpayer dollars by going to a new website called recovery.gov.” – President Obama, January 28, 2009

              EXPIRATION DATE: “More than two months after some of the funds were released, [Recovery.gov] offers little detail on where the money is going . . . The government [spent] $84 million on a website that doesn’t have a search function, when its purpose is to ‘root out waste, inefficiency, and unnecessary spending in our government.’” April 2, 2009

              Eighteen from his first 100 days:

              1. “As President I will recognize the Armenian Genocide.”

              2. “I will make sure that we renegotiate [NAFTA].“

              3. Opposed a Colombian Free Trade Agreement because advocates ignore that “labor leaders have been targeted for assassination on a fairly consistent basis.”

              4. “Now, what I’ve done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut.”

              5. “If we see money being misspent, we’re going to put a stop to it, and we will call it out and we will publicize it.“

              6. “Yesterday, Jim, the head of Caterpillar, said that if Congress passes our plan, this company will be able to rehire some of the folks who were just laid off.”

              7. “I want to go line by line through every item in the Federal budget and eliminate programs that don’t work, and make sure that those that do work work better and cheaper.”

              8. “[My plan] will not help speculators who took risky bets on a rising market and bought homes not to live in but to sell.”

              9. “Instead of allowing lobbyists to slip big corporate tax breaks into bills during the dead of night, we will make sure every single tax break and earmark is available to every American online.”

              10. “We can no longer accept a process that doles out earmarks based on a member of Congress’s seniority, rather than the merit of the project.”

              11. “If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime.  I repeat: not one single dime.”

              12. “Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe the United States has to be frank with the Chinese about such failings and will press them to respect human rights.”

              13. “We must take out Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants if we have them in our sights.”

              14. “Lobbyists won’t work in my White House!“

              15. “The real gamble in this election is playing the same Washington game with the same Washington players and expecting a different result.”

              16. “I’ll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we’ll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills.”

              17. “Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.” Obama is 1-for-11 on this promise so far.

              18. A special one on the 100th day, “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing I’d do.”

              And a list from of promises that expired during the campaign:

  4. ediggity profile image60
    ediggityposted 7 years ago

    R.I.P.

  5. leeberttea profile image58
    leebertteaposted 7 years ago

    It's sad. I hate to see our people lost in this war. It's gone on too long now and we probably should have left once we let Bin Laden slip away. I heard that many Afghan people are questioning why if we were able to defeat the Taliban in weeks, are they still there and becoming stronger. They believe America's CIA is transporting the Taliban from the south to the North. How can we ever win there when the people believe such nonsense? How do we answer their questions? We should just leave.

    1. figment profile image79
      figmentposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      i agree sad

    2. Ralph Deeds profile image70
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Finally something we agree on!

  6. Greek One profile image77
    Greek Oneposted 7 years ago

    you can add 144 Canadians

    1. Uninvited Writer profile image81
      Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      146 now sad

      1. profile image0
        ryankettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Add 288 from the UK.

        Although, in fairness, you can also add over 2000 Afghan civilian deaths for 2009 alone....

  7. Jerami profile image74
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    excuse my ignorance but how many of our troops are in Afghanistan now?

  8. PrettyPanther profile image84
    PrettyPantherposted 7 years ago

    CNN has an interactive map depicting casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    One map shows hometown locations and another shows casualty locations.  If you click on a location, a popup will display the name (and sometimes a photo) of the person who died and how he died. The two maps are linked so you can see where people are from and where they served.

    What makes it really special is friends and family can submit memories of their loved ones.

    This is a great graphic that shows the data but also the real people behind the numbers.


    http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/war.casualties/index.html

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Thanks. Great graphic. It shouldn't surprise anyone. More than I year ago when the increase in troops in Afghanistan was being discussed I expressed my fear that Obama was jumping out of the fire in Iraq and into the fire in Afghanistan and that the more troops we sent there the greater the number of casualties.

      1. habee profile image89
        habeeposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Rut-roh, Ralph - this is the second time today that I've agreed with you! Is the sky falling??

  9. TMMason profile image63
    TMMasonposted 7 years ago

    Get the ACLU out of the theatre and fight this war to win.

    I am tired of this BS they call war today.

    War is not, has not been and will never be, civillized. To tie our soldiers hands with BS ROE shit the enemy is not obliged to follow, is retarded.

    1. Uninvited Writer profile image81
      Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Warfare has always had rules of engagement...

      1. TMMason profile image63
        TMMasonposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Nowhere near what we call ROEs of today. Yes there wewre certain rules followed, but nothing so binding and hindering as what soldiers are prohibited with today.

        1. Paraglider profile image88
          Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Please define 'win'

  10. mega1 profile image78
    mega1posted 7 years ago

    our wars are really about drugs (heroin/morphine/poppies) and oil - and as always, the megabucks made on weaponry and military equipment.  Its just business as usual.  I don't see why people are really persuaded by the propaganda of the war machine.  It does no good to rage about it - we need massive demonstrations and civil disobedience - we need our boys not to sign up - otherwise the powers that be won't stop.

    1. ediggity profile image60
      ediggityposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      If no one signs up they will draft.

  11. Uninvited Writer profile image81
    Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago

    He pledged to end the war in Iraq and move the troops to where they should have always been...Afghanistan.

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
      Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Correct. Obama has done what he said he would do. He's not a fraud. However, I didn't agree with what he did at the time, and I haven't changed my mind. Also, winding down in Iraq is taking longer than I had hoped.

    2. theirishobserver. profile image57
      theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

      Cagsil - only catching your post right now - due to the great number of Irish in America you will find that many of those solidiers being shipped to die in foreign lands are off Irish blood - when I say we I am talking about all of us who are connected to these 'wars' Shannon Airport in Ireland is used on a daily basis to transport Americans to and from the theatre of war - so I imagine that when I say we - I am speaking about the we that are involved in these wars - which are not the preserve of political or military elites in the Pentagon smile Hope that clears that up for you smile

    3. theirishobserver. profile image57
      theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

      ryankett - well said - indeed one way or another we are all in this together.

    4. theirishobserver. profile image57
      theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

      Setting aside the politics of it all there are a lot of families grieving right now.

    5. profile image0
      ryankettposted 7 years ago

      Cagsil, my bad, for some reason I was convinced that you were in recovery hmm I will request deletion of my forum post so that a Google search on Cagsil doesn't paint any inaccurate pictures.

      1. Cagsil profile image60
        Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Sorry no recovery here. No need for it either. lol

    6. profile image0
      ryankettposted 7 years ago

      Well that is the first time that I have reported myself!

    7. IntimatEvolution profile image80
      IntimatEvolutionposted 7 years ago

      When you work on a crab fishing boat in Alaska, you know the risks.  When you are an Ax man, you know the risks.  When you are an United States American soldier, you know the risks.  Not saying it is right or wrong, or that they need to come home or not.  But as a Marine Brat, five generations long..........., it is what it is.  An American soldier lives for it. 

      That is all I'm saying.  They only one who can answer questions like these, are the real men at the the scene.  For us to speculate in open forums, make them feel they are worlds apart from their homeland.  They view chatter like this, to be a disgrace on the 1000 soldiers dead.  At least that is how it is and was with every military family I know.  And I've been around alot.

    8. AEvans profile image65
      AEvansposted 7 years ago

      That is so sad, so sad my prayers are with there families right now, I could not imagine what they have been going through. sad

    9. profile image0
      Kathryn LJposted 7 years ago

      It's sad that families have to deal with such tragedy. My step son is serving in the British forces in Afganistan.  My concern is with him.  I hope you will forgive my lack of interest in the wider picture.

    10. theirishobserver. profile image57
      theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

      Kathryn - agreed smile

    11. Pearldiver profile image86
      Pearldiverposted 7 years ago

      No surprises... There is a certain futility in invading and fighting over the religious ownership of rocks, hills and deserts.... no matter the diplomatic spin. sad

      1. Shil1978 profile image87
        Shil1978posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Is it about "ownership?" Is the plan to occupy these distant lands? If yes, then may be I am missing something!

        I am not sure if the ideal option is to shut oneself in one's own country and say we are not interested in what goes on in another country - especially when that country has been established to have elements in it that have openly called for your destruction and have proved that they are not just bark, but can bite too, as in 9/11 and the recent Times Square attempted bombing.

        Now, unless one believes in the 9/11 conspiracy theorists and says all the ills there are - are the direct result of one's own Govt., I am not too sure what other options should have been considered?

        Using diplomatic offices with the Taliban? Peace talks with the Taliban? Just walking away? What was the alternative?

        1. Pearldiver profile image86
          Pearldiverposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          There are many things that equate to 'ownership' in politics.. perhaps 'control' or 'financed by' should spring to mind.hmm

          Afganistan has been a war zone for a thousand years.. though for some reason that is overlooked. The place is a muslim state and on that basis alone will always be in despute with what we promote politically as being the answer to their problem.

          Short memories - USA financed the very same party that you are saying justifies the war yikes  The Taliban.... CIA backed, developed and deserted once the Russians pulled out.

          But as an environment to test new weapons and battlefield tactics it is perfect and is used that way. What a waste so many young lives are sacrified. What a waste of taxpayers funds when it is the muslim groups in places like Pakistan that are funded by 'Infidels'... those that are detested most by the parties that take the 'Aid.'

          Give it to them... it is theirs... other than hollow political excuses.. there is no reason to be slaughtering young lambs.

          1. Shil1978 profile image87
            Shil1978posted 7 years ago in reply to this

            "Financed by," or "controlled" by whom? Is that an assumption that you make or is it based on some facts?

            I am not sure about the "thousand years," but did people in ages past have the kind of weapons they have now, or the capability to pose the kind of destruction they can now?

            Did they pose a threat to lands thousands of miles away? I am not sure why any of that has to have any significance to this day and age.

            Afghanistan being a muslim country does not matter. Fact is there are thousands of countries around the world, who are muslim, and while they may not agree with the foreign policy of the US, they don't harbor elements that openly call for the destruction of the US, and even if they do, they just have the 'bark,' not the bite!!

            What you had in Afghanistan till 9/11 and shortly afterwords was a situation where stateless actors and the Taliban had taken complete hold. They didn't just bark but bit!! Would you say, they were they involved in carrying out humanitarian programs around the world?

            "short memories" - well, isn't this an oft-repeated argument. So, what? It was wrong (in hindsight)! Did anyone at the time cry hoarse about the CIA backing?

            This is a most cynical view. "testing new weapons" - well, what can one say!!

            Afghanistan can't survive on its own as a country, not yet!! There are far too many interested parties there to allow for that to happen. Its not an impossible task though, but it requires commitment.

            Its better a job is well done and a country strengthened to take care of itself, rather than leave mid way and then ponder over the what-could-have-beens years later. I don't think anyone wants Afghanistan to become a haven for Al-Qaeda and Taliban as it had become.

    12. theirishobserver. profile image57
      theirishobserver.posted 7 years ago

      Still - there will come a day when like Gadaffi these 'terrorists' will be invited for tea and cakes by the great and the good smile

    13. rg01 profile image56
      rg01posted 7 years ago

      "Afghanistan can't survive on its own as a country, not yet!!"

      ROFL, isn't that abit of an ignorant statement? It hasn't been under foreign occupation for much of its long history because foreign invaders are usually thrown out.

    14. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image58
      VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 7 years ago

      "Afganistan cannot survive on its own." This is very strange to read. It may well suit US, which cannot stand on its own. They want help from the rest of the world.

      Afganistan is the only country in the world which stood independent for several centuries, till 1979. Russia occupied Afganistan first in 1979 and US occupied it in 2001.

      Eventhough US thinks it had occupied Afganistan, those people never care for Americans. They continue their normal life, except a few terrorists, aided by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. So, Afganistan is standing on their own legs even now. The foreign merceneries and US soldiers fight each other. One day, native Afgans will drive both of them out.

     
    working