2 More Killed

These are not my claims, but those of others who are better informed than my sports television watching ass. I guess you didn't notice those Wikipedia articles were sourced from western and eastern news sources so ... open wide, here comes the little airplane:

BBC News: Afghan Pipeline Deal Close
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/west_asia/21007.stm

BBC News: Taleban in Texas for talks on gas pipeline
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/west_asia/37021.stm

Asia Times: The oil behind Bush and Son's campaigns
http://www.atimes.com/global-econ/CJ06Dj01.html
 
Chillroy, the "blood for oil" line may have some merit, but it is just a mantra. It does not change the original reason for going into Afghanistan - to deny Al Quaeda the use of that nation as a training grounds for attacks against the West. 911 was not a dream - it was a bomb attack on North American soil that killed 2996 innocent people, including 24 Canadians. The people behind those attacks lived and trained in Afghanistan (not the 911 terrorists - the organization that funded and directed them). In order to keep them out, the Afghan government must be able to sustain itself, and to defend its own people against insurgents. This is what Canada and its allies are trying to do in Afghanistan.
 
djk said:
The cost of liberty always has been in blood.

"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security deserves neither and will lose both." -Benjamin Franklin
 
CapitalGuy said:
Chillroy, the "blood for oil" line may have some merit, but it is just a mantra. It does not change the original reason for going into Afghanistan - to deny Al Quaeda the use of that nation as a training grounds for attacks against the West. 911 was not a dream - it was a bomb attack on North American soil that killed 2996 innocent people, including 24 Canadians. The people behind those attacks lived and trained in Afghanistan (not the 911 terrorists - the organization that funded and directed them). In order to keep them out, the Afghan government must be able to sustain itself, and to defend its own people against insurgents. This is what Canada and its allies are trying to do in Afghanistan.

The truth is Canada doesn't know why it's in Afghanistan anymore ... that's why we're getting out. At first it was to aid our US allies in the capture of Osama bin Laden. But after he escaped from Tora Bora, the mission has been continually redefined. First as "regime change" when the focus shifted to removing the Taliban from government, then as "nation building" when we started training the Afghans to stabilize their own damn country. Canada has been in Afghanistan for 8 years now but it's no closer to a stable democracy than it was pre-invasion. And like any government department that doesn't want its budget to shrink, they continue to talk about all the good work that they're doing in the name of the Canadian public. Had the Americans not left us high and dry in 2003 to open up a second front in the "War on Terror" they might very well have achieved some stability there. Instead we were left to carry the load in Afghanistan while the US (like a teenager with ADD) lost focus and invaded Iraq (another muslim country), which only served to galvanize al-Qaeda and provide them with a potent global recruitment pretext for jihad.

I'm not denying the events of 9/11. But I am denying that it was a bomb attack ... that's what actually makes it unique as far as terror attacks go and why we were caught off guard. 9/11 was a failure of several government agencies that were specifically created to avert that kind of disaster. The appropriate and proportionate response would have been to tighten up airport security and employment screening processes for new pilots. Sending the army to a foreign country to route out terrorism is like using a broadsword for surgery. But I guess that's what you do when you find that all you have is a tray full of dull and rusty scalpels.
 
Chillroy said:
The appropriate and proportionate response would have been to tighten up airport security and employment screening processes for new pilots. Sending the army to a foreign country to route out terrorism is like using a broadsword for surgery.
Perhaps we should not spend several millions of dollars to bring the killers of Victoria Stafford to justice but instead just protect our kids better.

We should protect our kids better and secure airplane cockpit doors etc. but justice and punishment are extremely important matters in our society.
We want killers and those who harbour them to be brought to justice and face the consequences of their actions.

I'm sure there are terrorists who are surprised by the enormous response to 9/11 and I think that is a good thing.
I don't want to see a proportionate response.
I want them to know that anything they do to us will be met with a response that is disproportionately much more severe.

I believe we should defend ourselves as well as we can but sometimes it makes sense to go on the offensive like hunting down potential pedophiles when they are into child porn or terrorists when they are making their bombs and plans.
Taking out obscene websites and terrorist safe havens makes sense to me.
 
Chillroy said:
The truth is Canada doesn't know why it's in Afghanistan anymore ... etc.

Well, you have a lot of issues to sort through, and a lot of ignorance to overcome. Your post is riddled with inaccuracies. But....in fairness....its not my role to educate you, so...carry on.
 
Last edited:
Malibook said:
I believe we should defend ourselves as well as we can but sometimes it makes sense to go on the offensive like hunting down potential pedophiles when they are into child porn or terrorists when they are making their bombs and plans.
Taking out obscene websites and terrorist safe havens makes sense to me.

This is just nonsense. What is the connection between terrorism and porn? Maybe the Thai police should set up an office in Canada to hunt down sexual tourists. That way they would be able to defend their kids better against our sexual terrorists.

CapitalGuy said:
Well, you have a lot of issues to sort through, and a lot of ignorance to overcome. Your post is riddled with inaccuracies. But....in fairness....its not my role to educate you, so...carry on.

Education is a system of imposed ignorance.
 
I'm afraid AFghanistan-Iraq will be this century;s VIET NAM. They have been fighting there for over a hundred years. They beat the mighty Imperial British Army in the 19th Century, the Soviets in the 1980's albeit with US aid. I don't see the west winning over there.I DO HOWEVER support the TROOPS and what they are TRYING to do.
 
Afganistan has defeated the Soviets, the British and even Alexander the Great. It is a quagmire, a Vietnam and a slaughterhouse. What makes anyone think that the USA and the halfhearted efforts of a few other will make any difference.
 
BAGRAM, Afghanistan (Reuters) - Life as 8-year-old Razia knew it ended one March morning when a shell her father says was fired by Western troops exploded into their house, enveloping her head and neck in a blazing chemical.

Now she spends her days in a U.S. hospital bed at the Bagram airbase, her small fingernails still covered with flaking red polish but her face an almost unrecognisable mess of burned tissue and half her scalp a bald scar.

"The kids called out to me that I was burning but the explosion was so strong that for a moment I was deaf and couldn't hear anything," her father, Aziz Rahman, told Reuters.

"And then my wife screamed 'the kids are burning' and she was also burning," he added, his face clouding over at the memory.

The flames that consumed his family were fed by a chemical called white phosphorous, which U.S. medical staff at Bagram said they found on Razia's face and neck.

It bursts into fierce fire on contact with the air and can stick to and even penetrate flesh as it burns.

White phosphorus can be used legally in war to provide light, create smokescreens or burn buildings, so it is not banned under international treaties that forbid using chemicals as weapons.

Colonel Gregory Julian, a spokesman for the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, General David McKiernan, confirmed that Western forces in the country use the chemical.

"In the case of white phosphorus it is used on the battlefield in certain applications ... It is used as an incendiary to destroy bunkers and enemy equipment; it's used for illumination."

But U.S. military training manuals say firing it at people is illegal. Its use in populated areas has been a persistent source of controversy.

Razia and her family are the first known civilian casualties of its use in Afghanistan.


WHO FIRED?

Rahman said the shell that burned his daughter landed after a firefight near their house in the eastern province of Kapisa. The NATO-led international force there is made up mainly of French troops, with U.S. support.

"(Western) troops were on the road, the Taliban were on the mountain and we were at the house, sandwiched between them. When the Taliban began retreating, they fired artillery at them, 12 rounds. One hit my house," Rahman said.

A spokeswoman for the NATO-led force rejected Rahman's account, saying an internal investigation into the incident concluded that it was "very unlikely" the weapon that hit Razia's house was theirs, because of the timing and location.

U.S. Major Jennifer Willis suggested instead that the Taliban had fired the shot: "An enemy mortar team, known to have been operating in that area, may have been responsible".

The Afghan government, military specialists and experts on the Taliban told Reuters, however, that insurgents have never been observed using white phosphorus. The only forces on the battlefield known to use it are the United States and NATO.

"I am not aware that the Taliban have used this in any of their attacks," said Zaher Murad, a Defence Ministry spokesman.

Ahmed Rashid, Pakistan-based author of a widely acclaimed book on the hardline Islamists, said that he was also not aware of such reports.

The use of the chemical for illumination and concealment of troop movements suit the tactics of foreign forces in a hostile environment, but it would be of little use to insurgents who know the terrain and can blend into the civilian population.

"To think they (the Taliban) are employing white phosphorus as a weapon in their arsenal is very far-fetched," said Marc Garlasco, senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch and a former senior intelligence analyst at the Pentagon.

"The U.S. has optics that will allow them to see through the smoke, so it is useless for (the Taliban). They don't need to illuminate because that is telegraphing to the United States where they are going to go and fight. Plus they know the area."

"They want high explosive to shock and kill; flames raining down from the sky aren't going to frighten the U.S. forces."

NATO spokeswoman Willis said insurgents had been observed using white phosphorus weapons in the past. Asked to provide examples of the Taliban using the chemical, she wrote back to say that she was unable to do so.

The Taliban also denied that they used it. "This is not true, it is just a mere allegation," said spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid.


NEVER NORMAL

When Rahman saw his daughter on fire, he rushed her out to the yard, where he put out the flames with water stored to mix mud for a new wall. Her hair came away in clumps in his hand.

He raced inside and found two other children dead from head wounds. He hoisted Razia on his back and staggered towards the local base where soldiers arranged a U.S. airlift that almost certainly saved her life.

Colleen Fitzpatrick, a U.S. military paediatric surgeon who has been treating Razia, confirmed Razia was hit by white phosphorous and had burns to 40 percent of her body.

"The way we treat that is with skin grafts ... (but) because her burns were so extensive we had to allow some of those donor sites to heal first, so we would go back to take skin from the same place more than once," Fitzpatrick said.

Razia, who did not want her picture taken, is now suffering mentally as well as physically.

"My daughter is really sad and really lonely and she misses her family and mother. When I call home in the afternoon ... she talks with her mother and is always saying 'mum, I miss you'".

Rahman says he is grateful for the medical help she has received from U.S. doctors, and reserves his anger for the provincial governor who visited his daughter but who offered no comfort, saying only "she will never get a husband".

When she leaves the hospital she will face an uphill struggle to rebuild her life. Although doctors say it may be possible to reduce her disfigurement, U.S. help may one day be cut off.

"It's never going to be normal, but there is still certainly room to improve on what she has," Fitzpatrick said.

"We would like to be able to offer her things down the line, but a lot of that just depends on the tempo of the war ... Obviously our primary mission is to support our troops."

http://in.reuters.com/article/southAsiaNews/idINIndia-39498520090508?sp=true