Vaporizing Afghan Towns

[rambone]

We all have varying opinions about these wars we've been participating in for the last decade. But how do you feel about what you're seeing here?

Turning a town to dust with God knows how many non-combatants killed.

Its bad juju if you ask me.

We need to end this already.


25 Tons of Bombs Wipe Afghan Town Off Map

 

[jblomenberg16]

It is certainly unfortunate when civilians are killed as a result of a war that they aren't actively fighting.

However, the destruction seen in those photos is nothing compared to the destruction of civilian targets that was unleashed in WWII all across Europe.

Our technology has certainly improved to where we can hit exactly where we want, and thus we do not have to completely carpet bomb an area in hopes of hitting the military target of interest.

However, no matter how "Smart" a bomb is, I don't think they can distinguish between a good guy and bad guy. In the case of this town, it appeared that the commanders had good information that most (if not all) of the civilians had been run off by the insurgents. There had been many US casualties in trying to clear the city, which to me says that there was a high density of non-civilians occupying it. So, rather than continue to send men in to be slaughtered, the commanders decided to just flatten it all.


I would hate if that happened to my home and town, but also would hate if my home and town were occupied by a local insurgency that was using it to wage war. However, strategically I can see a case for doing what was done to this town in hopes of elminating a real threat.

 

[jeremy]

Just goes to prove a point I have made more than once across the Decade since GWOT started...

No matter how good of tech you have, it is really hard to beat putting a bunch of 17 year old American Soldiers on the Ground...

 

[indykid]

It is a good thing today's bleeding hearts weren't around during World War Two or we would have lost that war. In Germany it was common to use hundreds of bombers to take out a city just to get one small munitions plant, or a ball bearing plant. In Japan we firebombed Tokyo, and nuked a couple of cities, all in the name of saving our fighting troops.

Guess what, in WWII it worked. Granted this is a different style war, but sometimes what if "fair" isn't possible. Especially when the terrorist/insurgents know how much we revere life, so they hide behind women and children, and then if one child is killed taking out an insurgent stronghold, we are the bad guys. Sorry, I don't agree with that.

How about the innocent people that were killed in New York City. How soon we forget.

 

[jeremy]

By the way I am not sure that there are any innocents over there...

 

[grimor]

oh well...

 

[eldirector]

Either we are at war, or we are not. War is messy. That's the point.

Playing nice doesn't win a war. You'd think after Vietnam, Korea, and now Afghanistan, we would have learned that.

 

[jeremy]

Either we are at war, or we are not. War is messy. That's the point.

Playing nice doesn't win a war.

Those in the Know, Know...
The problem are the Guys who sit on that Hill that think that since they have a degree in something that they know everything...

 

[qonorio]

I have no problem with the second picture of the town.

 

[Jay]

It's really tough to try and fight a war.... politely.

Consider the Airmen shot down in their parachutes by Japanese pilots
or the death camps in Germany
or the Hanoi Hilton

Some folks should get a bit of experience in war, then tell everyone else how to fight one.


The only reason New York wasn't flattened, was they didn't have the tools.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

Drop the same exact kind and amount of munitions on a "western" town of the same size and see half the damage...

yes, the damage shown is great. BUT also keep in mind the building techniques and (lack of) building codes.

 

[rambone]

However, the destruction seen in those photos is nothing compared to the destruction of civilian targets that was unleashed in WWII all across Europe.

It is a good thing today's bleeding hearts weren't around during World War Two or we would have lost that war. In Germany it was common to use hundreds of bombers to take out a city just to get one small munitions plant, or a ball bearing plant. In Japan we firebombed Tokyo, and nuked a couple of cities, all in the name of saving our fighting troops.

Guess what, in WWII it worked. Granted this is a different style war, but sometimes what if "fair" isn't possible. Especially when the terrorist/insurgents know how much we revere life, so they hide behind women and children, and then if one child is killed taking out an insurgent stronghold, we are the bad guys. Sorry, I don't agree with that.

This isn't WWII, and we aren't facing the Imperial Japanese or Nazi Germany and their impressive war machine. Those photos aren't of a fortified naval base or a tank factory. It was a village made of clay.

BTW I laughed when you called me a bleeding heart. Pull your head out of the sand and realize it isn't just radical leftists who are fed up with being a Warfare State. We are broke, dead broke. We have to stop digging. These guys building adobe houses are not worth $30,000,000 per hour worth of debt.

How about the innocent people that were killed in New York City. How soon we forget.

We've already killed between 1,000,000 - 1,500,000 people over there. I think we avenged their deaths enough times over.

ORB survey of Iraq War casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Either we are at war, or we are not. War is messy. That's the point.

Isn't this just an occupation? If we want to wipe out entire Afghan towns I would say we should declare an official, constitutional, actual war against the country of Afghanistan.

I don't think America would tolerate Afghan troops scattered all over our country wiping out cities because there were too many patriots in them who would not surrender. They think we are at war with their entire country. They keep fighting because we keep coming. We keep coming because they keep fighting. It will never end.

Afghanistan is where great nations go to die. Ask the Soviets.

 

[rambone]

 

[Jay]

Since this country is so unpalatable, to some, perhaps they should just go elsewhere.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

If we keep bombing the hell out of them they will stop fighting us, one way or the other. This is war. Kill them until they beg us to stop and promise to be good little terrorists.

 

[indykid]

Rambone, sorry if you thought that bleeding heart comment was aimed at you. It was not. It was aimed at the news media and our government who think they can fight a better cleaner war.

 

[Bigum1969]

War is hell.

It is also ugly.

If we're going to fight it, let's be all in and finish the job. If you have to level some towns, so be it.

 

[Bigum1969]

And now that I actually read the article...

If it's a choice between more dead and/or wounded American soldiers and destroying a clay house, I say make an ant hill out of the place.

 

[E5RANGER375]

If it saves JUST ONE American life then I have no problem with how many people we kill over there. I spent over 2 and a half years between afghanistan and iraq, both as a soldier and as a security contractor so I will tell all you who have never been there that EVERYONE will kill you over there if they can get a little milk money for your head. I dont care how innocent or good they are, those people would sell your head for a $5 bill. make no mistake about it. I have no remorse for any person killed in those countries other than if they are Americans. If they are dumb reporters, im less affected.

 

[ol' trucker]

And I am not a big Bush supporter. but when we were in Iraq and our soldiers were dying,that's all you ever seen on the liberal newscast..how bad war is. now that Barry is in the nuthouse,he has more troops in Afghanistan than ever before. and there have been more US casulties this last year then ever before. and somehow it very rarely is ever even talked about. wonder why that is. I am sure it couldn't be because he said that we would be out of there,not adding troops. I guess it depends on who is in the drivers seat, whether war is ok or not.