well thats revealing, mark me not surprised...go ahead, keep digging.

__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."

More Afghan children killed by international terrorists;

Yanqui, go home.

Firstly, I received no derision or little of consequence anyway.

Secondly, are you seriously contending you were not underhand? If you can tell me why you think you werent being underhand but in fact you were perfectly up front and relevent to the discussion Im all ears. Or eyes, as it were..

Care to explain your revelation and the logic behind it?

Even your own link said NATO forces were not involved.

We have UN permission to be there.

You go home from Tibet and stop threatening Taiwan then we can talk eh?

60 Minutes did a piece on this last night. Is there no sense of irony? Interesting how constant judgements are made on the value of human life thousands of times a day. Is there not something odd about a nation purportedly promoting democracy yet lauding its role as a cold, calculating, excecutioner because of all the hard work that goes into deciding which civilians will die today? Maybe this article should have been titled, "the thoughtful excecutioner of the 21st century." Has a nice ring to it don't ya think?


I'm sure the man with dead children who's missing a limb will gratefully say, "Well, at least I have one arm left, thank god for US military gymnastics." Macabre is an understatement.

Bombing Afghanistan, Afghan President Tells 60 Minutes That Too Many Civilians Are Being Killed - CBS News

__________________
“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.”

Seneca

Out of curiosity, did 60 Minutes include the DoD's statement from last week in their piece?

I don't know. However the main focus of the story was not about that airstrike but a smaller one on a village just outside a miltary outpost.

__________________
“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.”

Seneca

The Pashtun are right. It's US-led invaders who are the terrorists.



These people will never accept invasion nor cease to hunt down collaborators.

Yanqui, go home.

Tell us something new.

*yawn*

Actually its the Pashtun themselves who are the invaders. theyve been seeking to rule Af for decades.

I have sorrow for the children and innocent families that were harmed in any operations by my fine country's military. That said, whilst these terrorists hide among the innocent and use them as shields and fodder, there is little I could ever expect other than this to happen. They don't care about collateral damage as a result of a strike. It only helps their cause. If you feel so inclined to question how the U.S./Afghani SpecOps could have done this charge without hurting the undeserving people, perhaps your anger should be pointed towards the cowards who hide amongst them.

Indeed, I don't expect the US not to kill women and children. But ask yourself this: what if terrorists attacked a US military target, but could only find a bomb that was big enough to wipe out whole states? Would you say the same thing about the terrorists as you say about the US troops now? What if the 9/11 hijackers were really only trying to kill a member of the US military who was inside one of the buildings? Would some of those civilians simply be "collateral damage?" I point my finger towards both the terrorists and the US troops. Both bring terror and are often horrible human beings. An air strike is one of the less accurate methods to conduct an attack, so of course you will kill civilians if they exist in the area. It's like trying to kill a fly in someone's house by bombarding the town with a howitzer. You KNOW you will kill civilians. You KNOW there are more accurate ways to do it. But you kill the civilians anyway. It's a means to an end, but so is the job of a hitman, bank robber or hired insurgent. But hey, keep blaming the terrorists for the high crime of "not caring about collateral damage" while conveniently leaving out the people who actually dropped the bombs.

I do understand where you are coming from, one man's savior is another's satan. There is no reason to believe that anybody associated with 9/11 had anything other than innocent civilians as targets. Unfortunately U.S. troops have to rely on intel given to them by people who may not have the success of the West in that region in their utmost interest. Are you asking if I could sit by and watch as my family burned to death from a weapon that was not meant for them? No, I am not that naive. What I am saying is that the world arena is watching very closely. I grew up with children from Asian, Europe, Africa and everything between the near and far east. It is the bad apples we are concerned with here. The Radical Islamic Extremist can not be toyed with. Any man who will destroy his own people for a cause cannot be dealt with as you would deal with men in any other part of the planet.

I didn't make a statement, I asked a question. There could very easily have been a military person in the WTC, and the 9/11 hijackers could have very easily given it as their reason for the attack. Please go back and answer it.That's not what I asked, no. Here are the questions again:
what if terrorists attacked a US military target, but could only find a bomb that was big enough to wipe out whole states? Would you say the same thing about the terrorists as you say about the US troops now? What if the 9/11 hijackers were really only trying to kill a member of the US military who was inside one of the buildings? Would some of those civilians simply be "collateral damage?"
Good, but it's still not what I asked. I'm hoping that you don't need something like that to happen to you before you take a rational position on the matter.Actually, my concern is the innocent civilians that were killed indiscriminately.Well, we're not really discussing how to deal with them, but rather the "90 civilians killed in US airstrike." Now, can you please address the questions in my post?