Operation Cluster****: US Strike Kills 90 Civilians In Afghanistan, 15 Wounded

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Druidx

Platinum Member
Jul 16, 2002
2,971
0
76
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Just one...:laugh:

palehorse thinks the intarweb is serious business.

Your challenge doesn't excuse your apologist nature.

:confused: That doesn't even make sense.

The funny part is it probably made sense to him
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Ok, palehorse, lets put you to the test, how exactly will your plan work? How many troops is it going to take? And how are you going to tell the difference between Taliban and non Taliban people if you get into the Tribal areas of Pakistan. How do you prevent the Taliban from fleeing into the various Stans to the North or simply slipping right back into Afghanistan? Even if you can once again chase all Taliban away from Afghanistan, will you have the economic aid and development aid in place and ready to hit the ground running to properly exploit that expulsion?

And what if something goes wrong as your supply chain is very stretched. How long will you have to stay to achieve stability, or would you just be widening a quagmire?

Lay out your plan in detail in my challenge to you? Let us see what you know and how much is mere tin foil hat? As for me, I have been lied to by far more powerful men and woman than you? US President, Generals, congressmen, and defense Secretaries, they too hatched their own little tin foil hat over optimistic brainfarts, they too were cock sure they were right, and they ended up being proven wrong.

Please palehorse, lay your plan out in detail.

Let slip the dogs of war... and bring along the lawyers, investors, and builders in their wake. I expect you to rally the latter while I prepare, and march with, the former.

Target packages are a grunt's best friend -- especially those we've had six years to prepare.

We know where they lay their heads each night.
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Ok, palehorse, lets put you to the test, how exactly will your plan work? How many troops is it going to take? And how are you going to tell the difference between Taliban and non Taliban people if you get into the Tribal areas of Pakistan. How do you prevent the Taliban from fleeing into the various Stans to the North or simply slipping right back into Afghanistan? Even if you can once again chase all Taliban away from Afghanistan, will you have the economic aid and development aid in place and ready to hit the ground running to properly exploit that expulsion?

And what if something goes wrong as your supply chain is very stretched. How long will you have to stay to achieve stability, or would you just be widening a quagmire?

Lay out your plan in detail in my challenge to you? Let us see what you know and how much is mere tin foil hat? As for me, I have been lied to by far more powerful men and woman than you? US President, Generals, congressmen, and defense Secretaries, they too hatched their own little tin foil hat over optimistic brainfarts, they too were cock sure they were right, and they ended up being proven wrong.

Please palehorse, lay your plan out in detail.

Let slip the dogs of war... and bring along the lawyers, investors, and builders in their wake. I expect you to rally the latter while I prepare, and march with, the former.

Target packages are a grunt's best friend -- especially those we've had six years to prepare.

We know where they lay their heads each night.

Sorry to disappoint but LL would never do that. He is all talk and the more anti-american the better. It seems he likes nothing more than to see the US make a mistake or be blamed (rightly or wrongly) for any ill wind. He cannot be reasoned with and has no honor as you and I as military understand it.

He is a lost cause but has his right to free expression. One of the rights we would die for him so he can continue to speak. He is a sad case, and I pity him and those like him who see no future for the US, only bad times. We are better as a people than he is and we know it. One day, maybe by the grace of God, LL and his kind will come to understand what the US is really about.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Ok, palehorse, lets put you to the test, how exactly will your plan work? How many troops is it going to take? And how are you going to tell the difference between Taliban and non Taliban people if you get into the Tribal areas of Pakistan. How do you prevent the Taliban from fleeing into the various Stans to the North or simply slipping right back into Afghanistan? Even if you can once again chase all Taliban away from Afghanistan, will you have the economic aid and development aid in place and ready to hit the ground running to properly exploit that expulsion?

And what if something goes wrong as your supply chain is very stretched. How long will you have to stay to achieve stability, or would you just be widening a quagmire?

Lay out your plan in detail in my challenge to you? Let us see what you know and how much is mere tin foil hat? As for me, I have been lied to by far more powerful men and woman than you? US President, Generals, congressmen, and defense Secretaries, they too hatched their own little tin foil hat over optimistic brainfarts, they too were cock sure they were right, and they ended up being proven wrong.

Please palehorse, lay your plan out in detail.

Let slip the dogs of war... and bring along the lawyers, investors, and builders in their wake. I expect you to rally the latter while I prepare, and march with, the former.

Target packages are a grunt's best friend -- especially those we've had six years to prepare.

We know where they lay their heads each night.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pardon me palehorse, I am underwhelmed by the depth and breath of your plan. Vague in the extreme without mention of troop numbers allocated to do a much bigger job or where those troop numbers will come from.

But maybe its time to ask your Present rank? Are we talking a NCO, a LT, a Captain? Why do I doubt I am talking a major fast tracked to leadership because of vision, and I would be really amazed if you were a Colonel or a General.

I do not need name rank and serial number, I will settle for just rank, and then maybe you can tell us why your superior officers are a hell of a lot more realistic than you are because as far as I can tell, you and JOS are the only two people in the world advocating kill kill kill all Taliban.

Lay out your complete plan palehorse, don't be vague, don't give us pie in the sky, just one, one realistic plan and complete plan is all I ask for.

For P&N forum purposes, where is the beef or does that cat now have your tongue?
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Pardon me palehorse, I am underwhelmed by the depth and breath of your plan.
Pardon me, son, I don't give a flying fuck.

because as far as I can tell, you and JOS are the only two people in the world advocating kill kill kill all Taliban.
LOL... you really need to get out more. How about an all-expenses paid trip to Afghanistan? Are you down?! If so, I know a few high-ranking officers who would love to meet and school you! You could also use the opportunity to meet a few of your Taliban buddies in person!!

It's win-win, is it not!?

Lay out your complete plan palehorse, don't be vague, don't give us pie in the sky, just one, one realistic plan and complete plan is all I ask for.

For P&N forum purposes, where is the beef or does that cat now have your tongue?
You're not privy to any real plans... and those are all I deal in.

You rally and organize those lawyers, investors, and builders yet?
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
palehorse, What is your military rank son? Its now the first thing we should ask? The second thing this forum should ask is what is your plan in detail. Yes I give a flying fuck if idiots lead my country into disaster again, been there done, that too many times not to oppose it.

And in a word no, its not my job to rally others around what amounts to an 1/8 baked brainfart of yours. Come up with a viable plan and I will do what I can, but you are a day late and a dollar short if you want me or the American people to backstop you when your stupidity goes south.

Once again I ask you, palehorse, what is your plan in detail? Cat still have your tongue? Lay it out to this forum, is that too much to ask?
 

Kuragami

Member
Jun 20, 2008
92
0
0
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Originally posted by: Kuragami
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: Lemon law

But you better be quick, if you want to mount that head of the three month old infant
Nato managed to kill with another air strike. It would look so good mounted in your trophy room. But in this heat it rots fast and your taxidermist may not be able to save it.

You are so fucked up it isnt even funny


.... If anyone here is a soldier you would be lying through your teeth if you said the military does not try to dehumanize you. It starts at boot camp and continues until you leave service. I'm not suggesting there is some sort of Psy-Ops program to make soldiers crazy killers. Rather it's the nature of the military system that perpetuates the ideals first implanted in your head in boot camp....

What? Can you be more specific about all this "dehumanizing" that occurs, starting in boot camp? What ideals are implanted, anyway?

BTW, we capitalize Soldier (when we aren't lying through our teeth :roll:)
Roll your eyes on someone who hasn't gone through basic. Just because you never gave any of it a second thought doesn't mean it didn't occur. What? Did you think you were shooting at shapes of soldiers on the range because it made it more realistic? Here is a shocking answer for you. No.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Kuragami
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Originally posted by: Kuragami
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: Lemon law

But you better be quick, if you want to mount that head of the three month old infant
Nato managed to kill with another air strike. It would look so good mounted in your trophy room. But in this heat it rots fast and your taxidermist may not be able to save it.

You are so fucked up it isnt even funny


.... If anyone here is a soldier you would be lying through your teeth if you said the military does not try to dehumanize you. It starts at boot camp and continues until you leave service. I'm not suggesting there is some sort of Psy-Ops program to make soldiers crazy killers. Rather it's the nature of the military system that perpetuates the ideals first implanted in your head in boot camp....

What? Can you be more specific about all this "dehumanizing" that occurs, starting in boot camp? What ideals are implanted, anyway?

BTW, we capitalize Soldier (when we aren't lying through our teeth :roll:)
Roll your eyes on someone who hasn't gone through basic. Just because you never gave any of it a second thought doesn't mean it didn't occur. What? Did you think you were shooting at shapes of soldiers on the range because it made it more realistic? Here is a shocking answer for you. No.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do somewhat owe JOS an apology. But 60 or more innocent Afghan civilians are dead and I do not see any accountability anywhere in Nato. While the person who ordered this air strike was not JOS, someone did, and someone needs to be sacked for it or these mistakes will keep occurring. Nor do I think we can blame just military indoctrination, this Afghan occupation has turned into a kill or be killed situation for both the Taliban and Nato soldiers. With ordinary Afghan civilians trapped between the two opposing forces for the past six years and far into the foreseeable future.

To a certain extent, the present Taliban is not that numerous, but they sure are vicious because they too are in a kill or be killed situation. And to some extent they have one goal, expel Nato. And Nato seems to have one goal and that is to beat the Taliban while taking its eyes off off the very Al-Quida that attacked us on 911.

What it amounts to with present troop numbers is a basic Stalemate, with neither the Taliban or Nato making any headway.

What I refuse to believe is that all of the Taliban are simply rapists as JOS and palehorse would have us believe. But absent a military solution, its going to take a political solution.
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Originally posted by: palehorse


Pardon me, son, I don't give a flying fuck.


lol, come on man

your what? in your early thirties and calling people *son*

no no son

you don't get that right till your at least say 45ish

is that why you took the 74 out of your nic?

I love JOS posts but your attempts at imitation are too much




 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Wasn't there something about the Taliban grabbin power in the first place by rallyiing against the mujahideen because of a rape and murder of some children?

here we go a nice quick reference

The Taliban initially enjoyed enormous good will from Afghans weary of the corruption, brutality, and incessant fighting of Mujahideen warlords. Two contrasting narratives explain the beginnings of the Taliban.[10] One is that the rape and murder of boys and girls from a family traveling to Kandahar or a similar outrage by Mujahideen bandits sparked Mullah Omar and his students to vow to rid Afghanistan of these criminals.[11] The other is that the Pakistan-based truck shipping mafia known as the "Afghanistan Transit Trade" and their allies in the Pakistan government, trained, armed, and financed the Taliban to clear the southern road across Afghanistan to the Central Asian Republics of extortionate bandit gangs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

weird how that is eh son


 

Grunt03

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2000
3,131
0
0
Oops!!!:Q

So has everyone forgot that it is a war zone and shit happens. Where is the outrage over our troops being hurt and killed??

 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Grunt03
Oops!!!:Q

So has everyone forgot that it is a war zone and shit happens. Where is the outrage over our troops being hurt and killed??
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While you have a point Grunt03, its no longer a war zone and its an occupation in which we are trying to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. And as brutal as the Taliban was with its Sharia law, the Taliban swept into power partly because they were seen as the cure for far worse evils of total anarchy, civil war, and corruption.

And sadly in a military occupation on the total cheap, all Nato has done is to bring back total anarchy, civil war, and corruption. Which now partly explains why the Taliban is back and gaining ground.

But this also ignores a somewhat other central tenant of the thread. That both JOS and palehorse advocate, that the only way to break Taliban power is to invade the tribal areas of Pakistan. An area that has not been anywhere near as war ravaged as Afghanistan, where the taliban is not making a heck of a lot of mischief for the local population, and an area where almost everyone would be up in arms against Nato troops using either air power or boots on the ground. Not to mention the facts that Pakistan has flatly said no.

And yes, Grunt03, make no mistake about it, if Nato acts unilaterallyand takes the palehorse and JOS advice, one hell of a lot of Nato troops and a even large number of the the some other locals will end up dead in what amounts to a larger war zone
that is not at war now. And even then, its not likely to end the Taliban while it spreads Nato far thinner.

A number of posts back, I had repeatably asked palehorse to lay out his plan with troop numbers and contingency plans. Plus what military rank he has to show what right he had to speak for Nato.

But as usual, when it comes to putting his pie in the sky plans to the test, palehorse is missing in action as far as I can see.

But you are also right Grunt03, if we shoot and outlaw the Taliban who are basically a homegrown movement, they will shoot right back at Nato and outlaw them. Six years and counting of Stalemate and negative progress.

But to give you an Iraqi analogy, do we seek to kill every Shite, Sunni, and Kurd. Or do we seek some political accommodations? You too have some military cred Grunt03, maybe you should express some opinions on this thread rather than make a single unitary point.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: Grunt03
Oops!!!:Q

So has everyone forgot that it is a war zone and shit happens. Where is the outrage over our troops being hurt and killed??
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While you have a point Grunt03, its no longer a war zone and its an occupation in which we are trying to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. And as brutal as the Taliban was with its Sharia law, the Taliban swept into power partly because they were seen as the cure for far worse evils of total anarchy, civil war, and corruption.

And sadly in a military occupation on the total cheap, all Nato has done is to bring back total anarchy, civil war, and corruption. Which now partly explains why the Taliban is back and gaining ground.

But this also ignores a somewhat other central tenant of the thread. That both JOS and palehorse advocate, that the only way to break Taliban power is to invade the tribal areas of Pakistan. An area that has not been anywhere near as war ravaged as Afghanistan, where the taliban is not making a heck of a lot of mischief for the local population, and an area where almost everyone would be up in arms against Nato troops using either air power or boots on the ground. Not to mention the facts that Pakistan has flatly said no.

And yes, Grunt03, make no mistake about it, if Nato acts unilaterallyand takes the palehorse and JOS advice, one hell of a lot of Nato troops and a even large number of the the some other locals will end up dead in what amounts to a larger war zone
that is not at war now. And even then, its not likely to end the Taliban while it spreads Nato far thinner.

A number of posts back, I had repeatably asked palehorse to lay out his plan with troop numbers and contingency plans. Plus what military rank he has to show what right he had to speak for Nato.

But as usual, when it comes to putting his pie in the sky plans to the test, palehorse is missing in action as far as I can see.

But you are also right Grunt03, if we shoot and outlaw the Taliban who are basically a homegrown movement, they will shoot right back at Nato and outlaw them. Six years and counting of Stalemate and negative progress.

But to give you an Iraqi analogy, do we seek to kill every Shite, Sunni, and Kurd. Or do we seek some political accommodations? You too have some military cred Grunt03, maybe you should express some opinions on this thread rather than make a single unitary point.

jesus h christ... do you EVER shut up?!

Seriously, your comments on this subject are no longer needed. We know what you think, and we know that you're wrong. I don't know why you repeat the same bullshit so often... and, worse yet, I don't know why JOS and I ever bothered to school you with reality.

This conversation was over before it began. I think I'd rather poke my own eyes out with a #2 pencil than ever debate this subject with you again.

You can go around pretending that you "won," or continue living smugly in your basement believing that you're "right" even... I don't care.

But, whatever it is you do, please, just shut it. And stop putting my name in all of your damn posts...
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: Kuragami
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Originally posted by: Kuragami
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: Lemon law

But you better be quick, if you want to mount that head of the three month old infant
Nato managed to kill with another air strike. It would look so good mounted in your trophy room. But in this heat it rots fast and your taxidermist may not be able to save it.

You are so fucked up it isnt even funny


.... If anyone here is a soldier you would be lying through your teeth if you said the military does not try to dehumanize you. It starts at boot camp and continues until you leave service. I'm not suggesting there is some sort of Psy-Ops program to make soldiers crazy killers. Rather it's the nature of the military system that perpetuates the ideals first implanted in your head in boot camp....

What? Can you be more specific about all this "dehumanizing" that occurs, starting in boot camp? What ideals are implanted, anyway?

BTW, we capitalize Soldier (when we aren't lying through our teeth :roll:)
Roll your eyes on someone who hasn't gone through basic. Just because you never gave any of it a second thought doesn't mean it didn't occur. What? Did you think you were shooting at shapes of soldiers on the range because it made it more realistic? Here is a shocking answer for you. No.

Wow, you got me there... most targets resemble human silhouettes. How dehumanizing!! Certainly a complex psy-ops program is in effect. It's not like Soldiers will ever be shooting at people.

The Army trains people to kill, because that's what happens in battle. It's only dehumanizing in the theoretical, broader sense that lives are lost in war and we have to be prepared to take those lives. This is the world we live in and it's too damn bad if this reality upsets your childish sensibilities.

The Army is not some typical organization... we have to put normal people into extremely abnormal situations and this very unique task of placing people into very unnatural conditions means training is everything. You're a joke, and your beliefs are a threat to Soldiers lives. Our purpose is to accomplish the mission and not die, so the training better reflect the cold facts.

It kinda makes me wonder just how you would train Soldiers...

You sound like a kid who got scuffed up in BCT and exacerbated some inner psychological hang-ups. I take it you did not last long.

 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Originally posted by: cwjerome

I would send him the unclassified PP brief I gave to my CI Soldiers before they went to Afghanistan back in October... it's an excellent primer. But it's 45 MB and wouldn't do a damn bit of good anyways.

cw.. I don't know about LL but I would love to take a gander at that brief
my briefs are only about 2 MB at the most so access to your briefs could be invaluable

 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
For what it is worth Original Earl, I did enjoy the wiki link you posted. Any possible persuasion on the wide set of future Afghan option could use parts of that link to bolster their position.

But at the end of the day, one of the issues we will vote on come November 4 is that one issue that underlies this and other threads, and to capitalize the question, its a binary TO WIDEN THE AFGHAN OCCUPATION AND INVADE OR NOT INVADE THE TRIBAL AREAS OF PAKISTAN.--------------good idea or terrible idea.
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Originally posted by: Lemon law

But at the end of the day, one of the issues we will vote on come November 4 is that one issue that underlies this and other threads, and to capitalize the question, its a binary TO WIDEN THE AFGHAN OCCUPATION AND INVADE OR NOT INVADE THE TRIBAL AREAS OF PAKISTAN.--------------good idea or terrible idea.

LL, I think at the end of the day your going to be able to point back at these threads and say * I told you so*

mostly ;)

 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Orignal Earl
Originally posted by: Lemon law

But at the end of the day, one of the issues we will vote on come November 4 is that one issue that underlies this and other threads, and to capitalize the question, its a binary TO WIDEN THE AFGHAN OCCUPATION AND INVADE OR NOT INVADE THE TRIBAL AREAS OF PAKISTAN.--------------good idea or terrible idea.

LL, I think at the end of the day your going to be able to point back at these threads and say * I told you so*

mostly ;)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I may end up with I told you so bragging rights if the US and and other Nato countries decide to try to invade the tribal areas of Pakistan and it flops like I predict it will. But that is not worth a pitcher of warm spit, once the pooch is screwed it can't be unscrewed, and I am on this thread to oppose that kind of stupidity for the prevention value.

Stroking my own ego is the last thing I care about, I am in it to prevent hundreds of thousands of people getting killed while the country I love and larger world suffers irreparable damage.
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: Orignal Earl
Originally posted by: cwjerome

I would send him the unclassified PP brief I gave to my CI Soldiers before they went to Afghanistan back in October... it's an excellent primer. But it's 45 MB and wouldn't do a damn bit of good anyways.

cw.. I don't know about LL but I would love to take a gander at that brief
my briefs are only about 2 MB at the most so access to your briefs could be invaluable

I'm gonna back down from that. Although it is unclassified material it's still FOUO. I can try and send a much more generic overview I made that isn't tailored for a specific deploying detachment (22MB)... PM me your email.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
To Cwjerome,

While you have not made many posts on this given thread and I do not expect you to agree with my in general anti war
its clear you have some military credibility and are also tossing around terms many us, including me, do not necessarily
understand. Using google, FOUO stands for For official use only, a de facto classified standard.And a CI soldier seems
to be central intelligence or human intelligence that often may wonder around without a uniform.

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/...mipb/1999-3/holden.htm

And for what its worth, as somewhat as a end resolution to one part of this thread, there will be an end joint
investigation of this particular operation that is alleged to have killed so many children.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...ergJ3eDgGqYbrEHBWs0NUE

But the end question I ask you cwjerome is the binary one,yes or no, do you think that it is feasable for Nato to invade the
tribal areas of Pakistan and would it likely end in a Nato victory at present or even greatly enhanced troop levels? Because
answering these type of questions seem to be right up the mission of CI.
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
Original Earl, if cwjerome says he'll send it to you, he will.

I am sorry but i don't have the time to stick around and discuss today, i'm just in camp for an hour and it's time to leave right now.

Stay safe.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Orignal Earl
cw just makin sure i'm not a Taliban, before i
get the goodies
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Will you necessarily get the genuine article unvarnished truth goodies Original Earl?

And there I cite somewhat of a blast from the past in the Pentagon Papers. Ignoring the " patriotic" issues of their release somewhat decided by SCOTUS, the one thing we learned is that their was a giant gap between what the very top brass admits to itself and the President and what it tells to the general public and 99.9% of its members.

But still its very good to get more US military members of this thread rather than being stuck with two and only two. And I would hope that both cwjerome and Grunt03 would share their opinions on the binary invade or not invade the tribal areas question.