Skip to comments.US: Strike kills militants who downed US chopper (JUSTICE and REVENGE!)
Posted on 08/10/2011 7:57:45 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
An air strike by NATO-led forces in Afghanistan killed Taliban fighters, including a local leader, who were responsible for a weekend helicopter crash that killed 38 troops, the worst single incident in 10 years of war.
"We dealt with them in a kinetic strike," General John Allen, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, told reporters at the Pentagon.
Gen. Allen said the military tracked the Taliban fighters for several days after the helicopter went down. Forces reportedly trailed the fighters to a position in Chak District, Wardak Province, and then US F-16s struck and killed them Tuesday.
"The strike killed Taliban leader Mullah Mohibullah and the insurgent who fired the shot associated with the Aug. 6 downing of the CH-47 helicopter, which resulted in the deaths of 38 Afghan and coalition service members," the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force said in a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
If you ever actually care to know what I was talking about, let me know. Until then, by all means, continue with your misguided obscenity and your jumping to wild and completely absurd conclusions.
btw, I'm female and too old to have served in the military, so don't give me any of your garbage about my lack of 'courage.' (It takes a lot of courage to have a teenaged son in harm's way.....not that the truth matters to you).
Like I said, if you ever want to know what I think and not what you imagine that I think, do let me know.
The same occurred in WWII. The two goals are not mutually exclusive.
Not mutually exclusive, but saving innocent lives is a consequence of asserting US interests with the US military, not a purpose.
What your son did and mine are doing by promoting US interests may have resulted in saving innocent lives. Saving innocent lives alone is not to be confused with the definition of what constitutes US interests outside of promoting a defined US interest.
Your son's primary mission, as is the mission of my own sons', is to protect US interests. Period. Saving innocent people is often the outcome and consequence of US intervention, but never is it a solely defined purpose.
If a COC attempts to use US military assets solely for the purpose of saving innocent non-American citizens' lives absent a direct US interest for doing so, he has mis-appropriated those resources for a purpose not authorized in the Constitution.
The US military is not a global social program which exists to alleviate the suffering of the world's tyrrany-oppressed peoples.
What is a “kinetic” strike? Did we drop a bunch of “kinetics” on the enemy? By the way, what is a “kinetic”? It’s not in my handbook of US Ordnance.
When you knock down all ten pins in bowling, is that a kinetic strike”?
How about swinging and missing three pitches in a row?
I’d say that dropping several tons of napalm on the enemy’s ass would qualify as “kinetic” as long as they were fried beyond recognition, but we don’t have “nap” anymore.
Time for the military to drop Obama’s propaganda/disinformation terminology and just say we bombed the shit out of them and they are very dead.
Patton would have said that!
Watch up to 3 minutes, see if anything sounds familiar.
Thank you for such clarity...very well stated IMO.
Double dittos. This shit is never going to end w/ those freaks.
The good Col. ain't buyin' this tale.
His exact opening words were "I'm very skeptical."
He gave all the reasons why.
Apparently my use of the word 'save' in believing that part of our interest in stopping the Taliban from allowing terrorists to control Afghanistan and launch other deadly attacks on US soil includes saving the lives of innocent Afghan's and my subsequent statement of God's love for the Afghan people (as a reason for not desiring to annihilate the entire country) became confusing.
Several people have misunderstood what I said and conflated the two concepts, which I believe I stated separately (and clearly).
And now, desiring to extricate myself from further discussion and misunderstanding, I'm going to exit this thread.
Thank your sons for me, for their service and sacrifice on behalf of this great country of ours........and if Lurker comes back, tell him thanks for me for his service as well.
Good night. :)
Because it’s an overseas contingency operation in response to a man-caused disaster. The news outlets only cover (condemn) wars.
Most of us would prefer they learn of God’s love sooner rather than later.
I first noticed the use of "kinetic" when Obama described the Libyan war as a "kinetic action". He was using it as a euphemism for the word "war." I guess kinetic is now a stylish media word for military attacks.
In Obama's case, it is a "Kenyaetic action". A phony, fake, dancin'-barefoot-in-The-White-House kind of thing, similar to his "COLB".
Exactly. How would they know who the trigger man was, unless a SEAL team/Delta went in there, tortured every Muzzie to rat out the one who did it, in which case they wouldnt need to send in a “kinetic” airstrike since they would already be dead ANYWAY.
And his eternal torture chamber.
He is most certainly NOT the "nice guy" type.
No argument there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.