ForumsWEPRAttacks in Afghanistan

94 20574
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad

This
article states that Taliban attacked on various locations in Afghanistan and killed 11 soldiers bearing 39 causalities of their own (Ofcourse official figures of both sides cannot be trusted as each side will exaggerate opponent causalities we will have to wait for Taliban figures and then an approximate figure b/w both extremes can be found)
In my opinion it is beginning of the end in Afghanistan and there will be more attacks coming. What is your opinion?

  • 94 Replies
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad

Link or it didn't happen.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/11/afghanistan.usa
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/11/afghanistan.usa


That was an accident, not an attack. Unless we have declared war on the government we keep trying to set up?

In other news, possible Taliban troops have been found smuggling in explosives from Pakistan to Afghanistan. I assume 11 tons of explosives is the logical way to take down non-valid military targets with a ton of civilians around?
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

and on a school


So because your government attacks a school, that means the Taliban can attack NATO embassies in Afghanistan?
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad

In other news, possible Taliban troops have been found smuggling in explosives from Pakistan to Afghanistan. I assume 11 tons of explosives is the logical way to take down non-valid military targets with a ton of civilians around?

source?
So because your government attacks a school, that means the Taliban can attack NATO embassies in Afghanistan?

It was not our govrn, it was nato
and technically embassies are considered foreign soil
that is why they attacked
what's the point of this discussion again?
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

It was not our govrn, it was nato
and technically embassies are considered foreign soil
that is why they attacked
what's the point of this discussion again?



What? The link clearly says the troops where from Pakistan. Reread it?

They are diplomatic soil, and who shoots diplomats?
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad

What? The link clearly says the troops where from Pakistan. Reread it?

They are diplomatic soil, and who shoots diplomats?

and who throws them in jails?

What? The link clearly says the troops where from Pakistan. Reread it?

It is improbable as peace talks with them were ongoing
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

and who throws them in jails?rn


Arresting them is understandable under some circumstances. Blowing them up is typically not.

It is improbable as peace talks with them were ongoing


At least 80 militants have been killed in an air strike by Pakistani forces on a madrassa (religious school) used as a militant training camp, the army says.

Clearly it says that they whee Pakistan troops. And it was funny you mentioned that:

The BBC's Barbara Plett in Islamabad says Monday morning's attack coincides with peace talks between tribal elders and pro-Taleban militants in Bajaur.

The link clearly states that it was the Pakistan government did it, it even goes a bit to saying that the peace talks where not just a cover for the attacks. Did you read your own link?
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad

At least 80 militants have been killed in an air strike by Pakistani forces on a madrassa (religious school) used as a militant training camp, the army says.

Clearly it says that they whee Pakistan troops. And it was funny you mentioned that:

The BBC's Barbara Plett in Islamabad says Monday morning's attack coincides with peace talks between tribal elders and pro-Taleban militants in Bajaur.

The link clearly states that it was the Pakistan government did it, it even goes a bit to saying that the peace talks where not just a cover for the attacks. Did you read your own link?

Widely held belief in Pakistan is that Pak army took the fall.
Now what are we debating here exactly?
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

Widely held belief in Pakistan is that Pak army took the fall.


And it is widely believed in America that the world will end in 2012 and that our president was born in Kenya. Wide belief means nothing. The Pakistan army did it, regardless of what is widely believed.

Now what are we debating here exactly?


I say something and you say something. That is how debates work.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,129 posts
Jester

Now what are we debating here exactly?


2nd post page 7.
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad

And it is widely believed in America that the world will end in 2012 and that our president was born in Kenya. Wide belief means nothing. The Pakistan army did it, regardless of what is widely believed.

It was a govrn cover up.
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

It was a govrn cover up.


Bull ****. What proof do you have?
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad

Bull ****. What proof do you have?

mainly bcoz govrn was negotiating with them
Showing 61-75 of 94