This is me verbalizing my inner dialogue of conflict in my head and heart... (thinking)

I obviously advocate erring on the side of life and avoiding civilian casualties. But I often wonder, what is being thought by the troops and their commander officers in the heat of the battle with very messy and confusing non-conventional tactics by the enemy?

Further, I find it hard for anyone to be dogmatic about anything here, outside of always trying to save lives--the kicker is you gotta kill to save those lives, otherwise the soldier dies if not in the process of saving a life. Withdraw troops, potential death. Stay, death. Look the other way, death. Is there some magical option that doesn't end in death?

So I guess my question is, who wants to be in charge of choosing who lives and who dies, and how they die? Anyone? And the people who have settled on any one decision regarding this war--both wars even--are demonized. What the hell kind of incoherency is this!!!???

Lastly, how can I--one lone American civilian--help mold or shape this situation in the Middle East in any way, apart from doing nothing? ...my biggest question of all.

I couldn't agree with Gen. Scales more. The enemy hides with civilians and uses civilians for cover. If we can't fight for victory through all means necessary, bring all our troops home.

Fox entertainment contributor, Lockheed Martin handler, less pro for civilians. Put it all together and, "Yikes MSNBC building and Manhattan, you may be next".

It's OK to kill Afghans. They are never likely to vote for the GOP or be Lockheed Martin share holders.


The fact is that whatever one might think of the Taliban and I personally think their idea of Islam stinks, We invaded their country without good reason. They have a right to fight occupying armies.
The occupying armies have no right to be there.

The Taliban were fighting a civil war before we got involved. Only 3 countries recognized the Taliban as Afghanistan's legitimate government, and 2 of those 3 withdrew their recognition after 9/11.

We came in on the side of those who were fighting the Taliban. We did not invade like we did in Iraq. We are now part of an International Security Assistance Force trying to give security and stability to the country while it rebuilds itself. The Taliban are the destabilizers here, and the people who suffer under their rule wherever they have been in control are glad to be rid of them.

"If the islamists are using children as human shields, we must make it clear, that is their tactic and we will not bend to emotional blackmail. Just make sure we do not invoke our mythical deity in justification."

What are the kids and their families supposed to do? Where can they go?

Imagine if the father of one of those kids who was killed got mad and took revenge by attacking a US military base somewhere and in the course of that killed some American kids. What would you think of that? Would that be OK?

These opinions are so clearly Fox news standards. Killing 5 children is over restrictive. That must surely change our standing in the international community.

Maybe all Afghans should go on vacation for duration of the war.
A Carnival Cruise perhaps? Charter flights to some sunny island?
Maybe the Genral has some ideas of his own, smart fellow that he is

American corporations firmly believe that their profits are of far greater import than the lives of civilians in jeopardy from the use of their products.

If the islamists are using children as human shields, we must make it clear, that is their tactic and we will not bend to emotional blackmail. Just make sure we do not invoke our mythical deity in justification.