Comments on: FOX News “Analyst” Wants Reduced Civilian Protection Days After Children Killed in Afghanistan

By: MeriJon

MeriJon — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 07:51:33 +0000

Without GOOD REASON????? Your either an idiot or you are just majorly uninformed. Words like yours make me sick because we should be united against our enemy, not fighting each other putting each other down all the time. Why can't you see the mess that has been made by liberals.. If you don't see it now just wait, the start of the fall of America, is on it's way. What will you do without your video games…. etc…. WAKE UP!

By: MeriJon

MeriJon — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 07:45:00 +0000

no it doesn't Richard. It is simply WAR, which is UGLY and HARSH. What you have to decide is if your for protecting America and American Lives…. PERIOD!!!

By: Richard Dugan

Richard Dugan — Sun, 14 Nov 2010 19:02:29 +0000

If the tactics needed to ensure the safety of our troops are at odds with the tactics needed to ensure the safety of the civilians we are claiming to liberate, then it sounds like we have a choice between two bad strategies.

Increased collateral damage will not bring democracy.

By: jkolak

jkolak — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:45:31 +0000

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.

By: MacDavid

MacDavid — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 01:37:26 +0000

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.

By: Radical Muslim :: Another Terrorist Killed :: February :: 2010

Radical Muslim :: Another Terrorist Killed :: February :: 2010 — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:50:54 +0000

[...] went to Afghanistan to cause terror and was involved in the British led death and destruction of people and places in the [...]

By: soupdog

soupdog — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 04:04:08 +0000

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.

By: macgregor57

macgregor57 — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 03:26:28 +0000

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

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:26:13 +0000

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.

By: John Forrest Tomlinson

John Forrest Tomlinson — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:03:59 +0000

"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?