You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Afghanistan
60 Taliban killed in Afghanistan fight
2006-09-06
US artillery and airstrikes killed 60 suspected Taliban militants on Tuesday, the fourth day of a NATO-led offensive in southern Afghanistan, a NATO spokesman said. The US troops, operating under NATO command, clashed with the militants in Panjwayi district of Kandahar, where an offensive began over the weekend to flush out hundreds of Taliban fighters. NATO has already reported more than 200 Taliban killed in the operation.

NATO spokesman Maj Quentin Innis said the troops had identified Taliban positions and the two sides had exchanged fire. He said the estimate of 60 killed in Tuesday's fighting was based on reports from troops looking through "weapons sights and other observation devices." He said there had been no NATO or Afghan troop casualties. It wasn't possible for reporters to reach the site of the battle to independently confirm the death toll.

A Panjwayi district council member, Haji Agha Lalai, said bombings by NATO warplanes have killed 21 civilians over the past three days in an area called Zungawad. NATO spokesman Maj Scott Lundy said he had no immediate details to support Lalai's claims.
Posted by:Fred

#8  The vaunted Fall Offensive is coming! And if its anything like this year's Spring and Summer Offensives, they'll be plenty of dead Talibunnies.
Posted by: Lancasters Over Dresden   2006-09-06 19:40  

#7  Re-constructing Afghanistan is a valuable goal. More valuable are airfields close to the Iranian border and to Pakistan.
Posted by: lotp   2006-09-06 13:52  

#6  There are two critical issues in Afghanistan that are not being adequately dealt with; opium production and Pakistan. Given these, combined with the general backwardness of the local populace, we are at best just putting our finger in the dike.

I would be thrilled to see us napalm the opium fields but the weenies at State won't let it happen. I would love to see major arc light strikes in the Paki tribal belt, but we all know that ain't gonna happen. So we are essentially engaged in a long term, live fire war game. Very dangerous and expensive thing that with questionable long term result.
Posted by: remoteman   2006-09-06 13:36  

#5  
"He said the estimate of 60 killed in Tuesday's fighting was based on reports from troops looking through "weapons sights and other observation devices."


must have been quite a Spectre.
Posted by: Suri   2006-09-06 08:34  

#4  "Taxi!"
"Where to, sir!"
"Panjwayi district of Kandahar!"
"Heh heh. No, really. Where to?"
"The Sheraton!"
Posted by: Fred   2006-09-06 08:21  

#3  It wasn't possible for reporters to reach the site of the battle to independently confirm the death toll.

C'mon! If you Valiant Defenders of Freedom of Speech© won't leave your comfy hotel bar stools, who will catch the military in their ubiquitous lies?
Posted by: Bobby   2006-09-06 08:01  

#2  It is remarkable how the Dhimmis and their cohorts are trying to portray Afghanistan as a Taleban's return / military disaster in free-fall, when the evidence is that the Taledickweeds are rather less than live-fire exercise dummies. So many deaders, yet so little substance otherwise out of Kabul - or anywhere else. It has ceased to have much to do with the original conflict...

I believe, as someone suggested yesterday IIRC, that this has turned into a full-scale Columbian-style drug war.

We have to decide what we want to do about that... either we go all-out to interdict the opium industry - killing anyone involved, including "officials", or we tell Karzai and his warlord-cabinet that since they have chosen (accepted?) to return to live in the shit of their tribal warlord / druglord daze we'll just tune up our militaries on the dummies and leave when it suits us - or not.

I once disbelieved Michael Yon's very negative assessment, but now I'm not so sure. I haven't heard of any substantive reconstruction, though it was generally agreed early on that concentrating on this would "win hearts and minds". Anonymoose certainly had some interesting ideas that might've proven very useful - then. Now? Well, now it just looks like they completely reverted to pre-Soviet stupidity. So I end up at a bad conclusion, but by a completely different road and for different reasons than the MSM. I am truly discouraged.

In any case, I haven't seen any "news" stories which correctly characterize what we're actually seeing there, just memery.
Posted by: flyover   2006-09-06 02:38  

#1  WE'RE LOSING!!! WE'RE LOSING!!! WE'RE LOSING!!! DON'T YOU READ TIME MAGAZINE!?!?!?!
Posted by: anymouse   2006-09-06 01:49  

00:00