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
30 Taliban dead as district captured
2007-10-31
Taliban rebels overran a western Afghan district, sparking a fierce battle on Tuesday that left six civilians, four policemen and 30 militants dead, officials said. A soldier with the US-led coalition, an Afghan spy chief and 20 militants were killed in other incidents, reported AFP.

Taliban militants captured the Gulistan district during overnight fighting in western Afghanistan, officials confirmed on Tuesday. Located in western Farah province, the district was stormed by more than 400 militants armed with small and heavy weapons on Monday night, police said. The fighting continued for around an hour after which police retreated from the headquarters of the district, said Farah police chief Brigadier General Abdul Rahman Sarjang. Thirty Taliban, six local people who were helping them and four policemen were killed in the fighting, AFP added. However, Taliban spokesman Qari Yousaf Ahmadi told Daily Times that only two Taliban were killed and three were injured in the battle.

US soldier, militants dead: Separately, a soldier of the US-led coalition troops was killed in a clash with militants in the southern province of Kandahar, on Tuesday morning. Another coalition soldier was injured in the combat. Also in Kandahar, coalition troops and Afghan police arrested six people on suspicion of links with the Taliban, said a separate statement. Meanwhile, provincial police chief Sayed Aqa Sahib said NATO, US-led coalition forces and Afghan troopers had launched a “clean-up” operation in Kandahar, which resulted in the deaths of 20 militants.

Spy Chief: In another incident of violence, a district intelligence chief, his driver and two bodyguards were killed when their vehicle was blown up with a powerful remote-controlled bomb in the eastern province of Laghman on Tuesday morning. The incident happened in the Qarghayee district while the intelligence chief was on way to his office, crime branch chief at the Laghman police headquarters told Daily Times by phone. Claiming responsibility for the blast, Taliban spokesman Ahmadi said six security personnel were killed in the attack.
Posted by:Fred

#7  Most of them. It's the leaders who are gutless, not unlike here.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2007-10-31 17:03  

#6  How many of those NATO troops are getting really, really tired of having to sit safely in their cantonments

I'd like to think it was most of them but honestly? I'm not so sure.
Posted by: lotp   2007-10-31 14:16  

#5  If Baghdad had been levelled to the ground, the ground dug up and pulverized, and the city made totally uninhabibable in the initial approach to Iraq in 2003, I think we'd see a much different war at the moment.

Harsh as it sounds, it's going to take something like this to get the message across to Islam. I really think that leveling Mullah Omar's hometown of Kandahar prior to invading Afghanistan would have served some serious notice of our displeasure. Moreover, Muslims just might have made the connection between al Qaeda's monkeyshines and tons of people gettin' kilt fer it. Worst of all is how we passed on nailing a huge Taliban convention with Omar in attendance just before the invasion.

Islam will keep this shit up until, suddenly, entire Muslim cities get flattened like a Dixie cup under a hobnailed jackboot.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-10-31 13:36  

#4  This is why the US needs another four to six combat brigades of US Marines, fully-trained and raring to fight. We should have started the build-up on Sep 12, 2001. We also need another eight-twelve combat brigades of US Army troops, and a dozen squadrons of US conventional heavy bombers, similar to the old B-52D. We also need a naval vessel that could launch up to 400 GMLRS 30-50 miles deep into another nation's territory, and hit the "of" in "United States of America" engraved on a dime. Instead, we're still playing "manpower" games and leaving half our enemy to do as he pleases.

If Baghdad had been levelled to the ground, the ground dug up and pulverized, and the city made totally uninhabibable in the initial approach to Iraq in 2003, I think we'd see a much different war at the moment. I DON'T think we'd be seeing so much interference from Iran (especially if the aircraft that destroyed Baghdad were parked at Tikrit), and "Al-Qaeda in Iraq" would have to recruit from the moon. The United States has fought wars with half-steps since Korea, and all it's gotten us is more wars and tons of disrespect.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2007-10-31 13:13  

#3  How many of those NATO troops are getting really, really tired of having to sit safely in their cantonments playing soldier while the those lucky duck Amis and Diggers and Canadians get to do the real thing every day?
Posted by: trailing wife   2007-10-31 11:29  

#2  Better way of putting this is "Taliban attacks in battalion strength, seizes district". By real-war standards, less than ten percent casualties(as reported by the enemy, us) in the shock element in contact is a modest Taliban victory.

I'm starting to think that Yon is right, they *need* the Marines in Afghanistan. Shame we can't talk the Germans and French and Dutch into moving their combat-aversive elements into Anbar to hold al Queda out. Of course, even if we did, things'd go to hell in a few months anyways... bah.
Posted by: Mitch H.   2007-10-31 09:08  

#1  So now we know where 400 370 'bunnies can be found. Tomorrow's headline will be....?
Posted by: Glenmore   2007-10-31 06:58  

00:00