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
Afghanistan
Taliban whopper: claim 5,220 foreign troops killed
2009-01-05
The Taliban has long exaggerated its military successes, but its figures for 2008 may be the militia's most startling claims yet.

The Taliban claims its forces last year killed 5,220 foreign troops, downed 31 aircraft, destroyed 2,818 NATO and Afghan vehicles and killed 7,552 Afghan soldiers and police.
"and we destroyed a submarine and an aircraft carrier - the USS Kerry"
Though third-party observers can rarely confirm casualty claims on the Afghan battlefield from the Taliban, the Afghan government, the U.S. or NATO, the Taliban's 2008 numbers would appear to be far from the truth.

NATO's member countries announce all troop deaths, providing names, ages and hometowns and how the soldiers were killed. According to an Associated Press tally of those announcements, 286 foreign forces died last year in Afghanistan, including 151 American and 51 British troops.

The Taliban's toll is almost 20 times higher.

Despite the inflated toll, the Taliban have had more success recently. Violence in Afghanistan has spiked in the last two years, and Taliban militants now control wide swaths of countryside. In response, the U.S. is planning to pour up to 30,000 more troops into the country this year.

The insurgents' exaggerations are designed to boost morale inside the Taliban and to attract financing from donors sympathetic to their cause, a U.S. military official and a Taliban expert said. "They put out this propaganda in order to raise capital to continue their operations," said Col. Jerry O'Hara, a U.S. military spokesman.

Vahid Mojdeh, the author of a book on the Taliban, said the exaggerated claims help the insurgents recruit new fighters. "The Taliban needs volunteers to carry out suicide attacks, so they want to show they are killing a lot of people," Mojdeh said.

Propaganda has long been a key element in war, particularly in conflicts where the sides are fighting to win support from the population. The Taliban exaggerates U.S. or NATO deaths in order to persuade average Afghans that the insurgents are winning, while U.S. and NATO spokesmen frequently highlight construction projects -- roads and schools -- to Afghan journalists in the hopes that average Afghans will associate foreign troops with increased development.
Posted by:Frank G

#7  :)
Even worse than 1973?
That was a bad one....
Posted by: .5MT   2009-01-05 19:46  

#6  They must have hired on Dr. James Hansen to 'massage' the data and show that 1990-2000 2008 was the warmest decade deadliest year in the historical record.
Posted by: Abu do you love   2009-01-05 19:41  

#5  Baghdad Bob has found new employment and relocated to Afghanistan. The Taliban will use the sub-prime commission schedule to compensate Bob. They will substitute Coalition Casualty claims in place of borrower income claims.


Posted by: GolfBravoUSMC   2009-01-05 14:00  

#4  When the AP, as much as they would like to, won't even buy the snowjob, you have much work to do.
Posted by: tu3031   2009-01-05 11:37  

#3  "Despite the inflated toll, the Taliban have had more success recently. Violence in Afghanistan has spiked in the last two years, and Taliban militants now control wide swaths of countryside."

Actually, the above is pure crap. Yes, the violence has increased but that is because we have become more aggressive in going at them. We are engaging them more so there are more firefights leading to more casualties. And the amount of countryside they control has actually been shrinking. They held almost an entire province at one point two years ago when the Brits made a deal with them. That has since been taken away from them.

The article is a load of hooey.
Posted by: crosspatch   2009-01-05 11:16  

#2  The Taliban isn't exaggerating, they're just using the New England Journal of Medicine method.
Posted by: Darrell   2009-01-05 11:10  

#1  At first, the US utterly perplexed the Afghan soldiers by downplaying enemy casualties. The tradition was that everybody lied up the numbers, to brag, and they were puzzled why the Americans didn't want to do that.

But the ever practical Americans had very good reasons. The bad guyz have no idea of the field strength of their forward forces, casualty estimates, and other vital planning information. If anything, they think they are far stronger than they actually are.

And that is not something you want to assume.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2009-01-05 10:58  

00:00