Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Ahsan

Allies Feel Strain Of Afghan War

Recommended Posts

Allies Feel Strain of Afghan War

 

 

Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

 

 

The U.S. plan to send an additional 3,200 Marines to troubled southern Afghanistan this spring reflects the Pentagon's belief that if it can't bully its recalcitrant NATO allies into sending more troops to the Afghan front, perhaps it can shame them into doing so, U.S. officials said.

 

After more than six years of coalition warfare in Afghanistan, NATO is a bundle of frayed nerves and tension over nearly every aspect of the conflict, including troop levels and missions, reconstruction, anti-narcotics efforts, and even counterinsurgency strategy. Stress has grown along with casualties, domestic pressures and a sense that the war is not improving, according to a wide range of senior U.S. and NATO-member officials who agreed to discuss sensitive alliance issues on the condition of anonymity.

 

While Washington has long called for allies to send more forces, NATO countries involved in some of the fiercest fighting have complained that they are suffering the heaviest losses.

 

According to opinion polls, Canadians feel they have done their bit in Afghanistan.

 

U.S. and British forces have long derided each other's counterinsurgency tactics. The same tensions have emerged in Afghanistan.

 

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetwashingtonpost(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/14/AR2008011402722.html?hpid=topnews"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetwashingtonpost(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wp-dyn/conte...ml?hpid=topnews[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Outrage as US accuses Britain of inexperience in Taleban conflict

 

 

From The Times

January 17, 2008

 

Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, risked an unprecedented rift with Britain and other close allies after accusing Nato countries fighting in southern Afghanistan of lacking experience in counter-insurgency warfare.

 

Mr Gates said failings in the south were contributing to the rising violence in the fight against the Taleban.

 

His outspoken criticism, voiced in an interview with an American newspaper, provoked instant reactions from Britain, Canada and the Netherlands, the three most prominent members of the alliance, who have endured much of the fiercest fighting in southern Afghanistan.

 

 

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettimesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article3201002.ece"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettimesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle3201002.ece[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what the Afghans need are some waterparks. And 7-11's, and Mcdonalds. Coz if I go there, that's all ill need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Afghanistan Now Most Dangerous for U.S. Troops

 

 

The situation has deteriorated in Afghanistan. There have already been 111 U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan in 2007, making this the deadliest year for U.S. troops in Afghanistan of the entire war.

 

"We are stagnating in Afghanistan, if not backsliding," a senior U.S. military official tells ABC News.

 

It's also the deadliest year for non-U.S. troops, by far. This year, 112 non-U.S. troops in the coalition have been killed, including 40 from Britain and 29 from Canada.

 

Considering that there are only 26,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, compared to over 160,000 in Iraq, the death rate is considerably higher in Afghanistan.

 

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_abcnews.go(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/International/story?id=3937323&page=1"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_abcnews.go(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/International/story?...7323&page=1[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Afghanistan Now Most Dangerous for U.S. Troops

The situation has deteriorated in Afghanistan. There have already been 111 U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan in 2007, making this the deadliest year for U.S. troops in Afghanistan of the entire war.

I love how they added the "already" when this report was posted on Nov. 30, as if there were many more to come. Let's do the math, shall we? Even if we gross up that number to 121 to account for the remaining month of December, you still only get an equivalent of 745 for all of 2007 when compared to Iraq (160K/26K * 121). The MSM's contempt for the sheep of America is as unbelievable as their stories (although it's apparently well founded).

 

{Moderator note}

This post has violated forum rule #39. Action taken.

For more details, please read our (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?act=boardrules"]Forum Rules[/url].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I love how they added the "already" when this report was posted on Nov. 30

 

 

What kind of miracle was expected by the US and its allies from 30 Nov 2007 till today?

 

Not guns, its men behind the guns, who matter. Six years passed and these forces couldn't defeat few hundreds, fighting with KKs only.Sophisticated weapons and state-of-the-art war planes are indeed force multipliers, but can't bring you success, which is conditional to an iron will, determination and commitment to the cause, lacking in your ideal peace keepers.

 

 

Alliance remains divided as spring offensive nears

 

From The Times

January 21, 2008

 

Winter in Afghanistan is traditionally the season when hostilities cease, enforced hibernation sets in and the warring parties make preparations for the spring offensive.

 

The bloody start to the year is probably a foretaste of what is likely to follow once the snows melt, the mountain passes reopen and the fierce struggle resumes for the fate of the country.

 

For the Taleban the strategy is clear. Spread the insurgency, undermine the reconstruction efforts, drive a wedge between foreign forces and the local population and isolate the beleaguered Government of President Karzai.

 

The alliance is dangerously divided. The main contributing nations remain at odds over who should do the fighting, for how long and the tactics employed.

 

Most of the European forces, Nato forces, are not trained in counter-insurgency; they were trained for the Fulda Gap Nato’s Cold War battle lines in Germany.

 

Canada, whose forces have taken heavy casualties in the Taleban stronghold of Kandahar, has given warning that it may not extend its mandate beyond the end of this year because of growing public opposition to the war.

 

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettimesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article3221852.ece"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettimesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle3221852.ece[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What kind of miracle was expected by the US and its allies from 30 Nov 2007 till today?

 

Not guns, its men behind the guns, who matter. Six years passed and these forces couldn't defeat few hundreds, fighting with KKs only.Sophisticated weapons and state-of-the-art war planes are indeed force multipliers, but can't bring you success, which is conditional to an iron will, determination and commitment to the cause, lacking in your ideal peace keepers.

Unfortunately, our "allies" (i.e. the Afghan and Iraqi people) are cowards that won't fight for themselves and deserve the treatment thet get from their fellow countrymen (if it weren't so, they would have never been dominated by psychotic thugs in the first place). The West has to realize that societies made up of psycopaths and cowards are what they are because that's all they're capable of. Afghanistan and Iraq will never be the Netherlands (they won't even be Paraguay), so it's best to just put a fence around them (i.e. don't allow them to infect the civilized world) and leave them to their self inflicted misery (surely Allah will provide for these devout Muslims).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Afghanistan and Iraq will never be the Netherlands (they won't even be Paraguay)

 

Lol....the Netherlands....

 

{Moderator note}

This post has violated forum rule #39. Action taken.

For more details, please read our (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?act=boardrules"]Forum Rules[/url].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately, our "allies" (i.e. the Afghan and Iraqi people) are cowards that won't fight for themselves and deserve the treatment thet get from their fellow countrymen (if it weren't so, they would have never been dominated by psychotic thugs in the first place). The West has to realize that societies made up of psycopaths and cowards are what they are because that's all they're capable of. Afghanistan and Iraq will never be the Netherlands (they won't even be Paraguay), so it's best to just put a fence around them (i.e. don't allow them to infect the civilized world) and leave them to their self inflicted misery (surely Allah will provide for these devout Muslims).

 

 

Containment's not a bad idea, but it's not a matter of containing some Soviet style army; it's a matter of containing a lot of crazy citizens. Tanks and planes can't blend into the populace, terrorists can. It'll be hard to keep them from getting into trouble.

 

 

Unless we visit every attack with a disproportionately violent one of our own. Genghis Khan style. But that won't win us any friends in a world already run by the loonies.

 

No, I still think that the only way to cut out this cancer is to erect strong, less corrupt governments which can withstand the power of the mullahs and thugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Containment's not a bad idea, but it's not a matter of containing some Soviet style army; it's a matter of containing a lot of crazy citizens. Tanks and planes can't blend into the populace, terrorists can. It'll be hard to keep them from getting into trouble.
It's a matter of refusing to allow people from certain parts of the world to come to our shores, period. We don't need them and they pose more of a risk that they're worth. Here in New York, we'll be hard hit by a temporary shortage of falafal carts and taxi drivers that don't speak English, but we'll soldier on for the good of all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I still think that the only way to cut out this cancer is to erect strong, less corrupt governments which can withstand the power of the mullahs and thugs.
If that were possible, we'd have never had to go there in the first place. The psychopaths will always dominate the cowards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If that were possible, we'd have never had to go there in the first place. The psychopaths will always dominate the cowards.

 

 

Well said Dieter, the USA is a good example

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately, our "allies" (i.e. the Afghan and Iraqi people) are cowards that won't fight for themselves and deserve the treatment thet get from their fellow countrymen (if it weren't so, they would have never been dominated by psychotic thugs in the first place). The West has to realize that societies made up of psycopaths and cowards are what they are because that's all they're capable of. Afghanistan and Iraq will never be the Netherlands (they won't even be Paraguay), so it's best to just put a fence around them (i.e. don't allow them to infect the civilized world) and leave them to their self inflicted misery (surely Allah will provide for these devout Muslims).

 

 

Now you are blaming besieged communities for your own failures. Just accept that you have failed to defeat Talibans.

 

 

The British have made matters worse, says Afghan President

 

 

From The Times

January 25, 2008

 

 

Britain and Afghanistan fell out in spectacular fashion yesterday after President Karzai accused his British allies of bungling the military operation in Helmand and setting back prospects for the area by 18 months.

 

Mr Karzai, Britain’s key ally in Afghanistan, had little praise for the efforts of the 7,800 British troops deployed in his country. Most are in the restless southern Helmand province, where Britain has invested billions of pounds in trying to defeat the Taleban

 

Mr Karzai said that they had failed in the task.

 

 

Asked if he was blaming British failure for the return of the Taleban, he added: “I just described the situation of mistakes we made.

 

 

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettimesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article3248318.ece"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettimesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle3248318.ece[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Containment's not a bad idea, but it's not a matter of containing some Soviet style army; it's a matter of containing a lot of crazy citizens. Tanks and planes can't blend into the populace, terrorists can. It'll be hard to keep them from getting into trouble.

 

 

Not terrorists, rather freedom fighters. Their country was attacked and they have the legitimate right to defend against foreign aggression. Sun Tzu says that a fish can't survive w/o fresh waters, similarly insurgency can't survive w/o popular support. Had that not been the factual position on ground, Taliban's resistance movement would have died long ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now you are blaming besieged communities for your own failures.
The "besiged communities" are responsible for their own failures, which are legion. I'm sure they would have made it into the 12th Century at some point without our help.

 

Just accept that you have failed to defeat Talibans.
We've failed to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse and have to accept the fact that Bronze Age societies aren't capable of anything resembling civilized behavior, no matter how much Western do-gooders wish it weren't so. Got it. Good luck after the next earthquake, tsunami, famine or any other catastrophe Allah inflicts upon these people.

 

The British have made matters worse, says Afghan President
Karzai forgot to tell us that the entire region consists of cowards unwilling to fight the Taleban and Taleban sympathisers. This knowledge certainly would've affected the tactics (e.g. much less concern for collateral damage).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
similarly insurgency can't survive w/o popular support
So you agree that the region is made up of cowards unwilling to fight the Taleban and Taleban sympathisers, correct?

 

{Moderator note}

This post has violated forum rule #39. Action taken.

For more details, please read our (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?act=boardrules"]Forum Rules[/url].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well said Dieter, the USA is a good example
I agree. Why people allow themselves to be cowed by socialist scum like the Clintonistas is beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you agree that the region is made up of cowards unwilling to fight the Taleban and Taleban sympathisers, correct?

 

I hardly find logic in your posts. How could you attribute your own failures to the unwillingness of the locals to fight against Talibans?

 

The nature of counterinsurgency operations differs from the conventional conditions, soldiers are expected to face in combat. The commanders face an enemy whose objectives, tactics, and concepts are usually difficult to comprehend. The situation becomes worst, when you are conducting such operations in hostile environments on enemy territory, coupled with so many limitations like difficult terrain, extreme weather conditions, acute shortage of troops and resources available, vague and often inaccurate intelligence, which forces you to make jerky decisions and commit your resources in the wrong directions, which results in dissipation and you suddenly find yourself deprived of the flexibility on account of absence of reserves to deal with unforeseen and that is the ideal time, when freedom fighters will make you bleed. They will ensure that you are never able to achieve balance on ground. The same is happening with peace-keepers in Afghanistan.

 

 

 

Sun Tzu [using large font size is not allowed]says:-

 

 

1. The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat, first fights and afterwards looks for victory.[using large font size is not allowed]

 

 

2. To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. [using large font size is not allowed]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hardly find logic in your posts. How could you attribute your own failures to the unwillingness of the locals to fight against Talibans?
Which "failures" would those be? The Taleban are reduced to taking pot shots while hiding behind women and children, knowing that we won't just level the place as could easily be done. At some point, the "innocent civilians" need to stand up for themselves or risk losing the support of the Allies and falling back into the 2nd Century existence that the Taliban are sure to impose on them by force. It's becoming apparent that this is all they're capable of and it was a mistake to try to help them in the first place. Cowards deserve their fate.

 

The nature of counterinsurgency operations differs from the conventional conditions, soldiers are expected to face in combat.

Perhaps we should take off the gloves and follow the same rulebook as the Taliban.

 

{Moderator note}

This post has violated forum rule #39. Action taken.

For more details, please read our (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?act=boardrules"]Forum Rules[/url].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which "failures" would those be? The Taleban are reduced to taking pot shots while hiding behind women and children, knowing that we won't just level the place as could easily be done.

Let's say the Taliban is hiding behind women and children as you are told, then why didn't the Allies come to their hiding places one by one? What stops them from doing that? Are they this cowardly to only dare to use air attacks?

 

At some point, the "innocent civilians" need to stand up for themselves or risk losing the support of the Allies and falling back into the 2nd Century existence that the Taliban are sure to impose on them by force.

Sound pretty much like a megalomania. The people never asked for any support from the Allies in the first place. They never either asked the Allies to stop them from falling into the 2nd Century existence. In fact, it's the Allies that put them back into the 2nd Century existence.

 

It's becoming apparent that this is all they're capable of and it was a mistake to try to help them in the first place.

You are not helping them. It's your delusion that makes you think that what you are doing is helping them

 

Cowards deserve their fate.

You are crying here for being unable to use your cowardly tactics (dropping random bombs from the air), and blame those people for your failure, incompetence, desperation.

 

Perhaps we should take off the gloves and follow the same rulebook as the Taliban.

Well, no one stops you from doing the same tactics like them. You can come to their hiding places and shoot those who are hiding one by one. What stops you from doing this?

 

I agree. Why people allow themselves to be cowed by socialist scum like the Clintonistas is beyond me.

Please stop grumbling ...the whole other side (Clintonistas) may also say the same thing about your group ; )

 

Wasssalam,

Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's say the Taliban is hiding behind women and children as you are told, then why didn't the Allies come to their hiding places one by one? What stops them from doing that? Are they this cowardly to only dare to use air attacks?

 

You are crying here for being unable to use your cowardly tactics (dropping random bombs from the air), and blame those people for your failure, incompetence, desperation.

 

Well, no one stops you from doing the same tactics like them. You can come to their hiding places and shoot those who are hiding one by one. What stops you from doing this?

These are the same fanciful fairlytales being said about Iraq. If it were so, why so many Allied casualties and so few smoking holes where cities used to stand? Remember Fallujah, where the soldiers and marines went house to house, door to door, and killed the terrorists face to face while fearless jihadis like Zarqawi ran away like scared little girls leaving the cannon fodder to be slaughtered? Talafar? Ramadi? Baghdad? Mosul is next. I'm sure it's humiliating, but you look ridiculous parroting such nonsense. Speaking of cowards, why is it that the ones praising martydom never seem to make the ultimate sacrifice themselves voluntarily (we do our best to martyr them involuntarily)? How many of bin Hidin's many children have been martyred?

 

Sound pretty much like a megalomania. The people never asked for any support from the Allies in the first place. They never either asked the Allies to stop them from falling into the 2nd Century existence. In fact, it's the Allies that put them back into the 2nd Century existence.

 

You are not helping them. It's your delusion that makes you think that what you are doing is helping them

Why do you suppose the same "failure" didn't happen in Yugoslavia where Christians were sent to knowingly kill other Christians to save Muslims? Could you imagine the reverse happening? Ever?

 

As for the ever so popular Taliban, I saw a show on LinkTV this week called "Shadow" that gave a pretty clear picture of what Afghan women thought of the Taliban. I highly recommend it. But then again, they're just women, so who cares what they think, right?

 

Please stop grumbling ...the whole other side (Clintonistas) may also say the same thing about your group ; )
Grumbling? LOL

 

Wass salami,

 

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These are the same fanciful fairlytales being said about Iraq. If it were so, why so many Allied casualties and so few smoking holes where cities used to stand? Remember Fallujah, where the soldiers and marines went house to house, door to door, and killed the terrorists face to face while fearless jihadis like Zarqawi ran away like scared little girls leaving the cannon fodder to be slaughtered? Talafar? Ramadi? Baghdad? Mosul is next. I'm sure it's humiliating, but you look ridiculous parroting such nonsense. Speaking of cowards, why is it that the ones praising martydom never seem to make the ultimate sacrifice themselves voluntarily (we do our best to martyr them involuntarily)? How many of bin Hidin's many children have been martyred?

 

 

Any relevance ?

 

Instead of giving irrelevant justifications, you could ask your ideal peacekeepers to stop relying on 1000 kgs SMART bombs and concentrate on bringing visible improvement in the existing pathetic training standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Remember Fallujah, where the soldiers and marines went house to house, door to door, and killed the terrorists face to face while fearless jihadis like Zarqawi ran away like scared little girls leaving the cannon fodder to be slaughtered?

The last time I heard is that the US slaughtered innocent families in their house to house raids. Anyway, my question is, if the US is determined enough to get them, why were they still able to run away?

 

Why do you suppose the same "failure" didn't happen in Yugoslavia where Christians were sent to knowingly kill other Christians to save Muslims? Could you imagine the reverse happening? Ever?

Barbarous Christians were killing Muslims in Yugoslavia, and you think it is an amazing thing that other Christians tried to stop their barbarous Christian brothers from continuing killing Muslims after being silent for too long? Anyway, my question still stands, the Afghan people never asked for any support from the Allies in the first place.

 

As for the ever so popular Taliban, I saw a show on LinkTV this week called "Shadow" that gave a pretty clear picture of what Afghan women thought of the Taliban.

That's a show after all, made especially for your people

 

Wassalam,

Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any relevance ?
Quite effectively destroyed your pathetic fairytale of jihadi bravery and kuffar cowardice when the opposite is obviously true. The cognitive dissonance is clearly troublesome for you since you've apparently constructed a delusional alternate reality. Get help.

 

Instead of giving irrelevant justifications, you could ask your ideal peacekeepers to stop relying on 1000 kgs SMART bombs and concentrate on bringing visible improvement in the existing pathetic training standards.
The only pathetic standards we need to improve are the criteria for determining whom to assist. My suggestion: henceforth, only modern, civilized human beings capable of managing at least a semi-civilized society need be considered. Any place where the term "tribe" or "warlord" are routinely used to describe the populace shall be off limits. They are what they are because it's all they're capable of, no matter how much we wish it weren't so. Put a fence around them and leave them be. We could also institute a program similar to how Saudi Arabia refuses entry to anyone with an israeli stamp in their passport and deny anyone with a stamp from a long list of prohibited countries (this would also take care of the EU/UK "citizens" who've travelled back to their homelands for extended "holidays").

 

The last time I heard is that the US slaughtered innocent families in their house to house raids.
On Al Jazeera no doubt. Fallujah's looking pretty stable these days. When do you suppose the fierce jihadis will coming back to claim their rightful place?

 

Anyway, my question is, if the US is determined enough to get them, why were they still able to run away?

Better question: why did they run away and not stay to fight the infidels for Allah?

 

We spent several days allowing the "civilians" to leave before the initial assault, giving the brave jihadi "leaders" a chance to skulk away before a secure cordon could be established. Big mistake, I agree. If we were only dropping bombs, why didn't we just turn Fallujah into a smoking hole and kill everybody without risking any soldiers or Marines? And Zarqueeri finally did get his virgins after all. :sl:

 

Barbarous Christians were killing Muslims in Yugoslavia, and you think it is an amazing thing that other Christians tried to stop their barbarous Christian brothers from continuing killing Muslims after being silent for too long?
And my question still stands: would Muslims ever kill large numbers of other Muslims to stop them from continuing killing kuffar after being silent for too long? It's actually a rhetorical question given the numerous recent opportunities that have failed to prove the affirmative, but feel free to comment.

 

Anyway, my question still stands, the Afghan people never asked for any support from the Allies in the first place.
Then why haven't they turned, en masse, against the Allies? If someone were to invade the US, in addition to the military, they'd face 300 million armed citizens. If the Afghan people truly supported the Taliban, they'd all have turned viciously against us and we'd have been forced to withdraw given that this has always been a "country" awash in weapons. Unless of course they are all cowards. Which is it?

 

That's a show after all, made especially for your people
It's a show made by Afghans to expose the truth about your heroes. Go to LinkTV"dot"org and you'll see that it's a third-world cheerleader that has nothing but bad things to say about the US and the West generally, so they certainly have no ax to grind for the West. Truth hurts? I'm guessing you're a guy, given your fawning support of the Taliban.

 

Wass salami,

 

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite effectively destroyed your pathetic fairytale of jihadi bravery and kuffar cowardice when the opposite is obviously true. The cognitive dissonance is clearly troublesome for you since you've apparently constructed a delusional alternate reality. Get help.

 

 

On Al Jazeera no doubt. Fallujah's looking pretty stable these days.

 

 

If you claim opposite to be true, then why are you fighting over allocation of troops and resources in Afghanistan? Why do we see the element of frustration in your ideal peacekeepers after sensing visible signs of defeat? Th NATO is blaming US that they are sitting peacefully in the east, while Americans are blaming NATO for not eliminating Talibans in south and the blame game goes on. This occurs when a force is experiencing frustration after having been failed to carry out its assigned task.

 

Again I see no relevance of Falluja with Afghanistan. Anyway, since you are claiming a rosy picture about Falluja, go through the contents of this article:

 

 

Return to Fallujah

 

 

Independent. Uk

Monday, 28 January 2008

 

 

Three years after the devastating US assault, our correspondent enters besieged Iraqi city left without clean water, electricity and medicine.Its streets, with walls pock-marked with bullets and buildings reduced to a heap of concrete slabs, still look as if the fighting had finished only a few weeks ago.The doctors said that they were tending their patients as best they could. "The Americans provide us with nothing," said one mother who was cradling a child. "They bring us only destruction."

 

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetindependent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/return-to-fallujah-774846.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetindependent.co.uk/news/world/mi...jah-774846.html[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×