1 "We must withdraw from Afghanistan!  The real objective is now in Washington DC!" - Barack Hussein Obama

2 Yeah we really need to get a Patraeus (if not THE Patraeus) into Afghanistan.

3

Interesting that they are starting to add in non-American deaths as well.  Hey, CNN, you can really get those death totals up if you add in civilian deaths by natural causes, crime, etc.!!!

Frakkin' media ghouls.

4

Interesting that they are starting to add in non-American deaths as well.

But, CNN, I thought we were all alone in a unilateral effort? Ya know, Bush's War. I must've slept through the change in narrative.

5 They get to use the phrase "grim milestone" that they love so much.

6 So now the media is rediscovering Afghanistan?

I'm starting to get the feeling the media only cares about reporting US casualties. It's almost like there's an agenda or something at work.

Of course according to the deciders this spike is proof of Taliban strength. It's not like coalition forces went on the offensive or anything.  Casualty figures without any, what's the word, context, really don't tell you much about the situation. But then you'd have to believe the media is interested in reporting facts and not campaigning for Democrats.

7 This whole thing undermines the left's whole "Afghanistan is the important war" bullshit.  If we had never gone into Iraq but had 100,000 more troops in Afghanistan, the bad guys would've focused on Afghanistan all along, and most of the foreign miscreants and money would've wound up there.  We might not have as many total casualties as we have now, but Afghanistan numbers would be much higher.  And we'd still have Sadam, sitting on top of huge oil profits, causing trouble and ready to cause more.

8 They are now using foreign troop deaths in Afghanistan for the first time
just to boost the storyline that Afghanistan is now worse than Iraq.

9 'Twould help if more than the Brits, Canadians, and Danes among our NATO "allies" were willing to, you know, SHOOT people....

10 The Canucks are shooting bad people - I have seen several videos of them doing so pretty agressively.

11

Expecto Petraeus!

12

#5, it may be the case that Afghanistan is in worse shape than Iraq. Michael Yon has been fairly accurate so far and he has been worried about Afghanistan for a while. It does not say much about the health of our country when all you can do is hope some professional is dealing with the situation.  You already know the politicians will lie about it if they think there even a possiblity of a short term political gain and the majority of the press intentionally misleads the people who read/watch it.

 

One reason to vote McCain is the fact that he will not lie about something as serious as a war. Most of the democrats will and the press as a whole does not even try to inform its audience. 

 

expect: "There are problems in Afghanistan because Bush took his eye off it. McCain is running for the third Bush term."

press: "So why did Bush take his eye off Afghanistan? It almost seems unfair that Obama will have to solve every problem ever."

 

13 bleh at July 01, 2008 02:28 PM

Thanks to the dual commenting systems the numbers keep changing, so I am not sure I am the #5 you are referring to but if you are...

I'm not saying Afghanistan is great by any means. In fact, if the mission is to make Afghanistan a functioning nation as we understand the term, we're doomed to failure.

It's never been a country in the sense we use the term. It's always been a collection of regional warlords, with 'central governments' of various strengths in Kabul. We aren't going to change that anytime soon.

As early as the winter of 2001/2002 I was telling people get ready to stay and fight there (sometimes a lot, sometimes less) for a long time. We can probably create some sense of order but we'll be there to blow up bad guys when they are dumb enough to gather in groups large enough to make worth our effort for awhile. It's just the nature of that beast.

That's why Iraq was always the 'demonstration project'. With all its challenges, even before the insurgency, it has a much better chance to be a functioning country and provide an alternative model of what can be to places like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Afghanistan? That place will be well and truly fucked for a long, long time. It's simply a matter of degree and denying the enemy its use as a sanctuary.

14

How about the increase in the number of Taliban killed?

Lack of reporting about the increase in Taliban deaths caused by Fashion week in NYC and BDS but most by BDS.  

15 That place will be well and truly fucked for a long, long time.

It was like that even before the Soviet invasion and subsequent 20+ years of warlord/Taliban/AQ clusterfuck.  Applying modern western standards to what amounts to a anachronistic feudal society is foolish.

Real progress in Afghanistan, if it is even possible at all, will take many generations and upwards of 100 years.

16

The numbers I read were: 440 militants killed, 44 Afghan soldiers, and 34 civilians. 

Obviously this plan is not going to work.  We're going to kill off the less-skillful terrorists, increasing the average skill-level of the entire jihad!

In other news, the Michigan crushed -- crushed Ohio State 44-440, with 34 points being scored on the fans.

17 I know you're joshing Steve-O  but let me 'splain it in a bit more detail for demoralized lurkers. Let's fix the enemy in our sights.

The situation is more akin to what we did to the Japanese during WWII,  we are actually killing off the most skillful fighters our enemy can throw at us.

In a shooting war you don't hold back the mass of your most skilled troops unless you're planning on losing. It's a Catch-22 for the side that's taking more casualties than they can replace, and it seems pretty obvious that the 'Islamic world' isn't the billion-strong pool of recruits that purveyors of enemy propaganda are fond of claiming. And they won't be unless we do something stupid like glass Mecca and/or Medina, or just throw in the towel. The  enemies of the good people of the world are giving us their all.

Yes, the losing side seems to be the Taliban - judging by the ratio of casualties that even our hostile press can't manage to spin away. Taliban casualties are consistently an order of magnitude higher than the Coalition's in any open engagement. It's why they need suicide bombers,  IED attacks, and the press so much. At this point, in Iraq at least, the insurgents have been largely reduced to sending retards and a finite pool of fanatics to their 'glorious' deaths. Retards and garage door opener technicians we can deal with.

Under General Petraeus' leadership, COIN operations in Iraq are meeting with no small amount of success. He has been highly successful at building upon all the work done by the heros before him. A situation which bodes well for the good people of the world. Still, the terrorist networks are finally beginning to realize and adjust to the rope-a-dope they've been led into. They seem to have been shifting more of their resources from easily-supplied Iraq, to Afghanistan where our logistics become considerably more complicated. Unfortunately for them, this too plays to our advantage as there are more opportunities to catch them on open ground in Afghanistan as opposed to having to secure and garrison every town and city in a more urbanized Iraq. They want attrition? Here. Meet my little Gun Ship!

As with the insurgents in Iraq, the Taliban can "win" only by fighting just enough to keep the conflict in our newz to feed the "Grim Milestone" crowd who do their best to demoralize the general population in lock-step with the goals of our enemies. This is the long established weakness of governments (democracies) that are beholden to the will of the people. The average person, who loves and supports their country, can't easily resist what they haven't been informed of. They can't resist the tactical grind to keep their eye on the Long War; especially when a hostile press and a major political party is feeding them the enemy's misinformation and propaganda every day.

I fucken' hate those Pravda in Izvestia guys who can't seem to pull their collective heads out of the "if it bleeds it leads" asses! We might as well be under friggin' Soviet rule with these shits running their scam for the Dems. The sooner they implode the better.