+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Do any Afghani's ever get blown up by these "roadside IED's"?

  1. #1
    aka ivan the not-quite-as-terrible ivan astikov's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    moston, UK.
    Posts
    4,779

    Default Do any Afghani's ever get blown up by these "roadside IED's"?

    I'm thinking that it either never happens to the Afghani's working with the allied forces, or they don't get reported because they are worth less than British or American soldiers.
    Last edited by ivan astikov; 14 Feb 2010 at 03:02 PM.
    To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.

  2. #2
    Oliphaunt Baldwin's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,031

    Default

    Five seconds of searching tells me the answer is yes.

  3. #3
    Stegodon
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Foxbase Alpha
    Posts
    312

    Default

    The apostrophes keep them safe.

  4. #4
    Member
    Registered
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Turd Planet From The Sun
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by Baldwin View post
    Five seconds of searching tells me the answer is yes.
    Five seconds of reading your posts tells me you are an asshole. Live Long and Prosper.
    Last edited by Spock's Sock; 17 Feb 2010 at 04:27 AM.

  5. #5
    Member
    Registered
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    8

  6. #6
    aka ivan the not-quite-as-terrible ivan astikov's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    moston, UK.
    Posts
    4,779

    Default

    From the link - bear in mind it is The Scum and they could be out either way by a factor of 10!
    It is believed around half the 265 British fatalities suffered in Afghanistan were caused by roadside IEDs.
    Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but IED's have been going for a long time haven't they? So, why with all the money the military can throw at it, have they not come up with a method to explode these devices before someone walks or drives over them?
    To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.

  7. #7
    Member
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by ivan astikov View post
    From the link - bear in mind it is The Scum
    One man's scum is another man's freedom fighter. Me, I tend to side with the invaded against the invader. Especially when the invaded have a long history of being invaded and when the invaders have a long history of aggression. But that's just me.
    Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but IED's have been going for a long time haven't they? So, why with all the money the military can throw at it, have they not come up with a method to explode these devices before someone walks or drives over them?
    Because things are not as simple as you wish they were? Because wishful thinking does not automatically lead to practical results?

    Do you have any ideas you would like to share with us or with American and British militaries?

    The only idea I can offer if you do not want to get killed in Afghanistan is to stay the hell out of Afghanistan. It's simple, cheap and it works!

  8. #8
    aka ivan the not-quite-as-terrible ivan astikov's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    moston, UK.
    Posts
    4,779

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by sailor View post
    One man's scum is another man's freedom fighter. Me, I tend to side with the invaded against the invader. Especially when the invaded have a long history of being invaded and when the invaders have a long history of aggression. But that's just me.
    The Scum I was referring to, was The Sun news(ha!)paper. It's a pet name we more well-read Brits have for it.
    Quote Originally posted by sailor View post
    Because things are not as simple as you wish they were? Because wishful thinking does not automatically lead to practical results?

    Do you have any ideas you would like to share with us or with American and British militaries?
    Loads of them, but I wouldn't want to give any advantage to the enemy by disclosing them here.
    Quote Originally posted by sailor View post
    The only idea I can offer if you do not want to get killed in Afghanistan is to stay the hell out of Afghanistan. It's simple, cheap and it works!
    It's a bit too late for that.



    ps. The Scum views that sort of news headline as a "feelgood story".
    Last edited by ivan astikov; 01 Mar 2010 at 06:38 AM.
    To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.

  9. #9
    Member
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by ivan astikov View post
    The Scum I was referring to, was The Sun news(ha!)paper. It's a pet name we more well-read Brits have for it.
    I did not know that but the wording looked a bit odd for my interpretation so I might have thought twice.
    Loads of them, but I wouldn't want to give any advantage to the enemy by disclosing them here.
    Really? You have loads of ideas and solutions which have elluded the militaries of the USA and the UK in spite of all their resources? Are you sharing them with such militaries and governments? Do you plan on cashing in on your ideas or will you donate them as goodwill? What makes you think the insurgents read this board or even get any of their tactics from the Internet?
    It's a bit too late for that.
    It's never too late to get the hell out of Dodge. Never too early to stop throwing good money after bad and good lives after wasted lives. Never too late or too early to stop doing what is wrong and start doing what is right.

    The Vietnam war was clearly lost by 1969 but neither the American government nor the American people had the guts to face reality and so they continued the war for another six years in a vain attempt to not have to admit defeat. They continued to waste money and thousands upon thousands of lives in a hope that they would somehow justify what had already been wasted. In the end it was all for nothing. And now here we are again.

    Smart people know when to fold but smart is in short supply these days.

  10. #10
    Free Exy Cluricaun's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Elgin IL
    Posts
    3,641

    Default

    I have an idea. We force march Afghanis down the street in colums and make them pick up any debris on the side of the road ahead of our boys. It's not the most palatable idea, but it would work.
    Hell, if I didn't do things just because they made me feel a bit ridiculous, I wouldn't have much of a social life. - Santo Rugger.

  11. #11
    Oliphaunt
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    978 land
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    As for why the military hasn't employed more anti-IED technology there is a fairly recent article here that describes some of the challenges involved:

    http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/...fghanistan-119

  12. #12
    Member
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by Cluricaun View post
    I have an idea. We force march Afghanis down the street in colums and make them pick up any debris on the side of the road ahead of our boys. It's not the most palatable idea, but it would work.
    I hope you are not serious but just in case any fool takes this seriously I'll say that this is a crime which would immediately turn the Afghans and the world so fast against the USA that it would ensure a quick defeat for America.

  13. #13
    Member
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by Laughing Lagomorph View post
    As for why the military hasn't employed more anti-IED technology there is a fairly recent article here that describes some of the challenges involved:

    http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/...fghanistan-119
    From that article:
    Commanders are working to shift much of the coveted unmanned aircraft fleet from Iraq to Afghanistan to spy on people planting bombs,
    Good luck keeping hundreds of miles of roads under surveillance 24/7. You might catch a few but cannot hope to catch most. Not to mention that it will lead to more "accidents". How do you know if a group by the road are planting an IED or taking a leak or repairing a broken-down vehicle.

    This is a losing issue. $10 worth of explosives can blow up a vehicle and soldiers which cost hundreds of thousands if not millions. Just like America funded the resistance against the soviets, today there are too many countries who have an interest in keeping this resistance going.
    In the meantime, the IEDs are wreaking havoc, killing and badly wounding Western troops and Afghans while piling pressure on the Nato-led mission.

    With the carnage from the bombs undermining public support for the war on both sides of the Atlantic, some lawmakers in Congress say the military has to move faster.

    The Pentagon has promised anti-IED programmes will produce results “soon” but the death toll keeps rising, said Representative Duncan Hunter at a congressional hearing on Thursday.

    “We’ve been... told that since I got into office in January. ‘It’s going to be there soon, sir. It’s going to be there soon,’” said Hunter, a Marine veteran who served in Iraq.

    “It isn’t there now. And we’re losing guys every day. So what are we going to do tomorrow to defeat IEDs so that we don’t have any more IED deaths?”—
    Don't get involved in a land war in Asia.

  14. #14
    I've had better days, but I don't care! hatesfreedom's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,127

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by sailor View post
    From that article:
    Good luck keeping hundreds of miles of roads under surveillance 24/7. You might catch a few but cannot hope to catch most. Not to mention that it will lead to more "accidents". How do you know if a group by the road are planting an IED or taking a leak or repairing a broken-down vehicle.
    UAV's combined with infantry/air have already proven to have great effectiveness in locking down regions. Nobody knows what 'accidents' you're referring to either, there are much greater requirements for calling in an air strike these days. I believe reports even indicate that the Taliban killed more civilians last year than the Allies did.

    IED's are great weapons but they tend to blow up anything around them when they trigger, eventually civilians get irked about it.

  15. #15
    Member
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    UAV's combined with infantry/air have already proven to have great effectiveness in locking down regions.
    I am not convinced and, in any case, if the locals want you out you may gain the upper hand briefly but this only makes matters worse with the locals. You think they like being controlled by foreigners? You think they like foreigners frisking and interrogating their women? It is a losing proposition all around. Ask the French how it went for them in Algeria and Vietnam.
    Nobody knows what 'accidents' you're referring to either, there are much greater requirements for calling in an air strike these days.
    I guess nobody reads the news any more. A google search for Afghanistan bombing error yields plenty of cites, including errors that resulted in killing Canadian forces, Red Cross, etc. Americans seem to be trigger happy. You think all the Afghan victims are going to forget that easily?

    Just in the last few days, during Operation Moshtarak, there have been several "mistakes" that have resulted in the killing of civilians and for which American commanders have apologized.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8527627.stm
    22 February 2010
    At least 27 civilians died in a Nato air strike in southern Afghanistan
    And American forces complain they cannot defend themselves adequately. This is a catch22 situation. If you shoot first you kill civilians. If you wait they often kill you. You can't win.

    America has said they are more careful with the bombings but this just shifts the problem to troops who are nervous and shoot first. Many such shootings may go unreported in the west but they sure get reported. It was the same in Algeria, Iraq, Vietnam. You cannot win. Those people have nowhere to go and we are occupying their country. We will get tired before they do.
    I believe reports even indicate that the Taliban killed more civilians last year than the Allies did.
    I do not know if that is true but even if it was, a civil war is one thing, a foreign occupier another very different thing. they will have to settle their own scores but none of them want foreigners ruling them. The only thing they might all have in common is that they want the foreign invaders out of their land. They might use us for a while but that makes them traitors and they know it. In the long run we will see the heroes are those that resisted, not those who collaborated. Try to see how many collaborators are celebrated today in Vietnam or Algeria. Of course, at the time our governments tried to tell us that the Vietnamese or the Algerians really wanted us there and as proff showed a few corrupt collaborators. Those collaborators usually ended up dead because the imperialists would not even have the decency of taking them with them when things went south. They just abandoned them to their fates. As is happening in Iraq.
    IED's are great weapons but they tend to blow up anything around them when they trigger, eventually civilians get irked about it.
    It seems to me it is the Americans who are getting irked.
    Last edited by sailor; 01 Mar 2010 at 02:58 PM.

  16. #16
    aka ivan the not-quite-as-terrible ivan astikov's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    moston, UK.
    Posts
    4,779

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by sailor View post
    I am not convinced and, in any case, if the locals want you out you may gain the upper hand briefly but this only makes matters worse with the locals. You think they like being controlled by foreigners? You think they like foreigners frisking and interrogating their women?
    What do you think they would rather endure, if asked - a) being frisked by foreigners until the country is no longer run by heroin warlords, or b) carry on being beheaded for not sporting a beard, and stoned for thinking about lipstick?
    To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.

  17. #17
    Member
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    If they did not want their farmers growing heroin you might think they would get rid of it themselves. What makes you think Afghan farmers do not want to grow such a profitable crop? Again, America cannot control drugs in their own country and they want to control Afghanistan?

    If history shows anything is that people prefer to be free to govern themselves, even if badly, than to be ruled by others. We have seen this everywhere in the world and Americans would feel no different. Do you think Americans would welcome any foreign government if they provided health care or good government in general? Anyone who thinks so does not have a clue. What makes you think other peoples are any different? Look at most of Africa. Do you see any country clamoring for colonial powers to return?

    When Napoleon invaded Spain in the 19th century France was much more advanced and claimed they would bring social and scientific advances to Spain and make it better. A few Spaniards believed it and collaborated but the huge majority resisted and finally the French had to leave in spite of their calling the insurgents "terrorists" and committing all sorts of attrocities against them Immortalized by Goya). The collaborators had to leave with them. Today in Spain there are plenty of memorials to those who resisted and May 2, the day of the uprising in Madrid, is a holiday. How many memorials do you estimate their may be for the invaders? About zero is correct. I figure about the same number you will find to the Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq in a few years time.

    Go to India, go to China and you will find monuments and memorials to those who fought the invaders, not to those who collaborated.

  18. #18
    aka ivan the not-quite-as-terrible ivan astikov's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    moston, UK.
    Posts
    4,779

    Default

    Do you think ill-will towards America and the rest of the interfering west can get much worse, or do you reckon the coalition will finally go to far by going all out to kick the Taliban's arse, while we are still over there?
    To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.

  19. #19
    Member
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    I am not sure I understand the question. Of course their ill will is dependent on how we behave. It does not have to get any worse, it just has to outlast us and I believe it will because as long as we are there they will want us gone.

    Can America commit worse crimes? No doubt about it. Will they? I have no idea. I hope not.

    Up until ten years ago I never would have believed America would start a war like Iraq or would condone torture or things like Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib or Fallujah were possible. Now I make no predictions as to what America might or might not do but if history teaches us anything is that this kind of occupation generally does not end in the occupied people being happily occupied by foreigners. No matter how brutal the occupation it just turns worse for the occupier. I believe history will judge America harshly. I already do.

  20. #20
    aka ivan the not-quite-as-terrible ivan astikov's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    moston, UK.
    Posts
    4,779

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by sailor View post
    I am not sure I understand the question. Of course their ill will is dependent on how we behave. It does not have to get any worse, it just has to outlast us and I believe it will because as long as we are there they will want us gone.
    My phrasing was a bit clunky. I'll try again - seeing as the manpower and resources have already been committed, do you not think they may as well kill as many bad guys* as they can, before they leave?

    Quote Originally posted by sailor View post
    Can America commit worse crimes? No doubt about it. Will they? I have no idea. I hope not.

    Up until ten years ago I never would have believed America would start a war like Iraq or would condone torture or things like Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib or Fallujah were possible.
    Well, tbh, none of it surprised me.

    Quote Originally posted by sailor View post
    Now I make no predictions as to what America might or might not do but if history teaches us anything is that this kind of occupation generally does not end in the occupied people being happily occupied by foreigners. No matter how brutal the occupation it just turns worse for the occupier. I believe history will judge America harshly. I already do.
    So, do you think it is beyond the capabilities of the coalition - assuming they could ever read from the same page - to begin helping to build things that are useful to the Afghani's, on the off chance they might instill some good will before they pack their bags? ( I know some of this will be going on already, but it doesn't seem to be getting much airtime.)

    * And they ARE "bad guys", because that is the nature of top level heroin dealers who hang out with known terrorists.
    Last edited by ivan astikov; 02 Mar 2010 at 03:39 AM.
    To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.

  21. #21
    Member
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by ivan astikov View post
    seeing as the manpower and resources have already been committed, do you not think they may as well kill as many bad guys* as they can, before they leave?

    * And they ARE "bad guys", because that is the nature of top level heroin dealers who hang out with known terrorists.
    Insurgents are not terrorists. Opium producers arenot "bad guys", they are just farmers who grow a profitable crop. Opium production is *way* up since the Taliban were ousted. If you want to reduce opium production you need to put back the Taliban in power.

    So opium money supports the insurgents? So what? American taxpayers support the invading Americans. Does that make every American taxpayer a "bad guy" responsible for the invasion and the killings?

    It is this thinking of "killing bad guys" which gets America into trouble. Thinking that anybody who does not bend to their will is a "bad guy" and that you deal with bad guys by killing them.
    So, do you think it is beyond the capabilities of the coalition - assuming they could ever read from the same page - to begin helping to build things that are useful to the Afghani's, on the off chance they might instill some good will before they pack their bags? ( I know some of this will be going on already, but it doesn't seem to be getting much airtime.)
    Would you support a foreign invasion of your country if they built schools or gave away Mercedes cars? Look at Italy. They have dismally corrupt government at all levels. Do you think they would support a foreign invasion?
    Last edited by sailor; 02 Mar 2010 at 06:44 AM.

+ Reply to thread

Posting rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts