Theodore's World: Eight U.S. Troops Die in Attacks in Afghanistan

« SNL Mocks Obama' s FAILED Presidency | Main | Obama's Cap-and-conceal »

October 04, 2009

Eight U.S. Troops Die in Attacks in Afghanistan



.


8 U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan

KABUL, Afghanistan

CNN

Eight U.S. service members and two members of the Afghan National Security Force were killed Saturday in a battle with militants in eastern Afghanistan, officials said.

Tribal militants attacked two security outposts in the Nuristan province, said the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).

The militants launched their attack from a local mosque and a nearby village, the international alliance said.

Coalition forces repelled the attack, inflicting "heavy enemy casualties," the alliance said without offering details.

All eight service members killed were Americans, the U.S. military said.

"My heart goes out to the families of those we have lost and to their fellow soldiers who remained to finish this fight," said Col. Randy George, commander of Task Force Mountain Warrior. "This was a complex attack in a difficult area. Both the U.S. and Afghan soldiers fought bravely together; I am extremely proud of their professionalism and bravery."

ISAF withheld the identities of the deceased until family members were notified.



Eight U.S. troops killed in east Afghan battle

Attack near Pakistan border was one of fiercest in troubled eight-year war

KABUL - Militant fighters streaming from a village and a mosque attacked a pair of remote outposts near the Pakistan border, killing eight American soldiers and as many as seven Afghan forces in one of the fiercest gunbattles of the troubled eight-year war.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for the deadliest attack for coalition forces since a similar raid in July 2008 killed nine American soldiers in the same mountainous region known as a haven for al-Qaida militants. The U.S. has already said it plans to leave the remote area to focus on Afghan population centers.

Fighting began around dawn Saturday and lasted several hours, said Bandar, governor of Nuristan province. Badar said the two outposts were on a hill — one near the top and one at the foot of the slope — flanked by the village on one side and the mosque on the other.

Nearly 300 militant fighters flooded the lower, Afghan outpost then swept around it to reach the American station on higher ground from both directions, said Mohammad Qasim Jangulbagh, the provincial police chief. The U.S. military statement said the Americans and Afghans repelled the attack by tribal fighters and "inflicted heavy enemy casualties."

Jangulbagh said that the gunbattle was punctuated by U.S. airstrikes and that 15 Afghan police were captured by the Taliban, including the local police chief and his deputy. Afghan forces were sent as reinforcements, but Jangulbagh said all communications to the district, Kamdesh, were severed and he had no way of knowing how they were faring Sunday.

"This was a complex attack in a difficult area," Col. Randy George, the area commander, said in the U.S. statement. "Both the U.S. and Afghan soldiers fought bravely together."


Obamas celebrate anniversary with dinner out

First celebration of their marriage since entering the White House

WASHINGTON - There was no trip to New York and no fancy outing as the Obamas celebrated their first wedding anniversary since they moved to the White House.

Instead they kept it simple, with a dinner out Saturday night at an elegant, American-fare restaurant near Georgetown. The evening was balmy and the moon almost full.

President Barack Obama stayed in all day before taking a motorcade with Michelle Obama to the Blue Duck Tavern to mark their 17th wedding anniversary.

Mrs. Obama stepped into the restaurant wearing a backless knee-length dress while the president wore a dark suit.

Last year, the Obamas also had an understated anniversary with a simple dinner out in downtown Chicago. The Obamas were married Oct. 3, 1992, in a ceremony at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.




.


Wild Thing's comment...........

Someone has to take the reigns from obama!! So now at least 51 have died, not counting the Afghans, since McChrystal requested more troops. Obama is sitting their twiddling his thumbs, trying not to offend the lunatics on the left, while our troops die. Obama’s ROE’s strike again!

Fly over and the mosque!!!!!!

Prayers for the soldiers and their families. Our young men and women should not be sent into harm’s way without full support, and definitely not with ‘rules of engagement’ that will surely end up with more totally unnecessary deaths.

And Michelle and Barack go out, ok but did he return back when hearing this news and realize the 17th anniversary dinner had to wait. That he had to do something NOW! Damn them ...damn him for his despicably disdainful, nonchalant treatment of our troops and their urgent needs.

Dear God. I’m heartsick. I’m in tears. My heart is breaking for our brave troops, andn to have this vile person for their CIC.


"This attack was launched from inside a mosque that was considered off-limits for US forces."


Just as we thought--freakin' "Obama Rules".

That’s TWENTY-FOUR United States Soldiers killed in Afghanistan in the last 9 days!!

Obama’s rules of engagement are turning this place into a SHOOTING GALLERY, with our family’s soldiers as the targets!!!

This is war and our troops are supposed to be kill what's trying to kill you.

Prior to August 30, 2009, the USA has averaged 66 Military deaths per year in Afghanistan. Since August 30, 2009 ALONE, under General McChrystal and the new Rules of Engagement established by the obama administration, the USA has lost 51 of our Finest and Best. That is ALMOST an ENTIRE year's average in ONE MONTH!


8 members of our armed forces gave up their lives for our country while he went out to dinner. While he did nothing to support them or provide for their success. Today 8 families lost loved ones because Obama doesn't know what he is doing. I'd bet he is sleeping just fine tonight


Posted by Wild Thing at October 4, 2009 05:55 AM


Comments

That report said it all, "They came streaming out of the villiage and Mosque". From 'safe havens' that our troops can not shot at or call in an air strike.

You can't tell me the enemy doesn't know the ROE's as well as our troops do. It is impossible to fight a war with your hands tied behind your back. This is why I question the validity of sending more troops in.

From what I've learned McChrystal is a protege of General Patreaus. McChrystal was admonished in Iraq for being "too aggressive". The problem is not the General, as I first thought, but with this appeasement oriented administration. Where the enemy has all the cards in his favor and our troops are left to hang for themselves. The whole situation is bullshit.

Posted by: Mark at October 4, 2009 07:58 AM


Do you think anything was accomplished in the 25 minute meeting? Besides time to cook a pizza? How frustrated it must be for the military leaders.

I am so worried about our troops. ((prayers))

Posted by: Eden at October 4, 2009 09:44 AM


If you simply look at the area of the Pakistan border on Google Earth you will see that it is surely about the most rugged land on earth. I don't have the foggiest idea why we put land troops in there but if we must then we need a commander-in-chief who will do what it takes to win. The one we have wants us to lose. I watched a 20 year old movie last night, Tom Berenger and Charlie Sheen's Indians had an owner who wanted them to lose. They won anyway. It was a movie, folks. Not real life. In real life you need a leader who wants to win. When I worked for men who wanted me to succeed I could accomplish great things. When I worked for men who hated me and wanted me out, I couldn't accomplish anything. That's the way it works in real life. McChrystal can not overcome the burden of having a little Chicago street punk for CIC. It is later than we think.

We are at the "Lives, Fortunes, and Sacred Honor" decision point if not well beyond it. The first American Revolution destroyed the lives of almost all the Signers of the Declaration of Independence but they did what had to be done. Now at Patrick Henry's little home town of Red House, VA we have a Muslim Training Compound, protected by law. And I'll bet Zazi wasn't the only resident of my town here in Colorado planning to bomb his neighbors. Do you know what your Muslim neighbors are doing? Do you even know if they're Shiite or Sunni? What did the preacher at your local Mosque have to say Friday? Don't have a local mosque? Just wait a while. No religion is growing as fast as Islam.

Pogo said it best. We have met the enemy and he is us. How long are we going to kid ourselves that we are saving the world from these monsters? I'm really tired of hearing Hannity brag about how many millions of Muslims Bush freed and then opening the paper and reading that ten more American fighting men were killed yesterday in a place that needs B-52's and B-1's, not Armor and foot soldiers. Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn about freeing Muslims. One marine is worth more than 1.3 billion muslims in my book.

Posted by: horace at October 4, 2009 10:55 AM


All I can say is "DITTO", to Horace's remarks.
We can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times that President and Laura Bush went out for a night on the town.
He realized that he had a Country to run, and it took presidence over everything else.
Our current Leader(?), is so self-involved, it is sickening.

Posted by: SEAN. at October 4, 2009 12:00 PM


I join Mark in changing my assessment of Gen McChrystal. I thought McChrystal was an obama follower, but he may not be.

Afghanistan is a mess. The situation there is deteriorating. obama inherited it so it is not all his fault. However, his ROEs and his pulling the troops back from the cities in Iraq certainly have given the Taliban optimism. obama's speech in Cairo and his support of muslims, incl. a call for a palestinian state have also encouraged muzies. Add in his ignoring of the street demonstrations in Iran, releasing Gitmo detainees and pulling the planned missile shield in Eastern Europe and obama is damn near a cheerleader for radical islam. obama is far more encouraging to our enemies than he is to our troops.

The recent rash of arrests of radical muslims here in America make me expect that it is just a matter of time before we are attacked again. If we are, I also expect obama to waffle and waver. He probably won't do anything more than Clinton did. There may be a lot more action from the American populace though. All those guns and the ammunition were not bought just for fun.


Posted by: TomR at October 4, 2009 02:03 PM


Obama should be tarred and feathered, then sent packing to Afghanistan to be the Community Organizer in Chief. He is not a leader by any stretch of the imagination.

Posted by: Bob A at October 4, 2009 04:37 PM


Screw the rules of ingagement and bomb the fu#*ing mosque---this not war fighting, but playing at war. As the Russian general said when presented with a group of French prisoners during Napoleons retreat from Moscow, "shoot them, War is not a game and if more would do this we would go to war only when absolutely necessary, I don't play games".

Posted by: Ron Russell at October 4, 2009 05:31 PM


I expect McChrystal to be replaced with a true yes man, he's too agressive to abide by horseshit rules of engagement.
It always pisses me off that the United States, while not a signatory to the Geneva Conventions always abides by their rules. We deploy with a GC card, that specifies our behavior if taken prisoner, and how we are to treat enemy prisoners of war, uniformed or not. The Conventionis not one but several succeding conventions beginning with The First Geneva Convention of 1864.
Then there was the Second Geneva convention of 1906, for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and
Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea" (first adopted in 1906).
Third Geneva Convention of 1929. Its official name is the Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva July 27, 1929, this served the nation up through WWII to Korea. Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 on the treatment of civilians during wartime.

In 1993 the United Nations Security Council adopted a report from the Secretary General and a Commission of Experts which concluded beyond doubt that the Geneva Conventions had passed into the body of customary international law that is binding on non-signatory parties whenever they engage in armed conflicts. It includes the Martens Clause. ... By refusing to ratify treaties or to consent to the development of corresponding customary norms, the powerful military States can control the content of the laws of armed onflict. Other States are helpless to prohibit certain technology possessed by the powerful military States. ... the Martens Clause establishes an objective means of determining natural law: the dictates of the public conscience. This makes the laws of armed conflict much richer, and permits the participation of all States in its development. The powerful military States have constantly opposed the influence of natural law on the laws of armed conflict even though these same States relied on natural law for the prosecutions at Nuremberg. The ICJ in its Advisory Opinion did not clarify the extent to which the Martens Clause permits notions of natural law to influence the development of the laws of armed conflict. Consequently, its correct interpretation remains unclear. The Opinion has, however, facilitated an important debate on this significant and frequently overlooked clause of the laws of armed conflict.

These have been followed by protocols.

Protocol I,
1977 Geneva Convention amendment about the protection of victims in international conflicts.

Protocol II, 1977 Geneva Convention amendment about the protection of victims in non-international armed conflicts

Protocol III, 2005 Geneva Convention amendment about the adoption of the Red Crystal emblem, this gives the ragheads precident.

For most of us we adhered to the Fourth Geneva Convention, accordingly this brings up things not discussed before or after William Calley by the MSM, where the focus was on My Lai and later on Abu Ghraib and the panty raids.
There is even a special protocol for formedical personnel. It was strictly adhered to during Vietnam by the enemy signatories when they observed Dustoff operations and even rear area hospitals.

We have been in Iraq since March 20 , 2003 and in Afghanistan since October 7, 2001. With our Geneva Convention observances and rules of conduct mandated by our rules of engagement, just how many American or allied lives has it saved and how many American or allied prisoners have been repatriated? None and none alive, bodies and body parts have been recovered, and I'm expected to love these MF'rs and treat them as equals.

Posted by: Jack at October 4, 2009 08:26 PM


This Chump in Charge has no clue.I can resite my oath and stand behind it-forien or domestic!

Posted by: Chief at October 4, 2009 10:13 PM


Thank you everyone.

Posted by: Wild Thing at October 4, 2009 11:06 PM


Look everyone - America & the West are going to LOSE this war in Afghanistan (and also Iraq)because we are constrained by post war UN human rights rules. Our enemies on the other hand couldn't give a rats arse about UN human rights rules. We are in effect fighting with our hands tied behind our backs.

General Patton had ONE rule: "The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his."

Unfortunately civilian casualities are a part of war - any government that cannot deal with that fact should consign themselves to a crushing defeat. That is where we are headed if our politicans don't find their BALLS!!!!!


Sorry for the profanity - but I am madder than hell that our countries have become so piss weak since the end of WW2 - we have become that because we have allowed ourselves to be knobbled by the UN!!

It's time to bring your boys home - they are being wasted on a theatre of war that is balanced in the enemies favour!

Posted by: Lyn in Australia at October 5, 2009 06:45 AM