Al Jazeera with the Taliban

[Happy Times]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fa3_1173105514

Really irritated to see this ****.
Hope our goverments would support the war effort more,
coalition troops die in vain when the given mission and tools dont match.

[ASWnut101]

Suspected as much from day one. Now proved, I see. Too bad that Afghanistan has a "government" (notice the quotes) now, otherwise.........:dead:

[fatty]

Interesting video! Fascinating to see things from the other side. The country still needs a lot of work, that's for sure. A woman I spoke to the other day suggested it would be a decade before we see a solidly positive humanitarian situation.

[baggygreen]

I take a lot of things said by al-jazeera with the proverbial grain of salt.

There is absolutely no way of knowing if everything there was set up specifically for the story or not... hell we cant even know for sure that it was even filmed in afghanistan! it might've been kashmir, or pakistan... nobody knows for certain.

I do tho, believe that things in afghanistan arent as rosy as we'd like to think... certain NATO members need to actually contribute something more than words and good wishes.

[Skybird]

Not one detail in that movie surprises me a bit.

See the confidence and self-reliance in their habitus, and the open smiles of one or two men on the truck in the beginning. A loosing army looks different. I hoped they at least would look stressed or tensed. But nothing.

Throughout all medieval, Christian armies might have had the better weapons, but moral and fightign spirit of Muslim armies was superior to that of the Christians. This differences was even more obvious with the Ottoman armies. Today: the one party tries to minimize it's losses and fears death. The other embraces the possebility to be killed in combat.

if they manage to regain Afghan's trust on larger scale than just a major part of the Pashtuns, by introducing social work, health care and education like Hezbollah does in Lebanon, NATO has lost.

It was a stupid idea of NATO to take over from ISAF anyway. The worst of all options, to be precise.

[Fish]

I wonder they still laugh?
This morning a big Nato campain started in Helmand.


http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/03/06/afghanistan.operation/index.html


KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (CNN) -- NATO-led security forces have launched a major offensive against the Taliban and drug traffickers in southern Afghanistan, the military alliance's regional commander said in a statement on Tuesday.
The multi-national effort in the volatile northern region of Helmand province, codenamed "Operation Achilles," involves a 4,500-strong NATO contingent and nearly 1,000 Afghan troops.
NATO said one soldier had been killed in combat on Tuesday but gave no further details.
"This operation is targeting Taliban extremists, narco-traffickers and foreigner terrorists who have abused you, the Afghan people," Maj. Gen. Toon Van Loon, NATO's southern regional commander, said in a statement.
"Though Operation Achilles will initially focus on improving security conditions, its overarching purpose is to assist the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan improve its ability to begin reconstruction and economic development in the area."
More than 45,000 U.S. and NATO troops are battling a resurgent Taliban, Afghanistan's former rulers, and its allies in the al Qaeda terrorist network across a broad area of the south of the country, more than five years after al Qaeda's Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington.

[Skybird]

I wonder they still laugh?

Sorry, but how many campaigns is that now? It seems I lost track of them...

The interesting question is not wether they will be driven back or not. The only important question is - will they come back afterwards?

Let's find a quiet place, sit down and listen for a while.

[Skybird]

And I just realized that the British (3) and German (4) news sites I checked all talk of 4.500 NATO troops and 1000 allied Afghans, while American sites seem to claim NATO to leads 45.000 NATO troops into battle.

Someone messed up the decimale, it seems. anyone knowing about this for sure? 45000 sounds massively exaggerated to me. Maybe with all logistics in neighbouring countries?

[Happy Times]

And I just realized that the British (3) and German (4) news sites I checked all talk of 4.500 NATO troops and 1000 allied Afghans, while American sites seem to claim NATO to leads 45.000 NATO troops into battle.

Someone messed up the decimale, it seems. anyone knowing about this for sure? 45000 sounds massively exaggerated to me. Maybe with all logistics in neighbouring countries?

Im sure its 4500, ABC news had it right. And why in the hell the "loyal" allies Pakis arent supporting this operation from their side. **** this ****.. It would be fun if we could get the Pakis, Saudis and Iranians fighting each other with nukes:lol: End of terror...

[SUBMAN1]

That video is pretty funny!!! I watched how Al Jazeera staged a ton of other videos and how they staged them. That link is here somehwere. ANyway, You have a few guys with a couple RPG's (definitely not 400!) in the desert! You have one section of a town that seems to have a few fighters in it. You have a truck that travels all of what? 600 feet with a bunch of guys in it that jumped in from the desert scene above! What utter rubbish!

-S

PS. Where is that video showing how AL Jazeera stages scenes like this? A couple different ones like that are posted on this board soemwhere.

[fatty]

And I just realized that the British (3) and German (4) news sites I checked all talk of 4.500 NATO troops and 1000 allied Afghans, while American sites seem to claim NATO to leads 45.000 NATO troops into battle.

Someone messed up the decimale, it seems. anyone knowing about this for sure? 45000 sounds massively exaggerated to me. Maybe with all logistics in neighbouring countries?

I believe there are 45,000 NATO troops in Afghanistan TOTAL. Op Achilles quoted by Fish utilizes the 4,500 + 1,000 that you found.

[Skybird]

And I just realized that the British (3) and German (4) news sites I checked all talk of 4.500 NATO troops and 1000 allied Afghans, while American sites seem to claim NATO to leads 45.000 NATO troops into battle.

Someone messed up the decimale, it seems. anyone knowing about this for sure? 45000 sounds massively exaggerated to me. Maybe with all logistics in neighbouring countries?

I believe there are 45,000 NATO troops in Afghanistan TOTAL. Op Achilles quoted by Fish utilizes the 4,500 + 1,000 that you found.
Probably. I thought something like that.