80 dead in Afghan military base attack

[TFatseas]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapc...ex.html?hpt=T2

Authorities said no NATO or Afghan troops, or civilians were killed in the clashes, which began at midnight Friday and continued into Saturday morning.

101st Airborne, stops Jihad on contact.

[Gerald]

Talibaner

[Castout]

Good thing no civilian nor Nato troop was killed. Must be a hell of defender. . .

Taliban now has become a convenient word as also with the word terrorist I must say.

I was accused a Christian Taliban multiple times in a specific country less civilized forum .

Recently no less than the Vatican began using the term Catholic Taliban to label some Catholic group they are not too happy about . And they are not in the very least a militant or armed group or one which vouch for violence. . .But I must be thankful for allowing me to see how low some people in the Vatican can go . . . .

[krashkart]

It's about time we get some good news coming out of there.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by krashkart

It's about time we get some good news coming out of there.

With sympathy from the US, the anti-corruption brigade in Kabul currently holds negotiations to install the Taliban in Afghanistan's government, once that has been acchieved, peace will break out and women will not annoy anyone anymore by lamenting loud in public. Just be patient a bit longer, the future holds rich promises! It has been only 8 years so far, and what are 8 years compared to eternity?

[Jimbuna]

Good news for a change but why the discreoancy in numbers...is it 30 or 80?

[Schroeder]

I'm not sure whether I should believe it...NATO needs good news from that front badly and this sounds just too good to be entirely true.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

I'm not sure whether I should believe it...NATO needs good news from that front badly and this sounds just too good to be entirely true.

What's so unbelievable about it?

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Good news for a change but why the discreoancy in numbers...is it 30 or 80?

KABUL, Afghanistan -- Insurgents armed with rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars tried to storm a combat outpost in eastern Afghanistan on Saturday, setting off a battle that killed 30 attackers and wounded five coalition soldiers, NATO said.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/10...utpost-attack/



Note:Published October 30, 2010

[SteamWake]

CNN gets their headlines from the Telegraph I think.

Or is it that FOX lies and suppresses headlines...



On the surface it sounds like good news but as always we dont get the entire story.

[Gerald]

It's an entirely possible, like this news is linked here and there

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

CNN gets their headlines from the Telegraph I think.

Or is it that FOX lies and suppresses headlines...



On the surface it sounds like good news but as always we dont get the entire story.

I prefer the BBC myself...their 'lies' are believable

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Raptor1

What's so unbelievable about it?

80:0 , or 30:0... sounds a bit strange. I don't say it isn't true, I just don't expect to be told the whole truth any more when it comes to Afghanistan.

[Gerald]

here we go,Nato says its forces in Afghanistan have killed at least 19 Taliban fighters who tried to storm a combat outpost under cover of darkness.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11657981

Now we have covered many news agencies...






Note:30 October 2010 Last updated at 15:41 GMT

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

80:0 , or 30:0... sounds a bit strange. I don't say it isn't true, I just don't expect to be told the whole truth any more when it comes to Afghanistan.

Well, since the NATO troops are better trained, better equipped (Especially for night fighting), and probably in a good defensible position, it's not too far fetched. They did say 5 men were wounded, so it's not like there were no casualties at all.