Our elite forces killed "by" the Taliban

[SFC Ollie]

Such a bad thing for Reagans freedom fighters to do!

Here's the deal. America has the greatest technological war machine that the world could ever imagine but Americans are forced to fight on the ground in Afghanistan with terms dictated by the enemy because of some crazy fairness doctrine that liberals subscribe to. We had SEALs blown out of the sky and a couple of days later we killed the bad guys with an air strike. Here's the question: could we kill the bad guys with air strikes and save the ground Troops the trouble?

Not always. It simply isn't always, nor even most of the time, and option.

 

[whitehall]

Such a bad thing for Reagans freedom fighters to do!

Here's the deal. America has the greatest technological war machine that the world could ever imagine but Americans are forced to fight on the ground in Afghanistan with terms dictated by the enemy because of some crazy fairness doctrine that liberals subscribe to. We had SEALs blown out of the sky and a couple of days later we killed the bad guys with an air strike. Here's the question: could we kill the bad guys with air strikes and save the ground Troops the trouble?

Just nuke em all and let god sort em out?

Just the inane comment you would expect from a pussy with Groucho glasses.

 

[uscitizen]

It was the comment I got from lots of Bush supporters several years ago.
And seemed to be what you were saying.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Such a bad thing for Reagans freedom fighters to do!

Here's the deal. America has the greatest technological war machine that the world could ever imagine but Americans are forced to fight on the ground in Afghanistan with terms dictated by the enemy because of some crazy fairness doctrine that liberals subscribe to. We had SEALs blown out of the sky and a couple of days later we killed the bad guys with an air strike. Here's the question: could we kill the bad guys with air strikes and save the ground Troops the trouble?

No, here's the REAL deal, wh:

You can't kill all the bad guys with airstrikes alone. Not in that region, not in that terrain....You need troops on the ground along with airstrikes.

Look, in ten years of battle ove there, this is the worst single day hit. As sad as it is, it says a lot that we aren't losing significant numbers like that all the time.......In most wars we've fought before the technology of today, we woould lose sometimes hundreds or thousands in a single day, consistently.

Basically, the only way you're ever going to wipe out everybody on the ground through airpower, it would have to involve NBC.........That opens a whole new perspective and can o' worms.

Basically, the Ragheads got lucky. It happens.

 

[uscitizen]

Why such a big deal over this chopper getting shot down and the troops all killed?
Not minimizing their deaths in any way, just curious about all the hoopla over this incident.

Many have died in Afganistan and will continue to die as long as we stay there.

 

[Liability]

Why such a big deal over this chopper getting shot down and the troops all killed?
Not minimizing their deaths in any way, just curious about all the hoopla over this incident.

Many have died in Afganistan and will continue to die as long as we stay there.

SEAL Team 6 included the guys that took out Osama bin Laden.

My OP raised a question that occurred to me very early on.

Of course soldiers die and will continue to die in any of our war zones.

But it is particularly noteworthy when a group of elite forces who just made history have some of their members killed in what might have been a set up.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Why such a big deal over this chopper getting shot down and the troops all killed?
Not minimizing their deaths in any way, just curious about all the hoopla over this incident.

Many have died in Afganistan and will continue to die as long as we stay there.

SEAL Team 6 included the guys that took out Osama bin Laden.

My OP raised a question that occurred to me very early on.

Of course soldiers die and will continue to die in any of our war zones.

But it is particularly noteworthy when a group of elite forces who just made history have some of their members killed in what might have been a set up.

Set up by who?

 

[uscitizen]

Why such a big deal over this chopper getting shot down and the troops all killed?
Not minimizing their deaths in any way, just curious about all the hoopla over this incident.

Many have died in Afganistan and will continue to die as long as we stay there.

SEAL Team 6 included the guys that took out Osama bin Laden.

My OP raised a question that occurred to me very early on.

Of course soldiers die and will continue to die in any of our war zones.

But it is particularly noteworthy when a group of elite forces who just made history have some of their members killed in what might have been a set up.

Ahh the old celebrety status thing. Now I get it. Thanks.

Yeah like the enemy would not try and set us up

 

[Liability]

Why such a big deal over this chopper getting shot down and the troops all killed?
Not minimizing their deaths in any way, just curious about all the hoopla over this incident.

Many have died in Afganistan and will continue to die as long as we stay there.

SEAL Team 6 included the guys that took out Osama bin Laden.

My OP raised a question that occurred to me very early on.

Of course soldiers die and will continue to die in any of our war zones.

But it is particularly noteworthy when a group of elite forces who just made history have some of their members killed in what might have been a set up.

Set up by who?

Again, I noted my conjecture (absolutely unsupported flat out conjecture, at that) in the OP.

My concern then was: if the Seals went in to rescue other elite forces (like some Rangers), then is it possible that the attack on those other elite forces was intended to lure in the Seals? And who would be in a position to advise the idiot Taliban scumbags as to the possibility that a Seal team might get sent in?

 

[yidnar]

if this is the wrong thread, i'm sorry. Moving it is fine by me.

On the subject of our seal team 6 forces killed in the crash of the helicopter, it dawned on me that the whole thing was suspicious.

In fact, i thought i had posted this thought earlier, but maybe i never submitted it?

Here's my concern. The seal team was sent in to rescue another seal team in jeopardy. The rescue team, consisting of the same team ( members of seal team 6, albeit not the same actual forces) who took-out osama bin laden, then got attacked by the taliban. This made me wonder if maybe the other seal team had gotten attacked purely to cause the rescue mission which was the actual intended target?

I figure that the taliban isn't nearly sophisticated enough to pull that off. So, i am assuming agents with access to some of our intel in the region may have assisted the taliban.

I am fully prepared to suspect pakistan (or some of its military intelligence folks, anyway) since we "embarrassed" them by taking-out osama bin laden without their prior knowledge (and despite their sovereignty concerns).

Too conspiratorial? Or does anybody else smell a similar rat in all of what just happened over in afghanistan?

why werent they escorted by gun ships? Stupid stupid stupid

never and i mean never trust a muslim!!!

 

[Liability]

Why such a big deal over this chopper getting shot down and the troops all killed?
Not minimizing their deaths in any way, just curious about all the hoopla over this incident.

Many have died in Afganistan and will continue to die as long as we stay there.

SEAL Team 6 included the guys that took out Osama bin Laden.

My OP raised a question that occurred to me very early on.

Of course soldiers die and will continue to die in any of our war zones.

But it is particularly noteworthy when a group of elite forces who just made history have some of their members killed in what might have been a set up.

Ahh the old celebrety status thing. Now I get it. Thanks.

Yeah like the enemy would not try and set us up

My conjecture was exactly that the enemy might try to use one attack as bait to lure in the actual intended target.

But I was not talking about celebrity. I was talking about betrayal (possibly) by some of our alleged "allies" and revenge by the likes of al qaeda and the Taliban for the snuffing of bin Laden.

I see nothing humorous about any part of this topic, even if it based on my mere conjecture.

 

[Wicked Jester]

SEAL Team 6 included the guys that took out Osama bin Laden.

My OP raised a question that occurred to me very early on.

Of course soldiers die and will continue to die in any of our war zones.

But it is particularly noteworthy when a group of elite forces who just made history have some of their members killed in what might have been a set up.

Set up by who?

Again, I noted my conjecture (absolutely unsupported flat out conjecture, at that) in the OP.

My concern then was: if the Seals went in to rescue other elite forces (like some Rangers), then is it possible that the attack on those other elite forces was intended to lure in the Seals? And who would be in a position to advise the idiot Taliban scumbags as to the possibility that a Seal team might get sent in?

Highly unlikely.....The RANGERS went in to weed out the Taliban. It was an offensive mission........Highly doubtful, basically impossible for the ragheads to know that SEAL 6 would ever be designated to assist in any way.

Besides, I don't really think the Taliban really gave a shit about Bin Laden or his death.......Hell, they were negotiating early on to possibly turn his ass over......They're more concerned with regaining power.

 

[Liability]

Set up by who?

Again, I noted my conjecture (absolutely unsupported flat out conjecture, at that) in the OP.

My concern then was: if the Seals went in to rescue other elite forces (like some Rangers), then is it possible that the attack on those other elite forces was intended to lure in the Seals? And who would be in a position to advise the idiot Taliban scumbags as to the possibility that a Seal team might get sent in?

Highly unlikely.....The RANGERS went in to weed out the Taliban. It was an offensive mission........Highly doubtful, basically impossible for the ragheads to know that SEAL 6 would ever be designated to assist in any way.

The Taliban probably doesn't know much more than how to wipe their asses with smooth rocks.

But that doesn't mean that they cannot get intel from other sources -- such as a disgruntled component of one of our allies.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Again, I noted my conjecture (absolutely unsupported flat out conjecture, at that) in the OP.

My concern then was: if the Seals went in to rescue other elite forces (like some Rangers), then is it possible that the attack on those other elite forces was intended to lure in the Seals? And who would be in a position to advise the idiot Taliban scumbags as to the possibility that a Seal team might get sent in?

Highly unlikely.....The RANGERS went in to weed out the Taliban. It was an offensive mission........Highly doubtful, basically impossible for the ragheads to know that SEAL 6 would ever be designated to assist in any way.

The Taliban probably doesn't know much more than how to wipe their asses with smooth rocks.

But that doesn't mean that they cannot get intel from other sources -- such as a disgruntled component of one of our allies.

I edited my post about it.

 

[Liability]

Highly unlikely.....The RANGERS went in to weed out the Taliban. It was an offensive mission........Highly doubtful, basically impossible for the ragheads to know that SEAL 6 would ever be designated to assist in any way.

The Taliban probably doesn't know much more than how to wipe their asses with smooth rocks.

But that doesn't mean that they cannot get intel from other sources -- such as a disgruntled component of one of our allies.

I edited my post about it.

I don't agree. They still value symbolism.

In any event, it may very well be true, as you suggest, that it IS very unlikely.

That would make me feel a little better. Not a lot. But at least a bit.

 

[geauxtohell]

The Taliban probably doesn't know much more than how to wipe their asses with smooth rocks.

"Never underestimate your enemy"

- Sun Tzu

You would think that, almost a decade into this conflict, we could accept that the Taliban knows how to mount an effective insurgency.

 

[Liability]

The Taliban probably doesn't know much more than how to wipe their asses with smooth rocks.

"Never underestimate your enemy"

- Sun Tzu

You would think that, almost a decade into this conflict, we could accept that the Taliban knows how to mount an effective insurgency.

Yes and no.

They know how to take maximum advantage of their habitat.

That really doesn't mean that they are all that good at mounting an offensive campaign.

There IS a geophysical reason that Afghanistan became a quagmire for the Soviets.

by contrast, al qaeda has demonstrated skill at mounting very clever (even intricate) strategies and tactics in an extended offensive manner.

 

[geauxtohell]

Such a bad thing for Reagans freedom fighters to do!

Here's the deal. America has the greatest technological war machine that the world could ever imagine but Americans are forced to fight on the ground in Afghanistan with terms dictated by the enemy because of some crazy fairness doctrine that liberals subscribe to. We had SEALs blown out of the sky and a couple of days later we killed the bad guys with an air strike. Here's the question: could we kill the bad guys with air strikes and save the ground Troops the trouble?

Here's the deal.

Your ass.

A hole in the ground.

You don't know the difference.

I find it hilarious when people like you complain that the enemy just isn't "fighting fair". It shows how fucking stupid you are. If you had to fight the United States, would you "fight fair"? Would you wear a uniform?

Exactly.

It has nothing to do with the ROE.

 

[Wicked Jester]

The Taliban probably doesn't know much more than how to wipe their asses with smooth rocks.

"Never underestimate your enemy"

- Sun Tzu

You would think that, almost a decade into this conflict, we could accept that the Taliban knows how to mount an effective insurgency.

Yes and no.

They know how to take maximum advantage of their habitat.

That really doesn't mean that they are all that good at mounting an offensive campaign.

There IS a geophysical reason that Afghanistan became a quagmire for the Soviets.

by contrast, al qaeda has demonstrated skill at mounting very clever (even intricate) strategies and tactics in an extended offensive manner.

True about the Soviets.......Geographical, and the fact that there equipment was antiquated, along with the fact that the CIA was a major thorn in their side.

 

[geauxtohell]

The Taliban probably doesn't know much more than how to wipe their asses with smooth rocks.

But that doesn't mean that they cannot get intel from other sources -- such as a disgruntled component of one of our allies.

I edited my post about it.

I don't agree. They still value symbolism.

In any event, it may very well be true, as you suggest, that it IS very unlikely.

That would make me feel a little better. Not a lot. But at least a bit.

Pffft. A Chinook is a big fat target. If you are a Taliban fighter with an RPG and you have a reasonable chance of hitting one, you are going to take that shot whether you know it's full of SEALs or completely empty. It doesn't equate to a grand conspiracy. Shit happens in combat.

I doubt this was a set up. I suspect it was just bad luck.