us heli down

[intellex]

KABUL, Afghanistan - A U.S. Chinook helicopter that crashed in Afghanistan on Tuesday was likely shot down by hostile fire, and the fate of 17 American service members aboard was unclear, the U.S. military said Wednesday. Other reports indicated that the Taliban had attacked the aircraft.

The helicopter took indirect or direct fire from the ground, U.S. military spokesman Col. James Yonts told a news conference. “Whether or not that caused it to crash, we do not know yet,” he said.

Pentagon sources told NBC News that aircraft using infrared surveillance had detected movement just after the crash but that due to darkness couldn't tell if those were survivors or the enemy.




we will see how long they will hold on with their lies about wining the

war , and promoting democratie , i dont know if you guys had seen

last night when the xayawaan was talking , the so called to poost the

troops moral well , i wonder how they feel today after they read this

[michael_ital]

"CHOP,CHOP,CHOP!"

[Ina Baxar]

Hey c'mon let say it like it is > The US went to Afghanistan to root out the taliban regime , rite? Now is the taliban regime still in power in Kaboul? Not to my knowledge .So wether you agree or not , one thing is for sure , they accomplished their goal . Now losing 17 members servicemen in a helicopter crash is the price of the occupation , but it doesn't mean at all that they're losing the war . Military speaking, when your enemy is on the run , you've got the upper hand .

[michael_ital]

Ina, I agree, but for how long ? Will it be permanent? And didn't the Soviets ultimately fail attempting the same thing ?

[intellex]

[quote="Ina Baxar"]Hey c'mon let say it like it is > The US went to Afghanistan to root out the taliban regime , rite? Now is the taliban regime still in power in Kaboul? Not to my knowledge .So wether you agree or not , one thing is for sure , they accomplished their goal . Now losing 17 members servicemen in a helicopter crash is the price of the occupation , but it doesn't mean at all that they're losing the war . Military speaking, when your enemy is on the run , you've got the upper hand .[/quote]



ina bro if that is the case why cant they catch al amiir ( ladin) ? instead

of breaking houses and shocking women and kids , this is only the tip of


iceberg sxb i dont the westren media is showing us the real deal , the

real loss of their solders , in iraq they have only incureged more

youngsters to fight now then ever before , according to rumsfield this

war could last 12 years , and you are telling me they are winning?

[Ina Baxar]

Michael ital, the reason the yanks went to Afghanistan and the reason the Soviets invaded that country , to begin with , were different.
It is also the brutal tactics of the soviets that ultimately got them outta there sooner than they tought.
The US approach is different and is based on a multiple front. On one hand they're fighting an enemy and on the other rebuilding a country .
So I don't know for how long they will remain there , but it looks to me that they have a good part of the afghani people on their side , or the situation woulda been a lot worse than it is.

[Ina Baxar]

Intellex , first of all Afghanistan and Iraq are two different stories in my book.
I don't know where your amir is , but he knows he is a wanted man
I don't know where you get the "breaking down doors part " in Afghanistan , but if you look around { the internet is a good tool} you'll see that they're actually building a whole lot of schools . Let's not mix everything we're talking about Afghanistan here , rite?

[intellex]

no sxb we are talking war agains islam, under the name of democracy