KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (AP) -- A suicide bomber blew himself in a crowded market in southern Afghanistan on Monday, killing 17 people and wounding 47, officials said.
Insurgents often launch suicide bombings, usually targeting NATO-led and Afghan troops in southern Afghanistan, although sometimes civilians are the victims.
Afghanistan is enduring its bloodiest phase since the ouster of the Taliban regime in the late 2001 in an American-led invasion for hosting Osama bin Laden. - CNN -------- Just whose bright idea was it to leave Afghanistan and invade Iraq anyway? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
Posts: 17506 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Here's why I think the upcoming election will disappoint: it's so obvious, and it ought to be so easy for the Dems to make the point, that in leaving Afganistan and focusing on Iraq, we've done exactly the opposite of what we'd want to do in a fight against those who would use terrorism against us. Yet there's no one making the case in clear terms. The uncovering of the plot in London says everything we need to know: how to fight, the need to encourage people to like us enough to want to help us, that invading Iraq did nothing to prevent that attack and indeed may have fertilized the soil in which it grew. But there's no one able to make the case; and if there were, there'd be no one listening.
Posts: 1505 | Location: Puget Sound, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Originally posted by sid1114: Here's why I think the upcoming election will disappoint: it's so obvious, and it ought to be so easy for the Dems to make the point, that in leaving Afganistan and focusing on Iraq, we've done exactly the opposite of what we'd want to do in a fight against those who would use terrorism against us. Yet there's no one making the case in clear terms. The uncovering of the plot in London says everything we need to know: how to fight, the need to encourage people to like us enough to want to help us, that invading Iraq did nothing to prevent that attack and indeed may have fertilized the soil in which it grew. But there's no one able to make the case; and if there were, there'd be no one listening.
Isn't that argument too difficult for the electorate (or such tiny percentage of it that bothers to vote) ? Such part of the electorate that bothers to vote at all likes things simple and in Yes and No or Black and White or 'either for us or against us' terms, doesn't it?
