Lib media back to bashing the U.S. military

[ed1066]

Now that the raid resulting in the killing of Osama bin Laden is over and forgotten by the left wing elite, they can go back to one of their favorite pasttimes, pissing on the United States military:

www.salon.com/news/pakistan/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/05/09/navy_seals_pakistan_raid

When a Navy SEAL Raid Goes Wrong
A lot has been made of the riskiness of the Navy SEALs raid on Osama bin Laden's compound last week, with President Obama observing that "there would have been significant consequences" if bin Laden turned out not to be there.

What would those consequences look like? As it turns out, there was a previous SEALs raid in Pakistan in September 2008, though the disputed episode -- Pakistan maintains many civilians were gunned down -- long ago disappeared down the memory hole.

On Sept. 3, 2008, more than two dozen Navy SEALs helicoptered across the Afghan border into the Pakistani village of Musa Nika in the Angoor Ada district. The village is in Pakistan's much-discussed tribal region, where, back then, many believed bin Laden was holed up; who the SEALs were targeting is not clear.

According to a New York Times account sourced to anonymous U.S. officials, the SEALs spent "several hours" on the ground and, backed up by a AC-130 gunship, killed "two dozen suspected Qaeda fighters."

Pakistanis on the ground and in the government, though, fiercely disputed the American version of the story, insisting that most or all of the dead were civilians. Here is a competing -- and radically different -- account of the SEAL raid from the Sunday Times:

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

On BUSH's military.. big surprise, huh??
You see that slob Michael Moore is also on a rampage?
But only a few.. what happened to all the war protesters??

[Deleted]

OMG... kill the man who attacked us... no problem... start war with a country who didn't attack us.. problem....

Sooooo difficult to understand...

[ed1066]

But only a few.. what happened to all the war protesters??

Don't you know? Now that Obama is fighting three of them (with his Peace Prize no doubt swinging from his neck), war is great!

[Deleted]

All hail OBAMA!!!!!

[Deleted]

Ed-- he's dropping bombs in Yemen, too, now. Did you see that?? Trying to blow up that internet terrorist guy.. he can drop bombs anywhere he wants. LOL!!

[Opti]

OK so there's a Salon article with unsubstantiated stories. There wasn't an overt bashing of the military. I read just conjectures about possibilities with no supporting sources.

[deziloooooo]

May 9, 2011 19:05:54 GMT -5 @ed1066 said:

Now that the raid resulting in the killing of Osama bin Laden is over and forgotten by the left wing elite, they can go back to one of their favorite pasttimes, pissing on the United States military:

www.salon.com/news/pakistan/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/05/09/navy_seals_pakistan_raid

When a Navy SEAL Raid Goes Wrong
A lot has been made of the riskiness of the Navy SEALs raid on Osama bin Laden's compound last week, with President Obama observing that "there would have been significant consequences" if bin Laden turned out not to be there.

What would those consequences look like? As it turns out, there was a previous SEALs raid in Pakistan in September 2008, though the disputed episode -- Pakistan maintains many civilians were gunned down -- long ago disappeared down the memory hole.

On Sept. 3, 2008, more than two dozen Navy SEALs helicoptered across the Afghan border into the Pakistani village of Musa Nika in the Angoor Ada district. The village is in Pakistan's much-discussed tribal region, where, back then, many believed bin Laden was holed up; who the SEALs were targeting is not clear.

According to a New York Times account sourced to anonymous U.S. officials, the SEALs spent "several hours" on the ground and, backed up by a AC-130 gunship, killed "two dozen suspected Qaeda fighters."

Pakistanis on the ground and in the government, though, fiercely disputed the American version of the story, insisting that most or all of the dead were civilians. Here is a competing -- and radically different -- account of the SEAL raid from the Sunday Times:

"

The author of the article sums up,

"So were the dead "suspected Qaeda fighters" or innocent villagers and children? It's impossible to say at this point,"

So what is the purpose of the article? Possible the author had a assignment, to get paid, he owed 250 words on something from Pakistan, went on the computer, googled events from, this pop'd up.
I am sure she didn't go on site to investigate, it's three years old.

Have civilians been killed in this conflict, of course, urban warfare , a long away from where ever..

I wouldn"t get all worked up ed , unless you are concerned for the alleged victems, that I can understand and feel bad about also, , but only one little lib report in a not so populer lib publication

I think that was your concern and here, not really much, suggest to go back to the googling, you can come up with something better.

[Deleted]

Pakistanis on the ground and in the government, though, fiercely disputed the American version of the story, insisting that most or all of the dead were civilians. Here is a competing -- and radically different -- account of the SEAL raid from the Sunday Times:

Maybe the answer is somewhere between our 2 countries. We don't go into their country. They actually catch terrorists that seek refuge there. Just a thought.

[deziloooooo]

May 9, 2011 20:42:15 GMT -5 @oldtex said:

Pakistanis on the ground and in the government, though, fiercely disputed the American version of the story, insisting that most or all of the dead were civilians. Here is a competing -- and radically different -- account of the SEAL raid from the Sunday Times:

Maybe the answer is somewhere between our 2 countries. We don't go into their country. They actually catch terrorists that seek refuge there. Just a thought.

Work for me...Actually thery do catch and kill, only their bad, bad guys..the Taliban that consists of pakistanians who want to change theitr government.

The other Taliban, I call them the good/bad Taliban, they have a working relationship with them,SIS , security service Pakistan, their surrogates to cause trouble in Kashmir, India, and their own country, those are the Afgan Taliban, and along ther way , they also will kill Americans and Afgan military, those they stay away from, don't bother, possible/do have a working relationship with.

According to the explanation of Zakaria, I wasn't knowlegable enought to figure that out .

[ameiko]

May 9, 2011 19:15:16 GMT -5 oped said:

OMG... kill the man who attacked us... no problem... start war with a country who didn't attack us.. problem....

Sooooo difficult to understand...

If they are hiding our enemy, they are our enemy.

I don't know if even attack part of Pakistan counts as attacking Pakistan as a whole given how fragmented they are; the regular government has handed over large areas to Muslim militias rather than fight them and those are likely the areas where the SEALS went in.

[Deleted]

ameiko... Krick was saying where are the war protestors (as in protesting war in Iraq) ... and i was saying that was not the same as killing Bin Laden... that it is perfectly possible to both agree with our actions against Bin Laden, and protest Iraq (and even ongoing Afgani operations) ... and not be hypocritical... They are different things...