Aussies Not Pulling their weight in Afghanistan

They seem very content to let their allies do all the fighting.http://74.125.95.132/ search?q=cache:PgYbcp1QBVMJ:ww w.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/ar ticle.cfm%3Fc_id%3D2%26objecti d%3D10512860+Australian+troops +cowards&cd=3&hl=en &ct=clnk&gl=ca

This is better.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article....

Yank Oliver wrote:

This is better.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article....

Can you blame Australia for not wanting to fight? In WW1 we took a beating at Gallipoli which was the fault of the Brits. In WW2 the Japs did us in which again was the fault of the Brits in Viet Nam we got our arses kicked which was the fault of the yanks . That's enough for me mate you Canuks and Yanks and Brits can fight this one.

Well well its the gay guy with an obsesion for Aussie Soldiers.
Your dream is to be with an Aussie, it will never happen stupid indian..

We will just keep LOL @ you.

Try the Gay section h0m0.

SUPERIOR AUSSIE wrote:

Well well its the gay guy with an obsesion for Aussie Soldiers.
Your dream is to be with an Aussie, it will never happen stupid indian..
We will just keep LOL @ you.
Try the Gay section h0m0.

Whats all this gay stuff? Who said Aussie troops are gay? And if they are who cares.

Like to know wth the 'mission' is over there anyway?

Carve a utopian niche out of the world for all those Afghans that want Starbucks and HBO and Chevrolet? Fine let it go to a vote, then set up an autonomous "westernized" republic and let all those "liberal" Afghans live there and put the armies on the border to keep the "neanderthals" out, you know like that "great success" Israel. Not like the US etc haven't DRAWN UP BORDERS before...

Or is it to keep the bad men from coming here?

Oh well, this is working, we all know that the terrorists are going up to "checkpoint charlie" and when asked for their reasons for coming there, they say "I'm a terrorist, want to pass through on my way to North America". Then of course they get shot dead. Instead of getting visas for universities and flight schools and the such. That would be too easy. So lets just sit there and try to take on the never ending stream of tribal warriors that float over the mountains from a country of 180 million in Pakistan. This is a winning strategy.....

siloviki wrote:

Like to know wth the 'mission' is over there anyway?
Carve a utopian niche out of the world for all those Afghans that want Starbucks and HBO and Chevrolet? Fine let it go to a vote, then set up an autonomous "westernized" republic and let all those "liberal" Afghans live there and put the armies on the border to keep the "neanderthals" out, you know like that "great success" Israel. Not like the US etc haven't DRAWN UP BORDERS before...
Or is it to keep the bad men from coming here?
Oh well, this is working, we all know that the terrorists are going up to "checkpoint charlie" and when asked for their reasons for coming there, they say "I'm a terrorist, want to pass through on my way to North America". Then of course they get shot dead. Instead of getting visas for universities and flight schools and the such. That would be too easy. So lets just sit there and try to take on the never ending stream of tribal warriors that float over the mountains from a country of 180 million in Pakistan. This is a winning strategy.....

WTF ?

Yank Oliver wrote:

<quoted text>
WTF ?

You a little slow quickdraw?

siloviki wrote:

<quoted text>
You a little slow quickdraw?

Yeah there are a lot of morons who think they know what's up but can't even read on these forums let alone write.

I hasve kept on hearing about our "winning strategy" even as our losses increase.

This sounds a lot like the rhetoric surrounding prohibition claiming "sucess," even though addiction rates keep climbing and those of ever younger ages begin to use.

Just as america claims victory in Iraq.

There are too any believing morons in this country who couldn't think there way out of a walk in closet. We will come away from there with only losses to show for our efforts, that is very evident.

budoracle wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah there are a lot of morons who think they know what's up but can't even read on these forums let alone write.
I hasve kept on hearing about our "winning strategy" even as our losses increase.
This sounds a lot like the rhetoric surrounding prohibition claiming "sucess," even though addiction rates keep climbing and those of ever younger ages begin to use.
Just as america claims victory in Iraq.
There are too any believing morons in this country who couldn't think there way out of a walk in closet. We will come away from there with only losses to show for our efforts, that is very evident.

WOG lover!

Yank Oliver wrote:

<quoted text>
WOG lover!

Klaus you just got called a wog lover....

How shall you sleep tonight?

Meanwhile more of our soldiers have died propping up Hamid's "gov't of Kabul" and one of the most corrupt gov'ts on earth, including fine robe Hamid's brother, who is a kingpin of the heroin market.

How much grease you want to think is in our gov'ts pockets as they keep squirting out the diarrhea about "law an order and democratic ideals"?

Hamid Karzai the best corrupt gov't that money can buy. Not the gov'ts money, ours....

President of Kabul.

Sure there's alot of questions to be asked of the Afghan mission, that's fair.

But yesterday seeing the 8 Brit soldiers being drivne through a town with people now questining why are 18 ys being sent to A-Stan etc..

First of all, those guys signed up for the military, just like any of our guys. It's an occupation they wanted to do.

Secondly, we had 45,000+ die in WW2. They fought and we were proud of them then. Nowadays, my age group, the generation of today and even some of the "older folks" don't seem to get that a military sign up means your govt may ask you to go. Soldiers don't seem to have the prob, it's everyone else making a fuss.

It isn't just A-Stan, it's "oh, al-qaeda really isn't a big deal", "radical islamists are not that threathening" "9/11 is a farce" etc etc..

siloviki wrote:

<quoted text>
Klaus you just got called a wog lover....
How shall you sleep tonight?
Meanwhile more of our soldiers have died propping up Hamid's "gov't of Kabul" and one of the most corrupt gov'ts on earth, including fine robe Hamid's brother, who is a kingpin of the heroin market.
How much grease you want to think is in our gov'ts pockets as they keep squirting out the diarrhea about "law an order and democratic ideals"?
Hamid Karzai the best corrupt gov't that money can buy. Not the gov'ts money, ours....
President of Kabul.

You two bohunk commies should go back to where you came from. Canada for Canadians.

Naturally Wired wrote:

Sure there's alot of questions to be asked of the Afghan mission, that's fair.
But yesterday seeing the 8 Brit soldiers being drivne through a town with people now questining why are 18 ys being sent to A-Stan etc..
First of all, those guys signed up for the military, just like any of our guys. It's an occupation they wanted to do.
Secondly, we had 45,000+ die in WW2. They fought and we were proud of them then. Nowadays, my age group, the generation of today and even some of the "older folks" don't seem to get that a military sign up means your govt may ask you to go. Soldiers don't seem to have the prob, it's everyone else making a fuss.
It isn't just A-Stan, it's "oh, al-qaeda really isn't a big deal", "radical islamists are not that threathening" "9/11 is a farce" etc etc..

I don't have a problem with soldiers, I have a major problem with pasty assed pantywaists in gov't "appropriating" monies to whatever crony kickback pal there is, then getting up and lying to our faces about who and what they really support.

The Balkans war had our own military questioning our gov't and our "allies" particularly the United States and their gov't.

Then again the military is paid to shut up and do whatever the homos in Ottawa want and to let them spin their fairytales....

Yank Oliver wrote:

<quoted text>
You two bohunk commies should go back to where you came from. Canada for Canadians.

Meh, not worth the sweat off my middle left typing finger.....

SILOVIKI...Soooooooooooooooo (-) Negative,all the time.....Budoracle....you's ''BALANCE'' It out,here,tooooooooooo booooot!!..here.....eh...yada u....WE,Us 3 ,..choose to see ..all the sides,and Positive (+)...too!!....eh...yada u..

siloviki wrote:

<quoted text>
Meh, not worth the sweat off my middle left typing finger.....

Another western Canadian whiner.

siloviki wrote:

Like to know wth the 'mission' is over there anyway?
Carve a utopian niche out of the world for all those Afghans that want Starbucks and HBO and Chevrolet? Fine let it go to a vote, then set up an autonomous "westernized" republic and let all those "liberal" Afghans live there and put the armies on the border to keep the "neanderthals" out, you know like that "great success" Israel. Not like the US etc haven't DRAWN UP BORDERS before...
Or is it to keep the bad men from coming here?
Oh well, this is working, we all know that the terrorists are going up to "checkpoint charlie" and when asked for their reasons for coming there, they say "I'm a terrorist, want to pass through on my way to North America". Then of course they get shot dead. Instead of getting visas for universities and flight schools and the such. That would be too easy. So lets just sit there and try to take on the never ending stream of tribal warriors that float over the mountains from a country of 180 million in Pakistan. This is a winning strategy.....

You have a point.
It would probably be better just to nuke the whole damn area.
Problem solved.

siloviki wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't have a problem with soldiers, I have a major problem with pasty assed pantywaists in gov't "appropriating" monies to whatever crony kickback pal there is, then getting up and lying to our faces about who and what they really support.
The Balkans war had our own military questioning our gov't and our "allies" particularly the United States and their gov't.
Then again the military is paid to shut up and do whatever the homos in Ottawa want and to let them spin their fairytales....

A general like Rick Hillier spoke his mind. Then again, they say it's normal for them to have short terms but I think in a time like A-Stan Hillier told it like it was, demanded new equipment and tried really hard to remind Cdns we have a small dedicated group of people.

I don't see why our military has it is in terms of personnel numbers can't be equipped with the best. Ship building creates jobs etc etc..but of course the govt even gave the Navistar truck contract to Navistar Texas insted of Chatham Ont.

And if Iggy and the libs get in, because of a deficit, I'll seriously bet you $100 that the military will get picked on first in cutbacks.

Naturally Wired wrote:

<quoted text>
A general like Rick Hillier spoke his mind. Then again, they say it's normal for them to have short terms but I think in a time like A-Stan Hillier told it like it was, demanded new equipment and tried really hard to remind Cdns we have a small dedicated group of people.
I don't see why our military has it is in terms of personnel numbers can't be equipped with the best. Ship building creates jobs etc etc..but of course the govt even gave the Navistar truck contract to Navistar Texas insted of Chatham Ont.
And if Iggy and the libs get in, because of a deficit, I'll seriously bet you $100 that the military will get picked on first in cutbacks.

You got that right! Iggy and the Libscum suck puss!