UK aid worker may have been killed by US forces

[Happy Face 29]

British aid worker Linda Norgrove may have been accidentally killed by US forces during a rescue mission in Afghanistan, David Cameron has said.

 

International forces there originally said the 36-year-old died on Friday when one of her captors detonated a suicide vest.

 

But the prime minister said new details had come to light suggesting her death may have resulted from a US grenade.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11514210

 

Even as I watched the news yesterday morning, telling me it was her captors that set off an exploding vest I said aloud, it was a blitz, more important to kill the 'insurgents' than rescue the victim.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

Should have just left her with the so called 'insurgents'; she would be better off there than in this so called 'democracy' we live in. I would go and live there myself but my Xbox live subscription runs till next january.

[Guest alex]

I wonder what the fuck these aid workers think they're doing in these places in the first place tbh.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

Same with the 'humanitarians' aboard the disastrous flotilla. Why not just send the aid via the UN? Did they think they would be greeted at the blockade with milk and cookies?

[Guest alex]

British aid worker Linda Norgrove may have been accidentally killed by US forces during a rescue mission in Afghanistan, David Cameron has said.

 

International forces there originally said the 36-year-old died on Friday when one of her captors detonated a suicide vest.

 

But the prime minister said new details had come to light suggesting her death may have resulted from a US grenade.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11514210

 

Even as I watched the news yesterday morning, telling me it was her captors that set off an exploding vest I said aloud, it was a blitz, more important to kill the 'insurgents' than rescue the victim.

I'm as cynical as they come but I can't see how the US would profit in anyway from not making the success of the rescue the first priority here.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

You've just been brainwashed by the corporate media mannnn

 

 

It's becoming more and more obvious that HF is a wum and seeks to antagonize the likes of Leazes with these posts. The way he writes 'insurgents', as though the people who kidnapped a female aid worker and strapped an explosive vest to her were just some innocent lowly farmers who were driven to these actions by the West, it's laughable. Why this incident is so outrageous I have no idea, typical namby pamby generation getting worked up about these neglible - though unfortunate - incidents. You ought to read about Allied war crimes in WW2, it is an inevitable consequence of putting men in these circumstances.

Edited October 11, 2010 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt

[LeazesMag 0]

You've just been brainwashed by the corporate media mannnn

 

 

It's becoming more and more obvious that HF is a wum and seeks to antagonize the likes of Leazes with these posts. The way he writes 'insurgents', as though the people who kidnapped a female aid worker and strapped an explosive vest to her were just some innocent lowly farmers who were driven to these actions by the West, it's laughable. Why this incident is so outrageous I have no idea, typical namby pamby generation getting worked up about these neglible - though unfortunate - incidents. You ought to read about Allied war crimes in WW2, it is an inevitable consequence of putting men in these circumstances.

 

I don't think HF is a WUM, and he doesn't bother me, I just feel sorry for the naive in our midst. He might be a Mohammed though. Shame about the aid worker, in fact its tragic, but these people are also victims of the namby pamby generation too, who have little idea of the reality of human nature. She may well have thought she would be dealing with intelligent, potentially civilised people who would listen to her point of view and drop their guns when they realised she was right.

 

Fact is, its the western educated muslims who should be going home to their caves and educating the primitive in their homelands, but instead they leave it to us and preach hatred towards us instead. Deep down, they want us to pray to Allah 5 times a day just like they do, and they will be more than happy to see us dead if we don't.

[NJS 4386]

Sounds to me like LM's "heroic" special forces turned out to be incompetent killers - nothing to choose between them and the kidnappers.

 

Agree the lass was daft for going there though.

[Happy Face 29]

British aid worker Linda Norgrove may have been accidentally killed by US forces during a rescue mission in Afghanistan, David Cameron has said.

 

International forces there originally said the 36-year-old died on Friday when one of her captors detonated a suicide vest.

 

But the prime minister said new details had come to light suggesting her death may have resulted from a US grenade.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11514210

 

Even as I watched the news yesterday morning, telling me it was her captors that set off an exploding vest I said aloud, it was a blitz, more important to kill the 'insurgents' than rescue the victim.

I'm as cynical as they come but I can't see how the US would profit in anyway from not making the success of the rescue the first priority here.

 

I see it the same way I see the drone strikes on weddings, funerals, family homes etc. If there's any innocent victims that's just the way it is, taking out the enemy is the priority as I see it. Whether that's the case or not, my first cynical thought when the original story came out was that it was a cover up, and it seems to have been the right instinct in this case.

[LeazesMag 0]

Sounds to me like LM's "heroic" special forces turned out to be incompetent killers - nothing to choose between them and the kidnappers.

 

Agree the lass was daft for going there though.

 

the Delta Force aren't the SAS mate. Mind, if she had been a bloke there is every likeliehool that the "civilised" peaceful locals may have kidnapped and beheaded her instead.

 

Still tragic though. She should never have gone in the first place. Who exactly made her think it wouldn't happen to her I wonder ?

[LeazesMag 0]

British aid worker Linda Norgrove may have been accidentally killed by US forces during a rescue mission in Afghanistan, David Cameron has said.

 

International forces there originally said the 36-year-old died on Friday when one of her captors detonated a suicide vest.

 

But the prime minister said new details had come to light suggesting her death may have resulted from a US grenade.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11514210

 

Even as I watched the news yesterday morning, telling me it was her captors that set off an exploding vest I said aloud, it was a blitz, more important to kill the 'insurgents' than rescue the victim.

I'm as cynical as they come but I can't see how the US would profit in anyway from not making the success of the rescue the first priority here.

 

I see it the same way I see the drone strikes on weddings, funerals, family homes etc. If there's any innocent victims that's just the way it is, taking out the enemy is the priority as I see it. Whether that's the case or not, my first cynical thought when the original story came out was that it was a cover up, and it seems to have been the right instinct in this case.

 

why do I get the feeling with you, that you think troops should let someone take the first shot at them before they are allowed to fire back

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

HF shouts at the news. That puts him in the same demographic as Fox viewers and Daily Mail subscribers. The sad thing is he doesn't see that he is as brainwashed as them. He needs to get into the real world and get off his games consoles.

[Monkeys Fist 42449]

Former SAS member who took part in the storming of the Iranian Embassy on C4 news questioning the use of 'lethal' grenades in a hostage rescue.

He asked why pyro, flash bangs etc weren't used instead.

[Happy Face 29]

British aid worker Linda Norgrove may have been accidentally killed by US forces during a rescue mission in Afghanistan, David Cameron has said.

 

International forces there originally said the 36-year-old died on Friday when one of her captors detonated a suicide vest.

 

But the prime minister said new details had come to light suggesting her death may have resulted from a US grenade.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11514210

 

Even as I watched the news yesterday morning, telling me it was her captors that set off an exploding vest I said aloud, it was a blitz, more important to kill the 'insurgents' than rescue the victim.

I'm as cynical as they come but I can't see how the US would profit in anyway from not making the success of the rescue the first priority here.

 

I see it the same way I see the drone strikes on weddings, funerals, family homes etc. If there's any innocent victims that's just the way it is, taking out the enemy is the priority as I see it. Whether that's the case or not, my first cynical thought when the original story came out was that it was a cover up, and it seems to have been the right instinct in this case.

 

why do I get the feeling with you, that you think troops should let someone take the first shot at them before they are allowed to fire back

 

Funnily enough that's how international law says it should be....the Bush doctrine shit all over that.

[LeazesMag 0]

British aid worker Linda Norgrove may have been accidentally killed by US forces during a rescue mission in Afghanistan, David Cameron has said.

 

International forces there originally said the 36-year-old died on Friday when one of her captors detonated a suicide vest.

 

But the prime minister said new details had come to light suggesting her death may have resulted from a US grenade.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11514210

 

Even as I watched the news yesterday morning, telling me it was her captors that set off an exploding vest I said aloud, it was a blitz, more important to kill the 'insurgents' than rescue the victim.

I'm as cynical as they come but I can't see how the US would profit in anyway from not making the success of the rescue the first priority here.

 

I see it the same way I see the drone strikes on weddings, funerals, family homes etc. If there's any innocent victims that's just the way it is, taking out the enemy is the priority as I see it. Whether that's the case or not, my first cynical thought when the original story came out was that it was a cover up, and it seems to have been the right instinct in this case.

 

why do I get the feeling with you, that you think troops should let someone take the first shot at them before they are allowed to fire back

 

Funnily enough that's how international law says it should be....the Bush doctrine shit all over that.

 

As I thought. You aren't in the real world

 

Do you fancy letting someone shoot at you before you fire back at them ? And THAT is fuck all to do with Bush - whatever your illogical anti-american/west views tell you.

[LeazesMag 0]

HF shouts at the news. That puts him in the same demographic as Fox viewers and Daily Mail subscribers. The sad thing is he doesn't see that he is as brainwashed as them . He needs to get into the real world and get off his games consoles.

 

quite.

[Happy Face 29]

British aid worker Linda Norgrove may have been accidentally killed by US forces during a rescue mission in Afghanistan, David Cameron has said.

 

International forces there originally said the 36-year-old died on Friday when one of her captors detonated a suicide vest.

 

But the prime minister said new details had come to light suggesting her death may have resulted from a US grenade.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11514210

 

Even as I watched the news yesterday morning, telling me it was her captors that set off an exploding vest I said aloud, it was a blitz, more important to kill the 'insurgents' than rescue the victim.

I'm as cynical as they come but I can't see how the US would profit in anyway from not making the success of the rescue the first priority here.

 

I see it the same way I see the drone strikes on weddings, funerals, family homes etc. If there's any innocent victims that's just the way it is, taking out the enemy is the priority as I see it. Whether that's the case or not, my first cynical thought when the original story came out was that it was a cover up, and it seems to have been the right instinct in this case.

 

why do I get the feeling with you, that you think troops should let someone take the first shot at them before they are allowed to fire back

 

Funnily enough that's how international law says it should be....the Bush doctrine shit all over that.

 

As I thought. You aren't in the real world

 

Do you fancy letting someone shoot at you before you fire back at them ? And THAT is fuck all to do with Bush - whatever your illogical anti-american/west views tell you.

 

 

Aye, if taliban were roaming the streets of newcastle with high powered weapons shooting Brits you'd argue they have the right to protect themselves and their way of live would you?

 

Edited October 11, 2010 by Happy Face

[LeazesMag 0]

British aid worker Linda Norgrove may have been accidentally killed by US forces during a rescue mission in Afghanistan, David Cameron has said.

 

International forces there originally said the 36-year-old died on Friday when one of her captors detonated a suicide vest.

 

But the prime minister said new details had come to light suggesting her death may have resulted from a US grenade.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11514210

 

Even as I watched the news yesterday morning, telling me it was her captors that set off an exploding vest I said aloud, it was a blitz, more important to kill the 'insurgents' than rescue the victim.

I'm as cynical as they come but I can't see how the US would profit in anyway from not making the success of the rescue the first priority here.

 

I see it the same way I see the drone strikes on weddings, funerals, family homes etc. If there's any innocent victims that's just the way it is, taking out the enemy is the priority as I see it. Whether that's the case or not, my first cynical thought when the original story came out was that it was a cover up, and it seems to have been the right instinct in this case.

 

why do I get the feeling with you, that you think troops should let someone take the first shot at them before they are allowed to fire back

 

Funnily enough that's how international law says it should be....the Bush doctrine shit all over that.

 

As I thought. You aren't in the real world

 

Do you fancy letting someone shoot at you before you fire back at them ? And THAT is fuck all to do with Bush - whatever your illogical anti-american/west views tell you.

 

 

Aye, if taliban were roaming the streets of newcastle with high powered weapons shooting Brits you'd argue they have the right to protect themselves and their way of live would you?

 

 

and you would let them ? All in the name of defending themselves against the evil infidels, right

[Meenzer 15529]

If anything like this ever happened in Newcastle, at least Leazes could reasonably claim he lives in the real world for once.

[Happy Face 29]

British aid worker Linda Norgrove may have been accidentally killed by US forces during a rescue mission in Afghanistan, David Cameron has said.

 

International forces there originally said the 36-year-old died on Friday when one of her captors detonated a suicide vest.

 

But the prime minister said new details had come to light suggesting her death may have resulted from a US grenade.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11514210

 

Even as I watched the news yesterday morning, telling me it was her captors that set off an exploding vest I said aloud, it was a blitz, more important to kill the 'insurgents' than rescue the victim.

I'm as cynical as they come but I can't see how the US would profit in anyway from not making the success of the rescue the first priority here.

 

I see it the same way I see the drone strikes on weddings, funerals, family homes etc. If there's any innocent victims that's just the way it is, taking out the enemy is the priority as I see it. Whether that's the case or not, my first cynical thought when the original story came out was that it was a cover up, and it seems to have been the right instinct in this case.

 

why do I get the feeling with you, that you think troops should let someone take the first shot at them before they are allowed to fire back

 

Funnily enough that's how international law says it should be....the Bush doctrine shit all over that.

 

As I thought. You aren't in the real world

 

Do you fancy letting someone shoot at you before you fire back at them ? And THAT is fuck all to do with Bush - whatever your illogical anti-american/west views tell you.

 

 

Aye, if taliban were roaming the streets of newcastle with high powered weapons shooting Brits you'd argue they have the right to protect themselves and their way of live would you?

 

 

and you would let them ? All in the name of defending themselves against the evil infidels, right

 

No.

 

That's the point.

 

Be consistent.

 

I know you believe you're better than them, that they're all backwards and live in caves and should submit to white rule so consistency doesn't apply to your way of thinking.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

Happy Face would have had a happy face if the world had left the Afghan people to the oppressive and death obsessed rule of Taliban and Al Quaeda forces as he has previously advocated.

 

The real tragedy of these aid worker deaths is that they have all been very attractive middle class graduates, think of that poor bloke who was engaged to the last woman who was killed by the Taliban with the rest of her group. She was smoking hot. It is a noble pursuit but I don't know what would motivate you to go there if you were engaged with a prosperous life ahead of you.

 

If Happy Face was interested in a proper critique of the conflict he would read beyond his beloved Juan Cer and get a sense of perspective in the real world. Unfortunate and unlawful deaths have occurred in every conflict at the hands of both forces. It is the reality of war. Progress has been made with regard to legal recourse for victims but it is still not at an acceptable level if we lived in an ideal world. We don't unfortunately.

 

As for the old flotilla there were women who brought children on some of the boats, absolutely mental.

[Happy Face 29]

If Happy Face was interested in a proper critique of the conflict he would read beyond his beloved Juan Cer and get a sense of perspective in the real world.

 

Recommend something please. I'd honestly love to read some persuasive arguments that suggest we're going about things the right way.

[Monkeys Fist 42449]

If anything like this ever happened in Newcastle, at least Leazes could reasonably claim he lives in the real world for once.

Whilst running at them, armed with a kebab knife, shouting " Banzaiiiiii for the Shepherds!" ?

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

If Happy Face was interested in a proper critique of the conflict he would read beyond his beloved Juan Cer and get a sense of perspective in the real world.

 

Recommend something please. I'd honestly love to read some persuasive arguments that suggest we're going about things the right way.

 

Sure, start with www.google.com (that one's for alex)

 

 

I wasn't suggesting there are any persuasive arguments of that nature, just that citing individual deaths that happen in contentious circumstances is merely highlighting the inevitable consequences of any conflict, and therefore pointless. A proper critique of the mission in Afghanistan would focus on - to give a recent example - the snail-paced progress between the last two elections or the absolute confusion of Obama's policies toward the conflict. There are any number of things on a strategic level that have been inept at best, perhaps the biggest disaster was trying to mount the Iraq invasion in the midst of this mission; a much better job could have been done had that not been the case although it would have been no guarantee.

The Afghan mission is doomed to failure now in light of the clamour for the withdrawal of troops in most of the nations involved. The drone strikes will continue, the Pakistani government seemingly is ok with them despite their public protestations. I can only hope the Karzai government coalesces with the other elements in the country and provides something approaching stability once NATO forces have mostly left. They may be endemically corrupt (Karzai et al) but that is what happens in failed states. The preeminent malady of the effort has been incompetence from the get go. At least - to end on a positive - the Taliban and Al Quaeda have been weakened significantly.

Edited October 11, 2010 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt

[AgentAxeman 178]

stupid fuckin bint shouldnt have been there in the 1st place. the middle of a war zone is no place for civies (of both sides).

 

absolutely no surprise whatsoever that the yanks just blew the shit out of everything without checking the situation 1st. rightly or wrongly, its what they do.