Child soldiers trained by the Taliban to kill British soldiers

[NJmaverick]

The pictures come from a video filmed at an al-Qaeda training camp in Pakistan, where Taliban warlords are turning boys as young as FIVE into trained killers. Recorded only weeks ago, it captures a dozen nervous-looking boys in camouflage uniforms with headbands which say: There is no God but Allah.

The boy soldiers stand in line before being handed rifles and taught to fire rocket-propelled grenades.

They spend their day being brainwashed to kill their Jihad training caught on film as part of an al-Qaeda recruitment drive.

The bewildered children, barely old enough to go to school, are forced to stand in circles stretching and exercising to try to give them strength to carry heavy ammunition.

They live in tents and say prayers before sleeping with weapons lying next to them. When their training is complete the children are filmed walking over the Pakistan-Afghanistan border right into a warzone.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2008/08/02/child-soldiers-trained-by-the-taliban-to-kill-british-soldiers-115875-20681500/


Taliban STILL Using Child Soldiers
leave a comment »

Remember this?

It’s still going on – this, from CanWest News Service:

A 12-year-old boy caught in the act Friday as he put a homemade bomb under a road in the volatile Zhari District grabbed a baby as a human shield to protect himself from attack from the United States helicopter that spotted him.

The incident, in an area where U.S. forces operate under Canadian command, appears to be part of a Taliban strategy to use youngsters as lookouts or human shields, or to carry out attacks, because they know NATO rules of engagement make troops extremely reluctant to open fire in such situations.

There have been 29 incidents in which children have helped commit attacks or otherwise abetted the Taliban in Afghanistan’s four southern provinces since March, according to a document provided by the Canadian military. Eight of the incidents have taken place this month.

Among them were three blasts in Kandahar in the past few weeks in which as many as 12 Afghan children were blown up as they were being taught how to make or place improvised explosive devices – the greatest killer of coalition troops in Afghanistan.

http://milnewsca.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/taliban-child-soldiers-2/

[Enrique]

1. especially relevant because of the accusations of civilian deaths

right?

:eyes:

[StarfarerBill]

2. Heaven forfend we should ever believe the word of locals over the Pentagon...

...because the Pentagon never lies, right?

:puke:

[NJmaverick]

18. Your hatred is duly noted, as is the odd fact that you blindly believe

everything the corrupt Afghanistan government tells you. Your bias toward our government has clouded your judgment.

[StarfarerBill]

35. Facts matter, as you like to say.

There is no hatred here. The photo gallery I posted that you obviously took such offense to was put together by the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan, women who lived under the Taliban and oppose them more than you and I ever will...but who also oppose a foreign occupation and -imposed war that is killing many of their people.

So yes, I will take the word of RAWA, the UN, and even the Afghan government when it speaks the truth. If you prefer the lies of the Pentagon, that's your prerogative. In all likelihood, only you can change your own mind when you finally recognize the facts...hopefully before it's too late.

[Hannah Bell]

140. "the corrupt Afghanistan government" = US-picked & backed.

[jbnow]

27. Whatever age those killed were and terrorist or not if they

shot them handcuffed or even unarmed, rounded up and not fighting it would be no less a crime.
This issue of children being trained wouldn't make that legal.

If kids are being trained it would be heartbreaking for them and for having to imagine any troop there having to view even children as potential enemies.

[bridgit]

138. You are saying the Pentagon never speaks the truth, right? Only lies?

[Echo In Light]

10. Yes, it's just that obvious

[rug]

15. The 2 year old dateline doesn't help.

[NJmaverick]

19. You have evidence that they have stopped

or are you just extending the enemy trust you will not extend to our own troops?

[rug]

23. I haven't seen evidence that they started.

And the operations there have earned anything but trust.

[FreakinDJ]

33. that picture certainly disagrees with you

"Its all a CIA cover up" - right

:spank::spank::spank::spank::spank:

[rug]

38. A 2 year old photo from a rw British rag?

If it was from the NY Post the caption would say they were traing to kill American soldiers.

I am never disappointed at the lengths war supporters go to in the excuse of civilian and child deaths.

[FreakinDJ]

41. So the kids shooting at our troops are what - 7 yrs old now

kind of making the case for him arn't you

[rug]

48. Yes, they are 7 years old. The guy in Detroit started out practicing with his diapers.

[NJmaverick]

58. FACTS MATTER- There are TWO articls posted

[rug]

63. Yes, and the second one is devoted to Canadian military affairs.

The links there are hilarious.

What did you do, google "Taliban child terrorists"?

[NJmaverick]

82. Have you read the UN report on Taliban Child fighters?

[rug]

141. No, why don't you post a link?

[MNDemNY]

73. Again you seem to channel the last administration.

:+ :+ Will you be quoting Dick Cheney next?

[FreakinDJ]

74. Your arguement lacks any credibility

lets just call everyone we don't like - "Nazis"

grow up

[MNDemNY]

95. Nazi's??

You are the only one using that term. You should" grow up" A dead clown for you.:+

[NJmaverick]

83. you have their tactics down pat

[MNDemNY]

96. And you, their rhetoric and philosophy.

:+ :P

[LeftishBrit]

130. Actually the Mirror is not RW, but it is quite unreliable

[NJmaverick]

57. You haven't "seen" evdence of anything but you have been cherry picking reports

to suit your agenda.

[rug]

65. I didn't pick a two year old cherry.

[TicketyBoo]

132. Exaggeration

doesn't help your argument. August of 2008 does not two years make.

[FreakinDJ]

12. Many brothers from Vietnam had nightmares for the rest of their lives

as I am sure our troops in Afghanistan will surely have to.

Age don't matter when they are holding a gun or a bomb.

Sorry those are the cold cruel facts

Where is the Outrage for the spineless bastards that are using these children.

[Echo In Light]

16. Currently in use re US forces killing innocent people w/our tax $

[FreakinDJ]

39. clever - but the jury of pubic opinion is not in yet

I'll wait until more facts are known before passing final judgement

I'm not in the "Rush to Hate our Troops" camp

[Echo In Light]

44. I don't "hate" troops in general, and it only seems "clever" for those it's not obvious to.

[FreakinDJ]

75. Notice the GLARING DISCREPANCY in the Original article

"The student had their hands tied behind their backs"

"Some of the students still had school books in their lap"

These 2 things certainly conflict with any sort of logic. However it very evident the second quotes was designed for the maximum effect of spreading dissent towards our troops and the US efforts in Afghanistan.

Anyone who can't see that is mentally deficient or Lying

[howard112211]

45. Your point is moot. America is the agressor in this illegal war as it was in Vietnam.

Sure, some of the tactics the enemy resorts to constitute warcrimes. However, the agressor of an illegal war is not in the position
to decry warcrimes of the defending side.

[FreakinDJ]

72. Howard - they attacked on 911 - remember

or are you still preaching the "Controled Demolition Theory"

[MNDemNY]

108. The taliban???

man, you are clueless.

[winyanstaz]

127. umm the Afghanistan's attacked on on 9-11>????

or are you saying the Afghanistan kids attacked us on 9-11:P
Damned those child terrorists! How dare they try to defend their country!

[NJmaverick]

84. Sad but true, and who would let those monsters that use children and send them to their deaths

rule the nation?

[NJmaverick]

22. Yes very relvent in light of the claims that school children rather than fighters

were killed. FACTS MATTER (no matter how many times you roll your eyes)

[Enrique]

67. they could be fighters

or they could be schoolchildren.

What if it's schoolchildren, mav?

[NJmaverick]

89. Then investigations will determine that and action taken. However

it's not right to let people think they are school children just because of their age. Everyone needs ALL the FACTS before passing judgment

[MNDemNY]

109. And you have ALL the facts??

clueless war-mongering propaganda is what you have.That is all.

[NJmaverick]

118. What I know is you are working hard to HIDE the facts with your unreccs

[MNDemNY]

120. I function I never use??

paranoia may destroy ya!!!dead clown.:+ Back into your "safe"!! House is on.

[NJmaverick]

122. yeah those unrecs trying to hide the TRUTH

just magically appeared:eyes:

[MNDemNY]

135. Lot's of folks here seem to discount your war-mongering.

I am among them, but I do not use the feature. Back into your safe, now.:+ :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[NJmaverick]

142. More like a lot of folks with an agenda want to hide the truth about the child fighters

because it ruins their dishonest meme about blood thirsty US soldiers murdering civilians.

[Name removed]

144. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NJmaverick]

146. People like you see honesty and integrity as some sort of mental illness

let me tell you what I think of that :puke:


It was cute when you pulled this crap on Bush and the GOP, it's not so cute anymore

[MNDemNY]

147. Now you turn to blatant defense of "Bush and the GOP"??

Is the war mongering "cuter" coming from the likes of you??WOW your delusions seem to be taking their toll. Time to get back on the meds, maybe??:crazy: :rofl: :+

[MNDemNY]

167. .

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

[rug]

3. The Mirror?

Lets kill them in childhood before they hit puberty.

[NJmaverick]

86. You can also read the UN report on this topic

[Don Caballero]

4. Proves my initial thoughts that the "schoolchildren" killed by Coalition forces

are in fact Taliban posing as such. The Taliban and Al Qaeda understands how to win the hearts and minds of the people and how to quell support of the Americans and British.

[Enrique]

6. then I guess there's no need to investigate

if this story "proves" your theory.

[G_j]

7. no, it doesn't prove that at all

where do you get that?
It presents a possibility, but nobody has stated such a thing in any of the reports.

[Don Caballero]

8. I look at all possibilities before a conclusion is reached

Red flags sprouted quickly on my initial reading of the story. American troops rounding up children and executing them? That did not make sense to me at all. I then remembered that the Taliban are notorious for killing non combatants and blaming the Coalition forces to whip up fervor.

[G_j]

17. you might look into the definition of "prove" nt

[NJmaverick]

20. It's easy to claim their children soldiers are just school children

it's not like anyone is checking records or anything like that.

[Forkboy]

32. It's easy to claim they're taliban, too.

it's not like anyone is checking records or anything like that.

[MNDemNY]

105. He knows it for a "fact". just ask him.

:rofl: :rofl: (he might even have 'proof" in his "man sized safe" !!)

[MNDemNY]

104. Almost as easy as the likes of you claiming "for a fact" that they are trained soldiers.

:+ Do you have a "man sized safe" in your bedroom?? Just askin'!:rofl:

[Name removed]

200. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[depakid]

5. Long time ago? -someone wrote:

When first under fire an' you're wishful to duck,
Don't look nor take 'eed at the man that is struck,
Be thankful you're livin', and trust to your luck
And march to your front like a soldier.
Front, front, front like a soldier . . .

When 'arf of your bullets fly wide in the ditch,
Don't call your Martini a cross-eyed old bitch;
She's human as you are -- you treat her as sich,
An' she'll fight for the young British soldier.
Fight, fight, fight for the soldier . . .

When shakin' their bustles like ladies so fine,
The guns o' the enemy wheel into line,
Shoot low at the limbers an' don't mind the shine,
For noise never startles the soldier.
Start-, start-, startles the soldier . . .

If your officer's dead and the sergeants look white,
Remember it's ruin to run from a fight:
So take open order, lie down, and sit tight,
And wait for supports like a soldier.
Wait, wait, wait like a soldier . . .

When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.
Go, go, go like a soldier....

[stray cat]

9. this is public education in some countries - and you are no less dead when a kid kills you

[independentpiney]

11. I've been reamed for making that point on DU before

Some here seem to think if a child fires a weapon it shoots cotton balls.

[LeftishBrit]

133. True but neither our troops, nor so many children, would be dead if we weren't there

[Mari333]

13. the soldiers need to leave.

problem solved.

[FreakinDJ]

14. Where is the Outrage for the spineless bastards that are using these children.

Oh its the troops fault they use children to hide behind

Sorry I just don't buy it

[NJmaverick]

21. At DU the outrage specialists save their anger for our troops

[G_j]

24. just show us any evidence, or even suggestion from the reports

that the students killed were Taliban.

[NJmaverick]

30. Show proof, beyond the word of a corrupt government or the Taliban

that they were. You are the one making the slanderous accusations, it's your moral obligation to have sound proof to support your claims.

[G_j]

34. where did I make any accusations?

the story you posted is almost two years old.

[NJmaverick]

36. Bullshit, you run an article making an accusation you are making the accusation

plus there are TWO articles and you have ZERO proof they have stopped or that they were school children.

[G_j]

37. article?

what article? I didn't know I posted any articles making accusations on this subject.

news to me...

[independentpiney]

52. I was looking for evidence of a university in that village

those young men weren't attending the local elementary school,unless they're all Jethro Bodines.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[howard112211]

40. Since the Afghanis are fighting spineless cowards that use airstrikes...

... I would not place them on the first ranks with regards to cowardice.

[NJmaverick]

43. Our troops are- "spineless cowards"?

:wow:

[howard112211]

46. you must have misunderstood me. i am not referring to "our troops" in particular.

i am referring to America as the aggressor in this illegal war, which relies on unmanned drones and airstrikes as primary means of conducting warfare.

the tactics of a "spineless coward" if you like.

[NJmaverick]

50. No I heard you right

what do you think of the bravery involved in the use of IEDs?

[howard112211]

54. Your point is moot. America is the aggressor in this illegal war.

The enemy follows the logic of asymmetric warfare.

But from an objective point of view: planting a bomb is more dangerous than stirring an unmanned drone with a playstation joypad.

[NJmaverick]

56. Al Qeada admitted to 911 and the Taliban ruling Afghanistan refused to turn them over to us

that makes this a legal war.


Sounds like you just rooting for the other side, with your comments.

[howard112211]

59. ...

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2009/12/did-us-fail-to-provide-evidence-of-bin.html
http://www.natural-person.ca/pdf/Illegal_War_In_Afghanistan.PDF


edit: I'm checking out now. I have other work to do.

[NJmaverick]

151. I think Bush should have tried negotiation first but their offer was weak

and I can't say it was a wrong or illegal to play the game, just it would have been wiser to do so.

[G_j]

61. oh boy

now somebody is going to have to supply you with links to the stories that show the Taliban offered to turn over OBL.
You are wasting our time.

[MNDemNY]

107. That one has his own "facts".

They are kept in his "man sized safe"!:rofl: :rofl:

[NJmaverick]

148. Really the Taliban offered to turn them over no strings attached and "we' turned them down

:eyes:

[Echo In Light]

66. Dead wrong

[NJmaverick]

149. wrong

[Echo In Light]

201. Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

"Taliban demand evidence of Bin Laden's guilt:"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5

On the War in Afghanistan
Noam Chomsky interviewed by Stephen R. Shalom
ZNet, January 2002

Shalom: You've drawn attention to the fact that the United States dismissed Taliban offers to turn over bin Laden to a third party for trial. Clearly the U.S. sought nothing less than war. But that doesn't show that there were genuinely peaceful alternatives to war. If the Taliban had given up bin Laden, it probably would have been related to the fact that Washington moved a massive military force to Afghanistan's borders. While the U.S. rejection of peace overtures demonstrates Washington's preference for war, it does not show that the absence of coercive power would have succeeded in bringing the perpetrators of September 11 to justice.

Chomsky: Let's put that aside, and accept what is often the tacit assumption, that the U.S. had the right to resort to the threat or use of violence if there was no "genuine alternative," that is, no other way to compel the Taliban to turn over bin Laden and his associates. We now turn to the factual question: was there an alternative? Here too there is a preliminary problem -- on which I'm sure we agree, but it's perhaps worth bringing up anyway, just for clarity. There is a procedure for extradition. The first step is to present compelling evidence against the suspect. Here the situation is quite different from Haiti, or the contra war, or Operation Mongoose and subsequent terror against Cuba carried out from the U.S.; and many cases like it in which the evidence was clear and uncontroversial. Maybe the U.S. had compelling evidence about bin Laden, maybe not. But it flatly refused to present any evidence to the Taliban, in fact, refused even to request extradition, presumably because that would have suggested some limit on the imperial prerogative to act without any authority. The demand was: hand him over, or else; and if you do, we may leave you alone (overthrowing the Taliban regime was a late afterthought). No government, surely not the U.S., would ever accept such a demand, unless compelled to by the threat of extreme violence. There was, then, no alternative to such threat, if that was the demand, as it was. But that offers no justification for the threat of violence, or its implementation.

Putting aside that issue, would the Taliban have turned over bin Laden and others without the threat of violence? My own judgment is much like yours: highly unlikely. But we do not really know, since no efforts were made, and various Taliban offers, however ambiguous, were summarily dismissed. Similar questions arise for earlier years. But even if we are confident of our judgment, principle (2) arises. There are no consequences, unless we fill in, somehow, a missing chain of argument. That doesn't seem easy.

[MNDemNY]

106. When was "war " declared??

FAIL:+

[LeftishBrit]

134. It may be legal or illegal, but it's unwinnable and counterproductive

Like so many previous wars in Afghanistan.

If this war was going to achieve anything, it would have done so long ago.

And I don't root for the Taliban; in fact I'd be quite happy if all their leaders, and those of similar groups, dropped dead tomorrow; but this war is not solving anything.

[NJmaverick]

150. At this point the US is just seeking not to lose to badly

not to win it.

[malaise]

42. I left mine at the RW Jebus camps

that do the same to young American boys.,,crusade - kill for Jebus.
What's different with Falwell, Hagee, Robertson, Dobson etc. It's all the same to me - fuck all religion.

[FreakinDJ]

69. No difference - you fail to acknowledge they'er enemy combatants

regardless of age

[malaise]

94. What do you think you are

to them? Stop and think.

[bvar22]

98. I see two "spineless bastards that are using these children"...

...in a transparent attempt to justify the killing of other children in Afghanistan.

[winyanstaz]

131. dang right! How dare those people try to teach their kids to help defend their country!

Too bad they are not fetuses with those rifles......then the war mongering right wing sheeple wouldn't want to kill them so bad.
Those kid's biggest mistake was being born in a country we want to invade!

[NJmaverick]

26. I look at all the unreccs and have to think the FACTS/TRUTH are very unpopular

with the smear President Obama, the Dems and our troops crowd. They treat facts like vampires treat garlic

[Name removed]

29. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Electric Monk]

76. Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

[NJmaverick]

77. Nope OPs that accuse our troops of atrocities are very popular

while the FACT that the Taliban uses child fighters is very unpopular.

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MNDemNY]

111. The unrecs may well be pointing to the fact that most here on DU..

take exception to your war-mongering posts that seem to mirror that of the previous administration. Could be that a majority here think you would better serve this site if you got inside your "man sized safe" and closed the door , for a while.

[Odin2005]

116. The knee-jerk naive pacifists are like that.

I wonder how happy they will be if a Taliban-controlled Pakistan nukes Delhi.

[rug]

139. I see. Now we're in Afghanistan to prevent nuclear war.

How far do you stretch before you snap?

[MadHound]

47. Using any excuse, any justification that you can find

To somehow mitigate the fact that the US is killing innocent civilians, men, women and children.

Sad, truly sad how some posters around here are now cheering the death and destruction of innocents now that it's Obama's war.

[NJmaverick]

51. FACTS MATTER- To many people assume school age young men

must be school children and that is not always the case. Many of them are fighters that instantly turn into school children when killed

[MadHound]

64. Facts do matter, and frankly the fact that this story is two years old, coming from the MIrror

Really doesn't lend it much credence in my eyes or in the eyes of many thinking, perceptive adults. The facts are that the witnesses on the ground are simply confirming that the children killed were indeed school children is much more credible that this tripe that masquerades as news.

Also, the fact that you continue to push this, that you will go to such lengths to justify the killing of civilians says much about the state of your morals, your soul, none of it good.

Facts do matter, and sadly it doesn't look like you're in possession of them, rather just some hyped up propaganda from the the British equivalent of Faux news.

[NJmaverick]

90. You can also read the UN report on this topic

you can't be cherry picking data like you are doing. That's the same technique that convinced the US to attack Iraq

[lonestarnot]

49. Wasn't this also done in Viet Nam?

[rug]

55. It was. And the strongest defenders of it ended up voting for Nixon

or Wallace.

[lonestarnot]

60. Of course that makes sense to me.

[FreakinDJ]

70. Extensively -

[cali]

53. oh jeez. there is no justification for killing children. there is no justification

for this obscene war.

[NJmaverick]

68. Most battles don't have the luxury of checking IDs for age

plus bullets shot by teens are just as deadly as the ones shot be adults.

[cali]

88. Why is this happening? Because we're fucking there. We shouldn't be.

[arcadian]

62. sigline: read it

[NJmaverick]

78. FACTS MATTER

[arcadian]

79. The made up facts in your head matter?

They don't matter to me.

[NJmaverick]

81. You need a reality check- Google Taliban child fighter

Then you can join me in the REAL world

[MNDemNY]

97. the "facts" you seem to channel from the previous administration???

No, that is propaganda, of the sort Dick Cheney and his Daughter spew. good work.

[StarfarerBill]

99. All this pro-escalation talk is eerily reminiscent of seven years ago, isn't it?

[MNDemNY]

103. But ..But... "we" are in charge now, so it's all good, right?

Some poster(s) here sure seem to think that.

[StarfarerBill]

117. Yep. Democrats can do no wrong...history be damned.

[Edweird]

102. Here's a fact that matters. Shooting a handcuffed or bound enemy is a war crime.

It doesn't matter how old they are. It doesn't matter what they may or may not have done. You are not allowed to summarily execute them. Period.

[Zenlitened]

186. Why do you hate President Obama, you Obama-hater you?????

/sarcasm tinged with astonishment -- and grief -- at the lengths some will go to, thinking they are "defending" Pres. Obama from "haters."

Is this place not unbelievable? "Pay no attention to THAT story, sometimes killing kids is the downright sensible thing to do!"

:wow:

[Edweird]

196. There are very curious mental gymnastics taking place.

[Ohiodemoc]

71. OP seems to make the case that we should attack children too

If you look at the context, this article comes in the wake of condemnation of Western forces killing 8 Afghan children. The OP seems to be arguing that it's ok for us to kill children because "the others" do it and send them to war.

[NJmaverick]

85. by your "logic" you are saying our troops should surrender to the children

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

87. Now, the new improved, smaller, but deadlier Bogeymen. Quick send more tropps..and money!

Or, Obama and the generals could admit they lost and get out.

[gratuitous]

91. But especially money

I wonder what an Arab news outlet might make of the relentless advertising aimed at children even younger than 5 years of age about joining the military, popular entertainments designed to train our children in the use of modern weapons, movies that demonize certain people while glorifying those who kill them, a national budget that spends more than 50 cents of every dollar on troops and weapons, and a society so saturated in militarism and fear that people wet themselves over two year old videos from dubious sources accompanied by spurious spin?

[Electric Monk]

92. Now they're even training guinea pigs for combat!1!!

They're probably under 5 years old too!

[G_j]

93. video games & comic books

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20091228/cm_csm/271007

US military is meeting recruitment goals with video games – but at what cost?
<snip>

In 1999, the military had its worst recruiting year in 30, and Congress called for “aggressive, innovative” new approaches. Private-sector specialists were brought in, including the top advertising agency Leo Burnett, and the Army Marketing Brand Group was formed. A key aim of the new recruitment strategy was to ensure long-term success by cultivating the allegiance of teenage Americans.

Part of the new campaign, helping the post-9/11 recruiting bump, was the free video game America’s Army. Since its release, different versions of the war game have been downloaded more than 40 million times, enough to put it in the Guinness book of world records. According to a 2008 study by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, “the game had more impact on recruits than all other forms of Army advertising combined.”

America’s Army targets 13-to-21-year-olds. The T for Teen rating was attained because designers were, as one Army spokesman said in 2002, “very careful on the blood thing.” Designers emphasize the game’s realism, but the game is only realistic on a superficial level. Their conception of authenticity consists of realistic movement, gun clips that fall away at the right speed, and night vision goggles that make the same exact whir as the actual goggles do.

The Navy’s 10-page graphic novel, “Bravo Zulu,” aimed at minority high school students, was released in May. Its plot is as cartoonish as its sound effects: “KLANK,” “FZZZZZZZ,” “KA-KREEK,” “FZAAAAAAT.” The Army’s graphic novel, “Knowledge is Power,” was released in tandem with “America’s Army 3.” The graphic novel portrays a staff sergeant surviving an explosion unharmed. His exclamation to the rookie soldier who saved him implies that this shows it was wrong to be “worried about bein’ here!”

That these efforts are unfaithful to war’s reality has not gone unnoticed. Protesting the Army Experience Center in Philadelphia, Sgt. Jesse Hamilton, who served two tours in Iraq and nine total in the military, expressed disgust that the Army has “resorted to such a deceiving recruitment strategy.”

[Hell Hath No Fury]

100. How do you feel about assassination squads?

Because, whether they were civilians or "child soldiers", our forces assassinated them. They didn't bring them in for interrogation, they didn't bring them in to face charges, they killed them in cold blood.

I want to see you defend that.

[Cerridwen]

101. Who would they be training to kill if we weren't there?

Is your point that it's not okay to train children to kill? Or is it that it's not okay to train children to kill "us?"

Because I know that you're not defending killing children, right? Nor are you defending putting children into positions in which they might be killed, right?

Do you care if we train US children to kill and/or brainwash and indoctrinate them into hate? Have you seen the "Jesus Camp" videos? Or perhaps, you're saying because we have a "Jesus Camp" here it's okay for them to do the same there?

Do you care that for some of us, some of our young men and women in the military are young enough to be considered children as well?

The atrocities of war perpetuate the atrocities of war and now we're having a discussion about whether or not it's defensible to kill children who are training to kill.

The moral high ground not only got washed away, but the pieces left were mined with IEDs and little neon signs were put up with little invitations saying, "Suffer the children to come unto me."

[L0oniX]

110. I'm sure that the collateral killing of the innocent foments more terrorists of all ages.

[asdjrocky]

112. This is the sickest post I've ever seen at DU.

This even trumps the one about sending more troops to Afghanistan because there might be another terror attack in New York, and oh my what would the right wing say.

Sick fucking shit.

[Zenlitened]

145. In the race to the bottom... there is no bottom.

I agree with you.

The lengths some will go, to deflect ANYTHING that might reflect poorly on the Obama administration... it's staggering. Just mind-boggling.

:wow:

[NJmaverick]

171. The fictions you will spin in your efforts to discredit the Obama administration

would be far more jaw dropping

[Zenlitened]

179. More artless projections from you. Tiresome.

It's becoming clear that your freelance efforts at Message Discipline just aren't working, in fact are doing more harm than good.

Helpfully pointing out that sometimes killing children is the super awesomely patriotic thing to do... this was your plan?

Did you really think this was the best way to deflect attention from the handcuffed-kids-shot story?

From merely ridiculous... to utterly grotesque... all with one OP. Congratulations, I guess.

[NJmaverick]

184. whatever fantasy gets you through the day

although YOUR slander of our soldiers and marines is beyond disgusting

[Zenlitened]

190. Oh please, is that the best you can do? My "slander of our soldiers and marines"?

:rofl:

You need to re-read your copy of the Rove Playbook, dude, because you really just suck at this game you seem to be playing.

You make Dick Cheney look like the very paragon of subtle reason.

Hell, you make Joe McCarthy look like a smooth operator.

:rofl:

[NJmaverick]

191. sick

:puke:

[Zenlitened]

195. We agree again. Twice in one night!

What you're doing here is sick, in a pitiful way.

You've tried so hard to be DU's own Karl Rove, and ended up looking like Colonel Flagg.

[Name removed]

169. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[laughingliberal]

113. More evidence this is Viet Nam redux. Time to get the f outta there. nt

[tekisui]

114. Are you defending the practice of killing children?

Are you suggesting the children most recently killed by US/NATO deserved it?

Even if they had guns, do children as young as 5 or 6 deserve to be killed?

Seriously. You have jumped the shark in your blind defense of every act by our government or this administration. You bias is so ingrained that you have lost all credibility.

You should be ashamed of yourself for defending the killing of children, even if they have spent their lives being brainwashed.

[MNDemNY]

137. Yes, the OP is.

He seems to channel the previous administration at every turn. Curious.

[NJmaverick]

155. The report is the US troops were fired upon and the teens were killed in the return fire

That would not be the crime meme that is so popular here at DU. It's funny that you talk of losing credibility, as your anti war agenda is so extreme that you are viewed as having no sense of judgment or perspective on the matter.

[Odin2005]

115. People that make kids fight are vicious, evil scumbags.

DISGUSTING!!! Poor kids! :(

Fuck the Taliban!

[NJmaverick]

119. yes

[MNDemNY]

121. My uncle fought in WWII , in the Navy. He was 15 years old.

[NJmaverick]

123. If he did he lied to the navy about his age (which was very common)

[MNDemNY]

136. Yup, the ole' wink-n-nod kind of lie, not uncommon.

What does that make us? Vicious-evil-scumbags??

[tekisui]

125. The same can be said for those that kill kids.

And those that target children.

[NJmaverick]

152. What do you say to the soldiers and the families of those killed by the teens?

[tekisui]

154. I am sorry that your country sent them to kill and die in a stupid war.

[NJmaverick]

156. You are really caviler with THEIR lives

[tekisui]

158. No, actually. It is a tragedy. However, a couple of points.

They enlist willfully. If our country didn't send them to occupy another country, they would not be shot at in that country. I am sorry that our country send them to face an insurgent population defending themselves against occupiers.

Kids being brainwashed to shoot a clear enemy don't really have a choice. They have been mentally abused and can see with their own eyes death at the US gun. Killing them is not helping them.

[tekisui]

124. But, does that make the kids legitimate targets?

Are kids that have been brainwashed their entire short lives truly deserving of death?

[NJmaverick]

153. If they open fire on our troops (as was reported) then the troops

have no choice but to return fire.

[Odin2005]

160. No, did I say otherwise?

[LeftishBrit]

128. Agreed

But I don't think that our being there at this stage can do anything but make matters worse.

[winyanstaz]

126. Damned those child terrorists!!!

How dare they train to defend their country against us and british invaders!! Its simply terrible!

[LeftishBrit]

129. The use of child soldiers is too common in many places

http://www.child-soldier.org/

[Prometheus Bound]

143. Oh man, we can't even win a war against five-year-olds.

[Zenlitened]

157. An apologia, now, for the slaughter of children?

Grotesque, by any standard.

[TicketyBoo]

159. Oh, puh-leez!

There is no real choice if someone is shooting at our troops; they have to shoot back.

No "apologia" is necessary.

I wish we would just bring them home, but it ain't happenin' and wishing ain't gonna make it so.

[Zenlitened]

161. Ah, I guess I didn't get today's Reality Revision memo.

I didn't realize we'd discontinued discussion of a report that handcuffed children had been shot by Coalition forces... and are now focused solely on "Kids Are Shootin' Our Troops!"

Wow. If this sort of cynical message manipulation has become accepted practice now, then DU has gone from a travesty to an outright obscenity.

[NJmaverick]

162. I see you are cherry picking your facts and reports

I am pretty sure that was the same technique used to trick our nation into the Iraq war.

[Zenlitened]

163. Everytime you use the word "facts" to describe your little game here on DU...

... the very notion of factuality itself is diminished.

:hi:

[NJmaverick]

164. Facts are not a game. Although games are quite popular here at DU

report from any source, no matter how tenuous or unreliable as long as it supports one's agenda. Many have learned well from the previous administration. When it was employed against them, I thought it was turn about is fair play, but the use of those tactics now is unacceptable (but sadly very popular here)

[Zenlitened]

165. At last, we agree on something:

"Many have learned well from the previous administration."

Indeed.

[Electric Monk]

166. Wait a minute, are you for or against killing those children? You seem to be changing your stance.

Are you trying to encourage or discourage more war there?

[NJmaverick]

168. I hate to see children killed

however I am not going to condemn our troops for defending themselves. I will condemn the evil bastards that recruit them into their army. What of you? Are you willing to condemn the Taliban for this tactic?

[Electric Monk]

173. After they've been taken into custody and handcuffed too, of course, right?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7381479&mesg_id=7381479

That's the part of your thread that's been so divisive, in case you hadn't noticed. The assumption you posted old news in response to the new news.

[NJmaverick]

176. That is the sort of sick dishonest propaganda spreading that brought

shame to the liberals in the 70s. Bringing unsubstantiated rumors of atrocities is just an immoral thing to do and smears good men and women who are putting their lives on the line to defend ours.

[Zenlitened]

192. You're channelling Joe McCarthy now, but somehow you do it...

... with even LESS subtlety and charm!

:spray:

[freddie mertz]

204. Which "unsubstantiated rumors"? My Lai? John Kerry's testimony?

Did you even live in the 70s?

Did you even know any Vietnam veterans?

Shame on you.

[Prism]

170. So we're justifying child-killing now . . .

I'm not sure what to say about this.

I want to call it right-wing, but I'm not sure even the conservative blogs I read occasionally would write something like this.

This is troubling. Not only for a liberal website, but for any human one.

Is there no morsel of morality left that won't be sacrificed in the name of power?

[NJmaverick]

172. Returning fire on teens that attack is tragic but not unreasonable

why don't you condemn the evil bastards sending them out to fight? Where is your sense of moral outrage or do you only save it for those defending their lives?


I am also disturbed by your comments about these facts. It's like you want to trick people into thinking our troops are murderous monsters. What the hell drives you?

[tekisui]

177. Those defending their lives?

Like those protecting themselves and their land in Afghanistan?

If we weren't there, our soldiers' lives wouldn't be threatened, would they?

[NJmaverick]

182. They would only be threatened by Al-Qaeda from their new Afghanistan base

so really it's a matter of where they would be threatened rather than if.

[tekisui]

185. You are as bad as rudy, dubya and dick. All terra all the time.

Fight 'em over there bullshit.

[NJmaverick]

187. Actually an unwillingness to even listen to anyone with a differing view

makes them more in your league.

[tekisui]

188. Sticks stones, brutha.

You got nothing but party-line marching. Pimpin' it up, lack of independent thought. You are entertaining, though. They way you hide in your bubble and shout about facts, as if you are the only one capable of acquiring the truth. There is a reason you routinely get dozens of responses and many more unreccs. You post nothing but flame bait, and it has nothing to do with your delusion as 'arbiter of fact'.

[NJmaverick]

189. whatever

:eyes:

[Zenlitened]

174. Takes cynicism to a whole new level, doesn't it?

Protect the president by helpfully pointing out that sometimes killing children is just dandy! :patriot:

[NJmaverick]

180. You will say anything and smear anyone just push your anti-Obama agenda

will even dishonestly smear our brave men and women in uniform.:puke:

[Zenlitened]

193. You think you're Karl Rove, but you're actually Col. Flagg. LOL

Seriously, isn't that a bit over-the-top, even by your hamfisted standard?

[Prism]

197. Anti-war = anti-troop - The Ultimate Right-Wing Play

Bravo, my friend. Bravo.

[Zenlitened]

198. Astonishing, isn't it? I've never seen more blatant spewage...

... of obvious Rove-Wing "debate tactics" that didn't end with a DU tombstone.

[arcadian]

175. Man, this thread sure has a lot of negative recs.

that must mean it sucks.

[NJmaverick]

178. The thread posted facts. Something that is very unpopular here

unsubstantiated rumors that accuse our brave men and women of being brutal mass murders on the other hand....:puke:

[Electric Monk]

181. Some see what they want to see and disregard the rest.

You consider a RW brit tabloid solid facts, but ignore the NYT, LAT, and AP reports. You are clearly picking and choosing what you want to believe to be true, evidence be damned.

[NJmaverick]

183. If you actually read past the headline you would LEARN

they are reported unsubstantiated rumor. No evidence, but horrible accusations. When do you start calling our troops baby killer?

[arcadian]

194. So My Lai, Haditha... the troops who did that were brave?

And you support them?

[Name removed]

199. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[freddie mertz]

202. What kind of person labors so hard to justify killing children?

Even if the photo/story is true, the "fact" that some underage boys have been recruited or pressed into Taliban service hardly justifies the killing of children across the board.

In any event, if children were captured and then killed. as the piece in the other thread reported, that would constitute a war crime, as would the killing of any captured, disarmed combatant or civilian.

You seem to have become a dedicated war apologist, among your other charms.

[Forkboy]

203. A person like the OP.