Romanian soldiers die in Afghanistan

"Serbian soldiers die in Afghanistan"

Make sure we will never have to read this headline. Make sure Serbia never joins NATO.

R.I.P to the romanian soilders and shame on their government.

It is always a sad event when good people die in the service of something evil. It is sadder yet when people send thier own countrymen to die for the lies of foreign superpowers and the greedy ambitions of thier own leadership.

Hey Ment, why are you mixing Warsaw Pact here? As far as I remember Russians did not ask their allies to join them in Afganistan, NATO (read Americans) did. Russians were dying on their own for more than 10 years, whereas Americans very soon after realising that the war can not be won asked others to die alongside their own soldiers. They did NOT ask anybody before invading Afganistan, Iraq, before bombing Serbia, but when it turned out that they miscalculated their 'democratic, liberating missions', as they call them, they asked others for help. Simply saying if you want others to help, you should listen to what they have to say and then decide on some actions (whether they are reasonable and serving to interests of all is a different story) but if you do what you want and then ask for help, don't be surprised that some people/nations may not like that way of 'setting' the world. It is that simple, isn't it?

I hope it is okay if I introduce a few facts....

I don't know the situation i Serbia, but this is how it looks for some NATO (or potential NATO) countries when it comes to conscription (mandatory military service):

Belgium No
Bosnia and Herzegovina No
Bulgaria No
Croatia No
France No
Hungary No
Luxembourg No
Macedonia, Republic of No
Malta No
Netherlands No
Poland No
Romania No
Slovenia No
Spain No
United Kingdom No
United States No
Albania Yes
Austria Yes
Denmark Yes
Finland Yes
Germany Yes
Greece Yes
Moldova Yes
Turkey Yes

So, those Romanian soldiers was volunteers. They signed up to join the army, knowing full well (or should have known) that part of being a soldier in a NATO country, you risk having to fight a NATO fight - wherever that fight happens to take you.

As they say, if you don't like the smell in bakery, stay the hell out.

And - I am pretty sure the soldiers families and loved ones, no matter how they grieve for them, was proud of what these brave young men did in Afghanistan.
--

What Eastern thug, Ment? Are you afraid the Taliban will come find you in Kosovo or Albania, or wherever you are? Stop the BS, young people are dying for a worthless cause because of the aggressive agenda's of Empire. You, and others like you, suck up to NATO and the US because most support an Albanian Kosovo - isn't that the real reason you sing praise for them (NATO)?

RIP

How do the parents of these young men feel, knowing that their sons died for, for, for what? The NATO is a plague on this earth, that uses young soldiers' lives to advance their criminal agendas.

Condolences to all the families that lost loved ones from NATO's aggression.

When is this "human-meat-grinder- machine" going to stop devouring God's innocent children?

When?

Funny to read our albanians supporters and albanians themselves advocating a war against fellow muslims. Hazel even calls them "animals." Well, looks like those animals and albanians trolls have much in common, its just unfortunate that the west can't seem to see the similarities...yet.

NATO is the only force that are providing security for all nations.you both should be ashamed of your self for blaiming NATO.the world is better place with out BIN LADEN,MILOSEVIC and other criminels.russia should be ashamed as well for standing like little chicken when our boys are fighting the animals.

"Serbian soldiers die in Afghanistan"

Make sure we will never have to read this headline. Make sure Serbia never joins NATO.

R.I.P to the romanian soilders and shame on their government.
(Mikael C, 24 June 2010 17:00)

Thank god your five officers were safe and sound in Haiti, during the earthquake.what a hell they were doing there with rasklads???

Maciek

Don't confuse matters. Russia did not get attacked by a terrorist group headquartered in Afghanistan. Russia simply went and meddled there.

After 9/11, the U.S. asked the Taliban to hand over Al-Qaida leaders sitting pretty in Afghanistan. The Taliban refused. Then Bush came with the doctrine that if you willingly harbor terrorists that attack the U.S. then you are a willing participant in that attack.

NATO's charter? An attack on one member is an attack on all.

And that's why there's a coalition in Afghanistan. Is that clear enough for you?


Mikael
======

I honestly have to ask.
Why do you try so hard, go so out of the way to make the dumbest comments in this forum?

What the heck does religion have anything to do with any of this? Weren't two world wars fought largely between Christian countries?

It sounds like you have difficulties with the concept of a nation/country...so to clarify, let me ask you:

Do you think a SERB would put Russia or Greece or Romania or whatever before Serbia, even though they're all "Christian brothers"?

It's self evident to me, but you apparently seem to have different notions than most ordinary humans.

NATO is the only force that are providing security for all nations.you both should be ashamed of your self for blaiming NATO.the world is better place with out BIN LADEN,MILOSEVIC and other criminels.russia should be ashamed as well for standing like little chicken when our boys are fighting the animals.
(hazel, 24 June 2010 19:49)

What exactly are “your boys” fighting for in Afghanistan? Since 2001 the goal posts have changed so often that I am getting lost in the reasons behind this war.
First it was because of 9/11, then it was Bin Laden and Mullah Omar; then it was the Taliban; then it was to bring freedom and democracy to all in the middle east and now it’s to train the Afghan army then leave victorious. What will be the excuse in 2012?
Why would Russia want to send its troops to Afghanistan to die? They had their turn and lost 15,000, but your “boys” trained and armed Bin Laden and now he has turned those same weapons against his former masters.
“our boys are fighting the animals…..” did these animals invade the US or any part of Europe? No. So who are the animals in this instance?
It interesting that the mighty US and its allies always pick on the weak to show their strength – why not pick on the likes of Iran and see how far they get. The correct term for the strong picking on the weak is called a bully. The US, bully incorporated.

I am pretty sure the soldiers families and loved ones, no matter how they grieve for them, was proud of what these brave young men did in Afghanistan.
--
(Jan Andersen (DK), 24 June 2010 23:30)

Who would feel proud on losing a loved one? What was this great thing that these young men performed that would make their loved ones so proud? Did they die defending their homes and country? No, they died trying to give the US some respectability for the invasion of Afghanistan.
Please try writing something original and not just quoting western media outburst which tries to placate its populace for the killing fields of Afghanistan.

R.I.P and thanks for your hard work fighint the threat of this planet,al qaeda and the talibans.

It is always a sad event when good people die in the service of something evil. It is sadder yet when people send thier own countrymen to die for the lies of foreign superpowers and the greedy ambitions of thier own leadership.
(milan, 24 June 2010 19:48

I couldn't agree more Milan.
The biggest tragedy here is those young soldiers dying not in the altar of idealism or purpose but those of lies and greed.

Ment
I'm not confusing anything. The reasons why Russians went to war on Afganistan might be similar to the reasons Americans had when they went to war on Vietnam. If you follow what is happening in the former southern republics of Russia just now, you would know more about their decision (which was a mistake, anyway and they admit it themselves). I also hope you do remember who gave Talliban the weapons to fight with Russia and who trained them.

Did Iraq attack America?
Did Serbia attack America?
I hope you know the answers.

About NATO charter. By what country was America attacked on 9/11? American doctrin could be good to America, but not necesserilly to others.
When American ship USS Cole was attacked and Sudanese were found responsible, all NATO countries should have attacked Sudan?
Is this what you are trying to say?

I guess Winston never heard of the Warsaw pact either.

Neither does he seem to appreciate the danger posed to individual small European countries by the Eastern thug.

RIP to the soldiers.

Interesting that some here say it is up to every country to send soilders to die in Afganiastan and Irak. Is it really?

'You are either with us or against us'

'A coalition partner must do more than just express sympathy, a coalition partner must perform,' Bush said.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/11/06/gen.attack.on.terror/

Also in Italy you go in foreign mission only if you sign voluntary...no conscription and no obligatory mandate for the professionals.. Why they did IT ? Simple ..MONEY

Maciek

Once again with selective reading:

Since we're going down history lane, remember North Korea?

U.S.S.R supplied North Koreans with weapons and MIG-s, even though the intervention there was authorized by the U.N. A lot of international soldiers died because of the role of U.S.S.R and China.
In addition, after U.S.S.R's role in Vietnam, you can see Afghanistan as a tit-for-tat.

As far as I know, there are no NATO forces in Iraq. It's a coalition of the willing.

Second, we're talking about Afghanistan. Once again, the ruling government there (Taliban) refused to hand over Al-Qaida leaders and allowed them sanctuary in the country. The parallel with Sudan is invalid.

Serbia might be a subject of debate, but it cannot be denied that it got involved directly and indirectly in some of the worst atrocities committed in the Balkans.

One more thing... in my previous comment, the "Eastern thug" is not Afghanistan, it's Russia.

Ment
you have an Eastern thug and you have a Western thug.
It seems that you didn't get my bottom line, which was that Americans attack anybody they find 'disturbing' not taking into consideration international law, other circmustances and then if they see that the wars they waged are too costy and ineffective they ask others for help, NATO is helping them but less and less willingly - soemone must be blind not to notice that.
I gave you examples of Iraq and Serbia. Now it is clear that Americans made up some evidence of WOMD and others 'bought it' - there is or there was some debate or even parlamentary hearing in UK about that and a Polish President (I am Pole by the way) said that he was simply deceived by Americans.
Rambouillet agreement upon which Americans an some NATO countries attacked Serbia was not an agreement but ultimatum.
You write about treaties ... and that treaties oblige others, Poland had some treaties with England and France back in 1939 and when Hitler attacked us we still had treaties but no help, we also had a non aggression treaty with Russia and they stabed their knives into our backs in 1939 alongside Hitler, again in 1945 in Ja³ta American and English allies betrayed us (although we had the fourth biggest army fighting with Nazis on all fronts of Europe). I simply don not belive in treaties because if you look at the history you will see how much worth they are.

Funny to read our albanians supporters and albanians themselves advocating a war against fellow muslims. Hazel even calls them "animals." Well, looks like those animals and albanians trolls have much in common, its just unfortunate that the west can't seem to see the similarities...yet.
(michael, 24 June 2010 22:40)

Michael
Why it is so hard for you guys to stick to the topic and not humiliate the others? How it is that west is so "stupid" not to see those "similarities" but you think you are smarter than them? As far as I know nobody from albanians that are commenting here did not call you trolls.

GPS???

More seriously, the US always demands its friendship in blood. It is a pity that Ro has sent their men to die there but such is the price of being a member of NATO.

maciek,
first you say:
"Americans attack..not taking into consideration international law.."

and then you say:
" I simply don not belive in treaties because if you look at the history you will see how much worth they are."

make up your mind :)...either one or the other..so called "international law" IS a series of treaties, contracts and agreements. the word "law" in that context is misleading, the phrase "international law" is an oxymoron. for the concept of law comes hand in hand with that of the force as in "to enforce the law", in other words the police, and there is no international police, it is impossible to have it (the blue helmets/berets of today are good only for getting tied to bunkers, or watching Srebrenica and Rwanda happen). if you want international police to enforce international law, you need to throw that principle of sovereignity to the garbage, or at least water it down. And if you want to do that (peacefully) you need to modify the identities of the societies (slowly if it is done peacefully) so that they converge to a common thing, much like the EU project is doing by creating a new european identity and ultimately nation. bottom line, to have real law you need to get rid of the "inter" in the word "international".

NATO is the only force that are providing security for all nations.you both should be ashamed of your self for blaiming NATO.the world is better place with out BIN LADEN,MILOSEVIC and other criminels.russia should be ashamed as well for standing like little chicken when our boys are fighting the animals.

"Serbian soldiers die in Afghanistan"

Make sure we will never have to read this headline. Make sure Serbia never joins NATO.

R.I.P to the romanian soilders and shame on their government.
(Mikael C, 24 June 2010 17:00)

Thank god your five officers were safe and sound in Haiti, during the earthquake.what a hell they were doing there with rasklads???

I guess Winston never heard of the Warsaw pact either.

Neither does he seem to appreciate the danger posed to individual small European countries by the Eastern thug.

RIP to the soldiers.

R.I.P and thanks for your hard work fighint the threat of this planet,al qaeda and the talibans.

I hope it is okay if I introduce a few facts....

I don't know the situation i Serbia, but this is how it looks for some NATO (or potential NATO) countries when it comes to conscription (mandatory military service):

Belgium No
Bosnia and Herzegovina No
Bulgaria No
Croatia No
France No
Hungary No
Luxembourg No
Macedonia, Republic of No
Malta No
Netherlands No
Poland No
Romania No
Slovenia No
Spain No
United Kingdom No
United States No
Albania Yes
Austria Yes
Denmark Yes
Finland Yes
Germany Yes
Greece Yes
Moldova Yes
Turkey Yes

So, those Romanian soldiers was volunteers. They signed up to join the army, knowing full well (or should have known) that part of being a soldier in a NATO country, you risk having to fight a NATO fight - wherever that fight happens to take you.

As they say, if you don't like the smell in bakery, stay the hell out.

And - I am pretty sure the soldiers families and loved ones, no matter how they grieve for them, was proud of what these brave young men did in Afghanistan.
--

"Serbian soldiers die in Afghanistan"

Make sure we will never have to read this headline. Make sure Serbia never joins NATO.

R.I.P to the romanian soilders and shame on their government.

Funny to read our albanians supporters and albanians themselves advocating a war against fellow muslims. Hazel even calls them "animals." Well, looks like those animals and albanians trolls have much in common, its just unfortunate that the west can't seem to see the similarities...yet.

It is always a sad event when good people die in the service of something evil. It is sadder yet when people send thier own countrymen to die for the lies of foreign superpowers and the greedy ambitions of thier own leadership.

How do the parents of these young men feel, knowing that their sons died for, for, for what? The NATO is a plague on this earth, that uses young soldiers' lives to advance their criminal agendas.

Hey Ment, why are you mixing Warsaw Pact here? As far as I remember Russians did not ask their allies to join them in Afganistan, NATO (read Americans) did. Russians were dying on their own for more than 10 years, whereas Americans very soon after realising that the war can not be won asked others to die alongside their own soldiers. They did NOT ask anybody before invading Afganistan, Iraq, before bombing Serbia, but when it turned out that they miscalculated their 'democratic, liberating missions', as they call them, they asked others for help. Simply saying if you want others to help, you should listen to what they have to say and then decide on some actions (whether they are reasonable and serving to interests of all is a different story) but if you do what you want and then ask for help, don't be surprised that some people/nations may not like that way of 'setting' the world. It is that simple, isn't it?

RIP

Maciek

Once again with selective reading:

Since we're going down history lane, remember North Korea?

U.S.S.R supplied North Koreans with weapons and MIG-s, even though the intervention there was authorized by the U.N. A lot of international soldiers died because of the role of U.S.S.R and China.
In addition, after U.S.S.R's role in Vietnam, you can see Afghanistan as a tit-for-tat.

As far as I know, there are no NATO forces in Iraq. It's a coalition of the willing.

Second, we're talking about Afghanistan. Once again, the ruling government there (Taliban) refused to hand over Al-Qaida leaders and allowed them sanctuary in the country. The parallel with Sudan is invalid.

Serbia might be a subject of debate, but it cannot be denied that it got involved directly and indirectly in some of the worst atrocities committed in the Balkans.

One more thing... in my previous comment, the "Eastern thug" is not Afghanistan, it's Russia.

Funny to read our albanians supporters and albanians themselves advocating a war against fellow muslims. Hazel even calls them "animals." Well, looks like those animals and albanians trolls have much in common, its just unfortunate that the west can't seem to see the similarities...yet.
(michael, 24 June 2010 22:40)

Michael
Why it is so hard for you guys to stick to the topic and not humiliate the others? How it is that west is so "stupid" not to see those "similarities" but you think you are smarter than them? As far as I know nobody from albanians that are commenting here did not call you trolls.

What Eastern thug, Ment? Are you afraid the Taliban will come find you in Kosovo or Albania, or wherever you are? Stop the BS, young people are dying for a worthless cause because of the aggressive agenda's of Empire. You, and others like you, suck up to NATO and the US because most support an Albanian Kosovo - isn't that the real reason you sing praise for them (NATO)?

Maciek

Don't confuse matters. Russia did not get attacked by a terrorist group headquartered in Afghanistan. Russia simply went and meddled there.

After 9/11, the U.S. asked the Taliban to hand over Al-Qaida leaders sitting pretty in Afghanistan. The Taliban refused. Then Bush came with the doctrine that if you willingly harbor terrorists that attack the U.S. then you are a willing participant in that attack.

NATO's charter? An attack on one member is an attack on all.

And that's why there's a coalition in Afghanistan. Is that clear enough for you?


Mikael
======

I honestly have to ask.
Why do you try so hard, go so out of the way to make the dumbest comments in this forum?

What the heck does religion have anything to do with any of this? Weren't two world wars fought largely between Christian countries?

It sounds like you have difficulties with the concept of a nation/country...so to clarify, let me ask you:

Do you think a SERB would put Russia or Greece or Romania or whatever before Serbia, even though they're all "Christian brothers"?

It's self evident to me, but you apparently seem to have different notions than most ordinary humans.

It is always a sad event when good people die in the service of something evil. It is sadder yet when people send thier own countrymen to die for the lies of foreign superpowers and the greedy ambitions of thier own leadership.
(milan, 24 June 2010 19:48

I couldn't agree more Milan.
The biggest tragedy here is those young soldiers dying not in the altar of idealism or purpose but those of lies and greed.

NATO is the only force that are providing security for all nations.you both should be ashamed of your self for blaiming NATO.the world is better place with out BIN LADEN,MILOSEVIC and other criminels.russia should be ashamed as well for standing like little chicken when our boys are fighting the animals.
(hazel, 24 June 2010 19:49)

What exactly are “your boys” fighting for in Afghanistan? Since 2001 the goal posts have changed so often that I am getting lost in the reasons behind this war.
First it was because of 9/11, then it was Bin Laden and Mullah Omar; then it was the Taliban; then it was to bring freedom and democracy to all in the middle east and now it’s to train the Afghan army then leave victorious. What will be the excuse in 2012?
Why would Russia want to send its troops to Afghanistan to die? They had their turn and lost 15,000, but your “boys” trained and armed Bin Laden and now he has turned those same weapons against his former masters.
“our boys are fighting the animals…..” did these animals invade the US or any part of Europe? No. So who are the animals in this instance?
It interesting that the mighty US and its allies always pick on the weak to show their strength – why not pick on the likes of Iran and see how far they get. The correct term for the strong picking on the weak is called a bully. The US, bully incorporated.

I am pretty sure the soldiers families and loved ones, no matter how they grieve for them, was proud of what these brave young men did in Afghanistan.
--
(Jan Andersen (DK), 24 June 2010 23:30)

Who would feel proud on losing a loved one? What was this great thing that these young men performed that would make their loved ones so proud? Did they die defending their homes and country? No, they died trying to give the US some respectability for the invasion of Afghanistan.
Please try writing something original and not just quoting western media outburst which tries to placate its populace for the killing fields of Afghanistan.

Also in Italy you go in foreign mission only if you sign voluntary...no conscription and no obligatory mandate for the professionals.. Why they did IT ? Simple ..MONEY

Interesting that some here say it is up to every country to send soilders to die in Afganiastan and Irak. Is it really?

'You are either with us or against us'

'A coalition partner must do more than just express sympathy, a coalition partner must perform,' Bush said.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/11/06/gen.attack.on.terror/

Ment
I'm not confusing anything. The reasons why Russians went to war on Afganistan might be similar to the reasons Americans had when they went to war on Vietnam. If you follow what is happening in the former southern republics of Russia just now, you would know more about their decision (which was a mistake, anyway and they admit it themselves). I also hope you do remember who gave Talliban the weapons to fight with Russia and who trained them.

Did Iraq attack America?
Did Serbia attack America?
I hope you know the answers.

About NATO charter. By what country was America attacked on 9/11? American doctrin could be good to America, but not necesserilly to others.
When American ship USS Cole was attacked and Sudanese were found responsible, all NATO countries should have attacked Sudan?
Is this what you are trying to say?

Condolences to all the families that lost loved ones from NATO's aggression.

When is this "human-meat-grinder- machine" going to stop devouring God's innocent children?

When?

maciek,
first you say:
"Americans attack..not taking into consideration international law.."

and then you say:
" I simply don not belive in treaties because if you look at the history you will see how much worth they are."

make up your mind :)...either one or the other..so called "international law" IS a series of treaties, contracts and agreements. the word "law" in that context is misleading, the phrase "international law" is an oxymoron. for the concept of law comes hand in hand with that of the force as in "to enforce the law", in other words the police, and there is no international police, it is impossible to have it (the blue helmets/berets of today are good only for getting tied to bunkers, or watching Srebrenica and Rwanda happen). if you want international police to enforce international law, you need to throw that principle of sovereignity to the garbage, or at least water it down. And if you want to do that (peacefully) you need to modify the identities of the societies (slowly if it is done peacefully) so that they converge to a common thing, much like the EU project is doing by creating a new european identity and ultimately nation. bottom line, to have real law you need to get rid of the "inter" in the word "international".

GPS???

More seriously, the US always demands its friendship in blood. It is a pity that Ro has sent their men to die there but such is the price of being a member of NATO.

Ment
you have an Eastern thug and you have a Western thug.
It seems that you didn't get my bottom line, which was that Americans attack anybody they find 'disturbing' not taking into consideration international law, other circmustances and then if they see that the wars they waged are too costy and ineffective they ask others for help, NATO is helping them but less and less willingly - soemone must be blind not to notice that.
I gave you examples of Iraq and Serbia. Now it is clear that Americans made up some evidence of WOMD and others 'bought it' - there is or there was some debate or even parlamentary hearing in UK about that and a Polish President (I am Pole by the way) said that he was simply deceived by Americans.
Rambouillet agreement upon which Americans an some NATO countries attacked Serbia was not an agreement but ultimatum.
You write about treaties ... and that treaties oblige others, Poland had some treaties with England and France back in 1939 and when Hitler attacked us we still had treaties but no help, we also had a non aggression treaty with Russia and they stabed their knives into our backs in 1939 alongside Hitler, again in 1945 in Ja³ta American and English allies betrayed us (although we had the fourth biggest army fighting with Nazis on all fronts of Europe). I simply don not belive in treaties because if you look at the history you will see how much worth they are.