Nine NATO Troops Killed Across Afghanistan
At Least Five US Troops Among the Slain
With two more NATO troops killed last night and another two this morning, NATO is now confirming that at least nine of their troops have been slain since early Thursday, when a roadside bomb killed five US troops.
The five US troops killed yesterday were reported slain somewhere in “southern Afghanistan” but the Pentagon has yet to offer further details beyond it being a bombing. One of the other slain was confirmed as French, while the others have yet to be identified.
The deaths bring the August death toll for NATO to 57 already, with more than half of the month yet to come. This already makes August deadlier than the entire month of July and has it on pace to be the deadliest month yet of the decade-long war.
The August toll also includes some 30 US troops killed last week in the downing of a Chinook helicopter, the single deadliest incident of the entire war. Despite the massive tolls, top officials continue to insist progress is being made in the conflict.
Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz
- 12 Chechen Fighters Killed in Central Syria - May 24th, 2013
- Syrian Rebel Unity Talks on Brink of Collapse - May 24th, 2013
- New US Embassy Guards to Cost $1.6 Million Each - May 24th, 2013
- Constant Mortar Fire as Sectarian Violence Continues in North Lebanon - May 24th, 2013
- Obama's Drone Limits Welcomed in Pakistan, If They Pan Out - May 24th, 2013
John_Muhammad
August 12th, 2011 at 1:42 pm
" Massive toll " indeed. America hasn't seen a 'massive toll' in combat deaths for a LONG time. How many combat deaths occur every day in our opponent's ranks? I'll just go out on a limb and say it's a lot more than ours. Our 'massive toll' is a good day for them, I'd imagine.
Somebody might want to read up on the Battle of Stalingrad to see what 'massive toll' means. When a single battle swallows up anywhere from 1.5 to 2 million souls, THAT is a 'massive toll'. When the battlefield life expectancy of an infantryman is measured in hours, that's a 'massive toll'.
When 40,000 civilians die in one week as a result of the fighting, that's a 'massive toll'.
We won't even mention the siege of Leningrad.
Does America have the stomach for that kind of commitment to a war- are we that committed to THIS war? If we were faced with our sons and daughters (and fathers and mothers) dying in these numbers, we'd not be so quick to play the War Card. EVER.
I don't for one second take anything away from our fallen soldiers, but let's keep their numbers in perspective.
Jan Burton
August 12th, 2011 at 6:01 pm
Even the Tet Offensive saw a massive death doll compared to day's conflicts.
Today's American wars are very low-scale, but our society's tolerance for casualties has never been lower. We in the West have no stomach for war – not the Americans, the Brits, Canadians, Germans, Dutch, none of us.
Today's public wouldn't have last 10 minutes in WWII, Korea or Vietnam. That's certainly a good thing in that it makes big wars less likely, but it totally distorts our perspective.
Ubikwitus
August 12th, 2011 at 7:46 pm
It's a good thing the public don't give a rat's ass about the casualities. Until of course some politico tells them they have to 'ante up' to pay for all the pensions, so America doesn't have to borrow from China.
Naah!
It's best to play everything down. Make it a win, a cheap win at that, and pray that a get-out solution can be found before the Afghanistan monument is bigger than Korea's.
JDonald
August 12th, 2011 at 8:27 pm
Let's see; at the rate of 50 American military deaths per month, it will only take another 167 years for all the military to be killed off by the Taliban and the US effort will be over. Only then will the Afganastani's be able to determine their future according to their own desirres. Occupation and enforced democratization will have lost. But I reallhy can't wait that long.
David
August 13th, 2011 at 3:18 am
The Afghan war can not be won. End of the story.
thedissenter
August 13th, 2011 at 7:53 am
Oh, well. Times are changing indeed. Imagine invading/occupying mercenaries dying in a war zone. Who would have ever thunk it?
thedissenter
August 13th, 2011 at 7:55 am
Actually, it has only taken the Afghans (in connection with the Iraqis), less than a decade to bring the Empire of Evil to its knees. It wasn't necessarily done thru/by killing its mercenaries but by bleeding its no-so-deep pockets.
Tom Mauel
August 13th, 2011 at 3:50 pm
One soldier dead on either side is one too many for this totally pointless needless war sustained only because the US refuses to admit it cannot win.
Tom Mauel
August 13th, 2011 at 4:04 pm
More grim US combat figures. Eight US soldiers have died in Helmand province in the fist ten days of August, 2011. While the DOD website does not usually report the cause of death in Helmand the latest Navy casualty was reported as occurring while the deceased US soldier was on a dismounted patrol.
Last week CBS Evening News reported the number of US soldiers in Afghanistan becoming multiple amputees is 200% higher than a year ago because the new policy is to get boots on the ground. Apparently without regard for the fact the ground is littered with land mines.
mat
August 13th, 2011 at 5:02 pm
thats because its not a war in any conventional sense.