Comments:Taliban in Pakistan captures convoy bound for NATO troops
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
Remember that Ukrainian transport ship that pirates took a couple months ago? Both of these events show the lack of adequate protections for supply. Needs improvement. 22.214.171.124 03:33, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
This is why Nato needs about 30,000 more troops. Afghanistan is a huge country and controlling the areas outside of the cities has always been the biggest challenge. Talking with the Taliban will get us nowhere, they only understand overwhelming force. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkMontgomery (talk • contribs) 09:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
So basically they stole some equipment and food and gave it to local citizens, without anyone dying. Then when they come to get their stuff back that was stolen from them, THEN people start dying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 13:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
pergaps its better when they have some weapons to show their intentions and they need not so much make shift explosives.188.8.131.52 13:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Modern-day Robin Hoods?
I find it interesting that this particular faction of the Taliban would re-distribute their loot to local residents. I wonder if that were truly their intention, or if they simply wanted to perform an act that would garner positive attention from the public. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Winning hearts and minds, then the Pakistan army come blazing in and killing the wrong people. Great way to fight a war for hearts and minds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 21:17, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Truly their intention or not, what's for sure is that they got a lot of attention from the media and from the locals. It was the same after the Israeli-Lebanon war: while politicians were talking, Hamas was already organising the reconstruction. Nothing comes from violence. -Aless.mac (talk) 04:38, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Damn, Why are we losing to such untrained miltiants. Come on America, Bring out the kick buttocks spirit , we really need. Signed Nicholas Robinson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 02:34, 22 November 2008 (UTC)