U.S. allies will fight Taliban - if they don't get hurt

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-09-28-afghanistan-nato-caveats_x.htm

Nations limit use of NATO forces

PORTOROZ, Slovenia — Countries sending their troops to Afghanistan have placed a web of restrictions on how they can be used, creating headaches for combat commanders and hurting the coalition's ability to fight a resurgent Taliban.

The restrictions, also called caveats, vary and are imposed by governments who fear casualties or don't agree with all parts of the mission. Other caveats are due to a lack of training or equipment.

The result is some forces can't fight at night or in the most dangerous parts of Afghanistan.

At a NATO meeting here Thursday, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said it's understandable that nations don't want their troops to perform specific missions, but when numerous countries impose restrictions it creates a "situation that really is not acceptable." Rumsfeld and NATO authorities are working to get countries to lift the restrictions.


Note: This is the headline that the Chicago Sun-Times used for this story in todays printed paper. Page 35.

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. It's a problem when you try & frame a hot war as a peace keeping

operation because you can't admit that you never won the war. Good luck.

[applegrove]

2. Too bad the Taliban learnt from Iraq. Now soldiers face IEDs in

Afghanistan. Who would sign up for that. Seems only just barely enough troops to keep from loosing are there fighting "for our freedoms".

[NNN0LHI]

3. What a mess n/t

[zero_carbs]

4. The Taliban are the worst human scum that have ever existed.

They outlawed education for females and beat women who don't keep themselves covered from head to toe in public.

I have no sympathy for them.