For the lulz.
Posted on 07/30/2010 7:29:41 AM PDT by kbennkc
Not just her nose, though: They ordered her husband to saw off her ears too for the crime of running away from home. Time’s editor insists that “We do not run this story or show this image either in support of the U.S. war effort or in opposition to it,” but that’s nonsense, of course. The image is as stark an argument as you’re likely to see for continuing the war, which is why lefties naturally have been griping about it all day. Some offer legit complaints — instead of putting a mutilated girl on the cover to make the case for staying put, why not put a dead soldier on there to make the case for pulling out? — and some not so legit, like the idea that because this happened last year when U.S. troops were already in the field, it portends nothing about what’ll happen on a wider scale when we leave. I’m glad that Time’s trying to reintroduce the moral complications of withdrawal into the debate at a moment when the anti-war Narrative would prefer to ignore the messy aftermath, but this may be a case where “the story about the story” overshadows the actual, you know, story. Most of the bloggy links that I’ve seen today have gone to the piece at Time defending the decision to publish the photo, not the actual cover story about the catastrophic social backsliding to come once Islamist fanatics regain power (not to mention the inevitable retrenchment of Al Qaeda). Maybe a little too heavy on the distracting shock factor here?
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
The point here is that the leftis selling the Afghan war to the American people.
Because it’s Russia’s war, and we are pacifying their underbelly for free, while getting all the bad press, and Russia gets to sit on the sideline and gently tut.
It needs doing. But Russia should be paying.
I have no problem with Time publishing this story, as a matter of fact, it might be the first brave thing they’ve done in a while. It shows the evil our troops face.
+1
How can Time judge another culture? I thought that was verboten?
Good point.
A TIME cover without Obama??? WTF??
Imagine Time's editor saying that during WW2 or Korea.
I’d say you were right!....They way I see it,The ruskies should be in there alongside the U.S. instaed of relying on the U.S. to do their dirty work for them because they were the ones who lost the Aghan war in the first place.
The U.S. shouldn’t have financed the fundamentalist muslims in the first place.
Could you imagine what public support for our efforts in Iraq would have been if the media had reported on one of Saddam’s mass graves each day for a year? Few would have thought leaving Saddam in power was a reasonable option.
This isn’t the face of the Taliban. It’s the face of ISLAM.
The Soviet war in Afghanistan was a ten-year conflict involving the Soviet Union, supporting the Marxist government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan at their own request against the Mujahideen Resistance. The mujahideen found other support from a variety of sources including the United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt and other Muslim nations through the context of the Cold War.
Soviet ground forces, under the command of Marshal Sergei Sokolov, entered Afghanistan from the north on December 27, 1979. In the morning, the 103rd Guards 'Vitebsk' Airborne Division landed at the airport at Bagram and the deployment of Soviet troops in Afghanistan was underway. The force that entered Afghanistan, in addition to the 103rd Guards Airborne Division, was under command of the 40th Army and consisted of the 108th and 5th Guards Motor Rifle Divisions, the 860th Separate Motor Rifle Regiment, the 56th Separate Airborne Assault Brigade, the 36th Mixed Air Corps. Later on the 201st and 58th Motor Rifle Divisions also entered the country, along with other smaller units.[37] In all, the initial Soviet force was around 1,800 tanks, 80,000 soldiers and 2,000 AFVs. In the second week alone, Soviet aircraft had made a total of 4,000 flights into Kabul. With the arrival of the two later divisions, the total Soviet force rose to over 100,000 personnel.
Between December 25, 1979 and February 15, 1989, a total of 620,000 soldiers served with the forces in Afghanistan (though there were only 80,000-104,000 serving at one time): 525,000 in the Army, 90,000 with border troops and other KGB sub-units, 5,000 in independent formations of MVD Internal Troops, and police forces. A further 21,000 personnel were with the Soviet troop contingent over the same period doing various white collar and blue collar jobs.
The total irrecoverable personnel losses of the Soviet Armed Forces, frontier, and internal security troops came to 14,453. Soviet Army formations, units, and HQ elements lost 13,833, KGB sub-units lost 572, MVD formations lost 28, and other ministries and departments lost 20 men. During this period 417 servicemen were missing in action or taken prisoner; 119 of these were later freed, of whom 97 returned to the USSR and 22 went to other countries.
Material losses were as follows:
451 aircraft (includes 333 helicopters)
147 tanks
1,314 IFV/APCs
433 artillery guns and mortars
11,369 cargo and fuel tanker trucks.
The Soviets/Russians have already paid plenty for Afghanistan.
True. The only problem is, Time did this for sole purpose of swaying public opinion. Zero is losing support so they need some emotional images to bring his supporters back.
This would NOT have happened were a Republican were president.
True. The only problem is, Time did this for sole purpose of swaying public opinion. Zero is losing support so they need some emotional images to bring his supporters back.
This would NOT have happened were a Republican president.
The Leftist-In-Chief will soon be selling the idea we can work with a government sharing power with the Taliban. When someone here posts we should just nuke the place, we know the next post will be a sane, soothing, caution about Hitler.
My mind set is without a tool to deal with a people who can not be enticed with freedom and hard cash. I find myself thinking about a series of Enewetak evacuations. Maybe not Hitler, but as bad as Rameses. Instead of blood on door posts and beam to be passed over, it would be an invitation to women and children, "if you want to live, get on the C-130 now." Sorry adult men. If you would were worth a flying fig, you probably already died fighting these evil monsters.
For the lulz.
There. Fixed.
The action is correct, but the motivation is wrong. It is to raise the prospects of the Marxists this November.
Sick Ass Bastards!
This woman is simply beautiful.
If there is ever a fund established to pay for corrective surgery I would chip in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.