Got feedback on the new design? We're Listening! Send us Feedback

35 Killed in Kabul Bus Bomb Attack »

Posted by: MyWayOnNow 1 year, 2 months ago

5.3

Scale of 1 to 10

Read: 4

Propped: 31

Comments: 13

Click Prop It to Raise Score

Prop it

An enormous bomb ripped through a police academy bus at Kabul's busiest transportation hub Sunday, killing at least 35 people in the deadliest insurgent attack in Afghanistan since the U.S.-led invasion in 2001. The Taliban claimed responsibility.

Read Full Story at breitbart.com

Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment

Comments So Far: 13

95%
badnootka1 year, 2 months ago

A total lack of security around the police buses stsations and the like appears to be prevelant. Are people not searched before boarding? When you know you are a target it is up to you to take preventative measures and not accept that" he's OK, that my cousin Mohamed"
Reply
0%
UBCONFUSE1 year, 2 months ago

Afgan or Iraqi, it matters not. Their security forces are not focused and are wide open to this type of act. When you put uneducated people in charge and pick Officer leaders based on family ties, or tribal ties, the worst is going to happen.
The US Military is a band-aid. If we leave now, the warlords will take over. Mean while, we are in both places for many good reasons, but need to figure out a way to shrink our presence, but stay large enough for chaos to abate over time. Iran is the next military crisis and I truly think it will become a military crisis before the next election so as to hurt Republican chances. Democrats have no stomach for military action and Iran knows it. Elect Hillary and grow a Nuke. Weakness invites attack.
Reply
4 Replies
- 0%
  saintetienne1 year, 2 months ago
  
  Well said, UB.
  As maligned as he may be, George Bush is the first president to actually DO something about the ever-increasing quagmire that is the Middle East. Everyone knows the Middle East is out of control - - overrun with warlords, fanatics, terror camps, shady leadership, grisly violence and more money than they're able to handle.
  SOMEbody needs to step in and say enough is enough before it escalates to nuclear levels. It's not a popular decision, and it certainly isn't an easy decision, but it is a totally necessary decision, and Bush has made it and is standing by it.
  If Shrillary or B.O. Boy gets elected in '08, we can kiss our role as a world leader goodbye. These two brilliant bozos and the rest of the DumDum Democratic think tank will pull our troops out, pull out our foothold and our interests in the Middle East, and allow chaos to reign.
  At least our military is keeping the violence "over there". When we leave, it will follow us to our shores.
  Reply
  3 Replies
  - 0%
    RoyHobbs1 year, 2 months ago
    
    Let's see..
    Our role as a world leader. More like world policeman. Pretty much the whole world despises Bush.
    Allow chaos to reign. Like it isn't now? And it hasn't been?
    Ah, the Repug fear card is played again. Over there, instead of here. It only took 19 guys from SAUDI ARABIA to cause 9/11. Not buying it.
    Reply
    2 Replies
    - 83%
      saintetienne1 year, 2 months ago
      
      Roy Hobblebrain,
      I'm sorry, I didn't know this was a popularity contest. I guess when you spend all your time watching "American Idol", "Dancing with the Stars" and "Survivor", you WOULD begin to think that everything is based on viewer call-ins and who the favorite is to win.
      In the REAL world, Hobblebrain, we have leaders who take stands against things, regardless of public opinion, popularity or polls. I cringe to think where we would be had blow-hard Al Bore or Johnny Do-nothing Kerry had gotten in to office.
      Reply
      1 Reply
      - 0%
        RoyHobbs1 year, 2 months ago
        
        Nothing with logic, just lame insults. Typical. Sorry, I don't watch any of those shows you mentioned. I'm surprised you didn't call me a Lib, that seems to be the one used the most.
        Reply
90%
Raiderwall1 year, 2 months ago

Our role as world leader would've been greatly enhanced had Al Gore been president. Certainly the Taliban wouldn't been running free and wild in Kabul.
What has George Bush accomplished? NOTHING. He's done more harm than good. For all his bluster and bravado Al Qaeda has set up shop in Iraq run under his chickenhawk nose. Iran has gained influence throughout the middle east, and practically runs Iraq. The Taliban are regaining power throughout Afghanistan. It's almost as if Bush is working for the other side. He's truly incompetent. He's wasted our money, our troops, our good will after 9/11, and burnt right through his political capital.
The GOP prez candidates promise more of the same loser crap. It's time for a change. The only GOP candidate worth a damn is Ron Paul, and he doesn't stand a chance within his own party, a party of losers.

Reply
100%
tchef1 year, 2 months ago

Here is a prime example of why you don't start another war until you finish the first one. Most of our attention is focused on Iraq and this has allowed the Taliban to grow in power once again.
Reply
2 Replies
- 96%
  RoyHobbs1 year, 2 months ago
  
  Don't forget we're thinking about Iran too.
  Reply
- 0%
  HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
  
  And Sudan, can't let the Chinese have all that oil
  Reply
96%
Wizeone1 year, 2 months ago

The only mistake Bush has made with Iraq is not admitting that there were mistakes made immediately. But then if he had then he would have had to have said what they were. If he had done that he would have been helping our enemies. If he had helped our enemies he would have been lamblasted by the press and the dems. The man is damned if he does or doesn't. No one asks what would I have done then. Actually, I take that back we do know except now they say things like I voted for it before I voted against it after I voted behind it when I flip flopped but I can't decide what to do now. Here, this is what the latest poll says I should do.
Politicians should be voting for what is best for the country not what is best for their party.
Reply
100%
Raiderwall1 year, 2 months ago

Bush would've had to admit he shouldn't have invaded Iraq because it was a bad idea to open a second front in the war on terror.. He also would've had to admit that Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. and that he and his crew cherry picked the intelligence to fabricate a reason for invading Iraq. Therefore he'd have to admit there was no real reason to invade Iraq.
He'd also have to admit he trusted the wrong people, the Iraqi exiles who told him it'd be a cakewalk, that he didn't use enough troops to secure the country, that he's wasted billions of dollars and has nothing to show for it.
He'd have to admit he's ignored or been unable to go after Al Qeada because he's tied up US resources in Iraq, where Al Qaeda has set up under our noses.
He'd have to admit that the Surge is his most recent attempt to do what he originally thought he had done in 03, accomplish the mission.
Yeah, anyone with a track record like that might be due for a little criticism.
Reply
100%
Raiderwall1 year, 2 months ago

So, yeah Bush became a prisoner of his own politics, to the point of spending more time on spin than on effective strategy or policy.
At any rate, overextending the war on terror to include regime change in Iraq was an unwarranted expansion. It was the equivalent of sticking your neck out furthur than had to be done. It wasn't what was best for the country, and has since required Bush and Rove to work overtime attempting to justify this unwarranted and unwise action.
Since then, the whole country has been debating the political spin of the thing rather than the thing itself. Which, is what the cons do, you see it with intelligent design, and climate change. Debate the merits of the argument and the credentials of the opponent, and not the issue itself.
So, what is best for the country is to vote conservatives out of power. Get rid of their nonsense, so we can actually get to work on the thing itself.
Reply