French troops killed by Taliban

[Eugene]

Source: BBC

9 June 2012 Last updated at 13:39 GMT

France says four of its soldiers have been killed and five others wounded in an attack in eastern Afghanistan.

The Taliban said one of their suicide bombers carried out the attack on a Nato convoy in Kapisa province. Several Afghan civilians were also wounded.

President Francois Hollande said he "shared the grief of the families".

After his election last month, he announced French combat troops would leave Afghanistan by the end of 2012, two years before the main Nato pullout.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]


Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18377761

[may3rd]

1. Don't expect the taliban to apologize for using stealth fighters

the suicide bomber in Saturday's attack approached a French Nato convoy wearing a burka


France plans to get out in a few short months anyway.
Would this be considered a victory for women around the world ?

/sarc

[Arctic Dave]

2. Should the title have been,

"French troops die helping other nation occupy Afghanistan"?


I'm sure the victims will get the same non apology as we give. You know, they shouldn't pal around with occupiers and such.

[coalition_unwilling]

3. I'm sure the British said something similar about

George Washington, oh, ca. 1776.

Funny joke along those lines: So George Washington and Lord Cornwallis are getting together to decide upon the rules of war that will govern their upcoming battles. They decide to toss the dice to decide who gets to make the rules. As it happens, Washington wins the dice roll. "OK," he tells Cornwallis. "You and your men will dress in bright red and march in strict formation down the middle of the country roads. I and my men will dress in earth colors and hide behind trees."

True story

[BadtotheboneBob]

4. A question I never see asked...

... Who is providing the arms and logistical support for the Taliban? Weapons, ammunition, explosives, food, medical supplies etc. Who? Does anyone have any ideas or thoughts on the issue?

[Posteritatis]

5. It takes very little to keep a low-tech soldier in the field

Afghanistan's also about 30% weaponry by mass and volume at this point, much like other parts of the world with endemic violence like Somalia, Congo, etc.

There's enough stuff in the area from decades of war, and a lot of it is very rugged indeed. They wouldn't need state-level sponsorship to keep putting up at least something of a fight, when simple scrounging, some smuggling from across the borders, theft from coalition or government stockpiles, etc. will do quite a bit. Also, people there are simply used to getting by with very, very little compared to what we'd take for granted; they'd be able to stretch things further.

I'm sure there is some state-level stuff coming in, much like the US arming their predecessors in the eighties, but that'd more likely to be small amounts of high-tech gear instead of food or AK rounds.