3 NATO troops die in another "insider attack"

CBS

(CBS/AP) KABUL, Afghanistan - The U.S.-led military coalition in Afghanistan says three of its troops have been killed by a man in an Afghan army uniform.

A Pentagon official told CBS News that no American troops were hurt in the assault. A fourth soldier is wounded and is not expected to make it.

The attack is the latest in a rising number of disturbing shootings this year by Afghans soldiers - or insurgents dressed as government troops - on the international forces training them to fight the Taliban as the international coalition withdraws.

"Green on blue" attacks a growing problem
Watch: Mother seeks answers in "green on blue" attack
Afghan-uniformed gunman kills NATO soldier

NATO said Wednesday the latest attack came a day earlier in southern Afghanistan. It gave no other details.

Similar "insider attacks" have been rising sharply, with 34 of them so far this year. Forty-five coalition members have been killed, mostly Americans.

At least a dozen of this year's attacks have been in the past month, raising questions of a new Taliban strategy.

[Nikos_Retsos]

The Afghan troops are all "insiders!" They didn't enlist in the Afghan National Army to become the executioners of their own countrymen who oppose the U.S. occupation, because in their heart they hate the U.S. occupation too! And when the U.S. forces put them in the front lines to kill the Taliban, or to take the bullets from the Taliban, while foreign forces stay safely in the background, some of them feel sandwiched, and rather than kill their own countrymen, they turn their guns around!

"Green on Blue" killing is an unfit euphemism. The correct description is: We pay Afghans to kill other Afghans, but then they turn around and kill us! Obviously it seems a crime to us, but it is patriotism to them! Let's not forget that every story has "two sides!"

The right solution? Let's get out from there, save $ 10 billions a month (Thank you, Ron Paul), invest it here to lift our economy, and save the lives of our GIs! If our politicians don't want to do that, let's blame their stupidity - not the poor Afghan recruits who don't want to kill their own countrymen for a trivial U.S. salary. Nikos Retsos, retired professor

[worldcitizen1]

It's almost like they don't want us there????? Go figure.

[TnMuse]

This won't change until we elect a commander-in-chief who does not support the war-mongering policies we've embraced since Viet Nam. Both the Dem and Rep candidates YOU have chosen have publicly stated their full support of continued wars and possible new wars in Syria and Iran, and they both have promised continued AID to these people in Iraq and Afghanistan to "help them provide their own security". In other words we are going to keep selling them weapons. How stupid are we? YOU are responsibile. WAKE UP!

[karlmahlmann]

We don't even have a defined mission there. The whole operation is on auto-pilot. It's he same old story from vietnam, incompetent politicians. In my opinion, we should have just retaliated after 9-11 and that would have been that, but we sent our people in there with the idiotic idea that they might not hate us. guess again.

[aintfakin]

the defined mission is to train these cretins and let them handle their security
hahahahahaha

[ballwyllo]

Pull out now! Let them go back to the stone ages!

[worldcitizen1]

Maybe they like things that way. After the British, Soviets US etc. it might be real relaxing. I don't believe they invited us?