attack. commanders will always minimize collateral damage. this is one of the key tenants of what we how we operate. in this case, just like mr. kirby said, that this strike prevented a high profile attack against both, you know, coalition and u.s. forces and other afghan civilians. and so as we looked at the information that with he during the time of the strike, we took all of those measures in place and the decision was made to strike and thwart that attack. and on the fired rockets, so the u.s. force protection measures engaged those rockets and apparently they hit one of them or you didn t engage the other ones? you just wanted to engage that specific one? as we look at just going back, the force protection c-ram
an ordinance expert and trainee told me looking at the available photos of the scene show a lack of soot on the lawns, relatively little amount of shrapnel. a tree knocked down with the foliage intact. after viewing these things, you know, what do you still stand by with a high degree of confidence there was a significant explosion and not something like a gas tank explosion or something like that that may misdirect a secondary explosion? we know there was a secondary explosion. assessed what was there was going to be used in a high profile attack. i don t have details on the information that you are saying there but our intelligence experts and centcom will
me that the photos of the scene show a look of soot on the walls, so relatively little shrapnel. so after viewing these things, what is your feeling, do you think it was a significant explosion and not something like a gas tank explosion or something like that they may have been there and what would be used in a high profile attack. i don t have details on the investigation that you re talking about there. but we will continue to assess
e.o.d. tech from the publicly available photos of scene show a lack of soot on the the walls, relatively little amount of shrapnel, there is a tree that was knocked down that was with the foilage still in act. so after viewing these things, do you still stand by with a high degree of confidence there was a significant explosion and not something like a gas tank explosion or something like that that may misdirect the evidence of a big secondary explosion? we know that, as i said earlier there was a secondary explosion. that assessed that what was there was going to be used in a high profile attack. i don t have details on the the information that you re just saying, but our intelligence experts and the cent com will continue to assess the post
Diskussion Das englische Fußball-Herz blutet wieder. Das Fußball-Nationalteam der Männer wird sein Elfmetertrauma bei großen Turnieren nicht los. Das verlorene EM-Finale im heimischen Wembley-Stadion gegen Italien am Sonntag bedeute für die „Three Lions“ die siebente Niederlage im Elfmeterschießen im neunten Anlauf bei einer EM oder WM. Die Wartezeit auf einen Titel hält an, die Trauer darüber war gewaltig. Teamchef Gareth Southgate saß am Morgen danach wie ein Häuflein Elend bei der Pressekonferenz. „Es fühlt sich heute Morgen an, als hätte man mir die Eingeweide rausgerissen“, sagte Southgate. Dies könnte auf Schuldgefühle zurück zu führen sein, bestimmte der Trainer doch für das Elfmeterschießen um die erste Krone seit dem WM-Titel 1966 mit Marcus Rashford (23), Jadon Sancho (21) und Bukayo Saka (19) drei zwar hochtalentierte, aber doch sehr junge Männer.