Advertisement

Archive for Sunday, May 10, 2009

U.S. report blames Taliban for Afghan civilian deaths

May 10, 2009

Advertisement

Haji Barkat Ullah speaks Saturday with his daughter Frishta, 7, who was wounded in a coalition airstrike on Monday night in Bala Baluk district of Farah province and is recovering in a hospital in Herat, Afghanistan.

Haji Barkat Ullah speaks Saturday with his daughter Frishta, 7, who was wounded in a coalition airstrike on Monday night in Bala Baluk district of Farah province and is recovering in a hospital in Herat, Afghanistan.

— The U.S. coalition blamed Taliban militants Saturday for causing what Afghan officials say are dozens of civilian deaths during a prolonged battle that included American airstrikes. The U.S. said an unspecified number of civilians died but did not take responsibility for any deaths.

Afghanistan’s Interior Ministry declined to endorse the U.S. report, saying its own investigation would be completed soon.

Afghan officials have estimated up to 147 people died in the battle in the western province of Farah on Monday, but a U.S. spokeswoman called that number exaggerated. The U.S. report did not offer an estimate of the number killed in the battle.

The preliminary report said Taliban fighters herded Afghan villagers into houses to use as human shields while they fired on coalition forces in two villages in Farah. The report said that U.S. forces had responded to a call for help from Afghan forces and that militants attacked the troops from several locations.

Troops called for airstrikes on the militant positions, and a U.S. spokeswoman said Saturday that fighter aircraft made 13 passes over the two villages, using a combination of flares, strafing runs and bombs.

“The investigation suggests that villagers had taken refuge in a number of houses in each village. Reports also indicate that Taliban fighters deliberately forced villagers into houses from which they then attacked ANSF (Afghan security forces) and Coalition forces,” a statement from the U.S. coalition said.

Neither the U.S. nor Afghan forces took responsibility for killing civilians in Saturday’s statement. A second U.S. statement said villagers seeking medical treatment told Afghan doctors that militants were fighting from rooftops while forcing the villagers to remain in their compound.

“The joint investigation team strongly condemns the brutality of the Taliban extremists deliberately targeting Afghan civilians and using them as human shields,” the statement said.

Other groups expressed concern for the investigative process. Human Rights Watch on Saturday blasted the U.S. military and said the attack was likely to be “the largest and most tragic loss of life to U.S. bombs so far in Afghanistan.”

“Yet another devastating error inevitably calls into question the continued viability of the use of U.S. and NATO airpower in Afghanistan,” said Rachel Reid, the group’s Afghanistan researcher.

At the U.N. headquarters in Kabul, an official said that some at the world body were uneasy that the “very same people who are accused of causing the civilian casualties are being sent back to investigate.” The official — who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to share such internal views — called for an independent investigation.

The U.S. said the findings came from a joint U.S.-Afghan investigation. But the country’s Interior Ministry and Farah’s police chief both said that their delegations were continuing to investigate and that they did not endorse the U.S. report.

Comments

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 11 months ago

Really, Tom? Could you name those criteria? And please base it on what I've actually posted-- not the straw men you want to claim I've posted.

0

Tom Shewmon 4 years, 11 months ago

Bozo is not really an apologist. He is merely using different criteria now than before to measure all things war.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 11 months ago

Really, snap? Funny, you want to paint me as an "apologist," although you don't say for whom I am apologizing, nor can you point to where I have given any "apologies."

Instead of trying to prop up straw men for indiscernible purposes, why not try educating yourself as to what's really happening, snap?

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/patrick-cockburn-who-killed-120-civilians-the-us-says-its-not-a-story-1682310.html

0

Flap Doodle 4 years, 11 months ago

"Today the term "apologist" is colloquially applied in a general manner to include groups and individuals systematically promoting causes, justifying orthodoxies, or denying certain events, even of crimes. Apologists have been characterized as being deceptive, or "whitewashing" their cause, primarily through omission of negative facts (selective perception) and exaggeration of positive ones, techniques of classical rhetoric. When used in this context, the term generally has a pejorative meaning. See also: bozo" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apologist

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 11 months ago

Sorry, barry, but my previous post was anything but an endorsement of Obama's policies. His policy in Afghanistan (if there is one) is so far just as heinous as Bush's was (if he had one.)

0

madmike 4 years, 11 months ago

If it comes to using ground troops to attack a position or an air strike, I'll chose the airstrike every time. That is unless it Bozo doing the attack then i'll just let him go on his own!

0

barrypenders 4 years, 11 months ago

What a brilliant notion! President Bush used to bomb the bejesus out of those folk and Iraq, but all I ever heard from liberals was all the innocent lives that were lost because of wayward smart bombs.

Its nice to see that things are progressive with the liberals.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 11 months ago

While the Taliban should likely share the blame for the loss of civilian life, the simple fact is that when attacks are launched from the air, the pilots can never be certain of who is going to get hit. High civilian casualties are always the inevitable result of air strikes of any kind.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.