You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Afghanistan
Coalition raid toll rises to over 90 - Karzai fires Afghan General
2008-08-25
HERAT, Afghanistan, Aug 24, (Agencies): An investigation has found that more than 90 civilians, mostly women and children, were killed in coalition air strikes days ago, an Afghan government minister told AFP Sunday. President Hamid Karzai ordered the investigation into FridayÂ’s operation in the western province of Herat after Afghan officials said high numbers of civilians were killed but the US-led coalition said only 30 militants died.

The toll is one of the highest for civilians since international troops arrived in Afghanistan to topple the hardline Taleban regime in late 2001 and comes after a string of such incidents, most of them involving air strikes. “We went to the area and found out that the bombardment was very heavy, lots of houses have been destroyed and more than 90 non-combatants including women, children and elderly people have died,” the Islamic affairs minister told AFP after his visit to Shindand district earlier Sunday.

“Most are women and children,” said the minister, Nematullah Shahrani. Shahrani said his investigation was continuing and he was due to meet US Special Forces who had been involved in the operation with Afghan troops and commandos.

“They have claimed that Taleban were there. They must prove it,” the minister said. “So far, it is not clear for us why the coalition conducted the air strikes,” he said. He said his preliminary investigation had also found that there was no coordination between the Afghan and international troops involved.

Karzai meanwhile issued a decree ordering the “immediate removal” of the top army general for western Afghanistan and a commando commander after the “tragic air strike and irresponsible and imprecise military operation.”

The two were fired for “negligence and concealing facts,” a statement from Karzai’s office said. The strikes have drawn angry reactions from locals, who demonstrated on Saturday, torching a police vehicle and brandishing banners reading “Death to America.”

Meanwhile, the death of 10 French soldiers in an ambush by insurgents in Afghanistan has stoked a cry at home for France to rethink its commitment to the seven-year mission led by the United States. Most French voters want out, and the opposition is ratcheting up the pressure on President Nicolas Sarkozy’s government — though analysts say France and other allies will dig in for the fight even as they insist upon a new look at Nato’s strategy against the Taleban and al-Qaeda.

The word “quagmire” has popped up repeatedly when Afghanistan is discussed in Paris political circles — even in Sarkozy’s own party — since Monday’s well-planned ambush of a French-led patrol in the Uzbin Valley east of Kabul.

It was the deadliest attack on international troops in Afghanistan in more than three years, and the latest sign that the insurgency is growing stronger. “The pressure is going to be: How do we get this war right?” said Francois Heisbourg, who heads the state-funded Foundation for Strategic Research think-tank in Paris.

French Prime Minister Francois Fillon has ordered a parliamentary debate and vote on FranceÂ’s role in Afghanistan, part of a new law requiring a lawmaker vote on foreign military missions lasting more than four months. They are expected to take place between Sept 22 and Sept 30.

Analysts say there is little chance that parliament — where Sarkozy’s conservatives have a large majority — will vote to end France’s participation in the Afghan mission. But Afghanistan is likely to grow in the French public eye.

On Tuesday and Wednesday, the defense and foreign ministers will separately face questions from parliamentary panels about the ambush — such as the intelligence failings that led to such casualties in a well-trained French patrol. Aside from the 10 soldiers killed, another 21 were injured.
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#10  Maybe we could trade Afghanistan for Georgia.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2008-08-25 12:18  

#9  Give Afghanistan back to the Ruskis. They deserve eachother.
Posted by: penguin   2008-08-25 11:27  

#8  And if they can't I'm sure their supporters in Reuters and the AP can.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2008-08-25 11:06  

#7  Photography is so easy these days. When is Afghanistan going to release some photos of the strike areas so we can judge their claims for ourselves? So far, it's all talk.

What good would photography do? I'm pretty sure the enemy is perfectly capable of producing 90 dead civilians, and pictures of same, on demand.
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2008-08-25 10:55  

#6  Ummm...
You know this sceanrio stinks of a counter-intel move against coalition forces.
It's just the type of move you'd expect from a desperate force seeking to forment hostility toward the 'enemy'...
Posted by: logi_cal   2008-08-25 10:45  

#5  Photography is so easy these days. When is Afghanistan going to release some photos of the strike areas so we can judge their claims for ourselves? So far, it's all talk.
Posted by: Darrell   2008-08-25 09:36  

#4  Our forces were unusually quick, adamant and precise in releasing their after-action report to the public. Our opposition has been even more adamant than usual in pushing their version of events. I hope we are not going to have to walk back our words and say 'oops, sorry', though given how we presented it is hard to see how we could be wrong (it would require outright lies up the chain of command.)
Posted by: Glenmore   2008-08-25 09:27  

#3  The war on drugs and the war on various kinds of militants cannot be separated cleanly. To make lots of money producing and selling dope, you need a large scale security force, i. e., a militia. To start a revolution you need a militia and lots of money. Dope and radical ideologs are made for each other.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon   2008-08-25 07:39  

#2  The war on chemical choices (drugs) increases the costs of the war on terror.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2008-08-25 06:16  

#1  The war in Afghanistan is more about the protection of the world's heroin supply than it is anything political or religious. There are literally billions of dollars at risk and many of those billions get funneled off to the pockets of powerful regional figures.

There is going to be a lot of "inertia" to keep things as they are and keep the usual suspects in power as they facilitate a drugs trade that spans the globe and involves very powerful and very shadowy figures around the globe.

How much do you think the mob might want to invest to see that the flow of heroin is maintained?
Posted by: crosspatch   2008-08-25 03:50  

00:00