| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Afghanistan | ||
| 21 (terrorist-sheltering) Civilians Killed in Afghan Airstrike | ||
| 2007-05-09 | ||
| KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - Airstrikes called in by U.S. Special Forces soldiers fighting with insurgents in southern Afghanistan killed at least 21 civilians, officials said Wednesday. One coalition soldier was also killed. Helmand provincial Gov. Assadullah Wafa said Taliban fighters sought shelter in villagers' homes during the fighting in the Sangin district Tuesday evening, and that subsequent airstrikes killed 21 civilians, including several women and children. The U.S.-led coalition said militants fired guns, rocket propelled grenades and mortars at U.S. Special Forces and Afghan soldiers on patrol 15 miles north of Sangin. Maj. William Mitchell, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition, said troops killed a "significant" number of militants. "We don't have any report of civilian casualties. There are enemy casualties — I think the number is significant," Mitchell said without releasing an exact figure. A resident of the area, Mohammad Asif, said five homes in the village of Soro were bombed during the battle, killing 38 people and wounding more than 20. He said Western troops and Afghan forces had blocked people from entering the area. 38 killed minus 21 civilians equals 17 terrorists (accepting THEIR numbers).
The battle left one coalition soldier dead, the U.S. military said. The military did not release the soldier's nationality, but it was likely an American Special Forces soldier. The soldier's death brings to 48 the number of NATO or coalition soldiers who have died in Afghanistan this year. Sangin, a militant hotbed in the heart of Afghanistan's biggest opium poppy region, has been the site of heavy fighting in recent weeks. The report of civilian casualties comes less than a week after Afghan officials said that 51 civilians were killed in the western province of Herat. It also comes one day after the U.S. military apologized and paid compensation to the families of 19 people killed and 50 wounded by U.S. Marines Special Forces who Afghanistan's upper house of parliament on Tuesday passed a bill calling for a halt to all international military operations unless coordinated with the Afghan government, action seen as a rebuke of the international mission here. I'm sure getting government approval (Afghan or US Congress) to fight one's way out of an ambush is going to work real well.
| ||
| Posted by:Glenmore |
| #10 Coalition aircraft destroyed enemy command and control compounds including an enemy underground tunnel network The opium cartel has been busy, if they had time to dig a tunnel network... and someone did well to locate it for destruction. Woozle Elmeter2970, a lot of Afghanis are putting everything on the line, including their wives, children, uncles and cousins, to make a go of their country. But Opium Territory was a major source of income for the Taliban, and before that for the local warlords, and they're tied by blood relationships (the most important, in that part of the world) to the tribes on the Pakistan side of the border, not to mention the longstanding support of the ISI (Pakistan's CIA, essentially). As for Pakistan, the Pakistani press often reports (as posted here at Rantburg) that President Bush and the US in general not only do not trust President General Musharref and the ruling oligarchy, but force him at frequent intervals to prove that he is on our side of the WoT. Hence the occasional news item about stray Pakistani missiles accidentally fired into certain villages and such... and no doubt other things that never get reported. Our troops are on second, third, fourth year-long rotations to various battle zones; they've been going flat out since 2003. How many fronts would you have them take on at once, pray tell? Especially while Congress is playing stupid games with funding, so that at the moment everything not critical to current actions is being put on hold until further notice? As for Bin Laden, he has become a nullity. We haven't heard a peep from him in years, only from his #2 man, who is fond of boasting about all sorts of things from his hideaway deep in the tribal territories. This is a war on terror (ok, really on Islamofascism or Jihadi Islam, or whatever we're calling it nowadays) not on Mr. Bin Laden, whose only virtues were his telegenic eyes and his money bags. Finally, how do you propose to conquer Pakistan? If you look at a map, youll discover that a significant portion of the country is little valleys tucked in the Himalayas -- where a great many consider RPG launchers to be normal equipment for household defense, and the local tribes support the Taliban, Al Qaeda and all the rest of the jihadi groups who come there to rest and recover. There was a nice little battle between the tribes against a group of Chechnyans recently, with several hundred deaths on each side until the Chechnyans gave up and agreed to go jihading in Afghanistan instead. Quite a few military people here at Rantburg have opined that the only serious option with regard to Pakistan is to glass it over -- the place can only be destroyed, not conquered. Please share your own expertise on the matter, dear Woozle Elmeter2970, that we may know how to judge your opinions. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-05-09 19:08 |
| #9 Afghanistan's upper house of parliament on Tuesday passed a bill calling for a halt to all international military operations unless coordinated with the Afghan government And just what exactly do they propose to bring to the table, aside from warning the terrorists to go hide somewhere else? This is time-sensitive stuff. What are they going to do different? I'd threaten to pull out unless the coalition has the authority to do what needs to be done. |
| Posted by: gorb 2007-05-09 18:14 |
| #8 Maybe the next airstrike should be on the Afghanistan "upper house of parliament". |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2007-05-09 12:42 |
| #7 Steve, they're pulling their weight. It's just that there are not a lot of them. 30k versus 150k in Iraq. |
| Posted by: Chuck Simmins 2007-05-09 12:02 |
| #6 It's gratifying to read that the ANA stepped up in a significant engagement. Let's see more of that. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2007-05-09 11:45 |
| #5 When is someone from the military command going to appear before this "legislative body" and make it perfectly clear that enemy soldiers hiding in their homes or others only results in destruction of these places and anyone occcupying it. There will be no change or accomodation. What needs change is their attitude that they can run and hide among non-fighters. Tell them directly and tell them to pass it along to their compatriots. On another note, I think we could eliminate the entire population of Afghanistan with little discernable difference. Why are we pretending that the problem is not Pakistan and mounting direct attacks there? We should be killing most of their population to overcome the real problem. Our stated task is to run Bin Laden to ground, true? We all concede he's likely holed up and protected by Pakistan. Let's go. Americans are tired of this subterfuge and BS. If we were actually eliminating problems I think support would not waver. All this peripheral hocus pocus is what diminishes support. What is wrong with leadership? It is missing. This is just like watching a hound chasing his own tail. |
| Posted by: Woozle Elmeter2970 2007-05-09 11:32 |
| #4 UPDATE: Members of 1st Kandak, 1st Brigade, 209th Afghan National Army Corps combat advised by U.S. Special Forces were engaged with small-arms, mortar, and rocket propelled grenade fire from an unknown number of Taliban fighters 25 kilometers (15.5 miles) northeast of the Sangin District Center in Helmand Province on May 8. The combined force returned fire at Taliban fighters near the village of Lwar Malazi, and then pursued retreating fighters. During the pursuit, the friendly force continued to receive enemy small-arms, RPG, and mortar fire from the western side of the Helmand River. The ANA and Coalition force maintained contact with the enemy as Taliban fighters took cover in compounds or continued firing on Coalition forces. Coalition close air support aircraft destroyed three enemy command and control compounds including an enemy underground tunnel network located along the upper Sangin River Valley. During the 16-hour battle, ANA and Coalition forces fought through three separate enemy ambush sites while dozens of Taliban fighters from Kajaki and Lashkar Gha reinforced enemy positions. Over 200 Taliban fighters massed on the combined ANA and Coalition forces throughout the engagement. Intelligence also indicates foreign fighters and some Shindand district area Taliban fighters from Herat were involved in the battle. One Coalition member was killed in action during the long fought battle and there were no reported injuries to any Afghan civilians. http://www.centcom.mil/sites/uscentcom2/Lists/Current%20Press%20Releases/DispForm.aspx?ID=4854 |
| Posted by: Chuck Simmins 2007-05-09 10:54 |
| #3 Chuck, The reporter cites Major Mitchell who confirms "significant" casualties, though not (necessarily) civilian. It cits Gov. Wafa who claims the number 21 civilians, but admits they were killed in a battle in which the Taliban took shelter in their homes, which to me makes them totally acceptable 'collateral damage' - assuming they were not complicit, and therefor legitimate targets and not even 'collateral.' All-in-all this was a pretty well-done report, except for the original headline. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2007-05-09 10:30 |
| #2 By NOOR KHAN, Associated Press Writer Looks like another local AP stringer makes the call. To me, it looks like this should tell them that there's no place to hide. Maybe we're finally starting to learn how to fight this war... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2007-05-09 09:27 |
| #1 KABUL, Afghanistan (May 9) – Contrary to some press reports, International Security Assistance Force is unaware, at this time, of any NATO air strikes resulting in civilian casualties over the past 24 hours. |
| Posted by: Chuck Simmins 2007-05-09 09:10 |