| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| Strike 'killed 60 young Afghans' says UN |
| 2008-08-26 |
| There is convincing evidence that 60 children and 30 adults were killed in a US air strike in western Afghanistan last Friday, the United Nations says. The US originally said its planes had killed 30 militants in the attack in the province of Herat. President Karzai sacked two senior Afghan army officers over the incident. The US says Afghan forces led the operation in the district of Shindand. The incident has worsened relations between Mr Karzai and foreign forces. On Monday the government said it wanted to renegotiate the terms under which US-led forces and Nato-led forces operate in Afghanistan. If confirmed, the Shindand incident is one of the worst cases of foreign forces killing Afghan civilians. The UN investigation was carried out by its Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (Unama). "Investigations by Unama found convincing evidence, based on the testimony of eyewitnesses, and others, that some 90 civilians were killed, including 60 children, 15 women and 15 men," the UN's Special Envoy to Afghanistan, Kai Eide, said in a statement issued on Tuesday. "The destruction from aerial bombardment was clearly evident with some seven-eight houses having been totally destroyed and serious damage to many others. "Local residents were able to confirm the number of casualties, including names, age and gender of the victims." The UN investigation adds further weight to the Afghan government's own report into the incident. President Karzai's office said on Sunday that "89 of our innocent countrymen, including women and children" died in the incident. Reports say that Afghan soldiers were fighting Taleban militants in the village of Azizabad and called in US air forces for help. President Karzai subsequently sacked Gen Jalandar Shah Behnam, head of the army in western Afghanistan, and Maj Abdul Jabar, for "neglecting their duties and concealing the facts", indicating that they were partly to blame for the incident. The US has said it is carrying out its own investigation into the attack. An Afghan general said the air strike was launched following intelligence that a Taleban commander, Mullah Siddiq, was presiding over a meeting of militants. Afghan tribal elders said a bomb was dropped on a large group of mourners at a funeral wake. The issue of civilian casualties has been a constant source of friction between Mr Karzai and international forces. |
| Posted by:john frum |
| #11 This was the statement our side made; unusually early and precise. The U.S. military disputes the civilian casualty figures and says troops called for airstrikes after a group of wanted militants fired on a joint patrol of coalition and Afghan forces. "joint patrol" - we had boots on the ground with the Afghan Army unit. "wanted militants" - the joint patrol was looking for someone specific - this was not a random mission. "fired on" - the joint patrol did not initiate the action; they were probably getting too close to the wanted militant for his comfort. U.S. coalition spokesman, First Lieutenant Nathan Perry, told VOA the troops were able to search the compound following the battle to confirm the casualty figures. He says five civilians, who were believed to be related to the militants, were among the 30 people killed in the strike. Whether it was five or 65 civilian casualties I am confident they were connected with the militants in some close way. And I figure it was closer to five, since I know our guys can count - even if they have to count the feet and assume they can divide by two for the number killed. "There was already a battlefield assessment of this operation," said the spokesman. "We want to point out that this was an Afghan army operation. Coalition troops were in support of the Afghan operation. And after the operation, those troops on the ground were able to do a battlefield assessment. Not only did they confirm that they killed 25 militants, they also confirmed the main target that they were in pursuit of." Pretty unequivocal: our guys were there, they confirmed the number of dead and they confirmed they got the target they were after. Now, WHO was this target and why have his allies gone to such lengths to discredit the operation that got him? Ordinarily I would be willing to accept that we called in air support when attacked from fortified positions and flattened the 7-8 houses claimed, along with the 90 Talifriends or hostages in them. Too bad, so sad. But I would not expect an official spokesman to clearly state that WE counted 25 bad militants and 5 bad civilians killed, and state it BEFORE the Afghan claims of 90 innocent civilians killed, if it was not essentially correct. There is a lot of smoke being blown around this event. Our enemy has found a tactic that works - claim we killed a bunch of innocents (even if we didn't, or if we did because they weren't so innocent, or were being used as human shields, or even were killed by the 'bunnies.) Seems like the whole world is willing to buy that propaganda from them. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2008-08-26 23:07 |
| #10 gorb, buddy...it's NAMGSLA. YOU FORGOT THE SHEEP! |
| Posted by: anymouse 2008-08-26 20:20 |
| #9 Sounds more like an islamic NAMBLA meeting Could have been a NAMGLA meeting. Did they find any goats? |
| Posted by: gorb 2008-08-26 17:29 |
| #8 Hmmmmm...who's wake was it? |
| Posted by: tu3031 2008-08-26 14:54 |
| #7 Everyone is a civilian in Afghanistan especially after they have been killed. |
| Posted by: Jack is Back! 2008-08-26 13:21 |
| #6 Well, this is starting to stink badly. The long knives are out to sully the reputation of the US and NATO forces. I don't buy the story on its face, but who knows, shit happens in war. Of course not a peep about the talibunnies hiding behind women and children, and it is that that has my BS meter pegged. Note that we've heard nothing from the US forces. Clearly they are doing their own investigation. But in the end, if Karzai wants to put the clamps on us, then I say we bug out of that hellhole. It offers no strategic importance other than to be an irritant to Pakistan. And if they want to go all talibunnie again, we just carpet bomb from afar. My sympathy meter is not moving. |
| Posted by: remoteman 2008-08-26 12:49 |
| #5 nambla - pretty popular in those parts I hear ... |
| Posted by: Legolas 2008-08-26 12:15 |
| #4 Jame...Nah. 60 young adults. A few Older muslim men. Sounds more like an islamic NAMBLA meeting. |
| Posted by: anymouse 2008-08-26 11:59 |
| #3 Considering that to have killed that many children around here you have had to hit a school in session, you are probably right. Also, look at who they interviewed: locals and then TOOK THEIR WORD for who was killed. No gravesites visited. The UN is pathetic when it comes to reporting. Anybody want to bet the investigator sent is named Abdul Mohammed? |
| Posted by: Jame Retief 2008-08-26 11:55 |
| #2 You don't suppose that the attack was against a Taliban madrassa training these children to be gunmen and suicide bombers? It would be a good place to hold a meeting of Taliban leaders, now wouldn't it. No help, I suppose in identifying any of the adult men. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2008-08-26 10:20 |
| #1 That's "60 young Afghans" as in 60 males, ages 15-21. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2008-08-26 10:18 |