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/South Asia
US taking 'fewer' Afghan prisoners
2005-01-04
Now there's a headline that warms the heart.
KABUL: The US military is taking as few prisoners as possible in its campaign against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, an American commander said yesterday, partly to forestall more complaints about its conduct after the deaths in custody of at least eight prisoners. Colonel Gary Cheek, the US commander for eastern Afghanistan, said the troops under his command would be "relentless" in their pursuit of insurgents, including some 20 unidentified top leaders, through the bitter Afghan winter. But he said the soldiers were taking as few prisoners as possible as they try to win stronger support from the local population, and following a review of the military's policy on detentions last year. "We are always adapting to the changes in the environment and our commanders, our soldiers, are also trying to be more sensitive to the Afghan culture," Cheek said at a news conference. "I've told our commanders, for example, to minimise the number of Afghan nationals or others that they detain."
Dang. I thought that they would just ...
The US military, which still commands 18,000 troops here, has taken thousands of prisoners in Afghanistan since Operation Enduring Freedom, Washington's anti-terrorism drive, began after the September 11, 2001, attacks in the United States. Those not quickly released are transferred to larger jails at US bases in Bagram and Kandahar, from where many have in the past been sent to the American prison for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. However, allegations of mistreatment - dating back to before the prisoner abuse scandal in Iraq - have hurt efforts to win over ordinary Afghans. When asked about the death in September of a prisoner at his own headquarters in the city of Khost, Cheek said the man had complained to a guard that he was bitten by a snake. Sher Mohammad Khan complained to his jailers that he was bitten by a snake hours before his death, a high-ranking US military official said. Doctors could not find evidence of a bite when he was first detained but when medics checked on him later in the evening he had stopped breathing, said Colonel Gary Cheek, the US military commander in eastern Afghanistan. "Because we could find nothing wrong with him the doctor left... the second time that the medic went back to check on him... they found that he was no longer breathing," he added.
"Gee Sarge, musta been some snake."
Spokesman Maj Mark McCann said fewer prisoners were now being sent to Guantanamo, reflecting a decline in militant activity in Afghanistan. He also said detainees could be freed this year under a planned amnesty. The officials gave no figures to show whether detention rates had indeed declined, although Cheek said the three holding facilities under his control at bases in eastern Afghanistan were currently empty.
Posted by:Steve White

#10  Dead men also need no lawyers.
Posted by: tu3031   2005-01-04 6:45:20 PM  

#9  "Soldiers received strong and consistent guidance regarding the storage of food in their tent that could attract rodents and, subsequently snakes."

the manual goes on to say that food should be stored next to terrorist detention facilities...
Posted by: Carl in N.H.   2005-01-04 12:28:20 PM  

#8  From Stratagy Page: December 31, 2004: Without providing any numbers, American commanders have admitted that they are now able to be a lot more selective in who they arrest. Early on, American troops would round up nearly every adult male in villages or compounds they raided. But three years of compiling information, and gaining experience, have enabled U.S. troops to be a lot more selective.

Making a list and checking it twice, we know who's been naughty and nice...
Posted by: Steve   2005-01-04 10:17:56 AM  

#7  The bottom line is good news, basically. "Take fewer prisoners because so few of them are actually bad guys that it's no longer productive to arrest everybody to find out." What with the border outposts and large-scale offensives, the bad guys have pretty well been eliminated, especially in winter.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2005-01-04 9:51:10 AM  

#6  Dead men tell no tales.
Posted by: 2b   2005-01-04 9:23:30 AM  

#5  From Army Health Care:

And there were other hazards. Rodents were a problem at camp, not so much for disease but for the predators they attracted - snakes. Afghanistan has 270 varieties of snakes and 52 are poisonous, including the aggressive Saw-Scaled Viper. A bite from this snake could prove fatal. Soldiers received strong and consistent guidance regarding the storage of food in their tent that could attract rodents and, subsequently snakes.
Posted by: Steve   2005-01-04 8:16:25 AM  

#4  The US military is taking as few prisoners as possible in its campaign against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, an American commander said yesterday, partly to forestall more complaints about its conduct after the deaths in custody of at least eight prisoners.

The American military, teaching LLL and M$M the law of unintended consequences worldwide. The only problem I see here is that failure to take prisoners alive reduces the incentive to surrender. Perhaps the military should consider that consequence. But the ultimate judgement should lie with the commander on the scene who has the most information with which to make the decision.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis   2005-01-04 7:11:27 AM  

#3  Whay kind of posinious snakes would there be in Afganistan,anybody know?
Posted by: Raptor   2005-01-04 6:00:50 AM  

#2  I've been saying this all along. No prisoners means no accusations of "torture", no upkeep, and no expending of resources for such.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-01-04 1:24:30 AM  

#1  Fewer prisoners because they no longer survive the engagement would suit me. Bigger calibres, more hits, less talk.
Posted by: .com   2005-01-04 1:22:49 AM  

00:00