A US air strike in eastern Afghanistan on Sunday killed 47 civilians, 39 of them women and children while another wargasm was had at the White House and Pentagon.

Way to make friends there.

{ Deleted, Spam. SiteMonitor}

Oh, by the way........

WE ARE A NATION OF WAR CRIMINALS.

{ Deleted, Off Topic. Please take it to an open thread or the LNMC. SiteMonitor}

and yet some wonder why we are disliked by other nations

CafeenMan @ 9:

Why are we taking their word for it?

Good question. I've been discussing this incident with other Veteran's at Votevets.org and it seems that we have to take their word for it because U.S. forces are so overstretched that they do not have enough troops to verify the claims. Nor do we have enough field observers on hand to spot any legitimate targets.

Omg, when is this nightmare going to end!

Correspondents say the issue of civilian casualties is hugely sensitive in Afghanistan.

Civilian casualties a huge issue? Really? How strange. It must be their religion or something. Those inscrutable Muslims, you know . . .

the modern war on "terrorism".....killing from a distance
few experience the emotional pain...it's like playing xbox
for these people....just like not letting us see the flag draped coffins returning to the u.s....they want us to be
numb it's sick

Wounded Knee.
My Lai.
Waco.
And isn't this the SECOND time our military has bombed a wedding in Afghanistan?

Our government is great at killing women and children. There should be a statue to memorialize our kindness.

[Deleted. Off topic. Please take it to an Open Thread. Thank you. Site Monitor]

Krisken @ 11:

CafeenMan @ 9:

Why are we taking their word for it?

Because, sadly, at this point they have more credibility than our government does.

Well, the reason I'm asking is this is at least the third or fourth time the U.S. has blown up an Afghani wedding party. So I can draw four possible conclusions:

1) We're not aiming at them but we're an exceptionally bad shot and it's just a coincidence that we keep missing in the direction of wedding parties.

2) Our military likes bad press so much they keep blowing up wedding parties for no other reason than to keep getting bad press.

3) The wedding parties are legitimate wedding parties. But they also are gatherings of lots of known bad guys in the same place at the same time so we blow them up because it's worth the bad press to get so many bad guys.

4) The wedding parties aren't wedding parties at all and the Afghanis are lying because they know it gets us bad press and they aren't exactly on our side.

Anyway, I'm suspicious at this point. The first time or two I took it at face value but now it's getting to be a little incredible. I don't know anything one way or the other but my bullshit meters are getting a reading.

My friends, you have to break eggs to make an omelet my friends. Bomb bomb bomb. Bomb bomb Iran. Eh eh eh…..

no one in their right mind could think this excusable or acceptable. the human shield stories are lies and convenient mems.

but when the british pilot shot the british soldiers, or when the american pilot shot american soldiers, the meme fails and you get the truth.

they get faulty reports, haphazard 'intelligence', tortured confessions and then they send a pilot to kill someone from a half-mile away. when the pilots fire on someone, they have no idea who or what it is.

this is modern warfare - the most efficient way to 'kill them all and let god sort them out.'

CafeenMan @ 24:

Krisken @ 11:

CafeenMan @ 9:

Why are we taking their word for it?

Because, sadly, at this point they have more credibility than our government does.

Well, the reason I'm asking is this is at least the third or fourth time the U.S. has blown up an Afghani wedding party. So I can draw four possible conclusions:

1) We're not aiming at them but we're an exceptionally bad shot and it's just a coincidence that we keep missing in the direction of wedding parties.

2) Our military likes bad press so much they keep blowing up wedding parties for no other reason than to keep getting bad press.

3) The wedding parties are legitimate wedding parties. But they also are gatherings of lots of known bad guys in the same place at the same time so we blow them up because it's worth the bad press to get so many bad guys.

4) The wedding parties aren't wedding parties at all and the Afghanis are lying because they know it gets us bad press and they aren't exactly on our side.

Anyway, I'm suspicious at this point. The first time or two I took it at face value but now it's getting to be a little incredible. I don't know anything one way or the other but my bullshit meters are getting a reading.

OFE

Thank You Nicole.

chuck @ 17:

BTW - why do we have to go to the BBC for this story?

You don't.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i8dGftYb0s4XWdUMRdIVs3vh1CKAD91RKNDO0

Anaisi @ 27:
as long as they are securing your oil, I guess everything is OK.
wait until haliburton is empowered to imprison you and your neighbors
or to fry you with the microwave truck as you protest the price of food.

I guess then it will matter.

but I guess you're not reading this.

{ Deleted, Please don't post in all Caps or in all Bold lettering. It's yelling. SiteMonitor}

odanny @ 5:

Wars all have inevitable results, and the one thing inescapable in war is the most deaths to occur are always of civilians. This will always be true as psychopaths bomb each other's lands. If people were convinced of the futility of war instead of its necessity and looked for ways to end them rather than start them when we would find ways to stop them. We have psychopaths in Washington finding ways to fight them, and fight them badly.

I agree with your sentiment, but disagree with your facts. MODERN, airborne wars kill mostly civilians. Back in the day when wars were actually fought with men and guns or knives, it was very easy to tell if you were killing a combatant or a woman or a child.

This is what is called "collateral damage". Such a nice name for murdering innocent people; don't you think? The Afghanis suffered some collateral damage when the king of the dumb fucks was stealing their oil. See how much better that reads?

Our US army kills women and children!... and damn right i'm yelling.

Erroll @ 37:

Krisken @ 11:

CafeenMan @ 9:

Why are we taking their word for it?

Because, sadly, at this point they have more credibility than our government does.

Excellent point. Since the United States government has lied concerning just about every war that it has ever been in, it then stands to reason that George Carlin's #1 rule is quite accurate: Never believe what the government tells you. But so many Americans are so quick to accept what the U.S. government tells them because they still cannot conceive that the United States can do wrong while not wishing to acknowledge that the word of a foreigner can have just as much credibility, if not more, than that of an American.

And the US government alone is capable of lying to spin history?

I'm with CafeenMan@24- there are too many ways this can be spun by different parties. Any explanation is dubious.

DigitaLiberacion' @ 42:

Our US army kills women and children!... and damn right i'm yelling.

[And we have asked you not to yell on numerous occasions, CoIntelPro. Your comments are just as valid when you don't shout. Thank you. Site Monitor]

Keep on rockin' in the free world?

Mike @ 39:

oops, well thats what you get for being brown and in a big group, Could you imagine the uproar if 49 white europeans or americans were accidently bombed at a wedding on long island? Well they shouldn't have registered at Lockheed-Martin or General Dynamics....... Oh someone already got them the 500 pound cluster bomb, that leaves a hellfire threepack or the Rose linens.

[excellent snark,imho]

This story's been all over the world press for the last few days. Google it and you can read all sides.

Seems to me (after reading numerous accounts) that the US bombed the same wedding party twice. Killed the bride too.

The main problem is that the US is relying on air power to do something only ground troops can do effectively.

But it's been the same since Day One - "Shock And Awe" - air power which inevitably kills civilians.

It's impossible to bomb ONLY insurgents who BY THEIR VERY NATURE live amongst the civilian population.

This is a FACT.

To use Air Power in either Iraq or Afghanistan ENSURES Civilian Casualties.

The US has special accounts in place to buy off the families of the victims, and has done so - or attempted to do so - thousands of times.

So - it is KNOWN that many civilians will be killed or maimed.

If it is "unacceptable" - then why is the US still doing it?

Simple. It's genocide.

The US has sponsored and participated in genocide of the Iraqi people since the Reagan administration, thru Bush One, Clinton, and Bush Two.

That's right.

GENOCIDE.

Andy K Jong Il @ 44:

Erroll @ 37:

Krisken @ 11:

CafeenMan @ 9:
Because, sadly, at this point they have more credibility than our government does.

Excellent point. Since the United States government has lied concerning just about every war that it has ever been in, it then stands to reason that George Carlin's #1 rule is quite accurate: Never believe what the government tells you. But so many Americans are so quick to accept what the U.S. government tells them because they still cannot conceive that the United States can do wrong while not wishing to acknowledge that the word of a foreigner can have just as much credibility, if not more, than that of an American.

And the US government alone is capable of lying to spin history?

I'm with CafeenMan@24- there are too many ways this can be spun by different parties. Any explanation is dubious.

Andy, I'm not saying the U.S. government alone lies. I'm saying that considering we have a running total of 50+ executive scandals, a weak "opposition" congress, and a politicized checks and balances system, the world has no reason to take the word of the United States over Afghanistan. Despite what the Bush administration thinks, world opinion does matter.

Just Hussein Of It @ 40:

odanny @ 5:

Wars all have inevitable results, and the one thing inescapable in war is the most deaths to occur are always of civilians. This will always be true as psychopaths bomb each other's lands. If people were convinced of the futility of war instead of its necessity and looked for ways to end them rather than start them when we would find ways to stop them. We have psychopaths in Washington finding ways to fight them, and fight them badly.

I agree with your sentiment, but disagree with your facts. MODERN, airborne wars kill mostly civilians. Back in the day when wars were actually fought with men and guns or knives, it was very easy to tell if you were killing a combatant or a woman or a child.

This is what is called "collateral damage". Such a nice name for murdering innocent people; don't you think? The Afghanis suffered some collateral damage when the king of the dumb fucks was stealing their oil. See how much better that reads?

Just Hussein Of It @ 40:

odanny @ 5:

Wars all have inevitable results, and the one thing inescapable in war is the most deaths to occur are always of civilians. This will always be true as psychopaths bomb each other's lands. If people were convinced of the futility of war instead of its necessity and looked for ways to end them rather than start them when we would find ways to stop them. We have psychopaths in Washington finding ways to fight them, and fight them badly.

I agree with your sentiment, but disagree with your facts. MODERN, airborne wars kill mostly civilians. Back in the day when wars were actually fought with men and guns or knives, it was very easy to tell if you were killing a combatant or a woman or a child.

This is what is called "collateral damage". Such a nice name for murdering innocent people; don't you think? The Afghanis suffered some collateral damage when the king of the dumb fucks was stealing their oil. See how much better that reads?

For the past half a century this is certainly true, however factoring in the cumulative effects of warfare before modern airpower and strategic bombing, civilians have continued to long after hostilities cease. More often than not these deaths were never counted.

In todays high tech world great pains are taken to not catalog the human toll in Iraq/A-stan

In all fairness, sitemonitor, I generally appreciate your indulgence. Could not this topic be a worthy exception to the suppression of emotional expression required by the 'rules'?

several hear are emotionally bleeding, as am I, when we know ourselves to be powerless and this is a great outlet and we also know that the gubmint is probably watching along with Howard Kurtz.

but it hurts all of us with a conscience and you do allow for selective bolding. there is the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. please allow the spirit of the law to take some precedence here.

most of us are truly outraged.

I know your job is difficult, tracking so many threads with potentially volatile topics. I am asking on behalf of those of us who strongly empathize in this case to have a chance to not be blanketed by the 'rules'.

[Okay, we've got to get off of this topic, so here's my last point- this is the inflamatory topic du jour. Or is it?
What's to say that the next thread doesn't make you burn even more? And what's to say that some topic that you don't feel so outraged over doesn't outrage someone else? It all boils down to a matter of netiquette. ALL Caps and All Bold are shouting, and you don't need to shout to convey your emotions. Thanks. Site Monitor]

Krisken @ 54:

Andy K Jong Il @ 44:

Erroll @ 37:

Krisken @ 11:

Excellent point. Since the United States government has lied concerning just about every war that it has ever been in, it then stands to reason that George Carlin's #1 rule is quite accurate: Never believe what the government tells you. But so many Americans are so quick to accept what the U.S. government tells them because they still cannot conceive that the United States can do wrong while not wishing to acknowledge that the word of a foreigner can have just as much credibility, if not more, than that of an American.

And the US government alone is capable of lying to spin history?

I'm with CafeenMan@24- there are too many ways this can be spun by different parties. Any explanation is dubious.

Andy, I'm not saying the U.S. government alone lies. I'm saying that considering we have a running total of 50+ executive scandals, a weak "opposition" congress, and a politicized checks and balances system, the world has no reason to take the word of the United States over Afghanistan. Despite what the Bush administration thinks, world opinion does matter.

I should have clarified that my response was aimed at Erroll's "Since the United States government has lied concerning just about every war that it has ever been in..."

I understand and agree with your point, Kreskin, but this US administration's lies concerning the military's actions- in a historical context- is no different than most others here or anywhere else.

c. atrox @ 20:

Wounded Knee.
My Lai.
Waco.
And isn't this the SECOND time our military has bombed a wedding in Afghanistan?

Our government is great at killing women and children. There should be a statue to memorialize our kindness.

Don't forget Dresden in WWII. Thanks to nut jobs like Curtis LeMay we firebombed civilian targets in Germany and incinerated 40,000 civilians there. I doubt if this despicable, ghastly tactic shortened the war one minute. And Dresden was not the only city targeted, all together we killed over 230,000 civilians---for what? Thank you Ken Burns for incorporating this fact into your series "The War."

And if Dick Cheney was asked to comment about the civilian deaths in Afghanistan---his reply would be--So?

Anaisi @ 27, I never said that I didn't take it with a grain of salt either. I was only answering a question I thought you had about the killing of alledged "human shields". Sorry you didn't like the answer.

Here is what the end result of killing civilians in a war zone is:
"The Sun-Herald has obtained a confidential security report that warns the capital, Kabul, will become virtually cut off from the rest of the country and is likely to be the target of a "spectacular" terrorist attack."
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/afghanistan-more-unstable/2008/07/12/12...

As I said it negates the mission.

Inevitably, President Obama will be presiding over similar catastrophes, and Republicans will be calling him a baby killer. And who knows, some of us may do the same.

War is what it is. We will be in Afghanistan longer than we'll be in Iraq, with no end in sight. At any rate, it's very difficult to both support a mission (fighting the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan) and cry foul when the inevitable occurs. To paraphrase the current president, you're either for a war or you're against it.

constituent @ 18:

the modern war on "terrorism".....killing from a distance
few experience the emotional pain...it's like playing xbox
for these people....just like not letting us see the flag draped coffins returning to the u.s....they want us to be
numb it's sick

First thing that came to my mind...Was this a drone bomber being operated from California? oopsie!

Shared Humanity @ 3:

Yeah, well first they have weddings. Then they have kids (And not white Christian ones but little brown Muslim ones.) Kids grow up to be Muslim adults and you know how dangerous they can be. Sounds justifiable to me.

What a bunch of whiners!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read a few books. We aren't so lilly white.

Krisken @ 65:
don't go getting me in any more trouble than I'm already in.

In USer military interventions, there is a single, very simple rule regarding indigenous casualties: If they're dead, they were enemies. We sometimes inadvertently injure civilians, but never kill them. But if you're dead before USer arms, it can mean only one thing: You were an enemy.

CafeenMan @ 24:

Krisken @ 11:

CafeenMan @ 9:

Why are we taking their word for it?

Because, sadly, at this point they have more credibility than our government does.

4) The wedding parties aren't wedding parties at all and the Afghanis are lying because they know it gets us bad press and they aren't exactly on our side.

Anyway, I'm suspicious at this point. The first time or two I took it at face value but now it's getting to be a little incredible. I don't know anything one way or the other but my bullshit meters are getting a reading.

Here's the thing to ask yourself: WHY don't you know the answer to your questions?

The reason you don't know the answer to your questions is that our news media is not actually about news. If it were, why, they could go in there and broadcast images of the bloodstained wedding clothes, interview the person who conducted the ceremony, even show photos of the happy couple before their fatal wedding.

The reason you don't know is because the government doesn't WANT you to know. And they don't want you to know because they want to foster the kind of self-justifying doubts that you express in point four.

The media in this country and the government in this country are both owned by the super-powerful corporate aristocracy - you know, the guys who take home several hundred million dollars a year. The news media is now simply the marketing division of the corporate government. The newscasters are like those ladies who spray your wrist with free perfume when you walk into Macy's, they're merely marketing representatives. They will give you about as much valid information about the world as would the perfume ladies.

You have a RIGHT to have your questions answered, but unfortunately our government of, by, and for the people has been seized by the extremely wealthy for their own purposes.

And THAT'S why you don't know whether we're really blowing up wedding parties.

(BTW, the reason we blow up wedding parties is because any large gathering is considered a threat, and from the air an Al Qaeda training camp and a wedding party are hard to tell apart. Particularly in infrared.)

Why can't the Pentagon use the Israel defense....you know....."Al-Qaeda uses them as human shields"......"It was a mistake and we're sorry"........"We had asked them to evacuate the village before we started shelling and they refused"......

@76

I know why I don't know the answers. In fact, I posted a diatribe about it yesterday over at Newshounds.

7th post: http://forum.newshounds.us/viewtopic.php?t=22647

@73 & @41

I agree. Nothing Bush says is ever the truth except when he flipped off Americans with FISA and Europeans with his G8 exit. But as others have said, he's not the only lying piece of shit on the planet. He just does it more and is more easily seen through than anyone else.

Albatross @ 76:

(BTW, the reason we blow up wedding parties is because any large gathering is considered a threat, and from the air an Al Qaeda training camp and a wedding party are hard to tell apart. Particularly in infrared.)

Do you know that for a fact? Have you got a link?

And I've gotta think that the number of Afghan wedding parties that went undisturbed far outnumbers those that have been bombed.

Problem is that yours is only one of many possible explanations. How do you know that, after a mis-drop that killed 10 at a wedding party, the Taliban forces didn't execute many more and toss the bodies into the bombed site?

Do you know how the Nazis justified their invasion of Poland? The Nazis crossed the border, captured some Poles, brought 'em back to the German side of the border, dressed the prisoners in Polish military unis and executed 'em. Shit like that has been happening for a long time. And it's hard to tell what is true and what isn't when you encounter the "Fog of War".

Hosea @ 66:

Inevitably, President Obama will be presiding over similar catastrophes, and Republicans will be calling him a baby killer. And who knows, some of us may do the same.

And he will deserve such criticism, as he will thereby have been complicit in the acts. McCaint's already a certified baby-killer, though of course they were live 'gook' babies, not fetuses, so it's okay, there's probably no long-term foul.

War is what it is. We will be in Afghanistan longer than we'll be in Iraq, with no end in sight. At any rate, it's very difficult to both support a mission (fighting the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan) and cry foul when the inevitable occurs. To paraphrase the current president, you're either for a war or you're against it.

I hardly know what to say about the rest of the codswallop you spilled here, pal. "War is what it is." They pay for banality by the pound, not the word, I guess. Do you know anything about it, other than what you see on teevee? The solution to your 'dilemma' is easier. Inadvertent civilian slaughter only actually occurs when there is advertent sio-disant 'military' slaughter going on near-by. I never hear of wedding parties getting blown up in Utah, do you? What's the difference? No wars in Utah. duh...

Albatross@76: You nailed it...a very good post and accurate observation.

Andy K Jong Il @ 82:

Albatross @ 76:

(BTW, the reason we blow up wedding parties is because any large gathering is considered a threat, and from the air an Al Qaeda training camp and a wedding party are hard to tell apart. Particularly in infrared.)

Do you know that for a fact? Have you got a link?

And I've gotta think that the number of Afghan wedding parties that went undisturbed far outnumbers those that have been bombed.

Problem is that yours is only one of many possible explanations. How do you know that, after a mis-drop that killed 10 at a wedding party, the Taliban forces didn't execute many more and toss the bodies into the bombed site?

Do you know how the Nazis justified their invasion of Poland? The Nazis crossed the border, captured some Poles, brought 'em back to the German side of the border, dressed the prisoners in Polish military unis and executed 'em. Shit like that has been happening for a long time. And it's hard to tell what is true and what isn't when you encounter the "Fog of War".

Sorry, incomplete thought (got a phone call!)...But the Nazis then blamed the Poles for invading Germany and pointed to those dead folks in Polish unis as the proof.

I'm just glad this time it wasn't Canadian troops with the ol' "friendly fire" incident......what the heck is friendly fire? Do the bombs smile and wave before they kill you?

[Deleted. Off topic. For further clarification, please contact us at sitemonitor1@gmail.com . Thank you. Site Monitor]

CafeenMan @ 24:

Krisken @ 11:

CafeenMan @ 9:

Why are we taking their word for it?

Because, sadly, at this point they have more credibility than our government does.

Well, the reason I'm asking is this is at least the third or fourth time the U.S. has blown up an Afghani wedding party. So I can draw four possible conclusions:

1) We're not aiming at them but we're an exceptionally bad shot and it's just a coincidence that we keep missing in the direction of wedding parties.

2) Our military likes bad press so much they keep blowing up wedding parties for no other reason than to keep getting bad press.

3) The wedding parties are legitimate wedding parties. But they also are gatherings of lots of known bad guys in the same place at the same time so we blow them up because it's worth the bad press to get so many bad guys.

4) The wedding parties aren't wedding parties at all and the Afghanis are lying because they know it gets us bad press and they aren't exactly on our side.

Anyway, I'm suspicious at this point. The first time or two I took it at face value but now it's getting to be a little incredible. I don't know anything one way or the other but my bullshit meters are getting a reading.

Unbelievable. You have no reason to be suspicious.

1. We've killed a lot Afghan civilians and not just in wedding parties. Such is the nature fo war when you are forced to bomb the enemy from 20,000 feet due to a lack of troops on the ground.

2. Weddings in Afghanistan are often far larger than our typical celebrations. Whole tribes are involved and many are armed when they attend.

3. Karzai and his cronies are alive only because of us. He has no reason to lie. Further, he is under tremendous pressure from tribal laders who send their young men to join his army and police. When those tribes' members are killed like this, he has no choice but to investigate and voice their complaints or suffer a lack of vital support he needs to rule the country.

Keep in mind, the Afghan army and Coalition forces do not control much Afghan territory. They must rely on their tribal warlord allies to keep the Taliban out.

Killing civilians from the air, getting them to cooperate, and then abandoning them to Taliban retalitaion because we lack the resources to hold ground, and allowing Pakistan to fester, will have grave consequences.

If we continue to neglect Afghanistan the way we have been doing while we pretend we're fighting a war in Iraq, we will follow every army in history.....we will lose in Afghanistan.

ralph @ 93:

well, I'm sure we said we were sorry ! !
Where's the problem??

*Blinks* Well, I suppose, if we say sorry, everything should be better!

(we're both being snarky, right?)

yakfitguy @ 94:

CafeenMan @ 24:

Krisken @ 11:

CafeenMan @ 9:
Because, sadly, at this point they have more credibility than our government does.

Well, the reason I'm asking is this is at least the third or fourth time the U.S. has blown up an Afghani wedding party. So I can draw four possible conclusions:

1) We're not aiming at them but we're an exceptionally bad shot and it's just a coincidence that we keep missing in the direction of wedding parties.

2) Our military likes bad press so much they keep blowing up wedding parties for no other reason than to keep getting bad press.

3) The wedding parties are legitimate wedding parties. But they also are gatherings of lots of known bad guys in the same place at the same time so we blow them up because it's worth the bad press to get so many bad guys.

4) The wedding parties aren't wedding parties at all and the Afghanis are lying because they know it gets us bad press and they aren't exactly on our side.

Anyway, I'm suspicious at this point. The first time or two I took it at face value but now it's getting to be a little incredible. I don't know anything one way or the other but my bullshit meters are getting a reading.

Unbelievable. You have no reason to be suspicious.

1. We've killed a lot Afghan civilians and not just in wedding parties. Such is the nature fo war when you are forced to bomb the enemy from 20,000 feet due to a lack of troops on the ground.

2. Weddings in Afghanistan are often far larger than our typical celebrations. Whole tribes are involved and many are armed when they attend.

3. Karzai and his cronies are alive only because of us. He has no reason to lie. Further, he is under tremendous pressure from tribal laders who send their young men to join his army and police. When those tribes' members are killed like this, he has no choice but to investigate and voice their complaints or suffer a lack of vital support he needs to rule the country.

Keep in mind, the Afghan army and Coalition forces do not control much Afghan territory. They must rely on their tribal warlord allies to keep the Taliban out.

Killing civilians from the air, getting them to cooperate, and then abandoning them to Taliban retalitaion because we lack the resources to hold ground, and allowing Pakistan to fester, will have grave consequences.

If we continue to neglect Afghanistan the way we have been doing while we pretend we're fighting a war in Iraq, we will follow every army in history.....we will lose in Afghanistan.

Sorry I don't follow. Neglect Afghanistan from/for what? Are you one of those people that selectively believes the government propaganda when it matches your beliefs? There is no Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Hasn't been for decades. That was all a line of bunk. So how to cure this? Send more troops to kill more women and children like in Iraq? Would that make Americans feel better?

Andy K Jong Il @ 82:

Albatross @ 76:

(BTW, the reason we blow up wedding parties is because any large gathering is considered a threat, and from the air an Al Qaeda training camp and a wedding party are hard to tell apart. Particularly in infrared.)

Do you know that for a fact? Have you got a link?

And I've gotta think that the number of Afghan wedding parties that went undisturbed far outnumbers those that have been bombed.

Problem is that yours is only one of many possible explanations. How do you know that, after a mis-drop that killed 10 at a wedding party, the Taliban forces didn't execute many more and toss the bodies into the bombed site?

Do you know how the Nazis justified their invasion of Poland? The Nazis crossed the border, captured some Poles, brought 'em back to the German side of the border, dressed the prisoners in Polish military unis and executed 'em. Shit like that has been happening for a long time. And it's hard to tell what is true and what isn't when you encounter the "Fog of War".

If it is true that "the number of Afghan wedding parties that went undisturbed far outnumbers those that have been bombed" [which is in itself highly questionable], is that then supposed to somehow justify and accept the fact that innocent Afghan civilians were unjustifiably bombed by American fighter planes? I think not. You seem to be lacking in any kind of empathy for those Afghans who have been slaughtered by American bombs. Now, if Afghan planes somehow bombed a gathering of Americans at a park in an American suburb, I am sure you would want those Afghans strung up at the nearest lamppost. What you have try to remember is that Afghans did not attack the United States. On the contrary, the United States attacked, without provocation, Afghanistan and in the process has destroyed many Afghan homes and villages and by doing so has wiped out entire families of Afghans. But it is highly doubtful if anyone in the mainstream media will bother to report that from the Afghani point of view.

MountainMan23 @ 97:

And if you look into the details of Hitler's invasion of Poland you'll find the Bush Crime Family (in this case Prescott Bush and his cronies) behind that "pre-emptive war" too.

And it was all about natural resources too - the rich coal and iron ore deposits in Silesia that Hitler used to fuel his war machine.

Not disagreeing, but that's not the point.

It's easy to pull a ruse, and it's hard to disprove until long after it's occurred. Usually you've gotta wait until the "Fog of War" has lifted. Do you know about the Ems Telegram?

Hosea @ 66, for myself I consider the war in Afganistan to be illegetimate and ill conceived if not outright illegal. It is never the job(or shouldn't be) of the American military to overthrow the government of another nation. It's mission is to defend the United States. The war in Afghanistan does not defend the United States as Afghanistan had never attacked us nor was a threat of it doing so.

Erroll @ 100:

If it is true that "the number of Afghan wedding parties that went undisturbed far outnumbers those that have been bombed" [which is in itself highly questionable], is that then supposed to somehow justify and accept the fact that innocent Afghan civilians were unjustifiably bombed by American fighter planes? I think not. You seem to be lacking in any kind of empathy for those Afghans who have been slaughtered by American bombs. Now, if Afghan planes somehow bombed a gathering of Americans at a park in an American suburb, I am sure you would want those Afghans strung up at the nearest lamppost. What you have try to remember is that Afghans did not attack the United States. On the contrary, the United States attacked, without provocation, Afghanistan and in the process has destroyed many Afghan homes and villages and by doing so has wiped out entire families of Afghans. But it is highly doubtful if anyone in the mainstream media will bother to report that from the Afghani point of view.

So there have been what, 10 weddings in Afghanistan since the invasion, and we've bombed half of them, Erroll?

And get off of your high horse. To pretend that you know I don't care about civilian deaths is the epitome of self-righteousness.

Terrible @ 104:

Hosea @ 66, for myself I consider the war in Afganistan to be illegetimate and ill conceived if not outright illegal. It is never the job(or shouldn't be) of the American military to overthrow the government of another nation. It's mission is to defend the United States. The war in Afghanistan does not defend the United States as Afghanistan had never attacked us nor was a threat of it doing so.

Very well said. An obvious truth which should be said more often to counteract the propaganda that Afghanistan is the so-called "good war."

read some where else this morning , the reason given for this attack was a missle went off course , a LT. spkokeperson said " they were investigating " .
The only surge will be in the ranks of our warlords enemies , which brings to mind that old saying , an enemy of my enemy is my friend .
Pitiful , beyond words .

Don't all those dark skinned people know that Jesus told us we needed to test all of our fun new weapons out on them?

Terrible @ 104:

Hosea @ 66, for myself I consider the war in Afganistan to be illegetimate and ill conceived if not outright illegal. It is never the job(or shouldn't be) of the American military to overthrow the government of another nation. It's mission is to defend the United States. The war in Afghanistan does not defend the United States as Afghanistan had never attacked us nor was a threat of it doing so.

The war in Afghanistan is great for the United States...and we are defending the almighty dollar by controlling Afghanistan and Iraq to secure the almighty OIL DOLLR! (who's side are you on anyway) ...snark

...just think about all the opium/heroin our CIA can traffic... now that the country is lawless. CIA is American right?

what part of America dont you support?.......sssnnnnaaaarrrrrkkkk

Erroll @ 111:

#106-Andy

You seemed, either intentionally or deliberately, to have missed the point. If American planes bombed only ONE wedding party it would still be wrong, which simply reinforces my belief that you seem to have little empathy for those Afghanis who have been slaughtered by American bombs and bullets.

Because I'm questioning the explanation of how and why those people died, Erroll, doesn't mean I feel nothing that they died.

And nice choice you offered there: "either intentionally or deliberately". I'm awaiting your question, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"

Yeah, that's right. Bombs don't kill people, we do.

Did you ever notice how completely unfazed "pro-life" conservatives are by these stories?

US Kills 47 Afghan Civilians In Air Strike

Oops...my bad...
________________________________________________________

Reports at the time said that 20 people were killed in the airstrike in Nangarhar province. The US military said they were militants.

Shades of General Westmoreland?

they're the ones always saying "Let God sort them out..." or assuming that they were terrorists...

Makes me glad we never went to war while I was in the Air Force.

We came close a couple of times, the students taking the American Embassy hostage in Iran, and I got my honorable discharge just six days before our invasion of Grenada.

Of course as Air Force, I wouldn't personally be killing anyone, but lending support.

At Edwards AFB we we're basically experimenting with the equipment used in Grenada and more likely Iraq War I, not sure about II.

But another big deal of course was the shuttle-craft.

Instead of big raids on groups of people not firing on you shouldn't they be looking for OBL instead? They can establish once and for all he's been neutralized (never mind the successors) or capture his ass, and we could get out.

We can't kill people just because they have bedsheets on their heads.

Otherwise all over our country would be strewn the bodies of Klansmen.

Those were not people who died.
They were mere statistics in a billion dollar NWO database.
The game goes on.
NOBODY is stopping it.

Including those who have that power.

Hearts and Minds, folks. A movie that never goes out of style.

I don't know. My local news regularly has returning soldiers talking about the good work we're doing. Among the people who still watch TV news, there are probably some viewers who still believe that.

smchris @ 130:

Hearts and Minds, folks. A movie that never goes out of style.

I don't know. My local news regularly has returning soldiers talking about the good work we're doing. Among the people who still watch TV news, there are probably some viewers who still believe that.

Most of the soldiers are completely brainwashed. They can't understand anything other that providing them with weapons and pointing to the "enemy." Many of the ones who know what's going on are not speaking out due to gag orders they have to sign.

bush the war criminal, who is giving Hitler a run for his money, strikes again!!!

SCHRODINGER'S CAT @ 129:

The problem here is not Afghan weddings, the Taliban or terrorists.

A number of years ago I worked with a Polish fellow. This guy was a real Pole in that he lived in Poland during WW 2. He ended up working in a factory in Germany
making ball bearings or something like that.

He pointed out that the British bombed Germany by night ( a fact I already knew).When the British bombed a city the Germans knew where the bombs would land and could take appropriate action. Basically the British bombs landed on industrial targets ( ie. the British could hit their tagret).

The Americans bombed by day. "The American bombs fell everywhere" . What target?

I'm a fan of the US Air Force , BUT.

That seems kinda antithetical...In February of '42 the Brits went to a bombing strategy designed to disrupt German morale(Directive 22)- specifically, the morale of industrial workers- by carpet bombing idustrial areas to "dehouse" the industrial workforce. When the RAF had attempted "precision bombing" earlier, they found their efforts ineffective.

The US, otoh, engaged in "precision bombing" (though it wasn't very precise), centering on industry itself. On it's face it wasn't effective- German steel and aircraft production rose(though the campaign against oil refineries were effective)- but post-war the Germans admitted that the US raids were crippling.

Maybe your acquaintance experienced it differently. There are factors that might have made daylight bombing raids less effective where your acquaintance was living. But, like I said, it seems antithetical.

dada @ 14:

Omg, when is this nightmare going to end!

Likely it isn't; the vast majority of americans haven't seen a bombed child's body lying in a gutter rotting, so they don't care or believe, they just want their cheap fuel and more people around the world to see how amazing they are ........... I unfortunately have seen that kind of death first hand, and it was US munitions that did it.

Mission accomplished america, mission accomplished ........ the pay back for this is going to make 9/11 look like a bee sting.

DigitaLiberacion' @ 42:

Our US army kills women and children!... and damn right i'm yelling.

Has done for years, don't forget the rape and torture while you are at it.

DigitaLiberacion' @ 57:

There has been many small protests around the US against the illegimate wars we have been waging...but I think it's time for a large, unified one. One huge US protest where we all get together. One people will never forget

It was time for that years ago, though it never happened, the people were too busy acting in an emotional and short term viewed way after 9/11 ......... oh how convenient that "disaster" was ...

Shared Humanity @ 6:

Oh, by the way........

WE ARE A NATION OF WAR CRIMINALS.

Yup indeed.

I think I posted the BBC link to this a few days ago.

Terrible @ 19:

Joe O. @ 12 says: Nor do we have enough field observers on hand to spot any legitimate targets.

There are a couple of things that hunting and war have in common. One of them is being certain of your target! No wonder there are so many 'friendly fire' incidents in Afghanistan and Iraq.

That may be true but no matter how many observers and brilliant smart bombs we have these kinds of casualties are inevitable in a guerilla war. In a "conventional" war you have two uniformed armies waging combat. But in a guerilla war you are waging war against the civilian population. The enemy attacks and then fades back into the general population. In some ways we are victims of our own military spending and expertise. The US military is the best and most powerful in the world. Virtually no one can face them on a conventional battlefield which is what they have been trained for. Hence we are fighting more and more guerilla wars and we will keep on killing more and more civilians which makes more people hate us which makes more war. Good for Cheney and other war profiteers bad for everyone else.

Jack Jett @ 139:

Everytime something like this happens, and it happens a lot, I feel this sense of personal sadness. Almost like I share some of the responsibility for not having the balls to organize and protest this shit.

If you think about the press coverage that Elizabeth Smart or Chandra Levy gets in the news and WE...AMERICA is responsible for the death of so many yet it never gets reported.

It shocks me that America is more sad about that Tony Snow that about innocent men women and children. There was nothing innocent about Tony Snow's lying ass.

I feel the same way. I remember when I was young my parents taught me about the holocaust and how evil the Nazis were and how important it was to remember. I never dreamed this country could sink to the same moral level and it sickens me. But the answer is to get mad not sad. As Tony Sopranos shrink used to say depression is anger turned inward. Get more involved, write letters, protest, donate, and educate friends and neighbors.

Erroll @ 123:

Peace-time is just a lull between battles to give everyone a chance to reload.

CafeenMan @ 9:

Why are we taking their word for it?

I don't take anyones word for it. I evaluate the evidence and make up my mind. At this point though ANYONE has more credibility to me than the US spokes people. In this case there are pictures and a BBC reporter. More than enough to offset the Bush administration which has demonstrated they have no regard what so ever for the truth. The other reason I give the victims more credibility is that we are the invaders. By International Law and common decency we have the responsibility to not kill civilians and the onus of proof is on us.

Valor @ 85:

odanny @ 5:

Wars all have inevitable results, and the one thing inescapable in war is the most deaths to occur are always of civilians. This will always be true as psychopaths bomb each other's lands. If people were convinced of the futility of war instead of its necessity and looked for ways to end them rather than start them when we would find ways to stop them. We have psychopaths in Washington finding ways to fight them, and fight them badly.

So on the morning of 9/12/2001 you woke up and thought to yourself, "Meh.....what happened yesterday is the inevitable price we have to pay. Civilians died. We have to accept it and move on".

Are you that stupid?

You know, it could be possible. I dont know your posting history, and you're not off to a good start here.

Snark/ To bad our cars don't run on opiates......then the Afghan war could pay for itself.

More Snark/ We knew it was a wedding, we just heard they registered at Bed Bath and Bomb..... \End Snark