Afghanistan - UN Has Video Of US Airstrike Aftermath
The US has kicked the investigation of an alleged airstrike-gone-wrong into high gear, sending a general to Afghanistan to take over from local commanders after they had confirmed that the airstrike hit militant targets. The reason? The UN has video evidence contradicting those local commanders.
Afghan and Western officials say Afghanistan's intelligence agency and the U.N. both have video of the aftermath of the Aug. 22 U.S. airstrikes on the village of Azizabad showing dozens of dead women and children.
The Afghan government and the U.N. have said the raid killed 90 civilians, including 60 children.
The U.S. military said in a statement Sunday it will send a general officer to review the findings of the initial U.S. investigation that up to 35 militants and seven civilians died.
Locals had alleged that the airstrike was based upon faulty intelligence after political enemies of a local leader falsely 'fingered' the village in return for a bounty payment.
The BBC adds more about the nature of the new evidence.
Video footage from mobile phones showing dozens of dead bodies has given increasing credibility to claims by local residents that up to 90 civilians were killed in the attack.
The footage shows bodies - many of them women and children - lined up in a mosque in the village of Azizabad, which was the subject of a combined ground operation and airstrike by US forces.
Both the Afghan government and the United Nations have already carried out their own investigations into the attack.
They say the video evidence, and the presence of a large number of fresh graves in the village, confirm the accounts of local people.
Until now, the US military has insisted that far fewer civilians died in what it says was a successful operation against Taleban militants in the area.
On Sunday, however, the senior US commander in Afghanistan, David McKiernan, said that in light of new evidence, he had asked for the American investigation to be reopened.
You can watch some of the video as part of a BBC World news report on the incident here.
Violence is still rising in Afghanistan, with a higher rate of US troop deaths now than Iraq even at its worse. More than more than 2,500 people, including 1,000 civilians, have been killed in the last six months and, overall, coalition forces have killed almost as many civilians as militants have. Airstrikes have been blamed for many of the deaths.
Just after the airstrike in Herat district, Afghan president Hamid Karzai visited grieving relatives and told them "I have been working day and night over the past five years to prevent such incidents, but I haven't been successful in my efforts. If I had succeeded, the people of Azizabad wouldn't be bathed in blood."
Watch it.
Rogue state indeed.
We need more troops.
Vote McCain and receive you're free draft notice.
We are now in the process of setting up a McSame/Pain in the ass adminitration.
Kiss your sons and daughters goodbye for the next generatiin +.
THIS IS STRAIGHT TALK.
McCain will take care of it.
He's gonna send Arnold Scwharzenegger, Sylvester Stallone and Chuck Norris to Afghanistan.
They'll win it in a week.
re #3
adminitration should be administration.
prayers for the dead and their families. haven't we killed enough?
Immediately after the airstrike the locals reported these civilian casualties but the "US" denied there had been ANY.
Then the "US" had an "investigation" that revealed there had, indeed, been a few.
Then they "discovered" the UN and locals had videos of the aftermath and agreed to "reopen" the investigation.
I've been following the story.
And now the uproar is in Pakistan where aerial drones are DEFINITELY NOT killing civilians, despite testimony from locals AND the Pakistani government.
The problem is OUR mentality that "killing the bad guys" is going to make this a better world.
It only pisses off the survivors.
Those who investigate themselves always find themselves blameless.
As this excellent post states, "violence is still rising in Afghanistan" and will continue to rise as long as the belligerent U.S. military perseveres in slaughtering innocent Afghans, who have never threatened anyone in these United States. Unfortunately, what Cernig neglected to mention is that the champion of the people, Barack Obama, wishes to continue Bush's policy of wiping out the Afghan people by sending in more troops if he is elected president. Not exactly the most credible way of claiming that Obama is a man of peace, now is it?
To bad Ollie North couldn't be charged with another cover up, since the Military was stupid enough to rely on the assholes account. Nah
I'm scared to look at this....I am tired of being angry.
Escalating war in Afghanistan is a great idea. Remember the USSR?
++++
Yesterday morning early I watched a special on CNN about the women of Afghanistan. It was fu*king heart breaking and I was sitting there transfixed and crying. The program was called Lifting the Veil. The woman doing the program had gone over there not long after we attacked that country and she was comparing that time to now.
In some areas things were a little better but for the most part women are no better off today. Part of it is the damage our bombs caused but much of it is the culture. A culture that allows men to do just about anything they want to, to their wives and daughters.
They sell their young girls, one as young as 11 to men to become their wives. It's so bad that women are setting themselves on fire just to try to escape through death. Their husbands beat them as well as their mothers in law.
If the women report the abuse to the police, most of the time nothing is done about it and when their husbands find out about it, they beat them even more. Life in that country is already hell for the women and our shooting everything that moves there isn't going to change the culture. It's hell on earth for far too many women there!
If anyone read "The Kite Runner" you know what an amazing book that was. The author has another book out now and although it's fiction, it's about the lives of women in Afghanistan. It follows one particular woman who is sold to a much older man when she herself is not much more than a child. His abuse of her through her life is the most heartbreaking thing you may ever read. If you begin reading "A Thousand Splendid Suns", by Khaled Hosseini, prepare to allow yourself a lot of time because you are not going to put it down.
I say all this because after learning what life is like for women there, and then hearing that our own bombs are killing them and their treasures, their children, I seem to feel a sense of guilt so deeply that I can't even express it in words.
Left&Left @ 11:
I didn't watch it either and for the same reason and for the reasons I talked about in my comment. I just couldn't.
Liberal AND Proud @ 4:
That would be too presumptuous... better off sending Cindy to straighten out the mess.
Or better yet, send in Palin in a helicopter with a moose rifle.
Liberal AND Proud @ 4:
Those ARE three pretty good reasons to vote for him.
mjs @ 12:
Read Steve Coll's "Ghost Wars." We've learned little to nothing.
there's going to be more wars my friends. if mccain gets in you can count on it....mccain is NOT about diplomacy.
he is a physical/gut thinker NOT an intellect. if mccain
gets the presidency don't be surprised if we stay in
IRAQ much longer regardless of what the iraqi parliament decides.
Fortunately we've all been spared looking at the BBC report linked above. It's been scrubbed already.
Do we even need to go through the charade of re-opening the "investigation" into this? Will it accomplish anything?
Hmmm, hard to believe air strikes going wrong. They certainly drove the North Vietnamese into submission. Oh wait...
constituent @ 18:
McSame To-Do list:
2009 - Install Phil Gramm as Treasury Secretary to complete the rape of the federal till and ruination of the economy.
2010 - Start World War III. It'll be nuclearly brief.
THE END
hmm, an international war crimes tribunal in October wouldn't bode well for the GOP, would it...
I wonder why the Soviet Union couldn't win in Afghanistan? Hmmmmm!
Not to point out the obvious, but it seems that if you are relying on bounties to do your intellegence gathering legwork for you, it is inevitable that somebody with a grudge and no conscience is going to use you to settle his scores for him, and make money while doing it. Every bit of information thus received would seem to automatically require in-depth vetting to verify its truthfulness. But, if they were willing to go through the verification process, they wouldn't need bounties in the first place. Oh, well...they're just brown people, mere statistics
whothat don't really matter.When outsourcing goes bad.
Keep your on the bouncing balls kids. Some of you may have read the information I posted about the outbreak of cholera reported in Baghdad. There is a rhythm to all this. The neocreeps have pushed hard and fast in a very negative direction. They haven't done it well or wisely. What you are seeing now is the beginning of the push back. Chances are good that it will be hard and fast right into their faces. Just the way our universe keeps things in balance I guess.
Our job is to not get caught up in their drama. We need to change our country's direction by getting Obama/Biden elected. That's our work and we must succeed or face some gut wrenching consequences.
"Ordinary people accomplishing extraordinary things"
No time for despair, finger pointing or negativism. I've been talking to the good ol' boys at the feed store and the local bar (oh the sacrifices I make for my country.) Yeah there are the kool aid drinkers but there are also a lot of people who just haven't seen enough facts to understand what's happening. I haven't been totally successful in getting votes for Obama but I have been successful in making sure that McCain isn't getting their votes. As far as I'm concerned that's a win around here.
BobbyG @ 21:
you may be on to something........BUSH getting ready to place serious sanctions against iran. no investing by any country in/with iran....you know what CHINA will
say we don't give a shit what the u.s. says...my guess is russia will say the same thing
Translation: Bush is assigning his kibitzers to "check it out".
Of course, when McCain institutes the draft...there will be riders in there so that the yellow Elephant Brigade doesn't have to go.
I'm certain that there are decision making people high up in this Administration who would gladly murder a thousand Afghan or Iraqi civilians if they could get ten "insurgents". Dubya and his henchmen don't give a fuck about innocent people.
WTF!
(paraphrasing the pr-officer in the Reuter's video) "The fact that the Taliban sometimes hide among the civilians makes our mission more difficult".
Well, hell yes, but these problems seem to arise from a) faulty intelligence fed to US troops (a situation which hasn't improved through all of these years), b) over-eagerness of the US troops to use air power in all kinds of situations (a tendency not improved after all the mistakes of recent years) and c) where the hell were the forward observers? Didn't they scope and check out the target?
And there seems to be a curious unwillingness in the US military to own up to mistakes and a culture of covering up fu(kups. That kind of behavior is not acceptable. The US military is better than that.
emoboy44 @ 6:
Naw...we still got plenty of ammunition. We got more ammunition than we have humanity. Or social programs.
don't worry, oliver north says this is all bullshit.
"Russian ships will make a port of call in Venezuela later this year, and the two nations could hold joint naval exercises for the first time, both sides said."
Can Dubya kick the hornet's nest or what?!
Lusmu @ 30:
Well...gee...ya know...city wars are difficult. When you go door to door, well...our soldiers might get killed.
That would make the war unpopular with Americans. We can't have that. So, let's just blow up a mess of shit...and if there is collateral damage...well...America will apologize. "Geeee...we blew up a bunch of your people....well...I'm SORRRRRRRY."
Republican war strategy should be aptly named...The Steve Martin Strategy.
Winning their hearts and minds one bomb at a time, and if not, sorry we killed you or any of your family.
BobbyG @ 17:
The Savage Wars of Peace by Max Boot. I suspect that Mr Boot wrote the book in an effort to justify current adventures, but it didn't work that way..
“The fact that the Taliban sometimes hide among the civilians makes our mission more difficult”.
They're just working that out now???
Erroll @ 9:
Right. Because we all know that all politicans are the same.
It is a logical fallacy to conclude that similar actions - sending troops - as being the exact same thing from top to bottom. Not to mention which, you offer no proof of Bush's 'policy,' nor Obama's alleged continuance of same.
When my friend was sent to Iraq at the beginning of the invasion, he was one of the ones assigned to break down doors in the middle of the night. He said the Iraqis in the city where he was, somewhere in or around Baghdad, were paid rewards for leads they could give the US soldiers regarding where the "bad guys" were hiding.
He said if one neighbor was mad at another or if some relative didn't like another relative they would tell the soldiers that they were the enemy and get their neighbor or relative in trouble, plus the guy who told would get a reward. He said one guy turned in several innocent families just to make a some extra bucks for himself. It happened in Iraq and I'm betting it's happening in Afghanistan.
BobbyG @ 21:
You forgot: All the Creeyistyins get raptured to heavan and get to watch all of us evil people burning in hell for eternity courtesy of FAUXNoise.
Just an FYI, but CNN has scored an interview with that crazy preacher where Palin used to go to church. He says she left that church six years ago but we know via YouTube that she spoke there just this past June. They do believe in the end times, they don't necessarily believe doctors are the only healing force and some do speak in tongues. The interview will be shown on CNN tonight and if you want to see it check your CNN schedule.
Mick Angry Leftist Piobr @ 40:
After 8 years of this bullshit...eternity in hell is starting to look like an option.
BOTH parties have BLOOD on their hands and BOTH parties are complicit in continuing the occupation of Afghanistan and continuing this fraudulent " war on terror " . U.S. occupation forces are there for one main reason , the construction of the CASPIAN OIL PIPELINE from N. to S. , that will flow billions of oil through Afghanistan , through Pakistan and Turkmenistan , a deal signed only WEEKS after Karzai was placed into office by the CIA .
It's all about regional domination and control of resources and Afghan civilians don't mean a thing to the U.S. military or even the U.S. corporatist media and if the Taliban would have excepted UNOCAL's oil DEAL in 1999 , after being invited to UNOCAL's headquarters in Texas , there probably would not have been an invasion and bloody occupation .
Like the zionist and Imperialist Walter Issaccson of CNN shamelessly admitted , showing pics of "dead Afghan civilians would be perverse "after 9 -11 . As if it was not a legitimate news story , but exploiting the feeling of 9-11 served as convenient cover for the Globalists Agenda .
pissed off patricia @ 41:
If he speaks in tongues...will it be closed captioned?
Mick Angry Leftist Piobr @ 40:
Who do they think is in charge of forgiving. It sure as HELL isn't Dobson.
the 'culture'(if you can call it that) in the USAF is more bigoted than most and the AF is full of wahoos who don't mind 'target sortees'. they did it in the first gulf war and there's no reason to believe that MO has changed.
also, if the ground troops are getting info from renditioned and tortured people, who were probably turned in by angry neighbors, or even worse, were randomly snatched, how can any intel gleaned from that be considered viable? how can a drone possiblly be considered a viable alternative to actual, investigative work?
this is all based on lies anyway, and there's no connection to Bin Laden that has been clearly and convinvingly determined. the Al Qaeda hoax is running out of steam.
Grandpa is griinning. If this keeps up...he'll get to blow more shit up.
pissed off patricia @ 39:
BINGO!!!!!
More Christian terrorism, all for the glory of the Christian gods. Lovely, isn't it? Christian terrorism is 1,000 times worse than Islamic and Israeli terrorism combined so of course we continue to see these endless atrocities being committed by Christians. They hate every higher ideal that the United States stands for.
My friend said he knew they took a lot of innocent men and boys into custody but they were under orders to take any males from any reported home if they were old enough to fight or shoot.
We're all drones now.
Kill, baby, kill.
-GSD
GSD @ 51:
And we don't even get a shot at intercourse with the queen.
Bummer.
pissed off patricia @ 50:
Yeah, that is really sad, but since the "informer" had been promised and paid sums of
money, the lowly foot-soldier had to follow military orders and do what they were told.
I have sympathy for those "rounded up" and also sympathy for the military personnel
who are required to "follow orders."
I don't even want to think what a president Palin would do with the amount of power bush would leave she and McCain with after these past eight years. She wouldn't be president immediately but it would be almost an inevitability in at least four years, if not sooner.
Fredric L. Rice @ 49:
the christian gods must want the US/GB to have an OIL monopoly.
Liberal AND Proud @ 52:
palin's not your type anyway.
You know we're not the bad guys in this affair. There appears to be civilian casualties, and that is something the military never wants. Ever. But it's a war and bad things happen.
Iraq is one story, but Afghanistan is the only war we rightfully should be fighting. The Taliban government picked a fight with us, and we are legitimately fighting back. It's sad to see civilians get killed. No one wants that. But if the Taliban is hiding inside places where women and children are living, then it is they, not us, who are to blame. Don't think that they don't understand good P.R. They do. And if it costs them a few children's lives, they don't mind.
The militants are killing civilians as well. More, in fact, than we are.
You may now proceed to hate me. But I'm right.
Doggiebobo @ 53:
My friend wouldn't harm anything on his own. He was a kind gentle person who joined the Guard to be available to help here in the state in case of hurricanes etc. He said he would never have joined had he known there would be a war coming in the future and never really even considered he would be sent to fight in one. He knew from the beginning this war was based on bs and said so before he left.
They are not children that the baby jesus and the republicans care about. BJ and the R's do not understand your concern. They are in the way of oil, I guess, somehow. Oh, they threaten "our way of life", yeah, that's it. Our way of life. They will try to harm our children, so we have to get them before they do.
JoeSixPack @ 57:
For your information, the Taliban had offered up Osama before we invaded and Bush refused to take them up on it..
pissed off patricia @ 54:
Can you, or anyone else, seriously visualize Palin sitting down w/Putin from Russia,
Hu Jimtao from N. Korea, Kim JongII from China, or any other World Leader. Unbelieveable that "some" think that Palin would/could/should be in that position.
Oh no. You mean the Bush Administration is STILL looking for "terrorists" like al-Zarqawi?
JoeSixPack @ 57:
what proof is there that we have any enemies in Afghanistan? How was it determined within hours of the WTC attacks that we were attacked from Afghanistan?
claiming that we are justified in killing innocents because theother side is too? you're pathetic beyond words!
spare me your sympathy for these bastards who murder in our name.
Doggiebobo @ 61:
I don't know what she would do if her one line zingers didn't charm them. I mean how many catty snarky joke lines has she got?
This election is becoming more like that show American Idol every day. Pick the contestant who can deliver the best snarks, looks the prettiest and has the most shit for brains.
Our tax dollars at work!
lucid fiction @ 65:
And the money we borrow each month from other countries at work too. AKA, your children and grandchildren's debt.
According to Xinhua news:
The entire country is in an uproar, and there are demonstrations against the United States. "The gruesome incident prompted hundreds of Afghans in the affected area to take to the streets, chanting anti-America slogans."
In other words, rather than killing dozens of Taliban, the attack may have created scores of recruits for the movement.
pissed off patricia @ 54:
probably be able to finally get that pesky ex-brother-in-law of hers fired...
pissed off patricia @ 64:
I continue to be optomistic and have faith that the informed/educated voters will
come out in mass numbers in Nov. and that Obama will defeat McLamebrain with
out too much trouble. IF I am wrong, I too(as some have expressed) will be looking for a new residence in another country.
Bush: Iraqi citizens a bunch of ingrates
Last night on 60 Minutes, host Scott Pelley interviewed Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward to discuss his new book “The War Within: A Secret White House History, 2006-2008.” Pelley noted that one part of the story Woodward tells is President Bush’s “frustration with the attitude of the Iraqi people”:
Nearly 100,000 Iraqi civilians have lost their lives since 2003 (maybe more) and around 2 million have either fled the country or are internally displaced. For many years, ordinary Iraqis have had to deal with car bombs, suicide bombs, and other routine violence that ultimately resulted in civil war the sectarian cleansing of Baghdad. Why wouldn’t Iraqis be grateful for all that?
Woodward also revealed during the interview that the “secret behind the success of the surge” was not the U.S. troop build-up but a “breakthrough” in “secret operational capabilities that have been developed by the military to locate, target and kill leaders of al-Qaeda in Iraq, insurgent leaders, renegade militia leaders.” Woodward would not provide any further details of the secret plan.
Video
I'm sure you agree that avoiding civilian casualties should be very high on the priorities list. You cannot just glean over the problems we listed above over with "shit happens".
The Taliban "government" isn't in power anymore, and hitting civilian targets in a stupid-ass way isn't going to help in defeating the resurgent Taliban. It's going to make everyone hate us even more.
Maybe you missed it, but we listed a whole bunch of reasons why the US military fu(ked up really bad in this case. Again.
We are to blame if we do not learn from our mistakes.
Granted, it is more difficult and more prone to casualties to hit targets with ground forces but that's the only way forward, if something is to be accomplished.
Tell me, why do you think there are so few ground troops in Afganistan? Do politics play a part?
Ignore civilian casualties at your own peril.
Possibly but how would you know? Air strikes tend to cause a lot of casualties in one go. A lot more than an AK-47.
The thing is, you didn't address the issue, your post was about vague generalities.
JoeSixPack @ 57:
Actually, the only reason we're in Afghanistan is because the Taliban turned down an oil industry 'offer' to build a pipeline across their country. Talks broke off in early-mid 2001.
There was never any proof that Afghanistan had any hand in the 9/11 attacks, nor the hiding of bin Laden. The US demanded the Gov't turn over bin Laden, and they asked for some kind of proof -- or a warrant, order of extradition, and the response to that very reasonable request was straight up bombing.
I don't hate you, but you are kool-aid drinking wrong. You are in a legion of company, Al Franken thinks it's ok we're there.
We are there at the behest of the Oil Companies. It's beyond wrong. It's criminal.
maleman @ 3:
This is straight talk: vote for BHO and we may need a draft. Who in their right minds would enlist and want him as Commander in Chief? I would take Bill Clinton over BHO as Cdr in chief any day. BHO has zero experience, fact is, he doesn't like nor respect our military. Fact is, we only have 1 choice that would ensure our country stays efficiently protected. With BHO we will need a draft, but that is unlikely because he wouldn't ensure a strong, properly trained military. How can you lead something you' ve never been a part of? How can you lead something you don't know anything about and refuse to listen to the Commanders who do know? BHO is a dangerous selection.
It's all about the opium in Afghanistan. As valuable as oil - and necessary to finance all manner of subversive endeavors around the world. But of course the USA can't tell you that, so they pretend to be going after some boogie man or other. I don't believe a word my govt. says about what they are doing in the ME. Anyone who thinks we are there to capture bad guys or bring peace to the area needs to up their meds.
Erroll @ 9:
So McCain would be a better choice, how exactly? We are stuck with an Obama leaning right, or a McSame pretending to offer 'change'. Who do you trust most to return to their original positions? What would the result of either version of McCain being in office? How about either version of Obama?
the way i see it, Obama is the best choice we have, even if far less than a perfect progressive or liberal.
Shadowgm Hussein @ 38:
What are you doubting, that Obama wishes to send in approximately 10,000 more troops into Afghanistan? Exactly how is this supposed to be more palatable to the average Afghan, who sees more American soldiers illegally occupying their country? You seem confused about what Bush is doing in Afghanistan. He has already sent 30,000 troops into that country. Obama wishes to add about 10,000 more troops, which will of course simply add more misery and suffering to the average Afghani. Like so many Americans, you appear to be bereft of the word empathy. I realize this may be difficult but try and imagine foreign soldiers walking on your street wearing battle fatigues and especially carrying an assault rifle. Would you be happy to see those soldiers in your neighborhood? That certainly is how the Afghans are feeling whenever they see that little American flag sewed on to the uniform of an American soldier which they recognize to be the uniform of an imperial power. Your comments demonstrate that liberals can be just as super patriotic and just as blind to the plight of an occupied people as those on the right.
Perhaps you can get to ask Obama this simple question. Why is it somehow more acceptable to kill a man who is fighting for his country in Afghanistan but not in Iraq? If he cannot or will not answer this question, then he most certainly deserves not to be president.
miss_kitty @ 72:
Yeah..but...we're safer now..right...and we have cheaper oil...right? didn't me...huh huh...ummm...hello...is this thing on?
JoeSixPack @ 57:
JSP, leaving aside the fact that you're mistaken here I'd like to point something out to you.
You came on this site and you expressed your opinion in a respectful manner. For the most part, although you will be disagreed with, you are likely to find yourself treated respectfully. Consider what you know would happen (and has happened) to any of us posting on a similar site with a right wing orientation.
Then ask yourself, what sort of society do you want to live in? One you may disagree with but treats you with respect and allows you to express your opinion or one that refuses to allow any dissension to be expressed or tolerated. Please consider that (among other issues) for the next couple of months before you cast your ballot this Nov.
Peace and respect
Ken @ 73:
And your source of this unenlightening information?
Bush conveys his regret.
*sigh*
pinkobait @ 80:
And Cheney says..."gulllmmph...hmm...the Iraqi children are so much more tender than Afghani children...guuullllmph...need more damn barbecue sauce..."
Ken @ 73:
Ken, McCain crashed 5 planes. He was on scene when disastrous events occurred on several of the carriers he was stationed on. He spent over 5 years locked up as a POW. As someone who has served in the military, trust me, this is not the kind of guy you want to hear is taking command of your unit much less being the Commander in Chief.
Somebody like Obama is going to really exhaust all possibilities before committing our military to combat. His having done that will assure that the troops know that their sacrifice is absolutely neccessary and will ensure that the country can unite behind it's military without reservation.
Now that is the situation any combat veteran would like to be in if he or she has to go into action. That is straight talk from someone who's earned the right to say it.
Why, are generals better at covering up the truth than majors?
War criminals - all of them. Let them suffer the fate of war criminals the world over who have gone to The Hague and been subject to trial. Of course I am referring to the republicans (and bellicose democrats) that got us into these awful wars - bush, cheney, rice, rumsfeld, etc. And don't forget mccain...
Chicken "Hussein" Little - Not! @ 82:
SOME PEOPLE SAY THAT MCCAIN IS THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE!
Ron @ 79:
Me too, I want you to share with us all your source of your comments.
Erroll @ 76:
again, the critique of Obama, without mentioning the alternative. If Obama 'deserves not to be president' - then who does deserve to be president? McCain?
As with nearly every US election, the electorate are faced with making the lesser of two non-optimal selections. For Some Obama is actually worthy of voting FOR, instead of the usual "vote against" but i agree he is not currently promoting all the ideas many of us on the left would like him to... such is politics and the 'race to the middle'.
When the only other choice is McCain (more war, more economic imbalance, more religious intervention in our society, more reactionary conservatism) what are you going to do? Let the Republicans win (again)?
That is the kind of thinking that got us G W Bush, and look how wonderfully that turned out.
WWI = civilian war casualties 10%
WWII= civilian war casualties 30%
Vietnam= civilian war casualties 60%
Gulf War= civilian war casualties 80%
See a pattern here?
The US military said that its findings were corroborated by an independent journalist embedded with the US force. He was named as the Fox News correspondent Oliver North, who came to prominence in the 1980s Iran-Contra affair, when he was an army colonel.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article4699077.ece
(ht2 Lenin's Tomb)
Chicken "Hussein" Little - Not! @ 78:
Peace and respect right back at you.
I think you'd be surprised to see how much we have in common. I'm a life-long democrat and will vote in my best interests this November (Obama/Biden). However, I still feel we are justified in our war against the Taliban. I don't mean to make light, in any way, the horrors of war. Especially the killing of innocents. I hate war.
And, I admit, I could be wrong. I detest our ongoing mistake in Iraq. I was against that mistake from the beginning. I didn't see the connection to our world at all. After doing some research, I've learned a few things today. And I think that makes for good political discourse.
I believe that the Taliban was harboring Bin Laden. I know it to be true that Bin Laden was responsible for killing over 200 people in our embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. I believe he had every intention of killing more of us. He still does. I also think he was one of many people who wish us harm. And he contributed to an atmosphere of hatred that culminated in the WTC attacks. Was he responsible for that? I don't think he was directly. From what I know.
But something has to be done to bring justice to the victims of that horrible day. Perhaps we should have done something else. I don't know. Why we're not making life harder for Saudi Arabia, I'll never know. Oil? Oh, yeah. There's that.
I think a few people on here assumed that I was some kind of right wing interloper. I'm not. I enjoy this site immensely and come here daily for information and the camaraderie of like-minded people. I feel like I'm one of the good guys.
I guess the point I was trying to make is that I don't think any member of our military would purposely kill children. Or maliciously harm innocents. As bad as we've behaved over the last eight years, I feel that we still haven't lost that much of our humanity. Maybe I'm wrong.
Peace
RickB @ 89:
Oliver North, an independentjournalist embedded? Give me a break.
Ollie is a scumbag and as biased and dishonest as any person on this entire Earth.
I'm sure you're right, although there are bound to be some rotten apples. IMHO, the critique was directed at the tactics used, not the moral or the ethics of the average GI.
JoeSixPack @ 90:
Hey JoeSixPack....You are an o.k. guy and I'll have a beer with you anytime, any day.
And, I agree NO military personnel I ever served with would purposely kill children or
civilians.
#87
It appears that what you are doing is employing the lesser of the two evils argument. You inquire, "what are you going to do?" I find this question on what is supposed to be a liberal web site utterly baffling as well as bizarre. But as with so many Americans as well as the mainstream media you seem to believe that only the two major candidates should be given a vote. Your type of thinking is reminiscent of Orwell's Animal farm-two legs good, four legs bad. In this case, you seem to be saying that Americans can select any candidate they want as long as that candidate is either a Democrat or a Republican. Believe it or not there are genuine choices that liberals can choose from such as Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney and even Gloria LaRiva of the Populist and Socialist Party. Voting for any of those candidates means that you will not be voting for a corporate and militarist candidate such as McCain and Obama. I certainly will be resting a lot easier and my conscience will not be wracked with guilt knowing that I voting for a candidate who is not calling for the death and destruction of the Iraqi and Afghan people, which is what McCain and Obama are advocating.
Evidence from multiple sources of 90 civilian deaths verses a sanitized released report, coming from our intel sources I assume, of 35 militants and 7 civilian deaths...... hmmmmm.....fishy... IF the so-called intel experts can be punked and manipulated into destroying a village in what sounds like some kind of a tribal vendetta or bounty... And our military assets carry this kind of stupidity out???
Maybe instead of sending some suit with some stars on its shoulder to go over and do damage control, maybe we just ought to pick up our marbles and go the fuck home.. Don't sound like we're doing anyone, least of all ourselves, any good being in this country anymore.... Killing innocents while fighting some Bush administration trumped up 'war on a word' ain't too smart at all to begin with... And when the local yaahoos can punk out the so-called big-brains in all this crap?? Ya got a major fucking problem.... JD
90 more dead Vietcong, err I mean Taliban.
Another neverending war for the military industrial complex.
McCain the Liar @ 96:
America's economy has always been a war economy.
Doggiebobo @ 91:
Exactly!
Erroll @ 94:
hey, i hear you - i would love to pick a more liberal candidate... but not at the risk of 4 more neo-con years of death and destruction. i am trying to be a pragmatist here, not an idealist (even though i wish i could see my ideals come to pass).
the situation is what it is.
currently, there is absolutely no hope for a green (or other 3rd party on the left) or a libertarian (or any other right wing option) to make the office. until we get some form of ranked choice voting/instant run-off elections, we will have little sway over either the Dems or the GOPers.
making 'protest votes' to hold the Dems accountable, and possibly nudge them to more progressive values would be nice, if it were effective and didn't mean that instead of your ideal, the country moves even farther to the right for another cycle.
so now, given what we have...
your suggestion is to vote for a 3rd party candidate, which is every voters right to be sure. however, please consider the impact of your decision. if you *really* believe that ending up with McCain will be no worse than ending up with Obama, so be it. i can't understand that point of view myself... the republicans are orders of magnitude worse than the Dems on almost every issue.
everyone who voted for Nader had every right to do so, but i think most of those voters wished they had made the choice of the lesser of two evils, rather than getting what we all ended up with. the worst president in the history of this country.
to add to the above: remember that the conservatives are far more homogeneous than 'the liberals'. our fragmentation is both good and bad. its a good thing that we have some many divergent views, but its bad for any hope of an organized response to the uniformity of the conservative agenda.
so given the current realities, given the possible outcomes, any vote not for Obama is effectively (and sadly) a vote FOR the McCain/Palin agenda. you won't find (many of) their voters casting for Huckabee or Ron Paul.
Should we have a viable 3rd party option? YES
now it is our job to work our *how* to get there without abandoning our country to the goopers until things get so bad that a bloody revolution becomes the only option.
Who decides on any given day that they really ought to murder a bunch of children? Do they have it down on like a grocery list 'Milk, Bread, pick up Joey from soccer practice, kill 60 kids and their mothers, pickup wine for dinner tonight with the Smiths', is that how it works?
"Gosh honey, hard day in the office today. Fucking 3 hour meeting with those douchebags from marketing, you know that fat guy who sweats a lot? Yeah, him and his squadron of harpies. They know I have these damn TPS reports to do by Friday as well, the pricks.. But hey, it wasnt all bad, I murdered 60 kids and we had drinks out after lunch, do you remember Sue from accounts.. that crazy christmas party a few years back? Yeah shes finishing up at the end of the month."
Remember the Beslan school siege and how we were making confident assertions that Yes, these people sure are evil terrorists for doing this, because wont you please think of the children, what about the children!! And now its "This just in - we just murdered a whole school because we can, yay the war on terror. But now on to that crazy Britney, what is that girl up to now, her and her crazy parental skills!"
Malicious or not, they killed babies.
Any parent knows the horror of this.
.
Iraq; a War Crime...?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Khut8xbXK8
What is a Crime Against Humanity...?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIJYl7U4ksY
.
America has been doing this for years. (Massacring innocents and saying they didn't do it)
But so have a lot of countries.
The only difference being, I can't think of another guilty country who goes around saying "We're number 1!!" all the time, and insisting it has the morals to be the worlds police man.
RickB @ 98:
You know what the irony of this is, is that the Times in the UK is owned by News International the same people who own Fox News
Comments are closed on this entry