Even the media is starting to call out republicans over their seriously ridiculous protests against President Obama--who dared to give a back to school speech to the children. Usually the teabagger brigade compares Obama to Hitler or a socialist, but Joe Watkins (former Bush 41 guy) came up with a new and even more stupid argument than usual. Parents can't compete with his charisma----ergo he shouldn't speak to the kids. Huh?

Watkins: This president is not an ordinary president. He's one of the most gifted speakers that the world has ever seen. He's gifted, he's charismatic and when he speaks he speaks with tremendous authority and great conviction and with tremendous persuasion. And it's one thing to talk to adult who maybe have the ability to discern between right or wrong or whether they agree or disagree. The challenge becomes the parents when he talks to their kids about the present, he's so persuasive, he's campaigning for the hearts and minds of the kids. Today's speech was fine....but what moms and dads are afraid of is that what happens when kids who can't distinguish what moms or dads can when the Defense of Marriage is repealed or the act comes up to...

Dr. Nancy: Joe, Joe, he didn't slip, there was no gotcha in this speech, you know that, there was nothing like that here.

Watkins: No, but we know they'll be other times when the president will make very strong and compelling arguments for issues that moms and dads don't agree with.

Usually, this would be the perfect trait that American appreciate in a president, so he could be a positive influence on the kids of America. Telling them that cutting class and to study hard is what they need to hear, but not to republicans. And Watkins turns it into a gay bashing segment. Is Joe saying that the president will schedule a speech to school kids in favor and talk about the Defense of Marriage Act? Is he kidding me? Even Chuck Todd looked at Watkins like he had an alien brain.

Todd: Joe, it sounds like you're worried the president's going to be too popular with kids. I guess...is that the concern that if he were less charismatic you'd be OK with him speaking to children?

Watkins: No, not at all....he's so popular and persuasive that parents don't want to compete with that

Say, what? Liar, liar, Watkins' pants are on fire. As long as the president is conservative then that president can speak to the kids every single day. I'm waiting for conservatives to ban their children from ever watching an Obama speech or interview. Republicans have become freaks since they've let the teabaggers take over their party.

A new CNN poll shows us that the American people are still turned off the Afghan war. We'll that's not a surprise, but we have to keep talking about it so it's not lost in the great health care debate. I met Meteor Blades at the Netroots Nation party and we had a long talk about the war.
Here's some of what he said.

Make sure you read the whole article.

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, said Sunday that the situation is not good in Afghanistan and that it must improve in the next 12 to 18 months or there will be congressional and popular pressure against the policy. But what would mark improvement? Fewer killings? Better delivery of services? A smaller poppy crop? Improved infrastructure? Even the Bush administration conceded rhetorically that there was no wholly military solution in Afghanistan. The Obama White House has taken that idea a good deal more seriously. "Civilian surge" and "it’s not about how many enemies we kill; it’s about how many civilians we protect" have now become the mantra.
{}
The Pentagon budget for Afghanistan this year is $65 billion. The USAID budget of civilian aid for winning hearts and minds in Afghanistan and Pakistan is $4.4 billion. The words deliver one message, the dollars another. It’s not that the administration doesn’t have worthwhile ideas about how to improve life for the average Afghan – electricity and clean water and a $12,000 school would make the typical rural village a far better place. It’s the implementation that isn’t happening. While 17,000 more troops have been making their way to Afghanistan, only 92 of the State Department’s promised 313 new civilians have been hired.

Many of those civilians are doing terrific humanitarian work. But most of the billions they are supposed to be sinking into worthwhile projects are being sucked away by corruption long before it reaches the locales where it is supposed to be spent. This, accompanied with the slowness with which the civilian end of things has been delivered since the Bush administration, is cause for much understandable grumbling by the Afghan people...read on

Winning hearts and minds with a good attitude - NOT! A soldier complains about begging Afghan kids and tells one "your country sucks ass."

From the Gulf Times, a little-noticed aspect of the Bush administration's epic fail in Afghanistan. While the Western media is preoccupied with war - violent deaths, the resurgent Taliban and plans for a military Surge - the other Horsemen are even busier.

MORE than 1.6mn children under the age of five and thousands of women could die in 2009 as a result of the lack of food and medical care, particularly in terms of proper services for women and children, according to the Afghan Ministry of Health.

These are troubling statistics not only because of the human suffering involved, but because they indicate that millions of dollars poured into the country have not been able to reach the most vulnerable communities in the country.

Food shortages and inclement weather could leave 8mn Afghans -30% of the population - on the brink of starvation, according to several aid agencies. This is happening despite the World Food Programme (WFP)’s warning last January for a sharp increase in food assistance to the country. Lack of food is an actual threat not just in the remote regions of this country but also in Afghanistan’s urban areas.

Recent price increases in basic foods, particularly wheat, have adversely affected millions of Afghans, particularly in rural areas where domestic production cannot satisfy people’s needs. While in 2005 an average household was spending 56% of their income on food, that figure now rose to 85%, according to Susannah Nicol, a spokeswoman for the WFP.

...Children are particularly vulnerable. They are not only affected by lack of food. Diarrhea, acute respiratory infections and vaccine-preventable diseases are important threats to children’s health. Diarrhea and acute respiratory infections account for about 41% of all child deaths in this desperately poor nation of 26mn people, while vaccine-preventable diseases –such as measles, polio and diphtheria- account for another 21%, according to Unicef. The tragedy is that 80 to 85 % of these diseases can be avoided by preventive measures and appropriate and timely health care.

Afghanistan rates low in practically all health indicators. As a result, it has one of the world’s highest infant and maternal mortality rates. Hospitals in most of the country are in deplorable conditions, and lack enough trained doctors or medical equipment for even the most basic surgeries. Life expectancy is 42 years, according to figures from the World Health Organisation (WHO).

Do you think watching their babies die of famine and pestilence will help endear Afghans to the prospect of another 20-30,000 well-fed American soldiers in their country? Do you really think spending billions on those troops can possibly keep the lid on, given the statistics above? I know where I think the bulk of any surging should be going on.

Crossposted from Newshoggers

"We were walking, I was holding my grandson's hand, then there was a loud noise and everything went white. When I opened my eyes, everybody was screaming. I was lying metres from where I had been, I was still holding my grandson's hand but the rest of him was gone. I looked around and saw pieces of bodies everywhere. I couldn't make out which part was which."

That's the testimony of one man caught up in the disastrous airstrike on a Afghan bridal party wrongfully identified as a Taliban force back in July. The carnage was so complete they had to bury the 47 victims in 28 graves. US and NATO troops have denied the attack, but say they are investigating. In another similiar attack back in August they denied involvement at first too. Then investigated and found themselves blameless, only to finally admit their culpability and apologise once independent footage of the destruction surfaced. In a third such incident, in November, footage surfaced before the kabuki dance could begin. So far this year, such mistakes have cost over 600 Afghans their lives.

The Guardian report from which the above quotation was taken also includes a video report which contains footage of Afghans mutilated and crippled by mistaken Western airstrikes.

Afghans understand what's going on here in a way that Western leaders don't seem to.

Continue reading »

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.

   

Afghans prepare graves for people killed by a US airstrike on Azizabad village in Herat province. The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) says it has has found "convincing evidence" that 90 civilians -- including 60 children -- were killed in US-led air strikes last week.(AFP/File/Reza Shirmohammadi)

Some of you might remember this story from last Sunday. The UN has backed Afghan claims that a recent airstrike in Afghanistan didn't kill Taliban militants as the US military claims but instead killed 90 civilians, about 60 of them children. Under pressure, the US has now agreed to a joint investigation.

Evidence from all sides regarding the raid has been scant, with no conclusive photos or video emerging to shed light on what happened in Azizabad. But the claim of high civilian casualties by the Afghan government, which is backed by the U.N., is causing new friction between the Afghan president and his Western backers.

... The U.S. military says civilians are never deliberately targeted and that forces go to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties.

... Three Afghan officials said Thursday that U.S. commanders were misled into striking some 15 houses in Azizabad.

They said U.S. special forces troops and Afghan commandos raided the village while hundreds of people were gathered in a large compound for a memorial service honoring a tribal leader, Timor Shah, who was killed eight months ago by a rival clan.

The officials said the raid was aimed at militants who were supposed to be in the village, but they said the operation was based on faulty information provided by Shah's rival, whom they identified as Nader Tawakal.

Afghans targeted in U.S. raids have complained for years of being pursued based solely on information given by other Afghans who sometimes are business rivals, neighbors with vendettas or who are simply interested in reward money for anti-government militants.

   The local Afghan version of what happened is terribly reminiscent of the "bounties for terrorists" system that led to literally tens of thousands of Iraqis being arrested after being fingered by neighbours with grudges. The US military have released 11,000 Iraqi detainees this year and about 20,000 remain in US-run prison camps at Camp Cropper in Baghdad and Camp Bucca in southern Iraq. It's also reminsicent of the bounty system that led to them filling Gitmo with detainees, over 80% of whom were later released without charge.

You'd think by now they'd have worked out that the bounty system isn't working, it's just being used to settle local grudges. That's piss poor COIN doctrine - losing hearts and minds even among the fingerers, who surely see the US as just an unthinking oppressor of whom they can take temporary advantage.

  There's a bit of a difference of opinion between NATO and Afghan authorities over the result of recent airstrikes.

American-led coalition forces killed 76 Afghan civilians in western Afghanistan on Friday, the interior ministry said.

<!--proximic_content_off--><!--proximic_content_on-->

"Seventy-six civilians, most of them women and children, were martyred today in a coalition forces operation in Herat province," the statement said.

Coalition forces bombarded the Azizabad area of Shindand district in Herat province on Friday afternoon, the ministry said. Nineteen victims were women, seven were men, and the rest were children under 15, it said.

However, the coalition denied killing civilians. It said 30 militants had been killed in an air strike in Shindand district in the early hours of Friday and no further air strikes had been launched. Air strikes took place between 1am-2am after Afghan and coalition soldiers were ambushed by insurgents while on a patrol targeting a Taliban commander in Herat, the US military said in a statement.

...Saeed Sharif, a council member where the strike occurred, said: "Last night at 2am some people were attending a holy Koran recitation in Shindand district when Americans started bombing."

This isn't the first time this kind of thing has happened. What usually happens next is the NATO carries out an investigation and says it is in the clear while the Afghans stick to their story. Which makes me wonder about the disconnect between that absence of admission for culpability in individual incidents and the overall admission that airstrikes and shootings by coalition troops killed as many Afghans as the Taliban did last year. I'm sure Afghans wonder too - and then NATO wonders why the Taliban is resurgent.