US air strikes kill 140 civilians in Afghanistan, including 93 children

If they are occupied, there are no neutral zones.

Collaborators who work with the occupation do not define neutraility anymore than Jewish police who patrolled the Warsaw ghetto for the Nazis did.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hard to fight a war against them without occupying the country.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Also pointless. You can stay there for the next 100 years and you'll change nothing. Whats the difference between Karzai and the Taliban. The price tag. Maybe you'll go broke.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The army has a specific number per incident, I think it's like 19, but I forget. If they think more than 19 civilians will be killed, they don't do it.

 

They just killed 93 children, the rest of the 140 being mostly women/

 

From the link:

"Nevertheless, Washington has continued to dispute the death toll. U.S. military spokesman Colonel Greg Julian said villagers had an incentive to invent names of dead relatives in the hope of collecting compensation.

The U.S. military blames the Taliban for causing the deaths deliberately by herding civilians into houses it knew would be targeted by U.S. troops sent to rescue Afghan police and soldiers from an ambush. It also says the Taliban may have killed some of the villagers with grenades.

Julian said investigators had been shown 26 individual graves at the site and one mass grave, which he said was not large enough to contain so many bodies. He estimated the overall toll could not exceed 80."

 

Of course, they're lying. Maybe the fragments got mixed up.

http://www.federaljack.com/2009/05/08/red-cross-confirms-dozens-dead-in-afghan-air-strikes/

 

Of course, isn't is strange it's always women and children? I guess the men are out freedom fighting.

Anyway, the truth is that the Taliban often use abandoned soviet facilities which are located among the civilian population. It's against US strategic interests to have so many civilians killed, so we are probably trying to limit it. The alternative seems to be more troops on the ground, which means more money and more American deaths, which can turn the American public against the war. It's probably best just to defeat the Taliban as quickly as possible and go home.

 

You're not going home then. Might as well settle down.

 

How can you be so sure we won't defeat the Taliban?

 

Because all the men who were out freedom fighting [or not] will have even more reason now to kill the troops. And no reason not to blow themselves up.

Its called Badal. Look it up.

 

Evidently we can kill them faster than they can make them. Anyway, they may hate American troops, but that doesn't mean they will like the ideology of the Taliban.

 

Oh, has the population dropped in the last seven years?

 

Does killing 130 people result in 130 taliban recruits? They may choose to join the Afghan army instead! Intelligent people know what the Taliban have done.

 

Intelligent people know that those who will kill 93 children to get a few militants are not the kind you'd want to emulate.

al Jazeera coverage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThT3u4TWuY8

 

The Taliban kill plenty of Afghans themselves, so they make their own enemies too.

 

They're not as brave as American soldiers who would rather bomb children than put themselves at risk. The irony of who is really hiding behind civilians. To declare that the Taliban are "hiding behind civilians" when its obvious that civilians have never stopped Americans from bombing them.

 

That was the probably the plan. They want us to bomb civilians.

 

These names come from the US puppet government agencies, they are not fabricated. News agencies are running this story around the region. They have shown the funeral of the victims and even some of the dead bodies of the children and women. They have the name for every single person who was killed in these attacks, 93 of them children. The families themselves are protesting the murder of their children and family members.

NO TALIBAN FIGHTERS DIED IN THESE ATTACKS. NO WEAPONS WERE FOUND.

The Afghani national resistance (of which Taliban is but one group) was not even present in this area. This is an unjustifiable attack against the civilian population of Afghanistan.

Why are the Americans saying there were human shields? The Afghani resistance is known to fight outside the villages for this very reason, to prevent loss of civilian life. Since when have the Americans started talking like Israelis.

NOTE: These are American allies who have protested the attack, not Afghani resistance. They have denied that the Afghani resistance was present in this location.

 

How can you say that??? You come up with all kinds of pretend scenarios for Americans but the Taliban is irrelevant??

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!