It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US 'killed 47 Afghan civilians'

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 07:29 AM
link   

US 'killed 47 Afghan civilians'


news.bbc.co.uk

A US air strike in eastern Afghanistan on Sunday killed 47 civilians, 39 of them women and children, an Afghan government investigating team says.

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

But local people said the dead were wedding party guests.

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

President Hamid Karzai has said that no civilian casualty is acceptable.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 07:29 AM
link   
Does nobody check to confirm the target anymore?

with all the technology that the USA military has, why are civillians still being murdered?

I say murder as that is what it is. Can't be an accident as we seem to be seeing this same type of error almost daily for the last 5 years or so.

Can we seriously believe that there is no other option to an attack than just bombing from a distance? Talk about the bravery of being out of range.


"We never target non-combatants. We do go to great length to avoid civilian casualties,"

That's your response and i guess you're sticking to it...doesn't explain much though, does it?


those who passed on intelligence to the US military ahead of the air strike should be tried, "as well as those who carried out the bombing".

And those that gave the order, and those that sent these foreign troops there in the first place.. but nobody has been able to impeach those responsible for that, so how you'll get them to answer to this is anyones guess.

I've got an idea.. why dont both combative sides all meet up in a tent, tell each other exactly where they're going to be and when, and then all the civilians can move out of the way and let those who want to blow the heck out of the enemy cando so at their leisure. Sounds like a good idea to me.. it's fair, reasonable, civilised and no civilians die..a perfect war..soldiers for soldiers..not mass technology against civilians.

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Extralien

I've got an idea.. why dont both combative sides all meet up in a tent, tell each other exactly where they're going to be and when, and then all the civilians can move out of the way and let those who want to blow the heck out of the enemy cando so at their leisure. Sounds like a good idea to me.. it's fair, reasonable, civilised and no civilians die..a perfect war..soldiers for soldiers..not mass technology against civilians.


Great idea, just there's one problem. The insurgents LIKE to mix up with the civilians simply for the fact that if there is a strike, the civilians will also die and it makes for great headlines.



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 08:36 AM
link   
I wonder what would happen if one of their missiles hit Bushes daughters wedding few weeks ago and 40 people died. It would be a national tragedy and bush would probably nuke the whole middle east. But over there ts just another Friday.

starred and flagged



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Of course we did. Its always this way. We always bomb orphanages and weddings on purpose. I think they are primary targets. One thing we are never short of is people willing to stand around and point at the dead bodies all the while waving their hands for everyone else to come take a look.

Not star'd and never flagged.




top topics
 
2

log in

join