Afghanistan war logs: Massive leak of secret files exposes truth of occupation

Afghanistan war logs: Massive leak of secret files exposes truth of occupation

www.guardian.co.uk

The war logs also detail:

• How a secret "black" unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for "kill or capture" without trial.

• How the US covered up evidence that the Taliban has acquired deadly surface-to-air missiles.

• How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

• How the Taliban has caused growing carnage with a massive escalation of its roadside bombing campaign, which has killed more than 2,000 civilians to date.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.guardian.co.uk
www.guardian.co.uk

Pretty unbelievable scoop for Wikileaks on this one.

They turned over many of the logs to the Guardian and New York Times.

Here is an example of British Army action in Afghanistan.

The US army's archives contain descriptions of at least 21 separate occasions in which British troops are said to have shot or bombed Afghan civilians, including women and children. The logs identify at least 26 people killed and another 20 wounded as a result.

Some casualties were accidentally caused by air strikes, but many also are said to involve British troops firing repeatedly on unarmed drivers or motorcyclists who come "too close" to convoys or patrols. Their injuries repeatedly result from what are described as "warning shots" or "disabling shots" fired into the engine block, as required by the military's "escalation of force" regulations.

The casualties alleged to have been caused by the British include 16 children, at least three women and a mentally ill man. The number is a small fraction of the 369 civilian casualties listed in the logs as due to coalition (mostly US) actions in total.

www.guardian.co.uk...

What difference do you think this is going to make to policy, ROE in Afghanistan?

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

[edit on 25-7-2010 by Peruvianmonk]

well when wikileaks founder did that interview he told that wikileaks would show increasingly more over time with a climax end of this year. So I believe we are still just in the "prologue" phase of their plan... al the intel coming out will become more and more controversial as time goes by..

reply to post by faceoff85


Hopefully.

For me the only thing controversial about the leak is the information on the deaths of civilians etc, not the actual leak and those(Wikileaks) who leaked it.

THANK YOU WIKILEAKS!

I have no clue what we could do without it.

Just reading this on The Guardian website. It's a biggie.

Starred and flagged, Peruvianmonk.

• How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

Groom Lake?

reply to post by RUDDD49


Yeh that would make sense.

Good shout.

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk

Afghanistan war logs: Massive leak of secret files exposes truth of occupation

www.guardian.co.uk

The war logs also detail:

• How a secret "black" unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for "kill or capture" without trial.

• How the US covered up evidence that the Taliban has acquired deadly surface-to-air missiles.

• How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

• How the Taliban has caused growing carnage with a massive escalation of its roadside bombing campaign, which has killed more than 2,000 civilians to date.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I'm confused.....were supposed to arrest and try the Taliban as we fight them in a war? Personally I just prefer we kill them in engagements.......we are still allowed to fight them aren't we??? Just want to make sure it's acceptable to fire at them.


I also see no problem in killing Taliban with Drones so we don't have to risk coalition troops.

Bravo Wikileaks, and bravo to the absolutely amazing courage of whistleblowers. They are true Heros.

US replies with same old, same old. Putting them and their buddies at risk.
Never mind the abominable risk they are to Afghans. Never mind the mass murder of children and civilians which they are deliberately carrying out.

9/11 was a terrorist attack carried out by the US Government on its own people. The Afghan war is illegal. US and its allies are therefore carrying out terrorist activities in these countries.

The Taliban are old buddies of Obama (aka Soreto, aka God knows who).
The US is possibly even now providing them with weapons, as they did in the past, (via Obama as agent in the field), to keep the conflict alive.

THE US GOVERNMENT are the ones who are putting US military and Afghan citizens at risk in an act of terrorism against Afghanistan.

The heroic whistleblowers and Wikileaks are trying to STOP this insanity.

The NaZionists who run US and international politics are the CRIMINALS, whose ony concern is to protect themselves. They are blatantly not interested in protecting anyone else.

• How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

Orchestrated war to field test new technologies?

I think that is a viable possibility...

reply to post by RUDDD49


Quote :• How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

Groom Lake? End quote.

9/11?





[edit on 25-7-2010 by wcitizen]

reply to post by pavil


Well the problem is is that there have been many incidents when these drone strikes have either hit civilians directly or caused collateral damage in the attacking of actual Taliban.

UPDATE 041120D* At 0900 hrs International Media reported that US airstrike had killed 60 civilians in Kunduz.

www.guardian.co.uk...

In regards to these 'black' units, these have also killed many innocent Afghan civilians set up by locals with a grudge.

Shum Khan was a deaf and dumb man who lived in the remote border hamlet of Malekshay, 7,000ft up in the mountains. When a heavily armed squad from the CIA barrelled into his village in March 2007, the war logs record that he "ran at the sight of the approaching coalition forces … out of fear and confusion".

The secret CIA paramilitaries, (the euphemism here is OGA, for "other government agency") shouted at him to stop. Khan could not hear them. He carried on running. So they shot him, saying they were entitled to do so under the carefully graded "escalation of force" provisions of the US rules of engagement.

www.guardian.co.uk...

[edit on 25-7-2010 by Peruvianmonk]

Also of interest is Wikileaks'

CIA report into shoring up Afghan war support in Western Europe, 11 Mar 2010

http://__._/wiki/CIA_report_into_shoring_up_Afghan_war_support_in_Western_Europe,_11_Mar_2010

If the US had proof that OBL did what he is said to have done then
the Taliban would have handed him over, and this "WAR" would have never happened.
But the US didn't have any proof.

And ever since the Patriot and related Acts and EO's have been passed they don't need any proof here in North America either.
But hey, Thats the way we role when we are a tyranny.

Tyranny
Coming to a Home Theater near you.

minions die hard
just ask Saddam
have a nice day.


[edit on 25-7-2010 by Danbones]

Thanks the OP for this
Just wondering if this massive "leak" is coming from WhistleBlowers only, or maybe coming from the hacking incident a little while back ?
Also how come they keep using the word "deadly" about weapons of war Aint that what they suppose to be ?!
Seems like there is nothing about on wikileaks site though

reply to post by Peruvianmonk


Civilian casualties are unavoidable in a war such as the one in Afghanistan. I know that sounds harsh, but its the reality of an insurgent/guerilla war. There is no way to 100% be sure you are getting only the bad guys when they mingle with the civilian population. We have been doing better at avoiding such mistakes, but they will happen from time to time.

reply to post by BBC The1


Yes i noticed there was nothing on the Wikileaks site.

It seems they decided to hand the files to the Guardian and New York Times to publish rather than put their own site at risk.

reply to post by Peruvianmonk


Nothing new to me. This just means we have a source for it.

reply to post by BBC The1


Nothing on the site, but twitter feed did take notice of the simultaneous release by the Guardian, New York Times and Der Spiegel.

twitter.com/wikileaks