Afghan Children Handcuffed, Then Killed By American Soldiers
A girl in an outdoor classroom, Narang village, 2004.
From the London Times, December 31, 2009...
President Karzai sent a team of investigators to Narang district, in eastern Kunar province, after reports of a massacre first surfaced on Monday."The delegation concluded that a unit of international forces descended from a plane Sunday night into Ghazi Khan village in Narang district of the eastern province of Kunar and took ten people from three homes, eight of them school students in grades six, nine and ten, one of them a guest, the rest from the same family, and shot them dead," a statement on President Karzai's website said.
Assadullah Wafa, who led the investigation, said that US soldiers flew to Kunar from Kabul, suggesting that they were part of a special forces unit.
Mr Wafa, a former governor of Helmand province, met President Karzai to discuss his findings yesterday. "I spoke to the local headmaster," he said. "It's impossible they were al-Qaeda. They were children, they were civilians, they were innocent. I condemn this attack."
In a telephone interview last night, the headmaster said that the victims were asleep in three rooms when the troops arrived. "Seven students were in one room," said Rahman Jan Ehsas. "A student and one guest were in another room, a guest room, and a farmer was asleep with his wife in a third building.
"First the foreign troops entered the guest room and shot two of them. Then they entered another room and handcuffed the seven students. Then they killed them."
Directly from Karzai's website...
President Karzai in a telephone contact expressed condolences and shared grief with the families of the victims of the recent attack in Kunar province.Following the attack, President Karzai tasked a delegation on Monday led by the Chief of Complaints Commission and composed of representatives from the ministries of Defense, Interior, National Directorate of Security and the Office of Administrative Affairs for an immediate investigation of the incident.
The findings by the delegation concluded that a unit of international forces descended from a plane Sunday night into Ghazi Khan Village in Narang district of the eastern province of Kunar and took 10 people from three homes, eight of them school students in grades six, nine and 10, one of them a guest, the rest from the same family, and shot them dead.
Eight of those shot dead were confirmed as school students by the village school principle.
From the New York Times...
The governor of Kunar, Fazullah Wahidi, said that "the coalition claimed they were enemy fighters," but that elders in the district and a delegation sent to the remote area had found that "10 people were killed and all of them were civilians."
From the United Nations...
The United Nations said Thursday that a weekend raid by foreign troops in a tense eastern Afghan province killed eight local students and that it warned against nighttime actions by coalition forces because they often cause civilian deaths.
I've read all the links twice now, and I can't think of one fooking useful thing to say.
January 1, 2010 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rutabaga fancies himself a propagandist. He's manipulating your emotions with pics of Afghan girls, although no one ever claimed that schoolgirls were involved in this alleged incident.
Actual pic of the martyred schoolkids here.
Bearded six graders. The headmaster, who was contacted by Wafa by phone (he never traveled there in person), is the grandfather of the dead men and we shouldn't accept his account without verification.
More on this story coming.
January 1, 2010 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
TO SAM AND A FEW OTHERS WHO REALLY CARE;
It's time to stop enabling this kind of pseudo-progressive troll, there is a team of them posing as progressives around here and using our own peace-loving tendencies to drag us into these discussions from hell. They consistently recommend the profane co-posts of their fellow obsessive-compulsive anti-Obama-bots, and if you recommend them you might unwittingly be considered one of them by anyone like me who likes to go back and peruse such available facts AS WHO REC'S WHOM.
Don't legitimize this type of unhealthy dialog, or these OBSESSIVE Obama trashers, with recs or comments, they are all eaten up with hate and bitter disappointment, and they obviously want the rest of us to join their delusion. Anyone who takes part in it AS IF IT IS LEGITIMATE is falling into a very contrived trap.
Even suggesting Obama would CONDONE civilian-targeted attacks if he was in a position to do so, makes a mockery of the meaningful criticism that should be leveled at our careless leaders, and callously cheapens the lives of everyone touched by this war, especially the young and innocent victims caught in the crossfire.
They have already been used to death by evil men who would hide behind children as they make war, and call it holy, those of you using their innocent lives as a cheap pawn in petty political provocation just compound the tragedy, and prove how desperate you are to make our President seem as evil as your own dark, twisted minds.
Stop pushing these trashtalkers up the rec list, folks, they aren't sincere progressives, they are provocateurs, just don't rec them if you dont consider yourself one of them, and we will eventually know who is part of this trash team from their consistent mutual "rec" record, because they will have only each other to help them try to fool the rest of us.
January 1, 2010 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I sometimes forget to recommend, but here's one with your name on it.
I guess if I complain about the Cuban embargo I'm just hating on Obama despite complaining about it for decades.
You guys protect your little man, okay? Looks like he'll be needing it, and God knows you'd have to get a life if you gave up your hobby. Too bad about those bearded kids, they should know to get waxed for protection, but if you look like a terrorist, guess you gotta die like one.
January 1, 2010 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
civilian-targeted attacks
You don't need to target civilians to be a war criminal.
You only need to wage unjust war. Civilians will die--all the result of our criminal enterprise.
This is not a just war. (I doubt there is one in the 21st century, but that's another question.)
The term of art is "depraved indifference" to the foreseeable consequences of one's actions.
Welcome to the ranks of the depraved and indifferent. Don't hide behind purported unintentionallity.
January 1, 2010 9:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's all about who is 'reccing' who in the end, you know....
January 2, 2010 12:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's time to stop enabling this kind of pseudo-progressive troll, there is a team of them posing as progressives around here and using our own peace-loving tendencies to drag us into these discussions from hell.
Or in your case and the other Obama apologists...
It's time to stop enabling this kind of pseudo-liberal troll, there is a team of them posing as liberals around here and demonizing our desire to implement the right policies as disloyalty in an attempt to drag us into these discussions from hell.
January 2, 2010 1:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
"...our desire to implement the right policies as disloyalty"
Bitching about Obama on a blog is how you attempt to "implement the right policies?" The only effect your constant negativity has is to make the Republicans path back to power easier. Your pathetic attempts at "implementing the right policies" has an effect that is the exact opposite of your stated goal.
And I don't accuse you of "disloyalty." I accuse you of being stupidly short-sighted, and an obstacle to effecting the type of change you claim you want.
January 2, 2010 1:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
And you are an ignorant partisan if you think that a pro-corporate, pro-war Obama administration was the change the American people voted for. It isn't the progressives fault that the current FOWS (Friends Of Wall Street) in power didn't put the American people first and will suffer the electoral consequences. But I am sure it will be our fault for the fallout about 10%+ unemployment and the continuing home foreclosures and personal bankruptcies, right? It is never the centrists with their neoliberal economics who are ever at fault. A rising tide lifts all boats, huh? If the centrists think their Wall Street pals are gonna show any gratitude to Obama, and the D's, by helping to turn the economy around you and your fellow DLC types have been had. Suckers...
January 2, 2010 2:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
You can name call all you want, but those of you claiming to be better than politics we have still haven't articulated a remotely plausible strategy for getting to where you want to go policy-wise.
And if you stay home or throw away your vote on a non-viable third party candidate, then you are responsible for the Republicans' successful return to power. Man up and own the effects of your actions.
January 2, 2010 2:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
So if your party enacts policies so crappy that people can't in good conscience vote for them anymore ... a republican return to power would be the voters' fault; not the fault of democratic policy makers who drove the voters away?
Interesting take on the subject.
January 2, 2010 2:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is amusing that "do what he said he would do" doesn't seem to be on the menu. Instead that columnd reads "DFH/TooTuff/Bridge2Far". We're all Peter Pan & the Lost Boys now.
January 2, 2010 2:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
I find it interesting that all the blame for our crappy government has been dumped on Obama's shoulders after one year in office. No mention of turncoat Democrats in the Senate and House, no mention of a liberal media still "wired for Republicans," or of a previous Democratic administration that sowed the seeds for many of today's problems.
It took awhile to get to this point, you know. At the same time his critics are investing him with complete control over the American economy and all of the arms of our government, they are accusing his supporters of blind celebrity worship. At this point, I am capable of being mildly disappointed in the administration, while still being very glad that we don't have a President McCain. The demonization of Obama by the left is completely out of proportion to his actions so far, especially when looked at in light of the Washington political culture and the seriousness of the problems he faced coming into office. It's like you all woke up on January 21 and there is no Senators Lieberman and Nelson, no Blue Dog caucus, no military-industrial complex, and no "liberal" Washington Post.
January 2, 2010 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you think standing on principle justifies contributing to the further destruction of what is good about our country, have at it. But it is still your choice, and if you have any balls you'll accept the fact that your choices and your actions have consequences.
That's all I'm saying.
January 2, 2010 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
(sort of seems to fit here ... and I make comment 100!!!!!)
January 2, 2010 2:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
From the Canadian Press:
From the London Times article:
The battle for Afghan hearts and minds is apparently escalating.
January 1, 2010 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, the UN reports that civilian deaths from actions of NATO forces declined in 2009. This is noted in the article you link to and has been widely reported.
January 1, 2010 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
It may in the end prove instructive as to winning hearts and minds in whether the Afghan people materially differentiate between civilian deaths caused by NATO forces and those caused by Taliban/insurgents killing in response to NATO/US occupation/actions in their country.
January 1, 2010 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe the truth ultimately doesn't matter, you are saying, so it was OK to misrepresent it.
January 1, 2010 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you say so. I just quoted the referenced article.
January 1, 2010 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Leaving out: "Still, the figures showed a sharp drop in the proportion of civilians killed by NATO forces, which the UN attributed to a decline in the use of airstrikes." But that wasn't the point you wanted to make. You wanted to fan the flames of Ruta's porn fantasies about soldiers and schoolgirls.
January 1, 2010 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your assessment of what I hoped to convey in my comment is conjecture on your part at best. Actually I skimmed the article and stopped reading at the part I quoted. Either way, I linked to the article and still question whether there will be a material difference between deaths by Nato v.s. deaths by taliban in the calculus of winning Afghans hearts and minds. And a happy new year to you in all your marketing endeavors.
January 1, 2010 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL, my marketing stuff is evil, so be careful what you wish for. Best to you, too.
January 1, 2010 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another reason why escalating in Afghanistan is a bad idea!
January 1, 2010 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Will you please cite the sources and specific reports that provides proof this was indeed done by 'American Soldiers' as stated in your headline.
Thanks.
January 1, 2010 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Read the links, stupid!
And Aunt Sam replies:
"But I only believe what I see on TV, and what I see on TV is..."
"The pretty face of Barack Obama!"
"I don't care if Karzai's own investigator says "US soldiers!"
(Did you miss that link, stupid?)
"All I know is what I see on TV, and what I see on TV is..."
"The pretty face of Barack Obama!"
January 1, 2010 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've read the links and while there are some allegations there is no cite which provides documentation and substantive proof that this was indeed done by Americans.
And Ruta, resorting to personal attacks attempting to demean myself and or others does not in any manner do anything to make you or your message more credible.
If you cannot deliver facts and encourage rational discussion via positive, respectful exchanges - you only serve to diminish your posts and the substance of same.
Happy New Year!
January 1, 2010 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you don't like to be called "stupid?"
And maybe "stupid" is actually too mild a word.
If you aren't too stupid to understand the force of so much testimony from local authorities, from the local school-master to the governor of the province, and the United Nations and a national delegation from Karzai, who is absolutely dependent on the United States for his day to day survival, and has nothing whatsoever to gain by distorting evidence to accuse his masters...
Then you're a calculating advocate for mass murder.
But it's so much better to be stupid.
January 1, 2010 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
For those who are willing to enter into a rational, intelligent conversation about the issues, we all are the better for it.
The ongoing hateful spewing of venom and twisted rationale is at best tiresome and a waste of time and energy. It serves no useful purpose -only to add to the climate of negativity and chaos. Any actual intelligent communication is made impossible when the message becomes so mired in the muck of vitriol.
Again, it's not what you say it's how you choose to say it. If the goal is really to provide the base for a thoughtful, sane interaction - you would not be choosing to put forth this blather.
January 1, 2010 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
You don't want a "rational conversation."
What you want is to pretend that nobody knows anything until everybody forgets all about it.
Aunt Sam is nothing but a lying shill for Obama, and if there was video of that stinking con-man killing those children with his own hands...
Aunt Sam would still be making excuses for her shit-faced Messiah.
Meanwhile, today in Hawaii...
"Obama starts new year with basketball game."
January 1, 2010 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ruta cooked up the Gulf of Tonkin story in a previous life.
January 1, 2010 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
The ongoing hateful spewing of venom and twisted rationale is at best tiresome and a waste of time and energy. It serves no useful purpose -only to add to the climate of negativity and chaos. Any actual intelligent communication is made impossible when the message becomes so mired in the muck of vitriol.
January 1, 2010 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
What source of confirmation are you looking for?
When you have the New York Times reporting that a senior NATO official with knowledge of the operation confirming that it was carried out by a joint Afghan-American force and arguing only (and importantly) about the identity of those slain this is about as definitive as it gets short of ongoing videotaping by the assault force. Note that this confirms the report of the 'natives' as to who conducted the assault.
January 1, 2010 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
But Karzai says no Afghan troops were involved. So Karzai is wrong on at least that fact. That and the photos of the victims that show they are young bearded men and not sixth graders cast doubt on Karzai's statement.
Plus the whole story of Americans flying in to rip schoolchildren from their beds to handcuff them and execute them seems unlikely.
People who are too ready to buy Karzai's claim should be more skeptical.
January 1, 2010 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
The 'claim' I am buying is the NATO official's that Americans were involved. What they intended to do and what was done are subjects I am still agnostic on. Bob Kerrey and his Seals killed women and children to facilitate a mission so it is not like Americans never do things like this.
January 1, 2010 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
From Obama's daily briefing, January 1, 2010...
"Mr. President, credible reports from multiple sources indicate that American soldiers killed 8 Afghan children up close and personal."
And Obama replies...
"Let's shoot some hoops!"
January 1, 2010 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ease up, Ruta. You make some good points, then you go on a personal rant which makes us want to tune you out. Why not just make your point on substance and lay off an obviously nice, concerned person such as Aunt Sam. I don't get it. Try to reply by sticking to substance, not by calling me names.
January 1, 2010 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
But you don't have to call her stupid; we ALL hate it when we are called that or moron. You dig out plenty of info that we don't first see; let the stories speak, and your rationales for belief or mistrust in them.
Someone posted this great Bldwin quote on Scahill's blog this morning:
" People who shut their eyes to reality simply invite their own destruction, and anyone who insists on remaining in a state of innocence long after that innocence is dead turns himself into a monster." - James Baldwin
It is hard to suss out reality; and harder for some than others.
January 1, 2010 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jesus Christ...You project a metric Fuckton. Just because you happen to be stupid enough to read into things what you want to believe doesn't mean everyone else is. Aunt Sam read the article and found no proof. Therefore she asked for it. And you call her stupid? Seems to me that YOU are the stupid one for believing without proof.
January 1, 2010 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
There will be investigations; and the investigations will come to different conclusions, and then we will each decide which conclusion has more merit.
I am getting a mite cynical these days; but I almost barfed on my shoes this morning when I saw this at alternet: it's about youtube videos that the Fooking Department of Defense is posting online for our enjoyment and edification. We get to watch the little circle with the cross tracking Bad Guys, then witness the bomb BLOW THEM TO SMITHEREENS. Tra-la, tra-la, tra-la!
http://www.alternet.org/media/144893/drone_porn%3A_the_newest_youtube_hit
January 1, 2010 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. Jumping to conclusions only serves to enable those whose goal is to create chaos and negativity, which serves no useful or productive purpose.
Too many are too anxious to condemn and denounce based only on their personal agenda and ideology without basis of fact.
If this indeed was done by American troops and these were innocent children, then all need to face the conseqences.
But, for the sake of what's best and prudent for our country and society, I will wait for the facts to be delivered before I begin ranting, raving and condemning.
(It's interesting that given the topic, we all seem to rush to denounce or validate the 'news' reports depending on our own bias.)
January 1, 2010 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would argue that the facts of this story are essentially inconsequential at this point. It is our mission, after all, to (1.) win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people and (2.) to support the Karzai government and establish its military as a legitimate force in Afghanistan.
We now have the Karzai government making these very serious claims against the U.S. forces that wholly undermine the first part of the mission. We cannot plausibly challenge the "facts" of this Karzai investigation without wholly undermining the second part of the mission.
Kind of looks like a "no win" situation to me. And if we are so easily confronting a "no win" situation in Afghanistan, than just what the hell are we doing there in the first place?
January 1, 2010 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
SJ - Happiest of New Years to you and yours!
I can only address the standards I attempt to adhere to and endorse -
Facts/truth needs to always be 'essential' to ascertain any proclaimed knowledge of the issue.
This post deals only with allegations referencing a specific action. I believe that too often we diminish or ignore the specific parts in our rush to 'take on' the big picture (i.e. US in Afghan.). And yet, without all the smaller snapshots we are unable to obtain the facts needed to accurately ascertain the truth whether it be this or the larger issue.
Once we start throwing out the need to obtain fact/truth before we dive into the shallow end, we will never construct, only destruct.
January 1, 2010 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Happy New Year to you, Aunt Sam!
I want nothing more than to learn the truth about what happened here. It is incomprehensible that our military would commit such heinous acts as this, and we need to learn the truth for our own satisfaction (just as you insist, with no assumptions of guilt or innocence made beforehand).
Nevertheless, "a lie gets half way around the world even before the truth gets its boots on." I'm afraid this is probably no more true than in this case. The Afghan people need little excuse to mistrust our intent in their country. And in this instance, who are they going to believe? The Karzai government, which paints this picture of horror? Or the U.S., which has every reason to whitewash such a story?
And how do we get into a pissing match with Karzai over such a story without undermining his already tenuous hold on legitimacy? Better yet, if the Karzai accusations are indeed fabricated, what does that portend for future relations between these two governments? Does Karzai gain internal legitimacy by standing as a defender AGAINST the western intruders?
The complexities of the situation in Afghanistan are nearly overwhelming. But it is becoming increasingly apparent that there will be no military victory to come out of this struggle to "gain the hearts and minds of the Afghan people." Again, just what the hell are we doing in Afghanistan?
January 1, 2010 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
SJ,
Have you seen this...?
http://www.charlierose.com/guest/view/73
http://www.charlierose.com/#schedule_lower
Would really like to have your input on this - it's Richard Holbrooke and why we are in Afghan.
The Afghan people who actually live within the realm will no doubt have their own biases and experiences regarding the truth of the current regime and other factions.
Lies are oft given so much credence because they are screamed out the loudest and longest. If we counter with demands for facts and no longer give credence to those who publish and spread the lies, and yell the truth with the same time and energy - positive goals have a much better chance of being achieved.
Hope you view the above and come back to discuss. I have no doubt you will provide me with needed additional facts.
January 1, 2010 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Charlie Rose is the dumbest man on tv--don't waste our time with clips from his asskissing powder puff pieces, please...and Holbrooke is a tool.
You need to do better, or people might call you "stupid".
January 1, 2010 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
It wasn't Rose that I found interesting, it was Holbrooke. I'm not a fan of Rose's per se, he interrupts too much - but watch him when possible for some of the guests who I don't get to view often. I try to view and listen to both sides of the issue - in an effort to become better informed.
Again, Happy New Year!
January 1, 2010 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, dear, Holbrooke may be a tool, but at least he a well-seasoned, well-practiced tool. ;-}
He never met a blue-ribbon commission he didn't sit on...
January 1, 2010 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excuse me? Did you say, "Charlie Rose is the dumbest man on TV?" I just lost all respect for you. Tell, me, though --- who is the second dumbest, in your humble opinion? I'm dying to know.
January 1, 2010 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
just what the hell are we doing in Afghanistan?
I can help you there, Jeez. We are killing time (bad metaphor...)till Nov. 2012, so Prez won't be jacked up on Fox like he was by Loofah Bill "Do you believe we are in war with terrorists?" Prez: "Yes, I do."
Note to Prez: It's crime fightin' you need to do, not warrin' (you fuckin' oreo--sorry, it has to be said...)
January 1, 2010 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Note to Prez: It's crime fightin' you need to do, not warrin' (you fuckin' oreo--sorry, it has to be said...)"
No, it didn't.
January 1, 2010 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, it didn't.
Just for clarity, you beefin' the don't be warrin' or don't be an oreo? (never mind, I can guess...)
January 1, 2010 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
"(you fuckin' oreo--sorry, it has to be said...)"
This is quite possibly the most despicable piece of racism I have ever seen on this site. what the fuck does Obama's racial composition have to do with anything?
January 1, 2010 8:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
In this case, he's a liberal on the outside and conservative on the inside. While dipping into the racial waters is inadvised, I don't think you need to go for the methylated spirits just yet - presumably we're all adults here and won't swoon at a hint of un-gentile talk. Hint: there might have been 1 or 2 blacks who said more unkind things about Obama, not to mention that Obama is the product of a mixed marriage, so you might say he's an oreo with one side lifted off... Let the analogies begin.
January 2, 2010 3:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's pretty well-established by now that you're much more comfortable with race-based insults and criticism than any other kind.
January 2, 2010 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Drone porn" needs to be added to the dictionary.
The toolbox of the American mind is sadly incomplete without it.
January 1, 2010 11:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Times of London quotes Assadullah Wafa, who led the investigation:
“At around 1 am, three nights ago, some American troops with helicopters left Kabul and landed around 2 km away from the village,” he told The Times. “The troops walked from the helicopters to the houses and, according to my investigation, they gathered all the students from two rooms, into one room, and opened fire."
I don't know why Ridgepole left that quote out of his post, but it explicitly accuses American troops of the killings.
January 1, 2010 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
And no disrespect to Wafa, but until there is more than this statement and proof put forth that it was Americans, we should not (again)rush to judgment and condemnation. That's all I'm asserting. Wouldn't that be more productive and constructive?
Happy New Year!
January 1, 2010 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
more than this statement
con respetto auntie, try this:
officials said that eight of those killed were schoolchildren aged 12-14...NATO officials initially said all the dead were insurgents, but later backed off by saying there was no evidence to substantiate the claims that they were civilians."
Does this suffice?--first the lying sacks of shit make a denial (based, evidently, upon no evidence...) then a weasel (usually it's "ISAF sources said they 'had no knowledge of any civilian deaths'"
That's like I close my eyes, put my fingers in my ears, fuck the living shit out of your wife, and say I have no knowledge of where my dick was this afternoon...
January 1, 2010 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey There JR!
Thanks for this!
Geez, sometimes your analogy's make me grimace and LOL in the same instant reaction! Please, don't ever stop!
Happiest of New Year's and could you make it a 'resolution' to keep on, keepin' on with your posts and comments?!? Puleeze.
January 1, 2010 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
slouching (successfully) towards (picturesque?) vulgarity...
January 1, 2010 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, slouching is bad for your 'posturing'!
Stand up and shout it out!
January 1, 2010 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
slouching
stealin' from Billy B., who taught me all I need to know.
January 1, 2010 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent! Thanks.
January 1, 2010 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Khost School District Course offerings:
IEDs 101 - basic introduction to the creation of improvised explosive ordinance, and the preparation and burial of explosive.
Suicide Bombing 101 (no 202 offered) - details offered on martyr selection.
Beheading 101, 202 - on the use and deployment of the Holy Sword on infidels and collaborators.
Stealing Elections 303 - taught by Hamid Karzai, 'Lying to infidels 101' a course prerequisite.
VBIED 202 - IED 101 required for registration, bomb placement and detonation in vehicles.
January 1, 2010 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some people here appear to be taking the word of the Karzai government and an investigation conducted by them. It strikes me that, given Karzai's record, assuming that this is an accurate account of what happened is, to put it very kindly, imprudent.
A lot more information is needed. Frankly, it is easy to believe American troops could commit any number of stupid atrocities in the heat of battle and when their adrenalin is out of control.
But this sounds like a very deliberately planned and dispassionately carried out operation. It is far easier to believe that some other entity than the U.S. military did this.
January 1, 2010 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
some other entity than the U.S. military
What, you think this is a "false flag" op? Dream on.
This is us. This is what we do for a living. We kill children at night, in their beds. You think it's just adrenaline gone wild? This is hegemony. We are the hegemon. We are the killers. This is our money, our soldiers, our work, our crime.
Get used to it, or get it ended.
January 1, 2010 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are a few things that seem to be loose ends even for early reports. It could have been adrenalin gone wild, that shit does happen, but then someone would have concocted a cover story with plausible believability. I haven't even heard it claimed that the soldiers were fired on and there apparently were not even any throw-down weapons which would have no doubt been available if it were somehow intended from the start to go in and do some killin', and why did they leave witnesses? Cold blooded killers likely wouldn't but might if they intended the story to get out.
I'm not betting it was a false flag operation but I don't totally reject that idea either. Either way it appears to be having the desired effect of one. And, anyway, it is obvious that in the big picture you are right given the end results, "This is us. This is what we do for a living. We kill children at night, in their beds."
January 1, 2010 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
given the end results
I am not sure what price we must pay to grasp that the world does not belong to us, nor all it's treasures, (not even all it's women....). Apparently, 9/11 did not really sink in.
Where we should have repented, we hung Ward Churchill out to dry for saying what was needed, and made a joke of Rev. Wright.
Chickens, meet roost.
January 1, 2010 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
given the end results
I am not sure what price we must pay to grasp that the world does not belong to us, nor all it's treasures, (not even all it's women....). Apparently, 9/11 did not really sink in.
Where we should have repented, we hung Ward Churchill out to dry for saying what was needed, and made a joke of Rev. Wright.
Chickens, meet roost.
January 1, 2010 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am saying that before accepting this story as the Gospel truth, a lot more info is required than the word of the Afghani government.
And, there's not a lot I can do to change anything except throw in my two cents' worth.
January 1, 2010 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the information and links. This atrocious war can only get uglier. If nothing else, Vietnam taught that. The Winter Soldier hearings...My Lai massacre...
January 1, 2010 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't think of a better way to create implacable enemies than to kill people's children or other family members. For every slaughtered child my guess is that we create at least 100 permanent enemies from amongst family members, others in the community who know the slain, etc... Since there is virtually no Al Qaeda at all in the country, our war effort in Afghanistan is now little more than an ongoing criminal enterprise.
January 1, 2010 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for nailing that fundamental fact about the American occupation of Afghanistan.
And on the flipside, although Al Qaeda is gone, we make new enemies every day.
January 1, 2010 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
De nada!
January 1, 2010 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep...we are occupying Afghanistan only trying to prevent al-Qaeda from returning. Iraq and Afghanistan down, which country are we going to have to militarily destroy without provocation and 'occupy' next? Yemen? Iran?
And those new enemies we are making will exponentially multiply over generations. Using our military as a tool against jihadists is both criminal and counterproductive. Not a good daily double...
January 2, 2010 1:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for nailing that fundamental fact about the American occupation of Afghanistan.
And on the flipside, although Al Qaeda is gone, we make new enemies every day.
January 1, 2010 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
At this point, in the midst of conflicting statements, it is not clear who was killed, and whether those who carried out the raid were insurgents or anti-insurgent forces. There is no trustworthy information implicating Americans. It's too early for decisive conclusions about this incident. Inflammatory statements should be withheld pending more details:
http://war.change.org/blog/view/we_dont_know_what_really_happened_in_kunar
January 1, 2010 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
What this lying shill for Obama, Fred Moolten really means is...
"Let's pretend that nobody knows anything, until everybody forgets all about it."
Let's wait until the Army finishes its "investigation"...
25 years later!
Who cares about testimony from the local school-master and the governor of the province and the United Nations and a national delegation from Karzai?
They could all be wrong!
Nobody knows anything!
Let's just forget all about it, and...
Shoot some hoops!
January 1, 2010 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for posting this, Rootie. I was going to add the London Times piece to your previous post about Kunar.
And I was going to highlight that the kids were killed by U.S. special forces, which apparently would have been much to Aunt Sam's dismay and disbelief, although I'm not sure what's so unbelievable about it.
In any case, you might be interested in this report about the Kunar region (complete with maps). And this video from July shows how impossible "success" of any kind will be.
January 1, 2010 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
As in Joint Special Operations Command?
January 1, 2010 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't believe I expressed disbelief - although I do find it dismaying. I simply was stating that until there was some facts of proof to support the 'reporting', I would withhold my rants and condemnation.
Happy New Year to you and yours!
January 1, 2010 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
And now that you concede the identity of the forces?
Again, what are you looking for when you demand "some facts of proof to support the 'reporting'?
As far as I am aware -- Special Forces are not noted for their willingness to hold press conferences.
A stronger argument goes to who was slain. The IEDS in Afghanistan are constructed somewhere by someone. The employment of school boys to make these is not implausible.
It is to the advantage of the Taliban to make any and all attacks by Americans appear to be atrocious massacres whatever the facts may be.
A raid such as this is more dangerous to our forces but is more likely to result in the killing of the intended human targets with less collateral damage than is the use of drones. Yet the person to person nature of such killing engages our imagination and compassion much more than the death of some 60 at a village soccer match due to an suicide bomber sent because the Pakistani villagers were attempting to organize against the Taliban.
The ethical assessment of dueling massacres aside, how many Afghan villagers -- 'innocent' or 'guilty' -- do you think we can kill before the whole country converts to Al Qaeda?
January 1, 2010 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
school boys
To be fair, *school boys in Afghanistan are not like middle schoolers here....That said, it's theirdamn country, we need to be gone.
*I myself was brutally ripped off by a 13yr old kid who rapaciously extracted seventy-five cents for one lousy ouce of hash!
January 1, 2010 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Careful, if we start taking out the beard-endowed solely for looking the terrorist part, well, you probably won't be so Jolly anymore, and might have to change your name to Regina as well.
January 2, 2010 7:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Moolten and Aunt Sam argue against any "rush to judgment," on grounds "there is no trustworthy information implicating Americans," let alone "documentation and substantive proof."
That seems to be U.S. Gen. McChrystal's line too. While Karzai is demanding the killers be turned over to him, McChrystal is offering a joint investigation to "ascertain the facts."
Here's the bottom line, though: the killings took place overnight Saturday-Sunday. It's now the following Friday. What McChrystal's statement lacks is any denial of any of the findings in Wafa's report. No denial the killers were American, that eight of 10 victims were underage, that they were murdered in cold blood.
Couldn't he just get on the phone any time this week and demand of his subordinates: "What the hell really happened?"
Maybe not. A Canadian Press report has this intriguing line: "NATO has denied its forces were involved, suggesting 'non-military Americans' had returned fire in self-defence."
So what have we got here? CIA? Xe, once known as Blackwater? Some other freelance cowboy outfit?
With the Nisour Square judicial whitewash safely in their pocket, why should any of them feel any constraint against going in shooting?
The U.S. can and will spin this incident, but I doubt it can be swept under the rug. Executing captives (even adult ones caught in the act of making bombs) is quite simply a war crime.
And NobleCommentDecider, your jocular defence of murder ("Them kids needed killin' ") is beyond contemptible.
January 1, 2010 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
It looks as though the Who's Who can get a bit murky:
http://shadowspear.com/united-states-special-operations/other-government-agency-special-operations/special-activities-division.html
January 1, 2010 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, we bad - wanting to have the facts before hanging 'em from the highest tree. Shame on us.
Perhaps you're satisfied that the truth is indeed as some are reporting, but my research shows it's ever evolving and depending on what and who you 'read', the story continues to shift and twist in the wind.
So, I'll just take the time to wait and not proffer a knee jerk reaction when the initial 'reports' are fresh off the presses.
And wow, how shocking that McChrystal wants a joint investigation! My, he's just wrong too, huh!?!
January 1, 2010 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe one of the Rutabots can speculate why US Special forces would bother to fly to a village in Khost, handcuff students, and then murder them, as Karzai and his corrupt associates suggest, although concocting reasons shouldn't be hard for those here who take as gospel everything Karzai pronounces as truth.
January 1, 2010 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wafa's report wasn't eyewitness. He actually said he couldn't travel to the area to investigate because of Taliban activity.
It is generally acknowledged at this point that the killed were not underage. Many officials noted that the dead men were bearded and the most official photo of the dead I can find is from the anti-U.S. occupation website www.rawa.org (Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan).
Photo.
No sign of execution-style head wounds.
Karzai claims this was a 100% non-Afghan operation but many reports characterize it as a joint NATO/Afghan operation.
The source of the claim that the dead were young students was the village school headmaster, who was grandfather of most of the young men who were killed. Again, this claim was made by phone and not to onsite investigators.
January 1, 2010 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am frequently surprised when the Rutabots on the Cafe are so facile in believing anything spouted by the likes of Karzai or his associates, while believing their fellow citizens in uniform, who did not ask bush to start this war, are flying about Afghanistan murdering non-combatant shackled school children (when there is ample evidence the district involved have ample numbers of IED makers and suicide bombers, and whose corrupt Taliban leaders may be cozy with Karzai).
This post frankly looks like more drivel from the Cannabis Information Department.
January 1, 2010 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is every reason to believe this was a special forces job. As far as reports of combined Afghan/NATO forces involves, it is a possibility, but does nothing to mitigate the essential truth that several individuals were shot dead in the black of night by Joint SOC.
McChrystal is known for this kind of operation. This is his kind of warfare. The question is: who benefits? What is the actual message being sent to Afghanistan in terms of who they support on the ground?
This is a multifaceted affair. Brusquely maligning the Afghan reports and then using "support the troops" as a fig-leaf only squirts ink into an honest discussion. I know Ruta's personality can lead to defensive posturing, but we should all keep in mind the fact that this is war and McChrystal's history is replete with black ops. Funding for Joint SOC has spiked for this fiscal year and this is what SOC does.
January 1, 2010 9:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
"The question is: who benefits? "
That's a question that begs further questioning. Assuming that you are correct, how high in our command structure do you think the knowledge of this kind of operation goes or do you think McChrystal is a cowboy going off on his own, perhaps confident that he can get away with almost anything and the dirty stuff will just get a wink and a nod, or do you think that this has been discussed and agreed upon at higher levels?
How low does it go? Could a Company Commander order something like this? If it is a deliberate and thought-out tactic, how widespread do you think the knowledge of that fact is?
The idea that our army is stretched beyond reasonable limits has lost currency but since the time that even high ranking officers started saying that that is the case, many soldiers have done two or more additional tours. Could it be that operational efficiency really is at a breaking point and the tacticians feel truly vicious actions may be necessary as the only chance for success?
January 1, 2010 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joint Special Operations Command has its own chain that leads to a nebulous leadership whose trail runs to CIA, thus Leon Panetta. Have you read any news involving dead CIA members in Afghanistan recently? I know i have.
Can the average Company Commander order this kind of operation? Not if she or he values their commission. This is shadow warfare. I can tell you that Marine recon, such as scout snipers, now falls under MarSOC. Which means every recon Marine, and most counterintelligence Marines, are in fact led by spooks.
Is this a consequence of thinning military resources? I don't think so. I think they are moving towards creating an asymmetrical miltary wing that specializes in counterinsurgency without tears.
January 1, 2010 11:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Have you read any news involving dead CIA members in Afghanistan recently? I know i have."
Yes, I have read that news. Was that supposed to make everything break [Mc] Crystal clear all of a sudden. I try to keep up and sometimes that means asking questions of people who claim to have special knowledge or to have been in positions to have an informed opinion.
"Joint Special Operations Command has its own chain that leads to a nebulous leadership whose trail runs to CIA, thus Leon Panetta."
Would it be, in your opinion, a wrong connection of the dots to conclude that if Leon is part of a plan that includes murdering Afghanis that our President is too?
January 2, 2010 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
The President is the Commander in Chief. If he is any kind of leader, then the buck stops with him.
January 2, 2010 1:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
One thing to bear in mind is that by most accounts McChrystal's JSOC boys comprised Cheney's freelance murder squad that Hersch reported on a few years back. If that report is accurate, the chain of command got ALL fucked up - who the hell knows who answers to whom. Sometimes I wonder if maybe McChrystal still maintains some operational ties to the Cheney outfit - they sure have seemed to coordinate messaging a few times.
January 2, 2010 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
If McChrystal retains operational ties to Cheney's black ops, then why would Obama pick him for his flagship general, if not that Obama favors Cheneyesque perversion of intelligence/military services and propensity for war crimes?
Does Obama understand what a disaster Cheney was for the intelligence profession in general, and that the black ops, paramilitary section is the only one that thrived in his reign? (The CIA should not be a paramilitary unit- the reason the Agency is in the Executive Branch is because it is supposed to provide the President with information and analysis, and such is essentially the role sketched out for spies in the last chapter of Sun-tzu).
The CIA took major, major hits during Cheney's reign. It appears his successor is continuing this "war against intelligence."
January 2, 2010 9:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
This kind of operation is McChrystal's speciality. This is why I held his comments about COIN to be contemptible.
I believe Wafa's report, just like the Haditha killings (I was involved in the RCT 5 investigations due to my provision of witness fees) could be believed. In the case of the Haditha massacre, some grunts lost their minds because an intelligence asset betrayed their unit and they lost one of their Lance Corporals.
This case, IMO is black ops. It serves to terrify the populace (who may or may not be building bombs in this school) and solidify support for Karzai by making him appear sovereign.
The locals will never trust Americans, but they can learn to trust Karzai and separate his government from America if he is seen as on their side. And, if indeed these youths were constructing bombs, then this kind of operation proves how out of our element we are in this war.
If these are the kinds of operations necessary to bolster Karzai, speed withdrawal and "win," then we have lost our moral moorings.
January 1, 2010 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the perspective, Zip.
I had wanted to dig up something for Aunt Sam on McChrystal and his dark past.
http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=stanley_a._mcchrystal_1
January 1, 2010 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wendy,
Appreciate tiime and energy, but this really doesn't impact the basis of my statements in that I don't believe all the facts/truths are in yet on this incident. While of course I'm hoping Americans are exonerated, it is most important that whatever the facts are - they are clear and concise - and hopefully whoever is responsible faces the consequences of their actions. It serves no one well on any issue if there is a rush to judgment based on preliminary reports.
Again, thanks and Happy New Year!
January 1, 2010 10:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, Sam, it was from your reaction about McChrystal wanting an investigation and 'he's just wrong, too.' I was thinking 'Yeppers; he's wrong in a lot of ways.'
And Happy New Year to you, too.
January 1, 2010 11:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I found the site very interesting. And not surprising.
It's a real conundrum for me as I honor and respect the service and sacrifices of all our military men and women.
And yet, I have serious concerns about the 'blindly follow orders' no matter the circumstances and of course, the facts support the overt macho chauvanism that runs rampant without consequences of any depth and the 'don't ask, don't tell' crap really pisses me off too - but I believe much is the result of the old guard that refuses to move forward as it would no longer leave them as 'the almighty' supreme.
Still, I am totally convinced that our country treats our military as disposable after they have valiantly served to protect us. It's shameful and why there hasn't been more outrage over this is something we need to all decry.
Oh yeah, a real conundrum for sure.
McChrystal is a soldier first, foremost and above all else. That is just as much of a curse as it in time of combat be a blessing.
(He reminds me of droid! His demeanor is my way or the hiway and not in sync with society outside of the military. Anyway, that's my perseption to date.)
I bookmarked the site you referenced.
January 1, 2010 11:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
McChrystal has really curtailed civilian casualties. He may be capable of doing the worst possible deeds, but he has not been conducting a terror campaign like Ruta describes.
Something is definitely wrong with our relationship with Karzai when he is making this type of claim. This war is messed up 11 ways from Sunday.
But Ruta is a bully, and he is a deceitful manipulator by putting up several posts on this incident with pictures of young Afghan girls.
The title of this post, "Afghan Children Handcuffed, Then Killed By American Soldiers," is an assertion that doesn't pass the B.S. test.
If Karzai doesn't retract his charges, we should get the hell out of his country.
January 1, 2010 11:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
"He may be capable of doing the worst possible deeds, but he has not been conducting a terror campaign like Ruta describes."
How the hell do you know? Do you have some special knowledge or are you just another, uh, how you say in America, just another asshole, I mean a person with an asshole? I mean with an opinion?
January 1, 2010 11:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
His stated strategy is to reduce civilian casualties, and the numbers show it. There is no pattern of executions of students like Karzai is claiming in this case.
January 2, 2010 12:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll give them credit that the US troops are likely trying to bring down civilian deaths and in the last year succeeded. Bumping up our troop strength there and doing more missions will undoubtedly increase this number again, and the question is, "for what purpose? to fight poppies? to control a non-existent Al Qaeda? to defeat Taliban? to bring Taliban into the government? to combat drug lords? to help women? to bring peace and stability that will spread across the land like wildfire?"
We're propping up a guy who got 1/3 fake ballots - we go all democratic on Iran's ass, but in Afghanistan, it's just the price to pay for stability, just like a few civilian deaths here and there. (while I won't blame the US for all insurgent-caused deaths, there still has to be some thought about what would be happening if we weren't there - or if we were working towards an obvious power sharing and exit deal. But we're not adult enough to hear those discussions, too pornographic, so instead we hear "surge.... and how high?".
January 2, 2010 3:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Afghanistan was attempting to hold an election while in a war zone.
At the time, more of southern Afghanistan was under threat than in the North and the South was the area where Karzai's supporters lived. If his opponent's voters could go to the polls without fear of death while Karzai's had to brave Taliban threats to kill anyone who went to the polls, it is unlikely that Karzai felt there was anything inherently unfair in stuffing the ballot boxes.
January 2, 2010 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
People, don't get sidetracked disputing the merits or proof of this case or any other.
Remember this: it wouldn't have taken place if our troops were not occupying Afghanistan for no good reason.
We are destroying what little is left of that beleaguered nation for reason our top leaders cannot articulate with any specificity. At best they make vague claims to America's vital interests and fighting terrorism, but we know from the military's own studies that the militarist violence we are perpetuating and escalating throughout the Muslim world is what is creating and fueling terrorism.
There are no Al Qaeda in Afghnistan. Our continued presence there destabilizes the region which includes India as well as Pakistan. We have no business having half a million members of our armed forces and paid mercenaries in that country: none.
So regardless of the details, without our ongoing militarist, violent occupation of Afghanistan there would have been no deaths of anyone last weekend in Narandg, Kunar. WE, the United States and her citizens are responsible for the deaths that occured there and only we can bring a halt to such atrocities by withdrawing the troops and letting the people of that region solve whatever problems they may have whether they are a result of our actions or some other cause.
January 1, 2010 11:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK,I have held my say long enough.Americans,leave Afghanistan NOW!There's no way we are going to win the hearts and minds of a people with such incidents as this in the minds and hearts of its countrymen. I pray that the story being told is not true,for if it is,ALL involved are truly despicable.
January 2, 2010 12:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't believe this was done by American soldiers.
Doesn't make any sense. Come up with some reliable sources, and maybe your credibility will be restored.
January 22, 2010 3:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Very first, I’d choose to say thanks to you for this enlightening post. Secondly, I had prefer to doubt wheresoever I can discover greater information related to your article. I just came here through Yahoo & can't notice any related web sites along this matter. How do I subscribe for your web blog? I had choose to bind to your updates as they arrive along! I'd a query to interrogate but I forgot what it absolutely was... anyway, thank you.
XoX, Ray Cook
Author of how to cook beef tenderloin
September 2, 2010 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hi there as i totally enjoy your great article, I wuold be happy to write a multimedia review on your awesome wordpress blog in my little Website would you grant me permission to?
Sincerely, John Peds
Author of how to cook salmon
September 2, 2010 2:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope this is not so, very sad to be an American. If we have ignorant people killing kids.
scented rocks
scented stones
September 6, 2010 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi there cos I totally enjoy your special blog, i wuold be happy if you would ask me to write a honest review about your amazing work on my own Site would you allow me that?
Yours, Von Willy Peds
Software Developer of copy psp games-Researcher of psp music video Thank you for sharing your blogs i really like it .
September 12, 2010 1:50 AM | Reply | Permalink