Attack that killed kids likely missed target

LeighAnn

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 03:39 PM
Original message

Attack that killed kids likely missed target

Source: MSNBC

Officials: Military knew children were present but considered risk worth it

NEW YORK - The U.S. special operations forces attack June 17 that resulted in the death of seven Afghan children likely missed its primary target, U.S. officials tell NBC News.

Abu Laith al Libi — one of al-Qaida's top commanders — was the primary target of the attack against a compound in the Paktika province of eastern Afghanistan. According to several officials, and contrary to previous statements, the U.S. military knew there were children at the compound but considered Abu Laith of such high value it was worth the risk of potential collateral damage.

Those same officials now tell NBC News that although six sets of remains besides those of the seven children were recovered, it's not clear whether Abu Laith is among those killed.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19463133/

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

classof56

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 03:44 PM
Response to Original message

1. And the beat goes on...

Once again, words fail me...except to say how much I hate the evil minions that brought this chaos and death to the world. Damn them all!

Tired Old Cynic

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Name removed

(0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 03:49 PM
Response to Original message

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Kikosexy2

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #2

9. What's another...

brown/olive skinned kid killed worth anyways....GOP the party of pro-life..what a crock of sh*t....

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

indepat

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 03:53 PM
Response to Original message

3. I seem to recall Bob Woodward saying the CIA once missed their target but wasted 80

innocents (The Veil) in the process. For some, getting a chance at the primary target must be worth any amount of collateral damage.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

CoffeeCat

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 03:54 PM
Response to Original message

4. If someone could tell me...

...how "Christian Conservatives" reconcile this in their minds--please
do so. Leveraging a political agenda that kills innocent children--just
doesn't seem consistent with any teaching of Christ--of which I am aware.

Maybe I'm just not as self actualized as these Bush-followers who rationalize
his murdering, lying, criminal ways--as they tout their Christianity. Maybe
they know something about religion that I don't.

How any spiritually enlightened person could follow this marauding
death machine---is beyond my comprehension.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

sabra

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 03:55 PM
Response to Original message

5. so the military lied?

http://www.centcom.mil/sites/uscentcom2/Lists/Current%20Press%20Releases/DispForm.aspx?ID=5126

CHILDREN SAY THEY WERE FORCED TO STAY INSIDE

BAGRAM AIRFIELD, Afghanistan – The seven children who died in a Coalition airstrike on a compound in Zarghun Shah District, Paktika Province, last night were held inside the building throughout the day according to other children who survived the airstrike.

Coalition forces did not believe any children were in, or around, the compound during the day and ordered the strike believing the target was inside.

“We are truly sorry for the innocent lives lost in this attack,” said Army Maj. Chris Belcher, a Coalition spokesman. “We had surveillance on the compound all day and saw no indications there were children inside the building.”

Al-Qaida operatives have hidden amongst the people of Afghanistan in the past and caused unnecessary injury, and often death, to law-abiding citizens. Witness statements taken early this morning clearly put the blame on the suspected terrorists saying that if the children attempted to go outside they were beaten and pushed away from the door.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

KansDem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #5

8. The US initially said the kids were being used as "human shields."

“We had surveillance on the compound all day and saw no indications there were children inside the building."

How do you use a "human shield" but not let anyone know you're using a "human shield?" Now they're saying the kids weren't human shields, and that the US knew they were there and took a chance anyway.

“We are truly sorry for the innocent lives lost in this attack,” said Army Maj. Chris Belcher, a Coalition spokesman.--cry us some crocodile tears, Chris...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

acmavm

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 03:56 PM
Response to Original message

6. Support the troops, folks. Support the troops.

:sarcasm:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

KansDem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 04:03 PM
Response to Original message

7. And the bastards wanted us to believe al Qaeda was using the kids as "human shields."

GODDAMN, THIS MAKES ME MAD!!! I was witness to a lie in development when I first heard about this on the BBC in the early morning hours after it happened when it was reported that "al Qaeda was using the children as "hostages," then heard it later on NPR with references to "children as hostages" removed. Initially, the US military spokesman being interviewed said al Qaeda had been using children as human shields but was hiding them inside the compound and not letting them go outside. And the US didn't know the children were inside. I thought "This doesn't sound right! Why use someone as a human shield but not make it known you were doing this?" Later on that morning, the US changed its story, no doubt after realizing the absurdity of the first "official report."

Now it turns out the US knew the kids were there all along. F**K YOU, BUSH!!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MasonJar

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 04:36 PM
Response to Original message

10. Would that have held true if it had been their own kids?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

GoddessOfGuinness

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jun-27-07 11:41 PM
Response to Original message

11. So it's ok to sacrifice children when you're in the pursuit of the destruction of life, but

it's not ok to sacrifice stem cells in pursuit of saving lives. :-(

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

daleo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-28-07 12:04 AM
Response to Original message

12. Killing kids on the off chance of getting a terrorist

So, who's the real terrorist?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Nihil

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-28-07 04:04 AM
Response to Original message

13. I wonder if it will ever sink in for the US public?

> Military knew children were present but considered risk worth it

This was a deliberate decision by trained professionals of the
US armed forces. This is what the tax dollars are paying for.

There will be all manner of "It was the right thing to do" arguments
presented to defend this action. There will be "unfortunate event"
shrugs and "heat of battle" excuses as well as "these things happen".

Yet people get all uptight when a single madman takes out a couple
of students at a college? Shit, these things happen.

As for those who went completely ape-shit when a group of madmen
took out a couple of buildings in New York ... maybe they need to
remember that everything is "worth the risk of potential collateral
damage" and just forgive & forget?

:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:07 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.