Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Airstrikes kill fewer Afghans, but more dying on ground

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
laststeamtrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 06:35 PM
Original message
Airstrikes kill fewer Afghans, but more dying on ground
Source: McClatchy Newspapers

Airstrikes kill fewer Afghans, but more dying on ground
By Nancy A. Youssef, McClatchy Newspapers 1 hr 26 mins ago

KABUL, Afghanistan — Even as U.S. forces take steps to reduce the number of Afghan civilians killed by aerial attacks, other civilian casualties remain stubbornly high — deaths in so-called escalation of force incidents in which edgy American troops fire on civilians who've come too close to their convoys or roadblocks.

The number of Afghans killed in such incidents rose 43 percent in 2009 to 113, from 79 in 2008, while the total number of NATO coalition-caused civilian deaths and injuries declined 16.4 percent, to 535 from 633.

How to avoid killing civilians has been a persistent problem for American troops since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, when several well publicized incidents of U.S. soldiers killing friendly civilians soured many Iraqis on the American presence. It also fueled the insurgency, U.S officials came to believe. "I would argue in many instances we are our own worst enemy,'' Army Gen. Peter Chiarelli said of civilian casualties in 2006, when he was the No. 2 commander in Iraq .

Shortly after Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal assumed command of all U.S. forces in Afghanistan in June, he ordered U.S. troops to back off some fights if civilian casualties couldn't be avoided. In the months since, the use of U.S. air power has dropped, even during the recent offensive in Marjah, where errant air strikes killed at least 35 civilians in incidents that Afghan President Hamid Karzai called "unjustifiable."

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20100302/wl_mcclatchy/3440991
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
1. "civilian casualties remain stubbornly high ..."
stubbornly???

Damn

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Willful, stubborn civilian casualties refuse to decline despite best efforts of military.
Coming soon: "civilian casualties declared terrorist plot to discredit well-meaning NATO forces."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. more asymmetrical warfare, I guess
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Seems very asymmetrical to me.
I do wonder why we are struggling so hard to conquer a small 3rd world country like this, but if it gives the Pentagon something to do, I guess it's worth it. I mean Raygun did conquer Grenada and Panama, we can still handle things at that level. I'm sure we could take complete control of Rhode Island if we needed to too ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Well, RI does have a lot of water
but I'm thinking those folks would jump in front of bullets to stop them too. PR nightmare.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Heh.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Bush Senior did Panama.
Reagan did Grenada and bombed Libya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Yeah, you are right, I get them all mixed up in my mind now.
Edited on Tue Mar-02-10 08:54 PM by bemildred
And who can forget Somalia and the Balkans? So many little countries over the years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
2. "How to avoid killing civilians has been a persistent problem...since the invasion of Iraq in 2003"
Ooo, ooo!

I know how; I know how!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Don't invade and occupy?
Did I get it right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. YES!
We got a winner on the first try!

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-03-10 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
12. a label used to marginalize and desensitize this issue: "collateral damage"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

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.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC