Anti-American Anger Grows in Afghanistan

Anti-American Anger Grows in Afghanistan

Protesters take to the streets after U.S. troops open fire on passenger bus outside Kandahar city, killing four civilians

by Sonia Verma

U.S. troops fired on a crowded passenger bus on the outskirts of Kandahar city, killing four civilians and injuring 18 others, stoking anti-American protests that promised to complicate a massive offensive against Taliban insurgents this summer.
Afghan police and onlookers gather around the bus that U.S. forces opened fire on in Kandahar city on Mon., April 12. Four civilians were killed in the incident. Ahmad Nadeem/ReutersAlthough the military command issued an apology, saying it “deeply regrets the tragic loss of life,” Monday’s incident cast fresh doubts on Operation Omid, billed as the pivotal offensive of the war, which will see tens of thousands of NATO troops attempt to seize control of Kandahar.
NATO officials were already struggling to win support for the offensive from ordinary Afghans and tribal elders who had expressed concern over the potential for “collateral damage.”

Monday’s shooting appeared to confirm those fears, with angry Afghans spilling into the streets, burning tires and chanting “Death to America.”
“People brought the bus to Kandahar bus station and drivers and ordinary people protested against Americans,” said a man named Naqibullah who attended the protest, which he said “showed the anger of the people against the Americans.”

The shooting occurred before dawn when a bus carrying about 50 passengers travelling west on the main highway from Kandahar city approached a military convoy on a road-clearing mission, sweeping for land mines and improvised explosive devices.
Military officials said in a statement that “an unknown, large vehicle” drove “at a high rate of speed” toward the convoy.
Troops signalled the driver to stop with flares, flashlights and hand signals before firing, according to the statement.
“Once engaged, the vehicle then stopped,” the statement read. Later, NATO forces “discovered the vehicle to be a passenger bus.”
Rozi Mohammad, a 40-year-old man from Zabul province who was injured in the shooting, suggested the darkness caused confusion.

“I was in the front seat when we were faced with the convoy. It was dark. I only saw fire from the Americans. … Many people were injured and killed. After some time helicopters landed and took us … for treatment,” he recounted in an interview at Kandahar’s Mirwais hospital where he was being treated for his wounds.
It was unclear what effect, if any, the shooting would have the timing of Operation Omid, which is set to launch in June.

On a visit to Kandahar city two weeks ago, Afghan President Hamid Karzai vowed the offensive would not take place without the people’s consent.
His comments were puzzling to many observers, because tens of thousands of U.S. troops have already arrived in the region in preparation for the mission.
However, they also underscored the importance of local consent in NATO’s counterinsurgency strategy, which relies on locals to supply coalition troops with intelligence ahead of any military offensive.

Anger over civilian deaths has hobbled Western efforts to draw support away from the insurgency.

snip

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/04/13-8

What we need are a couple of DUers to go over there and explain to them how we're the good guys. And stuff.

Moyers: Obama's Bad Gamble on Afghanistan -- 100,000 Soldiers Used as Chips for a Bet the US Can't Win

We are losing lives for no purpose. The perpetuation of this unnecessary war exacerbates the problems in the Islamic world.

April 12, 2010 |

The war in Afghanistan has claimed more than one thousand American lives and in the last two years alone the lives of more than four thousand Afghan civilians. It's costing American taxpayers over three-and-a-half billion dollars every month—a total of some $264 billion so far. But for all that, in the words of one policy analyst quoted by the New York Times this week, "there are no better angels about to descend on Afghanistan."

The news from that torturous battleground continues to dismay, discourage and enrage. America's designated driver there, Hamid Karzai, is proving increasingly unstable behind the wheel. The United States put Karzai in power and our soldiers have been fighting and dying on his behalf ever since. Despite widespread corrupton in his government. Now he's making threats against the western coalition that is shedding blood and treasure on his behalf.

Even more disturbing,for the moment, are the civilian deaths from nighttime raids andaerial bombings by American and other NATO troops. Just this week, we learned of an apparent cover-up following a Special Forces raid in February that killed five civilians, including three women, two of whom were pregnant. It's believed bullets were gouged from the women's bodies to conceal evidence of American involvement.

This slaughter of innocents has led the pro-American "Economist" magazine to question whether ourentire effort in Afghanistan" has been nothing but a meaningless exercise of misguided violence."

With me is a man with first-hand experience of war. Andrew Bacevich served 23 years, some of them in Vietnam, before retiring from the Army. He's now professor of history and international relations at Boston University. Just this week he was at a US Army War College symposium on the highly pertinent question, "How do we know when a war is over?" His book, "The Limits of Power," was a best-seller and his latest, "Washington Rules: America's Path to Permanent War," comes out this summer. Andrew Bacevich, welcome back to the Journal.

snip

http://www.alternet.org/world/146406/moyers%3A_obama%27s_bad_gamble_on_afghanistan_--_100%2C000_soldiers_used_as_chips_for_a_bet_the_us_can%27t_win

K&R

Do they not understand or comprehend cause and effect? I know Obama has a law degree and all, but you'd think that he'd realize that having US troops on foreign soil just to fight against the failed "War on Drugs" -- which is legislation of morality btw -- sustaining heavy collateral damage that result in civilian casualties, just creates future generations of terrorists. You think 9/11 was bad? That's going to be a fly's fart in the barn compared to what will happen once those children born in Iraq under US occupation grow up. The problem isn't terrorists. The problem is US.

You reap what you sow. Can some Senator please get some goddamned balls and defund this thing? Oh, never mind. They're all a bunch of corporate whores.

Is there any way we can get the States to call for a Constitutional Convention under Article 5 of the US Constitution? Because these motherfuckers aren't going to vote in comprehensive campaign financing reform. It's against their self-interest. Why would they vote against something that gets them such a cushy job, pension and healthcare for life?

successfully countering the GREATEST MILITARY POWER ON EARTH who's in the process of pissing away Trillions of dollars before they realize that "inside every Afghan there is NOT an American trying to get out." :wtf: The unwashed masses in the USA GIVE AWAY over 50% of their tax dollars to their beloved MIC and, most likely, their pensions, to subdue this THIRD WORLD NARCO STATE. And it's all in vain because the natives are patient, often hunker down and can live in abject poverty for years to come. They'll wait us out. They will lose most every battle, yet win the WAR.

:eyes:

being occupied and have HOPE for their future.

Yeah, they have HOPE for the future because they KNOW that eventually their foreign invaders will piss away all their national wealth on WMDs and will be forced to withdraw.

http://yorick.infinitejest.org:81/1/img/card-proxy_army_afghanistan.jpg http://yorick.infinitejest.org:81/1/img/card-weapons_of_mass_destruction_usa.jpg

No hurry. The natives are NOT going anywhere. :(