babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » Afghanistan: Still losing the war V

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Afghanistan: Still losing the war V
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 20 July 2008 05:18 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Continued from here.

The invaders have scored another huge victory, this time massacring civilians and Afghan police:

quote:
At least 13 Afghan police and civilians have died in two incidents involving international forces, officials say.

Four Afghan police and five civilians died in an apparently mistaken air strike by international coalition forces in Farah province.

Separately, the Nato-led Isaf said it had "accidentally" killed at least four civilians in Paktika province.


Let's keep the record in perspective:

quote:
Last week, local tribal elders claimed dozens of people, including civilians, died in a Nato-led attack in Herat province, though Nato strongly denied this.

Earlier US forces admitted killing eight civilians in Farah province after they were attacked in Bakwa district.

And on 6 July, more than 50 people from an Afghan wedding party were said to have been killed after being bombed by US aircraft in the eastern province of Nangarhar.


Mr. Obama wants to send 10,000 more of these blundering murderers to Afghanistan to finish the job.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 20 July 2008 12:29 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
Isn't that really irrelevant? Is there any doubt that Karzai would invite NATO if an invitation was really required? He supports them being there; it's really the same thing.
The point is that being invited doesn't make it right. The US was invited into Vietnam by the puppet government of that country.

The very corrupt Ngo Diem and OSS-CIA director Allen Dulles had to first cancel elections in 1956 because they knew the country would go communist, and especially without a French military occupation. They interfered similarly in Laos elections for the same reason. ie Domino effect. And when they discovered Diem was not popular with VietNamese, they probably had him murdered before installing General Duong Van Minh in 1963 or so. The hawks really did win the war in VietNam considering that the vicious trade embargo and sanctions led VietNamese officials to re-acknowledge the country's bad debts in 1993, which were incurred by an illegit U.S.-backed regime in Saigon.

In order to enslave Afghans to the western cabal of banksters and create permanent U.S. interests in Afghanistan, permanent military bases, occupation and control, the very corrupt Karzai kleptocracy has to first launder drug money and billions of dollars in western aid, and even salt some of it away in Swiss or Chinese or Bahamian banks for themselves.

On the other hand, the Soviets were never really interested in projecting power beyond their own borders created after liberating Europe from the Nazis. The west wants to do what the Nazis did militarily but with marauding capital "inflows", military-economic shocks if necessary, and eventually opening up whole countries to real estate speculation and limited democracy through tainted elections.

[ 20 July 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 20 July 2008 12:46 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
On the other hand, the Soviets were never really interested in projecting power beyond their own borders created after liberating Europe from the Nazis.

Other than Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968) and Afghanistan (1979) and others that don't come to mind right now, you mean.

You see, when you "accept" an "invitation" to "liberate" people, you might just end up being hated by those people, well, forever. You really have to read the fine print on those "invitations" to assure yourself of their authenticity.

Which is why the U.S. is still waiting for garlands from the Iraqis.

Which is why Canada will be hated, forever, by the people of Afghanistan.

Which is why the Soviets had to withdraw in humiliating defeat after 15,000 corpses and untold wounded.

Those who think the U.S. is all-powerful (masterminded 9/11, etc. etc. etc.) believe that only U.S.-backed forces could have defeated the Soviets. Nothing could be further from the truth. The U.S. cannot win a war. The destruction of the Soviet armed forces (indeed, a good kick toward destroying the Soviet Union itself) came from the heroic struggle of the Afghan people themselves. Not Osama Bin Laden, not some U.S. or Pakistani weaponry.

The people.

The same people who will send Canada screaming in terror out of there one day soon.

Believe it.

[ 20 July 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 20 July 2008 01:13 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

Other than Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968) and Afghanistan (1979) and others that don't come to mind right now, you mean.



I replied at length to a similar question here

quote:
You see, when you "accept" an "invitation" to "liberate" people, you might just end up being hated by those people, well, forever. You really have to read the fine print on those "invitations" to assure yourself of their authenticity.

The Soviets did use a similar excuse as U.S. hawks have for lavish spending on national security state, which was a WW II body count of 30 or 40, 000, 000 after captains of western industry and finance backed up Hitler's war of annihilation against communism and plan to make new living space of the Soviet Union, and who knows how far IBM, GM, Ford, Wall Street Nazi front bankers, Krupp, Farben et al would have gone in their drive for globalizing fascist ecomomies driven by slave labour.

quote:
Which is why the U.S. is still waiting for garlands from the Iraqis.

U.S. and British oil companies won't let go of Iraq. They've returned triumphantly after 1.5 million Iraqis are effectively lebensraumed since the medieval siege of a desert nation began under Crazy George I through the Clinton Nazis and now the very-very psychotic Crazy Jorge II.

quote:
Which is why Canada will be hated, forever, by the people of Afghanistan.

Our Librano and Conservative stooges were only following orders. I try not to be quite as hard on our weak and ineffective colonial administrativeships. They bleet such a high pitched sound before the sheering and converting into lamb cutlets. They are to be pitied.

quote:
Which is why the Soviets had to withdraw in humiliating defeat after 15,000 corpses and untold wounded.

Islamic Gladios. Many of them were the equivalent of the slimey pond scum-eating Contra mercenaries recruited from all over Latin America to shoot the legs and arms off women and children and raize schools and hospitals and villages to the ground. Only, some number of your heroic religious fundamentalists and Gladio-Contras received a lot more aid money and $5 dollar bullets than the Latino version of $2000 dollar a month Contra mercenaries. Saudi Gladios, Turks and Tajiki mmujahideen helped them celebrate by raining rockets on civilians and raping scores of women and children as millions fled the country. They weren't the NVA or Sandinistas, and they weren't close to Cuban campesinos who chased the U.S.-backed mafia regime and Batista's brutal secret polizia from Havana.

The Islamic Gladios weren't even comparable to Tito's multiethnic guerilla heroes comprised of Serbs, Montenegrins, Croats etc. who fought and harassed the fascist invaders and ended up delaying barbarossa just long enough for the bastards to run out of guzzoline outside Moscow.

[ 20 July 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 20 July 2008 01:16 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

Those who think the U.S. is all-powerful (masterminded 9/11, etc. etc. etc.) believe that only U.S.-backed forces could have defeated the Soviets.

Hate to quote myself, but there ya go.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 20 July 2008 01:23 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I've said my bit about making such broad comparisons. The Ford stays in the yard?
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 20 July 2008 01:29 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Every arrogant self-important imperialist says its the "foreign-funded terrorists" who are kicking his ass.

None of them understands or wishes to accept the deep truth that the people hate them.

The Soviets picked up that foolish line from the U.S. and Brits. "The people love us - it's those foreign fighters that are the problem!"

If the people had an ounce of sympathy for the Soviets/U.S./Brits/Canada, the latter would be invincible. No Islamic squads or other mercenaries would survive two seconds. What is happening today in Afghanistan is exactly the same as what happened in the 1980s, and it will end exactly the same way.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 20 July 2008 01:53 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I believed you were implying without saying that western-backed Islamic Gladios, and they were there and did participate in the internationally supported and funded proxy war against the Soviet-backed PDPA government forces, that they were comparable to Cuba's heroic campesinos or even the Sandinistas. Sorry, I don't care for those guys hitching a ride with the same cause I know and support.

I don't believe Afghans are joing and fighting with the Taliban ... because they believe in and desire rule by the Taliban. They simply want the fascist invaders to leave Yugoslavia, I mean, leave Talibanistan sometime soon. There were even some large percentage of Chileans who supported Pinochet's dictatorship and policy for desaparecidos'ing socialists, teachers, trade unionists and social workers. But their cause was defeated in the first unfree, unfair, and tainted elections conducted after sixteen years of brutal fascist rule.

quote:
"All I could think of was: My God! This is National Stadium, where the bleachers were once filled with dissidents of every stripe after the coup, a mass waiting room for those about to be executed or tortured. This is where women were raped for the crime of wearing pants.

From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
sock puppet
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7739

posted 20 July 2008 03:34 PM      Profile for sock puppet   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Desp ite the significant gains Canadian troops have achieved in Afghanistan, Gen. Walter Natynczyk admitted Sunday the country's overall situation is worsening.
From: toronto | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 20 July 2008 04:34 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Fidel, your support for the Soviet action in Afghanistan is leading you back to where you were two years ago, when you had a benign view of Canada's "mission". Unfortunately, supporting one wrong inevitably makes it difficult to oppose the other wrongs. Please leave the Afghan people alone to determine their own fate, and don't reprint photos of how terrible things were before the U.S. marched in. Innocent people are dying in Afghanistan every day, financed in part by your tax dollars. Focus on that. The Afghan people are far more intelligent than you could ever dream to be when it comes to figuring out what kind of society they want to fashion for themselves.
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 20 July 2008 05:21 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh bull. Millions of Afghan people had to flee the country while Islamic fundamentalist whackos tore the country apart, and then they celebrated by raping women and children.

And then the same people who supplied the $5 dollar bullets and heat-seeking stinger missiles turned their backs on the ensuing carnage and fireworks that lasted for years.

But the U.S. military and CIA didn't exactly break with the religious fundamentalists in 1992 as claimed. They began funding the most ruthless whackos directly and bypassed the Pakistani dictatorship's equivalent of the CIA, Pakistan's shadowy ISI. The idea was that by neglecting to support more moderate forces in Afghanistan, the CIA chose to prop up the most vicious of warlords and drug barons, and let them fight it out in some Darwinian clash to the death. Millions of orphaned children were the result, and who were then recruited to the religious fundamentalist seminaries in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

If you want to know which came first, chicken or egg, it was the U.S.-backed Gladios who began raising hell six months before the Soviets "invaded" or "acted" or however you described it above. Some number of Afghans must have supported Najibullah's government, even though Pakistani and western news agencies said Kabul would fall to the mujahideen within a few months. The men and women volunteers of the PDPA held out against the well-armed international contras for over two years!


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 20 July 2008 05:28 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Fidel, are you suggesting the Russians were more altruistic invaders than the Americans are now? How about as the British were a hundred years earlier?

ETA: is this pouring from one glass into the other?

[ 20 July 2008: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 20 July 2008 05:45 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
Fidel, are you suggesting the Russians were more altruistic invaders than the Americans are now? How about as the British were a hundred years earlier?

Yes, I am. It wasn't nearly a perfect revolution, but then again I am not a Trotskyist who believes in the one that will never happen.

How U.S. destroyed progressive secular forces in Afghanistan

quote:
Before the revolution, female illiteracy had been 96.3 percent in Afghanistan. Rural illiteracy of both sexes was 90.5 percent.

By 1985, despite a counter-revolutionary war financed by the CIA, there had been an 80-percent increase in hospital beds. The government initiated mobile medical units and brigades of women and young people to go to the undeveloped countryside and provide medical services to the peasants for the first time.


U.S. Policy Has Betrayed Afghan Women for 20 Years

quote:
While unpopular in the countryside, the Soviet-backed regime had many supporters in Afghanistan's cities. Urban Afghans had seen that in the adjoining Muslim regions of the USSR--regions as backward as Afghanistan until the Soviet era-- tremendous progress had been made in eliminating illiteracy, reducing infant mortality, and improving living standards. Women, previously among the most down-trodden creatures on earth, had come to make up half or more of the doctors, engineers, and teachers in Soviet Central Asia. Many urban Afghans saw the USSR, for all its flaws, as a model for progress for their country.

According to Professor Val Moghaddam, director of Women's Studies at Illinois State University, "human rights reports have had to concede that women had higher status and more opportunities under the reformist, left-wing government.



I'm not sure that people like unionist would appreciate it if Pope Nazinger, Don Berlusconi, maybe King Carlos of Spain, and U.S. Christian fundamentalists were to fund a religious crusade of Canada. I can just imagine roving gangs of Catholics and Christian fundamentalists, right-wing militia whackos everywhere, ready to purge the non-believing pagans, commies, and generally running roughshod over everyone's rights. I doubt any of us would be agreeable to that. I mean sure there are religious extremists living among us, but we don't necessarily want them taking over.

unionist, who is your favourite Patron Sainte? Catholic seminaries all around? Do you even have a Rosary on hand? And at some point the Catholic schoolboard feds drop by and ask why you aren't paying school taxes in support of an all-Roman Catholic school system. unionist might answer, "God is great!" and then whip out his cheque book in order to pacify the extremists.

And maybe feudal landlords who hold sway with boss priests say to unionist: "You're growing Holy rutabagas in your flower boxes this year, right?" unionist might hold up his Rosary and Bible and instinctively blurt out, "God is great!" and then whip out his cheque book to buy a load of Holy rutabaga seeds. Yep, I can see it all now.

[ 20 July 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 20 July 2008 06:32 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So you would support the US invasion and Canadian participation if there could be shown some improvement in rates of literacy, women's lives, and infant mortality rates?
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 20 July 2008 06:51 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
So you would support the US invasion and Canadian participation if there could be shown some improvement in rates of literacy, women's lives, and infant mortality rates?

Not some improvement but a level of improvement to at least match that of the PDPA reform government which militant Islamists forced out of Kabul with massive military and financial aid from the west.

Sadly, Afghanistan's literacy rates are still atrocious - infant mortality still horrendous - abject poverty is everywhere - and U.S.-backed corruption is rampant.

And Soviets aren't supplying anyone with heat-seeking shoulder rockets or even bullets at $5 bucks a piece on the taxpayer's tab. And it's a good thing that tens of thousands of proxy fighters haven't poured in over the borders from surrounding countries to make things any more chaotic for NATO.

There is no "military solution" for Afghanistan. No more "proxy" wars or funding Islamic Gladios either. Pakistan and Afghanistan became Talibanistan in the 1980's, and the religious extremists in those two countries are quite a bit more insistent on certain things than the average Roman Catholic school board or even southern Baptists in the deep U.S. south.

[ 20 July 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 21 July 2008 07:53 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And Soviets aren't supplying anyone with heat-seeking shoulder rockets or even bullets at $5 bucks a piece on the taxpayer's tab.
The Russians are:

quote:
Moscow and Washington have agreed a deal in principle over the supply of Russian weaponry to the Afghan army in its fight against the Taliban insurgency, senior diplomats announced in a statement Friday.

Link

quote:
There is no "military solution" for Afghanistan.

Why not? If there was a military solution when the Soviets invaded, why not now?

From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 21 July 2008 09:45 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If the Russians or Iranians were supplying Stinger missile equivalents to insurgents in either Iraq or Afghanistan, as the Americans supplied to muhahideen in the 1980's, there would be hell to pay. Investigative news journalist Seymour Hersh says it isn't the case.

How do want your obligatory All-Roman Catholic School taxes and religious doctrine all the time everwhere?


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 21 July 2008 01:41 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Canadian military has lost all sense of fun - a little horseplay gone wrong, and they overreact:

N.S. soldier to face court martial in comrade's 2007 shooting death

Would they rather he had been killed by the bad people!? Hey??


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 21 July 2008 01:53 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What difference does it make? He still died a hero.
From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 21 July 2008 03:23 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
If the Russians or Iranians were supplying Stinger missile equivalents to insurgents in either Iraq or Afghanistan, as the Americans supplied to muhahideen in the 1980's, there would be hell to pay. Investigative news journalist Seymour Hersh says it isn't the case.

How do want your obligatory All-Roman Catholic School taxes and religious doctrine all the time everwhere?


What does it matter? They're still involved in selling arms to combatants. And the combatants on the American side. Does that now suggest the Americans are on the right side?

And what do you mean by the second sentence? Are you arguing invading and engaging in war in a third country is more permissible if they have strong religious beliefs?


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 21 July 2008 03:37 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Russians sell certain kinds of weapons to just about any country with the cash to buy them. Iran has a few Sunburn missiles laying around as well as few French Exocets, of which the U.S. Navy will be leery of if deciding to wage an attack on that oil-rich country.

I doubt the Russians will be supplying anything more than rifles, bullets, maybe some APC's. Heavy lift cargo planes are a Russian specialty, the kind of which were brought down by Stinger missiles during their war with Islamic Gladios in the 1980's.

quote:
And what do you mean by the second sentence? Are you arguing invading and engaging in war in a third country is more permissible if they have strong religious beliefs?

I'm saying that the Talibanization of Pakistan and Afghanistan during the 1980's ensured that ultra religious fundamentalism was spread throughout those two countries. Western countries caused this to happen by handing billions of dollars in aid and weapons to religious extremists in order to purge the region of secular socialist influences. That's what was going on in Central Asia leading up to th situation today.

[ 21 July 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 21 July 2008 03:38 PM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
What difference does it make? He still died a hero.

Remember when being a "hero" involved doing something, you know, like, heroic, or whatever? Once upon a time, you had to charge a machine gun nest, or rescue orphans, or pull people from a burning plane wreck.

Now, it suffices that you just died. It's no coincidence that the willingness to affix the label "hero" is inversely proportional to the actual cause of the subject's death. So, those guys who were killed by Goose are heros for eating a 500 pound bomb on an excercise range. They even named a bridge after one of them.

Now, Omar Khadr, he's a freakin' hero. Give the lad a medal.


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 21 July 2008 03:40 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Didn't they rename the 401 'Highway of Martyrs"?
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 21 July 2008 03:48 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jingles:

Remember when being a "hero" involved doing something, you know, like, heroic, or whatever? Once upon a time, you had to charge a machine gun nest, or rescue orphans, or pull people from a burning plane wreck.


My father told me a story about failed attempt to be a hero somewhere in Italy WW II. They tried to get a big Newfoundlander out of a burning tank that was bogged down in mud. They didn't get the big guy out in time, and all the while he was screaming his head off. I never saw my dad weep except when retelling that one.

[ 21 July 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
mimeguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10004

posted 21 July 2008 04:35 PM      Profile for mimeguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Institute for War and Peace Reporting (IWPR )

http://tinyurl.com/5plz9s

Nangarhar Elders Demand Retribution for US Air Strike Afghan tribal leaders demand justice following an air raid they say wiped out a wedding party.

By Ezatullah Zawab in Nangarhar and Hafizullah Gardesh in Kabul (ARR No. 297, 16-Jul-08)


quote:
Rai Khan, an elder from the Haskamena district of Nangarhar province in southeastern Afghanistan, was speaking for a community shocked by a United States bombing raid on July 6 that local residents say left close to 50 members of a wedding party dead, including the bride. Now they want President Hamed Karzai to deliver justice in the form that their traditions demand.

SNIP

The Afghan government launched an investigation, sending a commission to look into the locals’ claims. Dr Borhanullah Shinwari, a member of the delegation, told IWPR that all those killed were innocent civilians. “We saw the scene of the incident,” he said. “There were no military men there.” Shinwari echoed the elder’s demand for some form of justice.

“The perpetrators should be dragged into court and judged, as a lesson to others,” he said. “People’s patience has gone. They can no longer tolerate this.” First Lieutenant Nathan Perry, a spokesman for the US-led Coalition Forces in Afghanistan, told IWPR that the military makes every effort to avoid civilian casualties, but were taking the allegations seriously.

“We are conducting our own investigation,” he said in a telephone interview.
However, he refused to retract previous statements that all of those killed were hostile combatants.

“We are looking into it, getting more information,” he said. “It would not be a fair assessment to say that we are backing down from previous statements.”

SNIP

Nangarhar has had its share of tragedy - a shooting incident involving US Marines in March 2007, killed 19 civilians. The US unit involved was ordered to leave the country, and the military launched a rare “court of inquiry” into the incident, the results of which have not been made public. Just 48 hours before the latest incident involving the wedding party, US planes attacked a convoy in the eastern province of Nuristan. Provincial governor Tamrin Nuristani said close to 30 civilians were killed in that attack. Coalition forces had dropped leaflets warning that the area was going to be hit. Locals say the cars that were bombed belonged to non-governmental organisations and other non-combatants trying to leave town after heeding the warning.

The latest attack has rekindled the resentment that many in Nangarhar feel for the foreign troop presence. “The Coalition operates on its own,” said Hamesha Gul, the local government chief in Haskamena district. “They don’t ask the government, which is why they target a wedding procession instead of the Taleban and al-Qaeda.” In Nangarhar, the provincial council declared a three-day mourning period and closed its doors. Members of the local assembly joined the growing demands for justice. “This was a deliberate act,” said Abdul Aziz Khairkha, deputy head of the Nangarhar council. “If the government cannot stop these kinds of incidents, then we will rise up against it.”


The article goes on to report civilian death tolls for 2007 and the first few months of 2008.

quote:
According to a recent United Nations report, civilian deaths during the first six months of 2008 are 60 per cent higher than in the same period last year. Official figures put the death toll at close to 700 civilians; humanitarian aid agencies say privately that the figure is significantly higher, since many victims classed as “insurgents” are actually non-combatants.

The official tally for civilians and anti-government forces killed in the whole of 2007 was close to 8,000.

The civilian casualties are causing a severe backlash in Afghanistan. According to senators in the Meshrano Jirga, the upper house of parliament, the gulf between the people and the foreign forces is widening daily. “If these forces do not change their strategy and stop these wilful operations, the people will revolt,” said senator Abdullah Haghayeghi, speaking at a press conference in Kabul on July 6.



From: Ontario | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 21 July 2008 04:59 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by mimeguy:
Nangarhar Elders Demand Retribution for US Air Strike Afghan tribal leaders demand justice following an air raid they say wiped out a wedding party.
I know! Why don't they use the Fail-Safe solution?

[Spoiler Alert!!]

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Send a couple of U.S. A-10 Thunderbolts to bomb and strafe an unsuspecting wedding party in Iowa.

That should even the score.


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 22 July 2008 07:46 AM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
MEDIA LENS: July 22, 2008

MEDIA ALERT: SOME MATTER MORE - WHEN 47 VICTIMS ARE WORTH 43 WORDS

Bad Form

In his classic work, Obedience to Authority, psychologist Stanley Milgram observed:

"There is always some element of bad form in objecting to the destructive course of events, or indeed, in making it a topic of conversation. Thus, in Nazi Germany, even among those most closely identified with the 'final solution', it was considered an act of discourtesy to talk about the killings." (Milgram, Obedience to Authority, Pinter & Martin, 1974, p.204)

The same "bad form" is very much discouraged in our own society. One would hardly guess from media reporting that Britain and America are responsible for killing anyone in Iraq and Afghanistan, where violence is typically blamed on "insurgents" and "sectarian conflict". International "coalition" forces are depicted as peacekeepers using minimum violence as a last resort.

In reporting the November 2005 Haditha massacre, in which 24 Iraqi civilians were murdered by US troops, Newsweek suggested that the scale of the tragedy "should not be exaggerated". Why? (...)

In July, Afghan investigators in Nangarhar, Afghanistan, told the AFP news agency that they had been shown the "bloodied clothes of women and children" killed in a July 6 US air strike. The attack was reported to have killed 47 civilian members of a wedding party, including 39 women and children, with nine wounded. The head of the team, Burhanullah Shinwari, deputy speaker of Afghanistan's senate, said: "They were all civilians and had no links with Taliban or Al-Qaeda." (http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5joXBRRzFwxSG_I-Ucf34VMr379hQ)

Around ten people were reported still missing, believed buried under rubble. It is now estimated that 52 people were killed - the same number that died in the London suicide attacks of July 7, 2005. Another member of the team, Mohammad Asif Shinwari, said there were only three men among the dead and the rest were women and children. Marc Herold of the University of New Hampshire reports that eight of the victims were between 14 and 18 years of age. (http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mwherold/Anotherweddingpartymassacre_July62008.html). The US military initially claimed only "militants" involved in mortar attacks had been killed.

A separate investigation into a July 4 strike in the northeastern province of Nuristan found that 17 civilians had been killed there. The coalition claimed they had killed several militants who were fleeing after attacking a base. But an Afghan official again confirmed that the victims were "all civilians." (http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5joXBRRzFwxSG_I-Ucf34VMr379hQ) Afghan authorities said the dead included two doctors and two midwives who had been attempting to leave the area to escape military operations.

Air Force Times reports that allied warplanes are currently dropping a record number of bombs on Afghanistan. For the first half of 2008, aircraft dropped 1,853 bombs - more than they released during all of 2006 and more than half of 2007's total. But this only hints at the true extent of the slaughter. The figures do not include cannon rounds shot by fighters or AC-130 gunships, Hellfire and other small rockets launched by warplanes and drones, and assaults by helicopters. Air Force Times comments:

"In close-quarter firefights where friendly soldiers could be wounded if bombs are used, cannon fire and missiles are often the preferred alternative." (Bruce Rolfsen, 'Afghanistan hit by record number of bombs,' Air Force Times, July 18, 2008;
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/07/airforce_bomb_oef_071708/)

The response of the UK press to these latest atrocities is a case study in censorship by omission.

On July 12, the Guardian devoted 307 words to the attack on the wedding party. The killing of 39 women and children was not considered front page news - the story was buried on page 30. (Mohammad Rafiq Jalalabad, 'US air strike killed 47 civilians, says Afghan government,' The Guardian, July 12, 2008)
(...)

This media alert is archived
here


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 23 July 2008 07:51 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Australian Labour Party defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon has used his first visit to the US to call for an escalation of the war in Afghanistan.

Addressing the Brookings Institute think tank in Washington on July 14 he called for “a sort of surge”, while claiming “I think we can win the war in Afghanistan”.

Fitzgibbon’s speech dovetails with an emerging consensus between US presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain, who have both been calling for a troop surge in Afghanistan and adopting an increasingly bellicose attitude towards Pakistan — ironically the main US ally in the region.


GreenLeft

From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 26 July 2008 04:32 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
UK troops kill Afghan civilians

quote:
British troops in southern Afghanistan have killed four civilians and injured three others after a vehicle failed to stop at a checkpoint.

[The International Security Assistance Force] said the situation had been "caused by the reckless actions of the vehicle driver''. ...

Troops have warned civilians to keep away from their convoys and checkpoints.

However, some Afghans, apparently unaware that they are seen as a threat, have failed to heed these warnings.


This must be due to the inferior education system in Afghanistan. If they studied some history, they would learn that all residents of occupied countries have always been "seen as a threat" by their foreign liberators.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 26 July 2008 06:19 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
We're sending 200 more troops to liberate Afghanistan
quote:
Mr. Emerson's whirlwind trip to Afghanistan over the last two days stood out from previous visits by Canadian dignitaries in that he avoided major gaffes; while his predecessors were mocked for flashy photo opportunities or upbeat statements that appeared out of touch with the reality of rising violence in Kandahar, Mr. Emerson took a more sober approach to his first experience in the war zone.

His statement about increasing the number of troops in the Afghan mission to 2,700 from 2,500 was the only new information offered during the visit, but the increase has been widely expected after Canada announced it would be sending helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles to Afghanistan in the coming months. New equipment usually requires extra personnel.

“We've been talking with our NATO allies, and we do now have commitments to increase our troops, particularly in the Kandahar region,” Mr. Emerson said. “We feel more comfortable now that the troop support is being increased in an appropriate way.”



From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 26 July 2008 06:51 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Mr. Emerson's whirlwind trip to Afghanistan over the last two days stood out from previous visits by Canadian dignitaries in that he avoided Major Gaffes...


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 26 July 2008 07:10 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But sooner or later he'll meet up with Major Disaster.

[drift]

The phrase "Canadian dignitaries," applied to members of this (or just about any) federal government, makes me snicker. Similarly the phrase "Canadian statesmen" would be ludicrous.

Though maybe not. A statesman, of course, is just a dead politician.

We need more statesmen.

[/drift]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 26 July 2008 07:21 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I saw an interview with Emerson either yesterday or today, saying he expects the military has a long job ahead of it in Afganistan. He doesn't think the army will be returning any time soon.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bubbles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3787

posted 26 July 2008 07:22 PM      Profile for Bubbles        Edit/Delete Post
Emerson? Is that the one that jumped from the liberals to the conservatives? And now he is looking after foreign afairs. One more reason to get out of Afghanistan, maybe not too many gaffes, but the backroom dealings could be far worse. What deal did he make for another 200 soldiers?
From: somewhere | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 26 July 2008 07:31 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bubbles:
Emerson? Is that the one that jumped from the liberals to the conservatives?

And leaving behind Lake and Palmer, as well. For shame. You can rarely trust these gyus who want solo careers.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 26 July 2008 07:47 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I saw Emerson, Lake and Palmer in Ottawa in the 1970s, they had one fantastic hit that the radio played over and over (I think it was "Oh what a lucky man he was"), but they were nothing compared to, say, Ten Years After, or even Yes. Jethro Tull blew them all away, in any event - I saw Jethro Tull do the entire "Thick As A Brick" album at Lansdowne Park - a f*cking awesome concert, man.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 27 July 2008 03:21 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The US and its allies are dropping record numbers of bombs on Afghanistan. This is not news. In the first half of this year, 1,853 bombs were dropped: more than all the bombs of 2006 and most of 2007. “The most frequently used bombs,” the Air Force Times reports, “are the 500lb and 2,000lb satellite-guided . . .” Without this one-sided onslaught, the resurgence of the Taliban, it is clear, might not have happened. Even Hamid Karzai, America’s and Britain’s puppet, has said so. The presence and the aggression of foreigners have all but united a resistance that now includes former warlords once on the CIA’s payroll.

The scandal of this would be headline news, were it not for what George W Bush’s former spokesman Scott McClellan has called “complicit enablers” - journalists who serve as little more than official amplifiers. Having declared Afghanistan a “good war”, the complicit enablers are now anointing Barack Obama as he tours the bloodfests in Afghanistan and Iraq. What they never say is that Obama is a bomber.

In the New York Times on 14 July, in an article spun to appear as if he is ending the war in Iraq, Obama demanded more war in Afghanistan and, in effect, an invasion of Pakistan. He wants more combat troops, more helicopters, more bombs. Bush may be on his way out, but the Republicans have built an ideological machine that transcends the loss of electoral power - because their collaborators are, as the American writer Mike Whitney put it succinctly, “bait-and-switch” Democrats, of whom Obama is the prince.

Those who write of Obama that “when it comes to international affairs, he will be a huge improvement on Bush” demonstrate the same wilful naivety that backed the bait-and-switch of Bill Clinton - and Tony Blair. Of Blair, wrote the late Hugo Young in 1997, “ideology has surrendered entirely to ‘values’ . . . there are no sacred cows [and] no fossilised limits to the ground over which the mind might range in search of a better Britain . . .”

Eleven years and five wars later, at least a million people lie dead. Barack Obama is the American Blair. That he is a smooth operator and a black man is irrelevant. He is of an enduring, rampant system whose drum majors and cheer squads never see, or want to see, the consequences of 500lb bombs dropped unerringly on mud, stone and straw houses.


John Pilger

From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 28 July 2008 03:16 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Rick Salutin on the role of "Intelligence" in the war.

quote:
With both U.S. presidential wannabes competing over who will send more troops to Afghanistan, it puts increased pressure on our forces to stay, even though prospects are bleak. Our new military chief, "General Denial," admits things have got worse rather than, as he initially said, better.

After the Kandahar prison break, in our own backyard, Gen. Walter Natynczyk said improved intelligence would be crucial: "When something doesn't seem right then you don't have all the information." The Manley commission also called for better intelligence — a fine idea. Would it be hard to achieve? You bet.



From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 28 July 2008 04:13 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Canadian intelligence and heroism at work:

Canadian troops shoot and kill a 2-year-old and a 4-year-old


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 28 July 2008 06:21 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So, all they have to do is say they perceived a threat and they can do whatever they want. Fucking murderous criminals that they are! As if a car carrying 3 adults and 2 children is a threat 30+ ft away!

And all NATO lyingly has to say is:

quote:
NATO commanders say...that militants, who regularly use civilian cars loaded with explosives in suicide missions, are to blame for endangering innocents.

This is sickening and ALL Canadians have blood on their hands.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Noah_Scape
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14667

posted 28 July 2008 05:55 PM      Profile for Noah_Scape     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes it is sickining, and we do all have Afghan blood on our hands...

Eventually, our leaders will decide that the time for "more diplomacy and reconstruction" is needed, and until then, with the "kill the Talbian" military mindset, we will just be doing more and more damage to the Afghans, and to our credibility and good standing in the world.

Violence has not worked yet, over the 10's of 1000's of years that humans cultures have been using it, and somehow we still expect a different result [as the saying goes].

Violence only begets more violence; it will certainly invite retribution ; it is shortsighted.

For example, I heard some American Jews talking about the threat from Iran, and how Israel should do a pre-emptive strike on Iran because "Iran threatens Israel's existence" - as if Isreal, in saying that, is not being a threat to Iran's existence!!

Ok, whoa, I do not want to get started on a Israel-Iran debate here, that was just an example of how short sighted it is to use "the violence tactic".

As a Canadian, I am not at all convinced that the Taliban are my enemy... from what I can see they are mostly just poor people who are cajoled into performing some military duties for their leaders. Most armies of the world are like that, certainly the American military is mostly made up of people from poorer background, and military "jobs" are just the last resort for many of Canada's young people who have limited opportunities in the job market.


From: B.C. | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 28 July 2008 06:07 PM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Noah_Scape:
....military "jobs" are just the last resort for many of Canada's young people who have limited opportunities in the job market.

Many people also join due to family tradition.


From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 28 July 2008 06:10 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
An Afghan refugee told me that the Taliban would put people into a small building, then drive a tank into them.

He kinda had a grudge against the Taliban, I suppose, since they drove him and his family from their home at gunpoint, saying, "Either leave or die."


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Neocynic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13142

posted 28 July 2008 06:24 PM      Profile for Neocynic     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nothing like the killing of children to polarize the debate. Those of us who are loyal to the state of Canada are in conflict with those who are loyal to the Canadian nation. Believers in the rule of la are pitted against the tribal nationalists who now prosecute our disasterous war in Afghanistan, and who seek out every opportunity to expand the military and militarism in Canada today. They choose power over law. We insist on law over power. Obviously, the great fault line that runs through this "debate" is the division between believers in the Canadian "nation", and believers in the state of Canada, i.e. the legal entity and all it subsumes, like the Charter of Rights and what it stands for. Each time we hear of imposing our democracy on Afghans, our essentially ethnic political ideology and culture, whenever we hear of helping "children" and our Western ideals of "freedom", ideas that they would like us to think can be dropped like high explosive upon a people for their eager acceptance, we hear echoes of the past. Without regard for humans and their nature, indeed, without regard for the simple child and her family riding in their car in their village, we act with the brute force of barbarians. The Taliban are indigenous. We are not. Those echoes emanate from the Third Reich. These tribal nationalists who thump the war drum with so much zest for the death of children are successors to the Naziis in every way. What better recalls the internment camps of Himmler than Guantanamo, which soon morphed into concentration camps? What better reminds us of the Gestapo than CIA waterboarding? Who better resembles Goebels and his Ministry of Propaganda than the US Pentagon? Who does that famous picture of the Jewish boy in the shortcoat pitifully holding up his hands in the Polish Ghetto from World War II remind us more of than Omart Khadr and our treatment of him and his family? 1939. Its closer than you think.
From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 28 July 2008 06:39 PM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Neocynic:
These tribal nationalists who thump the war drum with so much zest for the death of children are successors to the Naziis in every way.

Yes it is polarizing in some ways, as long as justified emotion entirely takes the place of perspective. I disagree with your statement. Although I wouldn't argue with the tribal nationalist description, they are not successors to nazis. Although they seek to control the population and their resources using violence, there is no evidence that the ultimate plan includes the eradication of an entire people.


From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 28 July 2008 07:12 PM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Open letter sent to Quebec dailies (Please speak up too, folks. Our silence makes us all collective child assassins.)

Lettre ouverte à nos soldats

Les nouvelles m'apprennent que des soldats canadiens ont mitraillé à mort dimanche en Afghanistan un garçonnet de 4 ans et une fillette de 2 ans, sous prétexte que la voiture où ces enfants prenaient place s'étaient trop
approchée de leur blindé.

L'excuse officielle - lâchement reprise par nos médias - nous dit que nos fiers militaires avaient peur d'être attaqués et que le conducteur de la voiture n'avait pas répondu à leurs signaux répétés de rester à plus de 10 mètres de leur blindé.

J'aimerais savoir à quoi peut ressembler le signal qu'un Afghan est censé pouvoir interpréter instantanément à une telle distance.

J'aimerais aussi savoir s'il est arrivé que des insurgés afghans utilisent une voiture piégée remplie de monde: je ne crois pas que ce soit jamais arrivé, et il y avait cinq Afghans dans l'auto que vous avez criblée de balles de fort calibre.

Je m'adresserais à vous par votre nom, messieurs, mais votre identité est
soigneusement protégée par les Forces canadiennes.

Il y a de quoi...

Lorsque vous reviendrez au pays, chers Canadiens, ne vous étonnez pas de voir nos policiers tirer à vue sur les civils: vous nous en donnez tous les jours l'exemple.

Martin Dufresne

[ 28 July 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 28 July 2008 07:33 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Examples like this - the two children killed by Canadian Forces gunfire - will continue, because, as the CBC said tonight on the National, while larger population centres in Afganistan have been instructed not to approach Coalition forces, the majority of tiny villages haven't been reached yet and thus their residents have no idea that they risk being shot at by troops fearing suicide attacks.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 28 July 2008 08:03 PM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Boom Boom, your comment makes it the "uneducated" Afghan civilians' fault that we are killing them! Afghans are not "approaching" Canadian soldiers: we are crashing their living space to impose Western control of the region. Please reconsider.
Also, all kinds of thieves put up roadblocks on Afghan country roads. Afghans have no way to know whether they stand a better chance at survival by stopping or trying to whiz through such "control points".

[ 28 July 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]

[ 28 July 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 29 July 2008 02:05 AM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by martin dufresne:
Boom Boom, your comment makes it the "uneducated" Afghan civilians' fault that we are killing them!

It's not his comment Martin. It was broadcast last night on CBC.

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: Slumberjack ]


From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 29 July 2008 04:17 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Slumberjack:
It's not his comment Martin. It was broadcast last night on CBC.

Yup.


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 29 July 2008 04:42 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Slumberjack:
Yes it is polarizing in some ways, as long as justified emotion entirely takes the place of perspective.
This is a very obtuse comment. What and whose perspective are you speaking of, that should trump "justified" emotion?

quote:
I disagree with your statement.
Personally, I think the commentary by neocynic was fairly close to the mark. And disagree with your stating there is no evidence. I believe in fact there is.

quote:
Although they seek to control the population and their resources using violence, there is no evidence that the ultimate plan includes the eradication of an entire people.

When "they" seek to control populations and resources using violence, it must be continually sustained. Sustained violence and oppression destroys peoples and their way of life for generations, and eradicates their autonomy at the least.

Moreover, when "they" destroy agricultural land, orchards, bomb and flatten villages, litter depleted uranium shells and cluster bombs about a country, and utlize sustained violence, what exactly are "they" doing other than trying to eradicate the people?


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 29 July 2008 05:17 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Neocynic and remind are right on the mark. I find it interesting how some people can always see yesterday's crimes with great clarity, but not today's.

Perhaps we should recall the actual charges laid against the Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg:

quote:
Indictments

Count One: Conspiracy to Wage Aggressive War

This count helped address the crimes committed before the war began, showing a plan to commit crimes during the war.

Count Two: Waging Aggressive War, or "Crimes Against Peace"

Including “the planning, preparation, initiation, and waging of wars of aggression, which were also wars in violation of international treaties, agreements, and assurances.”

Count Three: War Crimes

These were the more “traditional” violations of the law of war including treatment of prisoners of war, slave labor, and use of outlaws weapons.

Count Four: Crimes Against Humanity

This count involved the actions in concentration camps and other death rampages.


How many of these indictments do not apply to the U.S.-NATO-Canadian invaders of Afghanistan?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 29 July 2008 05:48 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good point unionist regarding clarity of the past and failure of clarity to see, today, their complicity. However, I would say there is no clarity of the past, nor the present.

Though IMV, current participation in the "war effort" by regular/reservist Canadian military personel, should be viewed as war crimes, I reserve particular antipathy towards those who had left the Canadian military and have gone back in a temporary specialist role, for huge sums of money. They are mercenaries and are committing war crimes for their own personal gain.

And thanks for posting the actual charges at Nuremburg!

etd for clarity.

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: remind ]


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 29 July 2008 06:27 AM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It's not his comment Martin. It was broadcast last night on CBC.
-------------------------------------------------

Yup.


Sorry, I failed to detect a critical distance. Will write the CBC in protest.


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 29 July 2008 07:14 AM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
To www.cbc.ca/contact/

In its "coverage" of this tragedy, the CBC made excuses for the killers by claiming that "while larger population centres in Afganistan have been instructed not to approach Coalition forces, the majority of tiny villages haven't been reached yet and thus their residents have no idea that they risk being shot at by troops fearing suicide attacks" (I am paraphrasing).
This is unconscionable. They are not "approaching" us, we have invaded their country and are setting up roadblocks on their roads, in their living and working space.
You are blaming the victims, making it this Afghan family's fault that our soldiers riddled with machine gun bullets a car that was carrying a family of five civilians when it dared to approach our soldiers by less than 10 meters.
Your pathetic explanation doesn't hold water: no suicide attack has ever been launched by a car filled with people. And if Afghan civilians are supposed to undertand and obey "visual and verbal signals" given from more than 10 meters away when they are inside a car, our proud boys are certainly able to discern whom they are about to kill and hold their alleged "fear" at bay. These soldiers ought to be court-martialled and you are giving them a pass.
I am deeply ashamed of my governement for waging this war, but I am even more ashamed at what passes for reporting about it at the CBC. Shame on you! The blood of those children is on our hands, and you are covering up instead of pointing out the horror of the situation and assigning blame where it ought to go.


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 29 July 2008 07:19 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bravo, martin.
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 29 July 2008 10:34 AM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
Though IMV, current participation in the "war effort" by regular/reservist Canadian military personel, should be viewed as war crimes, I reserve particular antipathy towards those who had left the Canadian military and have gone back in a temporary specialist role, for huge sums of money. They are mercenaries and are committing war crimes for their own personal gain.[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: remind ]

The war effort is being facilitated and assisted not only by uniformed individuals, but also by 10s of thousands of PSAC DND employees, who work side by side in all non-combat related activities in support of CF Operations. Frankly, I don't know where they'd be without them and their dedication. You might also toss in the employees at Revenue Canada who process the tax free salary status for soldiers deployed into theatre, because after all, as you pointed out, there are certain financial gains to be made in the business of committing war crimes. And what better way to encourage young reservists and regular soldiers, or mercenaries if you will, than the chance to take advantage of tax-free salaries and bonuses, processed through the hands of unionized civil servants. There are many other non-military entities that lend varying levels of support to activities associated with the war effort. The entire apparatus is larger that it seems at first glance. And while you're at it, if you are not personally doing everything you can to cheat the tax people, and just willfully send along accurate annual tax returns, and thus dutifully remitting to the government every penny they ask for, part of which goes toward supporting criminal activities abroad, as in not offering active resistance to the entire machine...then we can see that collaborating and enabling is not just the sole enterprise of people in helmets.


From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 29 July 2008 10:40 AM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ah, yes, the old reductio ad absurdum method of whitewashing the responsibility of the real war criminals.

Nice one.


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 29 July 2008 10:40 AM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
Neocynic and remind are right on the mark. I find it interesting how some people can always see yesterday's crimes with great clarity, but not today's. How many of these indictments do not apply to the U.S.-NATO-Canadian invaders of Afghanistan?

Neocynic said this:

quote:
These tribal nationalists who thump the war drum with so much zest for the death of children are successors to the Naziis in every way. What better recalls the internment camps of Himmler than Guantanamo, which soon morphed into concentration camps?

I disagree on this that we are at that point in this war. I'm surprised that you see now and then as the same in that regard.


From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 29 July 2008 10:51 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
Ah, yes, the old reductio ad absurdum method of whitewashing the responsibility of the real war criminals. Nice one.
Exactly mspector.

From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 29 July 2008 11:43 AM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by remind:

[QUOTE]This is a very obtuse comment. What and whose perspective are you speaking of, that should trump "justified" emotion?


When the activities of troops in Khandahar province equate to the running of nazi death camps, this is where I'd have to part company with your much higher plateau of progressiveness.

quote:
Moreover, when "they" destroy agricultural land, orchards, bomb and flatten villages, litter depleted uranium shells and cluster bombs about a country, and utlize sustained violence, what exactly are "they" doing other than trying to eradicate the people?

Trying to win an unwinable and illegal war using all the means available to them, while keeping domestic arms manufacturing workers employed in replacing spent munitions. The lives of innocent people are not a consideration at all, insofar as there can be enough cover up and blood money involved to deal with the revenge factor, which is more to do with ongoing security posturing, and not out of sympathy for the dead or survivors. I cannot accept though, that any of this terrible disgrace is on the same level as say...Babi Yar, or all the other monstrous atrocities of that scale and purposeful intent. Contrary to the opinions of Spector and yourself, this is no whitewash of the sickening incidents that are occuring there. On this particular point, if you and others choose to juxtapose the past with the present and lend equal weight to both as part of your argument, no amount of evidence could dissuade you from your views.

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: Slumberjack ]


From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 29 July 2008 11:48 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by martin dufresne:
[QB]To www.cbc.ca/contact/

- snip -


With a bit of editing, this would be a good letter to send to the Minister of Defence and the new Military Chief of Staff (the guy that replaces Hillier).


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 29 July 2008 11:57 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Slumberjack:
I'm surprised that you see now and then as the same in that regard.

I see "then" as the battle that has already been won, and "now" as the battle that has yet to be won. That's why I instinctively recoil from any attempts to say that "now" isn't nearly as awful and horrible as "then". At best detracts somewhat from the urgency of "now".


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 29 July 2008 01:43 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Slumberjack:
Contrary to the opinions of Spector and yourself, this is no whitewash of the sickening incidents that are occuring there.
The whitewash is you trying to say that the troops themselves are no more guilty of war crimes than the government employees who process their tax returns, or the citizens of Canada who don't cheat on their taxes. Your message is clear: "everybody's guilty so nobody's guilty".

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 29 July 2008 02:18 PM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
The whitewash is you trying to say that the troops themselves are no more guilty of war crimes than the government employees who process their tax returns, or the citizens of Canada who don't cheat on their taxes. Your message is clear: "everybody's guilty so nobody's guilty".

[ 29 July 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]


There are varying degrees of culpability, and a good measure of disingenuous inference it seems. But don’t let any of that interfere with your creativity.


From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 29 July 2008 02:38 PM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

I see "then" as the battle that has already been won, and "now" as the battle that has yet to be won. That's why I instinctively recoil from any attempts to say that "now" isn't nearly as awful and horrible as "then". At best detracts somewhat from the urgency of "now".


So you feel it's a reasonable methodology then, borne out of urgency, to link the two as the same in all aspects? It needn't detract from what is happening now. Truth doesn't detract from anything, in the same way that disproportionate exaggeration can.


From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 29 July 2008 02:52 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Slumberjack:

So you feel it's a reasonable methodology then, borne out of urgency, to link the two as the same in all aspects?


I am far less troubled by those who say, "our troops are behaving like Nazis", then by those who insist they are not.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 29 July 2008 03:55 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Slumberjack:
There are varying degrees of culpability,
I'll say, but one would not know that you believe so, from your words above.

quote:
But don’t let any of that interfere with your creativity.
Actually, I believe that the creativity in this situation belongs to you, but of course those who have to justify do so.

From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 29 July 2008 04:20 PM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Boom Boom: With a bit of editing, this would be a good letter to send to the Minister of Defence and the new Military Chief of Staff (the guy that replaces Hillier).

Be my guest!!!
The Honourable Peter Gordon MacKay
Minister of National Defence
National Defence Headquarters
Major-General George R. Pearkes Building
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K2
Facsimile: 613-995-8189

Chief of Defence Staff Lt.-Gen. Walter J. Natynczyk
National Defence Headquarters
Major-General George R. Pearkes Building
101 Colonel By Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K2
Facsimile: 613-992-4739

Canada's Commander-in-Chief Michaelle Jean
Rideau Hall
1 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A1
Fax (613) 998-8760, E-mail:


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 29 July 2008 04:44 PM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
Actually, I believe that the creativity in this situation belongs to you, but of course those who have to justify do so.

I don't expect you to recognize the error of unjustly linking nazi death camps with Khandahar, but I do wish you would just come out and say what's on your mind.


From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 29 July 2008 04:51 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Slumberjack:

I don't expect you to recognize the error of unjustly linking nazi death camps with Khandahar, but I do wish you would just come out and say what's on your mind.


Are you capable of commenting on people's opinions - or only on their character? Why don't you just stop doing this?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 29 July 2008 05:34 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
Are you capable of commenting on people's opinions - or only on their character? Why don't you just stop doing this?

I find it refreshing that he is back to his normal slumberjack ways, before he decided to go undercover and try out for volunteer moderator. One can only hope he did not get too may IP addresses.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Slumberjack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10108

posted 29 July 2008 06:24 PM      Profile for Slumberjack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sigh....Must everyone agree with every aspect of your ideology to avoid being tag teamed by both of your insinuations and accusations? I feel that both of you have been partially responsible for the exodus of some really fine contributors through the manner in which you interact with people who don't agree with you, even in the case of one point among many other agreements. But that's just me. In all of what we discussed here, there is the unmistakable insinuation of criminality leveled against me by both of you. If you hold on your position regarding the point I was making in my disagreement, then of course there is no other way to conclude otherwise. I've enjoyed my experience here on babble since it's inception, and my brief time as a mini-mod before I requested to be removed, in light of an unforseen absence overseas....facilitating criminality it would appear. But do keep up the good work...love you both...
From: An Intensive De-Indoctrination, But I'm Fine Now | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 29 July 2008 08:23 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Liberals and the Bloc have made predictably sycophantic comments about the killing of the two children.

I checked the NDP website to see if they felt it was important enough to make their front page. Amid calls to end internet throttling and crack down on cell phone charges and put the brakes on the banks, the only mention of Afghanistan was Jack Layton's July 19 statement about the latest Canadian soldier who died. The linked piece reads in part as follows:

quote:
At just 25, Corporal Arnal was a courageous contributor to our country. We recognize and praise his courage.

The memory of Corporal Arnal remains alive in the hearts of all New Democrats across the country as we reflect on this tragic loss.

We wish to send our most heartfelt condolences to this hero’s family, friends and colleagues. May they find solace in knowing that they remain in our prayers.


Just thought I'd highlight the repulsive bits in case you couldn't find them on your own.

Who's writing copy for Jack these days - Rick Hillier?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 29 July 2008 09:02 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ya, I read that in a email I got last week and for myself, I was not too impressed with the use of hero and expropriating ALL NDP voices. However, in respect to the other high lighted bits you had, I had no significant problem with them.

I believe it does take courage, and I believe it was a tragic and needless loss, to his family friends and community. The extent of operant conditioning that prompts people to give their lives and participate in war, for no reason, is always tragic.

And if Jack wants to extend prayers, I am good with that too, as personally, I also extend prayers to those who have suffered a loss, perhaps not the kind that many religious persons would, but I would say they are prayers nonetheless.

It is also good to see that the NDP are not jumping on the sycophant bandwagon, so thanks for pointing that out.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
sgm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5468

posted 29 July 2008 09:31 PM      Profile for sgm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
From earlier this month:

quote:
Armed with legal advice that the [laser] systems can be classified as warning devices, the Canadian military wants to proceed with the purchase of laser weapons designed to temporarily blind people.

But a group opposed to the purchase of the equipment says any use of the so-called "laser dazzlers" in Afghanistan violates international law and sets a dangerous precedent.

[snip]

The Canadian military wants to mount the dazzlers on rifles and vehicles, mainly for use in protecting convoys. It's hoped the systems could result in fewer Afghan civilians - who don't heed warnings to stop at checkpoints or to approach convoys - getting shot dead by soldiers.

[snip]

"Laser dazzlers would allow our soldiers another non-lethal means to ensure that they have done all they can to warn Afghan civilian drivers and pedestrians from entering a critical zone in which deadly force could be used," reads the e-mail from department spokeswoman Jillian Van Acker.

"We are confident that the proposed use of laser warning devices would not contravene any provision of international humanitarian law applicable to Canada."

But Salloum questioned that claim.

To satisfy international obligations, Canada would be required to conduct various technical and medical tests to prove the weapons do not violate international law, he said.

"If these are so safe and so legal, then where is the evidence?" Salloum asked. "How come (Defence) is not releasing any of its reports and test materials to back up their claims?"


Full story here.

Ceasefire campaign here.


From: I have welcomed the dawn from the fields of Saskatchewan | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 29 July 2008 09:44 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sounds like the promotion of tasers as "non-leathal" weapons,however, the only system required to stop innocent Afghans from dying, is a system that gets NATO out.
From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 30 July 2008 11:07 AM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Frustrated Afghan officials say more than 60 civilians have been killed in the past month by international troops...
From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
contrarianna
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13058

posted 30 July 2008 11:23 AM      Profile for contrarianna     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
baltimoresun.com
"Afghan air war grows in intensity
Fears of civilian casualties rise as airstrikes increase

By David Wood

Sun reporter

July 28, 2008

Daily airstrikes by U.S. and allied fighter-bombers in Afghanistan have almost doubled since last summer, according to U.S. Air Force data, a trend that reflects increased insurgent attacks but also raises concerns about civilian casualties.

The growing reliance on airstrikes by U.S. commanders in Afghanistan appears to mark a turn in the course of the war.

Responding to requests from ground commanders, allied aircraft over the past week have pummeled enemy ground targets an average of 68 times a day across Afghanistan, dropping 500- and 2,000-pound guided bombs and strafing enemy forces with cannon fire, according to Air Force daily strike reports.
.... civilian casualties from airstrikes have spiked twice this year, from none in January to 23 in March to 60 so far this month, according to new, unpublished data from Human Rights Watch researcher Marc Garlasco, a former targeting chief for the Pentagon's Joint Staff..."
More civilians to be slaughtered from air strikes


From: here to inanity | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
contrarianna
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13058

posted 30 July 2008 11:40 AM      Profile for contrarianna     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Also from the same article:

Maj. Gen. Douglas L. Raaberg, deputy commander of air operations in the region:

"It's a painstaking effort," he said. If insurgents are mixed in with civilians, "we will wait them out if we can" or ask the ground commander to flush them out.

But U.S. and allied troops in trouble take precedence.

"My hat's off to the ones on the ground," Raaberg said.

"There's nothing more uncomfortable than to hear on the radio mortars and grenades going off. You've got to go help them."
===========
Well, he at least had the restraint not to say:
"Civilians? Let God sort 'em out."


From: here to inanity | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 30 July 2008 07:48 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Not in Afghanistan to guard pipelines: MacKay

quote:
Defence Minister Peter MacKay insisted Wednesday that Canadian troops are not in Afghanistan to guard a new natural gas pipeline being built through the southern part of the country.

Of course, this grinning ignoramus goes on to say that Canadian troops might, in fact, do just that:

quote:
“We're going to try and prevent chaos. If the Taliban are attacking certain places in the country or certain projects, then yes we will play a role.”

He can't even stick to a lie for a whole interview.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 31 July 2008 04:23 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Félicitations, martin! Je viens de lire ta lettre dans Le Devoir!
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 31 July 2008 05:49 AM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
...mercilessly censored, alas, but it's better than nothing.
Note in the same edition of Le Devoir a feature story on page four about childhood ending at eleven in Afghanistan (because of those mean ole Talibans). The subtitle could have been "if Canadians soldiers don't cut down the kids before that".

As for Mackay, maybe he was referring to the project of passing out crayons to deserving Afghan children...?

[ 31 July 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]


From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 31 July 2008 05:52 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Is it online? Congrats! Never mind, found it!

[ 31 July 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 31 July 2008 05:58 AM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes. Those mealy-mouthed enablers replaced my original title, "Lettre ouverte à nos soldats", by the conciliatory "Une bavure?"
From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Buddy Kat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13234

posted 31 July 2008 07:21 AM      Profile for Buddy Kat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by martin dufresne:
To www.cbc.ca/contact/

In its "coverage" of this tragedy, the CBC made excuses for the killers by claiming that "while larger population centres in Afganistan have been instructed not to approach Coalition forces, the majority of tiny villages haven't been reached yet and thus their residents have no idea that they risk being shot at by troops fearing suicide attacks" (I am paraphrasing).
This is unconscionable. They are not "approaching" us, we have invaded their country and are setting up roadblocks on their roads, in their living and working space.
You are blaming the victims, making it this Afghan family's fault that our soldiers riddled with machine gun bullets a car that was carrying a family of five civilians when it dared to approach our soldiers by less than 10 meters.
Your pathetic explanation doesn't hold water: no suicide attack has ever been launched by a car filled with people. And if Afghan civilians are supposed to undertand and obey "visual and verbal signals" given from more than 10 meters away when they are inside a car, our proud boys are certainly able to discern whom they are about to kill and hold their alleged "fear" at bay. These soldiers ought to be court-martialled and you are giving them a pass.
I am deeply ashamed of my governement for waging this war, but I am even more ashamed at what passes for reporting about it at the CBC. Shame on you! The blood of those children is on our hands, and you are covering up instead of pointing out the horror of the situation and assigning blame where it ought to go.


Well in the first report by the Canada press on a phone call to newsworld they did say "one shot was fired from a large caliber gun that SEVERED the head off a 4 year old girl".... That has been the only time it was mentioned by any news agency that a Canadian soldier did the dreaded act of looping off a head. Which apparently is what the taliban was supposed to off done in the past, and used as an excuse to show how cruel they are.Probably why they leave that part out.

With all the high tech super powerfull binoculars and powerfull guns they couldn't see more than one person in a car and then instead of shooting the engine with the super sized caliber gun or the driver they shoot the passengers from 30 feet away.

There is something real fishy with this story...and it reeks of coverup..more like trigger happy soldier can't wait to do the dirty deed and get away with it, with rules of engagemnet set by the invaders. The remainder of the family was right to say death to the canadians, however Canada will give them hush money to shut up...so now Canada bribes it's way out of crime...now where have we heard the word bribe before.

Originally posted by Jingles:

Remember when being a "hero" involved doing something, you know, like, heroic, or whatever? Once upon a time, you had to charge a machine gun nest, or rescue orphans, or pull people from a burning plane wreck.


There job as soldier is to be killed and kill that's it... so I don't know where this hero bullshit comes into play. Now going on a "suicide mission", that seems more heroic. Until they have the balls to do that number , there not heros.Funny how when the shoe is on the other foot the term "suicide mission" is not OK, but in war propaganda films from post WWII it was the ULTIMATE in heroics.

If anything the mismatch between the 2 forces makes them look more like slaughtering cowards. When the Afghans get surface to air missles and even things up a bit, it should be interesting to see how brave the Canadian soldier is then. Can you spell "cut and run". When they are being slaughterd like ducks in a shooting gallery..what then? Until then enjoy the propaganda and remember everything they tell us is a lie.


From: Saskatchewan | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 31 July 2008 07:39 AM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"There is something real fishy with this story...and it reeks of coverup..."
I think so too. The news report I heard on Radio-Canada Monday afternoon was quite different from the Globe & Mail story. It spoke of our brave 'uns firing not from a roadblock at a car that had tried to run it, but from an armoured vehicle that felt it was being followed from too close. The official story about visual and verbal signals having been ignored by the car where the victims rode becomes even more unbelievable, an even thinner excuse for outright murder.
But our newsmen don't even have to be embedded to lie about anything that may hurt the national interest.
Also "hush money" for surviving members? That seems rather naive. The last we heard from the surviving father of Sunday's victims, he was targeted for having "left the hospital without permission to attend his children's funeral" (The Global Male Monday article))

From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 31 July 2008 08:45 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
In the NY Times, op-ed columnist Thomas Friedman criticizes the Obama camp for, apparently, supporting some kind of "surge" in Afghanistan. Friedman thinks this is poorly thought out and only an election winning strategy ... not a war winning strategy.

Now there are all kinds of problems with the article. I'm not going into them all. However, let me draw your attention to only one problem:

quote:
The main reason we are losing in Afghanistan is not because there are too few American soldiers, but because there are not enough Afghans ready to fight and die for the kind of government we want.

As near as I can tell, this writer was serious. Why won't enough Afghans fight and die for the kind of government WE want? The obstinate stupidity arrogant hubris displayed here is astounding. This is what columnists from one of the biggest circulation newspapers in the US, possibly on the planet, have to say.

Drilling in Afghanistan

[ 31 July 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 31 July 2008 10:49 AM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The funny thing is, the Soviets also thought that they were going to win in Afghanistan because they had the support of important Afghan actors, namely the two Communist Parties and their hangers-on.
From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 31 July 2008 11:37 AM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Enlighten us Jeff about the terrible things that the Afghan socialist government did that required western intervention. Was it the schools they built or maybe the change in laws to give women rights? What exactly was it that required the west to arm religious fanatics?
From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 31 July 2008 11:44 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I've found plenty of post-Soviet Russian commentators provide cautionary tales about the Soviet experience in that country. Some of it reads like excellent advice. But the hubris by the NY Times op-ed columnist, Friedman, is breathtaking and noteworthy. That's why I added it to this thread.

But, hey! Maybe Jeff can find similar quotes from Pravda or Izvestia from the Soviet era that shows the same insolent hubris.

Knock yourself out! We'll be very grateful. I pwam-isss.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 31 July 2008 02:58 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:
The funny thing is, the Soviets also thought that they were going to win in Afghanistan because they had the support of important Afghan actors, namely the two Communist Parties and their hangers-on.

So why is it that NATO has achieved even less than the Soviets did in Afghanistan, and given that there is no Soviet Union to aid and abet the Talibanization of Pakistan-Afghanistan similarly today?

Afghans and Pakistanis never asked for or even desired Talibanization of their countries. Imagine that the Soviets, China, and Cubans funded religious whackos and right-wing militia groups to takeover the U.S. and Canada in the 1980's? Imagine being told you're Catholic or Baptist now or else? Not so good eh.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 03 August 2008 12:31 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Kabul’s refugee camp is growing
quote:
The United Nations refugee agency has registered 450 families from Helmand Province at the camp — approximately 3,000 people. But that is only a part of the overall refugee picture. An estimated 10,000 to 15,000 people have been displaced by the insurgency in the south, but the numbers fluctuate as some have been able to return home when the fighting moves elsewhere.

The International Committee of the Red Cross has warned that the displaced who have reached the cities represent only the tip of the iceberg, and many others are trapped by violence in remote areas without assistance.

Many of the families who have arrived in Kabul have suffered traumatic losses and injuries, and they say that they are pessimistic about the future.

“The Taliban are getting stronger,” said Muhammad Younus, a farm worker who abandoned his village after his father, brother and uncle were killed in an airstrike two years ago. “There were armored vehicles on the hill and they were firing. There was a heavy bombardment, and planes bombed, too,” he said. “They did not differentiate between the guilty and not guilty.”

He, like many of the displaced people, complained that villagers found themselves trapped between Taliban fighters, who used the villages for cover to attack foreign forces, and NATO and American forces, which would often call in airstrikes on village compounds where civilians were living.

“We left our houses because we had no power to resist the Taliban or the government,” said Mr. Muhammad, the representative who brought families to Kabul from villages in Kajaki.

“Anytime the Taliban fired a shot from our houses, then the coalition, the government and the police came to the area and hit us.”
….

His strongest complaints were against the Taliban who, he said, had accused a relative of being a spy for the coalition forces and executed him. “I absolutely know he was not,” he said vehemently.

“The Taliban are coming during the night, with heavy weapons, riding on vehicles, and we cannot even dare ask them to leave, because if they see someone at night outside they will slaughter them and accuse them of being spies,” he said.

But the heavy reprisals by NATO and American forces was what drove them from their homes in the end, he and others said….

“I blame the foreigners,” Mr. [Khan] Muhammad said. “If the Taliban fire from over there, do you come and bomb this village?”

He added, “We only want a stable country, whether with the Taliban or the foreigners.” But he said that the level of violence made him realize that the foreign forces could not bring security.

That sentiment was echoed by many of the villagers, who said that the civilian deaths were particularly galling given the sophisticated technology of the coalition’s warplanes.

“If they kill, if they wound innocent people, we don’t want them,” said Tauz Khan, a man from the Sangin district who said he lost five members of his family in bombings last year. “If they build and bring peace we will accept them.”

His father, brother and a daughter were among those killed. “You cannot take revenge against a plane,” he said. “But I will not forgive the foreigners for this crime.”



From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
contrarianna
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13058

posted 03 August 2008 12:59 PM      Profile for contrarianna     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Afghanistan: Not a Good War
Conn Hallinan | July 30, 2008

Foreign Policy In Focus

....

War Gone Bad
There is no mystery as to why things have gone increasingly badly for the United States and its allies.
As the United States steps up its air war, civilian casualties have climbed steadily over the past two years. Nearly 700 were killed in the first three months of 2008, a major increase over last year. In a recent incident, 47 members of a wedding party were killed in Helmand Province. In a society where clan, tribe, and blood feuds are a part of daily life, that single act sowed a generation of enmity.
Anatol Lieven, a professor of war at King’s College London, says that a major impetus behind the growing resistance is anger over the death of family members and neighbors.
Lieven says it is as if Afghanistan is “becoming a sort of surreal hunting estate, in which the U.S. and NATO breed the very terrorists they then track down.”
Once a population turns against an occupation (or just decides to stay neutral), there are few places in the world where an occupier can win. Afghanistan, with its enormous size and daunting geography, is certainly not one of them.

Writing in Der Spiegel, Ullrich Fichter says that glancing at a map in the International Security Assistance Force’s (ISAF) headquarters outside Kandahar could give one the impression that Afghanistan is under control. “Colorful little flags identify the NATO troops presence throughout the country,” Germans in the northeast, Americans in the east, Italians in the West, British and Canadians in the south, with flags from Turkey, the Netherlands, Spain, Lithuania, Australia and Sweden scattered between.
“But the flags are an illusion,” he says...."


Foreign Policy in Focus


From: here to inanity | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 09 August 2008 12:17 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Another dead Canadian soldier - maybe friendly fire this time?

quote:
A Canadian soldier has died of injuries sustained in a firefight with insurgents in Zhari district of Kandahar province, military officials said Saturday.

The soldier has been identified as Master Cpl. Josh Roberts of the 2nd Battalion of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry based out of Shilo, Man. ...

There is speculation that a private security company passing by in a convoy may have accidentally opened fire on Canadian troops. ...

"Without private security firms, it would be impossible to achieve what we're achieving here" [Brig.-Gen. Denis Thompson, the Canadian commander in Afghanistan] said.


... whatever that might be...


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
oldgoat
Moderator
Babbler # 1130

posted 11 August 2008 09:33 AM      Profile for oldgoat     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Closing, and continuing here.
From: The 10th circle | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca