comments_image -

Afghanistan: More Civilians Die From U.S. Bombs

Air strikes on civilians are cruel, inhumane -- and strengthen the hand of the Taliban.
September 4, 2009  |  
 
Advertisement
 

I don't know why the US military keeps thinking it can just bomb insurgencies against a foreign occupation into oblivion, but they do:

KABUL, Afghanistan — A NATO airstrike early Friday killed at least 80 people, many of them civilians, in a once-calm region of northern Afghanistan that has recently slipped under control of insurgents, Afghan officials said.

Hours after the airstrike, NATO officials in the Afghan capital acknowledged that a coalition aircraft had attacked and destroyed two fuel tankers in the tiny village of Omar Kheil, 15 miles south of Kunduz.

The officials said the airstrike had targeted insurgents, but Afghan leaders said the attack killed many civilians who were siphoning fuel from the trucks.

 This is cruel, inhumane and it won't work. But I suspect our generals will just keep doing it anyway. You wonder if they learned anything from the Vietnam War about the limits of air power? All this does is strengthen the hand of the Taliban.

What's the cliche? Penny wise, pound foolish. No doubt we killed a few Taliban fighters. But we also likely created a few more from the families of those we murdered who were not our enemy (until now) and handed another propaganda victory to a radical bunch of religious extremists. In a war against a guerrilla force any "military target" is inevitably a civilian target as well. Unless we intend to kill everyone who lives in those areas of Afghanistan controlled by the Taliban such tactics are profoundly stupid. It goes without saying that their inherent immorality is not debatable.

 

submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: afghanistan, nato, taliban, civilian casualties, air strikes
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
Pro-Coal Group Pays People to Wear Its Shirts at EPA Hearing

By Heather Moyer | Sierra Club

 
 
Kids Inundate NY Governor With Concerns About Fracking

By Seth Gladstone | Food and Water Watch

 
 
Shareholders, Top Doctors Demand McDonald's Assess its Health Impacts

By Sara Deon | Civil Eats

 
 
Republicans Block NY Minimum Wage Increase That Would Give 880,000 Workers a Raise

By Laura Clawson | Daily Kos

 
 
Why Don't TV Meteorologists Believe in Climate Change?

By Katherine Bagley, | Inside Climate News

 
 
New Book Says Teenage Obama Was a Huge Pot Head -- So Why Won't He Legalize It for the Rest of Us?!

By Kristen Gwynne | AlterNet

 
 
Pew Poll Finds Clean Energy Is A Political Wedge Issue for Republicans

By Stephen Lacey | Climate Progress

 
 
Mitt 'Not Concerned with the Very Poor' Romney Visits West Philly, Gets Lesson in Keeping it Real

By Kristen Gwynne | AlterNet

 
 
Corporate Media Stokes Racial Angst in Election Coverage

By Adele M. Stan | AlterNet

 
 
5 Things to Know About the Paycheck Fairness Act (The Next Big Legislative Battle for Women)

By Annie-Rose Strasser | Think Progress

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 2 ]