PDA

View Full Version : At least 90 believed dead including 40 civilians a


cpfc12
06-09-2009, 07:43 PM
At least 90 people including 40 civilians have been killed in northern Afghanistan after Nato launched an air strike on two fuel tankers hijacked by the Taliban, Afghan officials said.

Militants seized the two trucks, which were delivering jet fuel to Nato forces, around midnight Afghan time. Nato launched the strike in Kunduz province as the Taliban fighters tried to drive the vehicles across a river, according to the local police chief, Gulam Mohyuddin.

The Nato secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, announced an investigation, saying: "A number of Taliban were killed and there is also a possibility of civilian casualties."

The provincial governor, Mohammad Omar, told Reuters the dead included villagers who had gathered to collect fuel from the tankers.

Lieutenant Commander Christine Sidenstricker, a press officer for the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), said Nato aircraft spotted the hijacked lorries on a river bank. "After observing that only insurgents were in the area, the local Isaf commander ordered air strikes which destroyed the fuel trucks and killed a large number of insurgents.

"The strike was against insurgents. That's who we believe was killed. But we are absolutely investigating [reports of civilian deaths]."

Asked how pilots could know whether a crowd gathered around the truck included civilians or fighters, she said: "Based on information available at the scene, the commanders believed they were insurgents."

A Taliban spokesman, Zabihullah Mujahid, said fighters had captured the two fuel tankers but one became stuck in mud by a village.

The Taliban decided to empty the tankers and local people arrived to take some of the fuel when jets blew the trucks up in a huge explosion.

One of the tanker drivers told the BBC two of his colleagues were beheaded during the Taliban hijacking.

The deaths could reignite anger with foreign troops over civilian casualties. Two months ago the new commander of US and Afghan forces in the country, General Stanley McChrystal, announced measures to reduce civilian casualties, which he said were undermining the war effort.

Rasmussen said the alliance remained committed to reducing civilian deaths caused by Nato forces, adding that the number had dropped by 95% this year.

Mohammad Humayun Khamosh, a doctor at Kunduz Central hospital in the provincial capital, said 13 people with burns were brought there for treatment but none of the dead had been taken to the hospital's morgue because the bodies were too badly burnt.

"It is very hard to collect dead bodies or remains from the blast because the fuel they were collecting was highly flammable," he said.

Ghulam Yahya, one of dozens of relatives gathered outside the hospital, said: "My brother was burnt when the aircraft bombed the fuel tankers. I don't know whether he is dead or alive."

Omar, the provincial governor, told the Associated Press that the dead included the senior Taliban commander for the district, Abdur Rahman, and four Chechen fighters.

"Abdur Rahman is a very dangerous man," he said.

The air strike was 1.2 miles from the village of Omar Khel, officials said.

The Kunduz area is patrolled mainly by Nato's German contingent, which is barred by Berlin from operating in combat zones.

McChrystal's tactical directive follows intense criticism of Nato air strikes by the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, and others this summer. The controversy was fuelled by a report from the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan that said coalition air strikes were responsible for nearly a third of the 1,013 civilian deaths during the first half of the year.

The report found that Taliban landmines and suicide bombers were responsible for 59% of civilian casualties during those six months.

In July, it emerged that the Ministry of Defence had paid or was considering compensation for more than 100 civilian deaths caused by the British army in Helmand province.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/04/afghanistan-taliban

cpfc12
08-09-2009, 03:21 PM
cough

entrangermercenary
08-09-2009, 06:51 PM
cough

take benylin



http://www.ciao.co.uk/Benylin_Chesty_Coughs_Non_Drowsy__5098305

Really in a ideal world there would not be war !! But it isn't ideal and there will always be civilian casualties :( If u notice in the conflicts the air force are the main culprits of civvy casualties, wether it be drones or fixed wing aircraft !
So marpat what u got to say :p

marpat
08-09-2009, 08:45 PM
take benylin



http://www.ciao.co.uk/Benylin_Chesty_Coughs_Non_Drowsy__5098305

Really in a ideal world there would not be war !! But it isn't ideal and there will always be civilian casualties :( If u notice in the conflicts the air force are the main culprits of civvy casualties, wether it be drones or fixed wing aircraft !
So marpat what u got to say :p

I would blame the forward air controller on the ground. They call in the airstrikes!!

War breeds accidents. During WWII an American general was killed by US bombers when they dropped their bombs short of the target. All you can do is try the limit the risk factor to innocent people.

I notice that none of the anti-west bitches ever seem to complain when somebody gets their head cut off by the taliban for having non-Islamic regulation hairstyles.

cpfc12
08-09-2009, 08:50 PM
I would blame the forward air controller on the ground. They call in the airstrikes!!

War breeds accidents. During WWII an American general was killed by US bombers when they dropped their bombs short of the target. All you can do is try the limit the risk factor to innocent people.

I notice that none of the anti-west bitches ever seem to complain when somebody gets their head cut off by the taliban for having non-Islamic regulation hairstyles.

Yeah and judging by it nobody gives a fuck when innocent civillians get killed, yeh it seems some do, but meh the life of little brown people is cheap. Still though mistake or not, that is mass murder ! will there be any justice i believe not.

marpat
08-09-2009, 09:07 PM
Yeah and judging by it nobody gives a fuck when innocent civillians get killed, yeh it seems some do, but meh the life of little brown people is cheap. Still though mistake or not, that is mass murder ! will there be any justice i believe not.

People do care but you dont want to believe that because you prefer to pass judgement on people from a distance. Perhaps you should dicuss your views in person with people who have been there. You can tell them they are murderers or whatever you believe.

Put it this way, if people did not try and limit the casualties they would be a lot higher than what you are seeing. If there were no limits then why dont they just go for the full no soviet style mass bombing and poisoning?

Why not put some of the blame on the taliban who stole the truck and decided to offload its contents in an area that was later found to have innocent civilians in it? obviously you think that they are the eatern version of Robin Hood and deserve no criticism. Perhaps if they werent so stupid they would protect their own people by not carrying out such dangerous tasks when people are going to be exposed. Perhaps they did it with the full purpose of generating negative propoganda for the west, knowing that such things are causing big rifts in that country.

cpfc12
09-09-2009, 03:38 PM
Meh i deleted my page long essay of a post, because i realised what is the point, you are entitled to your own beliefs and i am entitled to mine. If the growing desensitiation of a certain group of people and liimited coverage of mass killings of them doesn't bother you, then fair enough, if you are against this war and the killing of children you are branded a evil hippie who hates the soldiers meh, thought there would be more open minded people on david icke forums

marpat
09-09-2009, 07:46 PM
Meh i deleted my page long essay of a post, because i realised what is the point, you are entitled to your own beliefs and i am entitled to mine. If the growing desensitiation of a certain group of people and liimited coverage of mass killings of them doesn't bother you, then fair enough, if you are against this war and the killing of children you are branded a evil hippie who hates the soldiers meh, thought there would be more open minded people on david icke forums

But your views are totally one sided. All I ever see in thise forum are people blaming soldiers for decisions made by politicians and then posting a load of absolute shit about what soldiers apprently are. I never see people complaining about violent Islamic thugs who terrorise their own people with violence and death and who enforce complete obedience to a very rigid and aggressive interpretation of the Koran.

People like you are only interested in one thing, namely demonising the military while totally ignoring anything good that they may be doing. To you they will always be in the wrong because David Icke says so in his books.

At least there are a few of us in here who see the whole picture and not just the side that suites our blinkered views of the world.

cpfc12
10-09-2009, 06:19 PM
But your views are totally one sided. All I ever see in thise forum are people blaming soldiers for decisions made by politicians and then posting a load of absolute shit about what soldiers apprently are. I never see people complaining about violent Islamic thugs who terrorise their own people with violence and death and who enforce complete obedience to a very rigid and aggressive interpretation of the Koran.

People like you are only interested in one thing, namely demonising the military while totally ignoring anything good that they may be doing. To you they will always be in the wrong because David Icke says so in his books.

At least there are a few of us in here who see the whole picture and not just the side that suites our blinkered views of the world.

Yes i understand what you are saying marpat, i started to feel the same way about the police, i guess like everything there is no black and white situation. Like any organisation you are going to have good and bad in it. I know exactly what you mean though, i used to be really against anyone who protested against war, but then i had a change of heart as i started to see the bureuacracy of it all, and realised hang on a minute that is not so black and white either, also this fire had extra fuel added to it, when i saw some unsavoury characters to put it, joining up, and being branded as heroes by people, where as i knew their true colours and the real reasons why they would join. Of course though can't tar everyone with the same brush, in recent years i have realised that with different organisations and groups of people, the army is nothing greatly new to me, neither what they do, my dad was in the army in the late 80s, northern Ireland i think, and i was considering a career as a cmt or something, but with the current conflicts going on i wouldn't wish to join, as i would only ever consider fighting for soemthing that i truly believed in, and would be willing to die for, there are plenty of other jobs and ways of life apart from the army that are exciting.

I still stick by though, that this war is wrong, and the way afghan INNOCENT deaths are being just used as statistics, creeps me out, along with other things, and the constant propaganda being used to try and recruit young men to die in this war. From what i have read from Icke i don't believe he critcizes soldiers, but then again if they do commit war crimes, should it be justified that they are complained about ?? i dont mean to go on a personal crusade about all soldiers if it seems like this i apologise.

marpat
10-09-2009, 07:37 PM
Actually Icke refers to soldiers as psychopaths.

accuracy
12-09-2009, 01:28 PM
You Zionists just keep on with the bullshit.

:rolleyes: