Mounting Civilian Afghan Deaths Prompt U.S. Investigation, 78 Killed This Month Alone

KABUL -- U.S. and NATO military officials in Afghanistan have launched investigations into three separate U.S.-led airstrikes that Afghan officials say killed at least 78 civilians this month.

The investigations come during what U.N. and Afghan officials say is one of the deadliest years for civilians since the war began. In the first six months of this year, the number of civilians killed in fighting has increased by nearly 40 percent over the same period last year, according to U.N. data.

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[abouttime]

Bombs are not healthy for children and other living things.

The US has been doing this for years and years. The Afgan people want us out!
Karzai has pleaded - demanded that the US stop the terrible spector of killing innocent people with bombs.
Bombs don't discrimminate. Bombs are dropped fron planes. The soldiers eyes see only coordinates on a screen from commands whose "intelligence" is questionable - to say the least.
Leave the people alone.
US out of Afganistan!

[rroy]

In Afghanastan,just like Iraq and possibly Iran,there is this one big question that never seems to have an answer that makes any sense!The question is"WHY?"
This particular theatre of operations,Iraq,Iran,and Afghanastan has one thing in common,and that is not one of them has ever attacked the U.S.Yet,by some form of twisted logic they are our mortal enemies.
We were told that Iraq presented a very dangerous threat to our National Securety.That
turned out to be untrue.
We were told that Afghanastan provided a refuge for Bin Laden and Al QUaida.So we are bombing the hell out of non combatants,and Bin Laden-who is rumored to be in failing health and may not even be alive-remains at large.
We are told that Iran is a potential threat to the area because of it's pursuit of Nuclear Knowledge and developng a use for it.
Yet we totaly ignore the fact that Iran,like it's neighbors,and us is a sovereign nation and has every right,just like us and it's neighbors,to determine it's own destiny.We also ignore the fact that it's near eighbor,Israel,has a persistantpolicy of usurping lands outside it's legitimate borders,usurpingvauable resources of land outside it's borders and has a couple of hundred nuclear devices.
Why do we blindly pursue this path that has a very good possibility of getting the world into another conflagration that will mke WW2 look like a church picnic?

[MikeDu]

These 'investigations' are a joke. U.S. soldiers can pull a 'Columbine' in any town in Iraq or Afghanistan, litter the area with bodies, and come up with a clean bill of health after one of these 'investigations'. How many otherwise healthy men went into U.S. custody in Afghanistan only to come out in a body bags with the claim of 'natural causes' for their deaths?

[Mogamboguru]

Why we REALLY fight in Afghanistan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6afjdjjG1mI

[egal]

THIS is why it's so important to get more troops into Afghanistan as soon as possible. From a military standpoint, we can't currently afford to withdraw from Afghanistan due to the known terrorist presence and political, economic, and infrastructural instability. Unlike Iraq, the vaccum there is something we can predict fairly well, and it would be ugly. So, we can't just pull out.

Which means we have to stay until some (hopefully valid and not arbitrary or indefinable) improvement is reached. Unfortunately, without sufficient troops on the ground, we target the terrorists by doing more airstikes and other long-range, low-manpower assaults that cause staggeringly higher incidences of innocent deaths and casualties than of the deaths/cessation of terrorists/terror threats.

Much as we hope to get more soldiers into Afghanistan and then be able to leave it in relative peace and internal stability, we must support sending more troops to Afghanistan for many reasons, including the need to repair political, religious, social, and physical, etc. structures. More troops can provide the temoporary security to reinitiate strong leadership and tolerance, rooting out terrorists to improve our security, as well.

But, perhaps the penultimate reason we need to get significantly more soldiers into Afghanistan in the short term is that using our people to root out terrorists instead of using missiles can drastically reduce the number of innocents killed by or civilians turning to terrorism because of our attempted assaults on the terrorists and their providers.

[Mogamboguru]

Bull$hit.

We CAUSED that mess!

How can "More of the same!" - EVER be expected to be the solution for something it CAUSED, in the first
place?

You are insu lting the World's intelligence. Please, stop that.

[BuyRubles]

I'm sorry egal, but how in the world can the US subjugate Iran if the Mongols, British Empire and Soviet Union all failed? What is unique about the US?

[MagisterLudi]

Unfortunate, war is a dirty business. But it has to be done in A-stan.
Hopefully, the legitimate families will be reimbursed for damages. NATO can pay them in land and education grant for other children of the clans or Euro citizenship.
So the death wouldn't be in vain.

[cdnnewsjunky]

It wouldn't be so dirty if American troops did their jobs right. It seems only the American military has a problem with collateral damage in Afghanistan.

[danoj]

Collateral damage happens in war. The American military is pretty restrained, despite what this website would have you believe. Can you imagine how the Russians or Chinese would have treated A-Stan after 9/11 if it had happened in there countries. Prolly wouldn't be and A-Stan left. So when you suggest the American Military is not restrained or professional 99% of the time; it would suggest to me and most main stream Americans that your either a lefty nut America hater or ya just have no clue what you're talking about.

[sociocanuck]

There's no justification for killing people, even if by accident, and no amount of compensation can truly clear the void left by such "damages". Whether you're American, Canadian, Afghan, or anyone else, personal loss can not just be whitewashed with effectively bribery.

[danoj]

No, it can't be taken lightly, but in war there has to be a certain amount of acceptable casualties or the darn thing is never going to get concluded. As far as A-Stan goes, until Pakistan starts rooting out it's border areas, or we start doing it for them. No matter how many troops we put in there the place is never going to be secure.

[ultracrepidarian]

So what would you take as reimbursement for your child or spouse?

[BlackWidowPilot]

And you're shipping out for the front...when?

War is a *despicable* business that is always best done as an absolute last possible resort, and when it is done it cannot be done half-assed on the cheap to benefit corporate cronies and political allies.

Leland R. Erickson

Citizen

[biwee]

You sound as if you would so easily accept similar deaths of your relatives or children. Would you?? Or, maybe you just do not place much value on human life, like the Israelis.

[cdnnewsjunky]

Winning hearts and minds. You may as well pack up and go home now.