Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiUN Says Has Evidence Air Strikes Killed 90 Afghans, Including 60 Children
KABUL - The United Nations said on Tuesday it had found convincing evidence that 90 Afghan civilians, most of them children, were killed in air strikes by U.S.-led coalition forces in western Afghanistan last week.
![[An Afghan woman who lost family members weeps after air strikes on Friday in Azizabad district of Shindand August 23, 2008. An UN investigation suggested that 60 children were killed in the airstrike.(REUTERS/Mohammad Shoiab)]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/afghancivilians.jpg "afghancivilians.jpg")
The issue of civilian casualties has driven a rift between the Afghan government and its NATO backers, with President Hamid Karzai saying earlier this month that air strikes had achieved nothing and had only succeeded in killing ordinary Afghans.
"Investigations by UNAMA (United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan) found convincing evidence, based on the testimony of eyewitnesses, and others, that some 90 civilians were killed, including 60 children, 15 women and 15 men," U.N. Special Envoy to Afghanistan Kai Eide said in a statement.
The U.S. military has launched an investigation into the incident, after first saying it was unaware of any civilian casualties in what it said was an air strike on a known Taliban commander that killed 30 militants.
The Afghan government on Monday ordered the review of operations by foreign forces amid mounting discontent over civilian casualties nearly seven years after U.S.-led forces toppled the Taliban, the presidential spokesman said.
The order foresees a set of laws to be drafted in consultation with foreign forces and then approved by the Afghan parliament, Humayun Hamidzada told a regular press briefing.
"STATUS OF FORCE AGREEMENT"
It says the presence of the international community in Afghanistan must be reviewed through mutual agreement and reiterates previous government demands on banning air strikes on civilian targets, un-coordinated house searches and the illegal detention of Afghan civilians.
"The authorities and responsibilities of the international forces in Afghanistan must be regulated through a 'status of force agreement' consistent with both international and Afghan laws," the order says.
Hamidzada did not have a figure for civilian killed in foreign military operations. But he said: "The patience of the Afghan people has ran out. We no longer can afford to see the killing of our children."
UNAMA said it sent its human rights team to the Shindand area to investigate the latest incident, meeting local officials, elders and villagers.
Afghan and foreign soldiers entered the village of Nawabad in Shindand around midnight on August 21. Operations lasted several hours and air strikes were called in, the villagers told UNAMA.
"The destruction from aerial bombardment was clearly evident with some 7-8 houses having been totally destroyed and serious damage to many others," the U.N. statement said.
"Local residents were able to confirm the number of casualties, including names, age and gender of the victims.
"This is matter of grave concern to the United Nations, I have repeatedly made clear that the safety and welfare of civilians must be considered above all else during the planning and conduct of all military operations," Eide said.
Writing by Jon Hemming; Editing by Alex Richardson
81 Comments so far
Show AllSo America, how’s your conscious feeling today? So are the burdens of empire!
As the Romans told the inhabitants of the island of Crete when the invaded it and were asked the question by the people of Crete, where's our democracy?
The Romans replied," democracy for us, occupation for YOU!"
So, it seems that is philosophy of the empire as Americas war machine goes looking for new innocent victims to bomb.
I just wonder sometimes how the guys that fly these aircraft can justify their actions?
Perhaps it is the difference between having a real conscious or a conscious of convenience..
Or maybe it is not having one at all!
Have you ever thought......"Wow, Americans killed ten terrorists." "Wow, Americans killed five Al Qaeda Terrorists." "Wow, America killed at least ten militants¨."
I have never thought "Wow" As a matter of fact, who decided that those people killed were anything but human beings either armed or unarmed?
The Iraqi People were invaded by a foreign military force. The Iraqi People had a right to defend themselves against an Invasion Force. I have always been upset with terms like Al Qaeda or Terrorist when nobody can prove that those people killed were either a terrorist or a member of Al Qaeda. The only terorists I know are those that commit suicide to kill innocent civilians or soldiers.
Some how the U.S. Government has us convinced that what they are doing is waging a war against terrorists when the reality is the U.S. Government has been waging a war to protect U.S. Oil interests and anybody in the way of U.S. Interests is a terrorist.
So we killed 90 more civilians in Afghanistan......The "Surge" worked in Iraq because over 1 million Iraqis are dead and over 4 million are living in refugee or detention camps........It worked, didn´t it? So let´s do some more "Cluster Bombs", the fewer Afghans there are the better our chances of success.......
We, the American People, have lost the moral leadership we once had. With the Bush Administration now speeding up the process of Iraqi Immigration into the United States, we, in the United States, will be having to deal with terrorist acts of revenge. "A terorist is an individual who is willing to commit an act of violence out of anger, hate, or revenge and is willing to die in that act.
None of those 90 Afghan Civilians deserved to be murdered....they were just poor people living in a poor land. Shame on us again.........
"I just wonder sometimes how the guys that fly these aircraft can justify their actions"
From where they sit it's just another video game. Killing people ain't so bad when their blood isn't splattering all over you.
Remember the "highway of death" in the first Gulf War? It was the road from Kuwait back to Iraq. US planes bombed and strafed (and killed!) thousands of RETREATING Iraqis, as well as an untold number of civilians. My most vivid memory of the accounts of that slaughter was how some of the US pilots were complaining that they couldn't reload their guns quickly enough to enjoy more killing.
Just another video game!
WSWS ORG
i noticed that too. it would be good to see it back on the home page.........
If we were truly a nation of conscience, someone at the democratic convention would ask for a moment of silence. In that silence the screams of the mother's agony would fill the Pepsi Center. Tears of shame and sadness would flow from all eyes and a vow taken to stop this insanity.
It won't happen. War rhetoric will be top priority, not necessarily the kind we are used to from the last 7 years but it's there, must not show weakness, must stay on war footing, "More troops in Afghanistan", hooray for Obama.
A moment of silence would mean that Michelle Obama would have to spend an entire minute without talking or making her shrill, cackling noises. It ain't gonna happen!
Two more things:
Thing Four: It obviously goes without saying, the US empire and ALL apologists are SO BANKRUPT - slaughtering children... how do any of us sleep, how do we not rise up and stop the machine?
Thing Five: So what are we going to do about it? Rise up and stop the machine?
Just three things:
Thing One: i love the Common Dreams community! Thanks to so many... and thanks to Craig for listening and adjusting the changes in the comments area.
Thing Two: i love Cindy Sheehan! Who else among candidates is mixing it up with the people?
Thing Three: i probably shouldn't say it - (okay i won't even name names) but certain apologists for Obama are getting very tired...
Empire's collateral damage. Do the pilot's, knowing what they've done, go to sleep thinking of their own children? or their younger brothers and sisters, safe at home after a fun day with friends at the local playground? Do they wonder if maybe tomorrow they will have better luck and hit the real target? By the way? they may wonder, what exactly is our target? Hmmm, well it's all in a days bombing run. Good night Chuck, see you tomorrow. Hey, that was damn good wine tonight wasn't it? Yeah, but I don't feel so good. Come on Chuck, you can't let it get to you, it's our job to defend our country from those terrorists, the kids just got in the way. I guess you're right. Good night.
One would think that someone as obviously bright and thoughtful as Obama would realize that this sort of thing recruits Taliban, al Qaeda and other extremists and diminishes our standing and moral authority in the world. We are not defeating the terrorists, but ourselves. In fact, we become terrorists.
Alex
Obama realizes what his puppet-masters tell him to realize.
Life is beautiful, a look at the liberation of Iraq. Now playing in a country close to you.
http://www.wordsareimportant.com/lifeisbeautiful.htm
It's all the reason I need to not vote for either of the two "mainstream" candidates, both of whom support these atrocities. But what Good Germans we live among! My neighbor informed me today that she was going to vote for Obama because her concerns were much larger than the war, she said. Much larger than the massacre of innocents, she means. Interesting. If I see one more essay from one more liberal historian pondering the "puzzle" of how politicians like Hitler ever came to power in Germany, I think I'm going to throw up. The late Aime Cesaire answered their question in his "Discourse on Colonialism" over fifty years ago, if they ever take time to examine what was said.
We are responsible for these crimes as if we had done them ourselves. We have for too long sat outside and done nothing to demand the end to war. And now we say. "Oh, please Mr. Obama end the war for me." We need to make him do it. We need to organize, organize, and organize to end OUR wars.
Note the military bases: Empire's Military Bases Map
http://www.motherjones.com/military-maps/
We can no longer just blame Bush and the neo-cons.
"Hey, ho let's go."
marc
"The U.S. military has launched an investigation into the incident, after first saying it was unaware of any civilian casualties in what it said was an air strike on a known Taliban commander..."
A sensible military doesn't air strike one Taliban commander whenever he's in the midst of others, unless they're intended targets, also.
What a dumb admission to overkill and poor judgement in tactical force.
This kind thing happens regularly in Afghanistan, and Iraq,and our military leaders know it. It's only, rarely that it's reported,then it's the same old crap over,and over
WE'LL INVESTIGATE, INVESTIGATE? what a joke,sounds like something the moron in the White House would say
Google the image of Ali Hussein. That's what bombing does. That is just one child in one place. And it happens everywhere.
McCain was bombing Vietnamese civilians from the anonymous air the same way when he was shot down. Remind people of that when they call him a war hero. Now he wants us to shatter people for 100 more years.
Obama wants to send more troops to Afghanistan. Why? They will not speak the language nor know who is who. Nobody will help the troops. They will be far away from home and hated. There will be more Ali Husseins and more Casey Sheehans.
Who cares that the candidates love their own children.
Joe
McCain says al-Queda is slipping into Iran, as in "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran."
McCain says he will stay in Iraq for "One Hundred Years. A Thousand."
And he has promised to turn up the heat in Afghanistan as well.
Together, these three promises, this rain of bombs will mean countless more lives lost, more dead children, than Obama's promise to send more troops to Afghanistan, wrong as that may be.
Also, clearly, only Obama's insistence on a withdrawal timetable for American troops in Iraq has shifted the discussion to the left. Now even the BUSH gangsters discuss it.
No to World War Three in November.
Has anyone pointed out to McCain that AQ and the Iranians are bitter enemies? If AQ is slipping into Iran it seems that would be a good thing from McCain's point of view. The Iranians would make mince meat out of them.
BTW, I heard the other day that the Beach Boys (what's left of them) are taking time off from playing county fairs in the midwest to make an appearance at the Republican convention. I wonder if they'll play backup while McCain sings his stupid "bomb-bomb-bomb" song.
In the meantime AT&T is giving Democrats a party to celebrate the carnage.
Americans sure know how to party YAY.
Politicians all too often live in a cloud of puff. Does anyone still think that George W. Bush ever knew what he was doing?
One would hope that such people might, through residual decency or the law of opposites or a remembered moment of sanity in a classroom some place, recognize reality when it is thrust under their nose (the only way they can get some since they never would pro-actively look for it).
John McCain has suffered from melanoma. And so has the United States, in Iraq. Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan are four cancerous or pre-cancerous situations for the United States-- with each one offering a way of cheapening life here.
We need to excise our extraneous growths and treat the main organism (The United States at home).
*
The gratuitous killing of these 90 people is entirely consistent with what the Winter Soldiers told us-- with "us" being those Americans who chose to listen to them (not the New York Times for instance).
Let's hear the following dialogue happen:
Reporter: Senator McCain, I heard that we've blown up four wedding parties in Afghanistan. How many wedding parties blown up would be acceptable in a given year?
McCain: None
Reporter: Senator Obama, on the same subject, what evidence is there that we know what we are doing in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Iran, and that we have ever known what we were doing there?
I'll let Barack Obama answer that one himself.
*
I think I placed the previous dialogue at John Escher's blog on the Obama website, so you know where my sympathies lie. I am a person who is simultaneously delighted at the prospect of a black president and at Michelle Obama's speech and at every single opportunity for uplift at the Democratic Convention now going on.
And who is simultaneously horrified by news stories such as this and the white
supremacist who allegedly just said that he and his buddies planned to shoot Barack on Thursday.
It used to take me all of Sunday morning to read the New York Times. This past
Sunday it took the whole morning just to read "The News of the Week in Review."
There is simply too much news right now-- more than any one person can assimilate. This is one reason the talking heads in the media sound asinine without fail. They talk before they assimilate. And may have a plan never to assimilate.
This is what I fear of our politicians as well. The Convention is going on but a story such as this one-- about 90 Afghans just gratuitously killed by us with
sixty of them children-- should be even bigger.
Common Dreams is correct to give it its position of prominence. What can anyone do, however, to deal with so many Americans whose humanity has become diminished? Even a white supremacist, I should think, would be happy if his energy didn't cost so much.
The picture accompanying this report looks like it should be on the front page of National Geographic. The story is about a massive bombing, we get pictures of a quaint extended family... Vietnam dissolved when? When pictures of what was actually happening there came here. Moveon, Commondreams, whatever supposed alternative news source are all fronts servant to fascism. They sanitize the news to pointlessness. Would it be hard to convert a war supporter or even a tepid war resistor to a staunch war resistor if there were a picture of the 60 mangled children strewn in the rubble that was their homes...?
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Cindy has it exactly right!
Amazing the juxtaposition of narratives. Last night I heard Michelle Obama lovingly refer to her children as the focus of her life. No doubt the 'true believers' ate it up and weeped into their shirt sleeves. But against the backdrop of the latest report of civilian depths at the hands of US militarism, and the antiseptic coverage and reporting, and further, that Obama seeks to perpetuate US actions in the Afgan Republic with little or no regard for the lives of non combatants. It makes his own narrative of family disingenuous and appalling!
The people of the US will not rise in protest at these murders. We will eat, drink and be merry because we only care about how we feel not how anybody else feels. Not my problem. I don't give a damn. Give me another beer. The people are the problem and their elected representatives accurately reflect the state of mind of the people. lizard
Bush was convicted by a war crimes tribunal in Tokyo in 2003. He was convicted of war crimes in Afghanistan. The conviction has no teeth because the US is rogue against international law.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/TOK403A.html
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
&YYY&
So who are the masters of terror,so look who spreads death with no error.
Bombs and missiles sent deliberate and sure, are for the end of terror certainly no cure.
Look who is spending billions and lives, on gambling, losing health, for oil and hated lies.
Why do you blast, poison and torture ignorant Afghani children, and still hope to improve how the world is run.
I think Cindy Sheehan is much more intelligent than these unsophisticated
post that has her name attached to it
Well, Sambo, I'm not sure if your comment even qualifies as a left-handed compliment-- because the reason "these unsophisticated post... has her name attached to it" is because it (they?) were in fact WRITTEN by the much more intelligent Cindy Sheehan!
unh huh
ezeflyer,
I've heard that one before.
But McCain has not suggested attacking anywhere that Obama hasn't also suggested attacking. I think you are aware of that.
How about a real answer?
Cindy -- "and I don't think McCain would be any better or worse in militarism than Obama...."
Cindy I totally support you against Pelosi and even plan on helping out your campaign. However, the above statement is a stretch. Everything is relative. The argument that everyone who falls in between the wide chasm of Gandhi and Hitler is somehow the same amorphous mass with identical politics is ridiculous to say the least. McCain is definitely more prone to use force and is a warmongerer. I do think Obama is less likely to start a war and I think his focus would probably be more towards the economy at large. I do think he has moved waaaay too much to the right and I dont plan on voting for him.
ezeflyer,
Why do you support Sheehan over Pelosi, but not McKinney over Obama?
Because McCain will kill us all and destroy the world. Obama won't.
Note carefully how this is just asserted. There are no facts or statements to back it up.
Obama promises to massively increase the defense budget. He's promising to add troops to the Army and Marines. He's promising big increasing in spending for equipment and training.
Obama promised during the debates that we'd be in Iraq at the end of his first term. Obama's withdrawal plan is basically the same that Bush is negotiating with his Iraqi puppet. Obama has promised to expand the war to Pakistan. Obama is promising to send more troops to Afghanistan. Obama was right with McCain when talking about the Georgia crisis.
On his recent trip to pay homage to Israel, just like Bush and McCain, Obama promised the Israelis that the only talking he'd do with Iran would be to deliver an ultimatum. Then he said that after that, it would be appropriate for military strikes to begin. Essentially, Obama promised the Israelis to 'negotiate' just like Bush and to attack Iran if Bush doesn't.
So, note carefully how the Democrats just put this sort of bull out as a flat assertion. Nothing to back it up. Because if you know the facts, there is nothing to back it up. Its just political bull.
Obama will follow exactly the same policy as McCain. And if you actually listen to what Obama says, he's telling the world that all the time.
Unless crowded by circumstances, that is.
Careful, eze. If you start suggesting we vote for McKinney instead of Obama, certain people will say you're a racist.
Let's be honest these fascist oil-thirsty jack-asses (a.k.a. US government) don't give a rat's ass about these people. Hell they don't even care about their own people. Look around you. I live in Seattle. The homeless are erecting a Hoover ville-like place and naming it after Seattle Mayor Greg Nickel, Nicklesville. It's starts locally and ripples out from there in ever bigger and meaner circles.
Nicklesville, I love it! San Francisco was flirting with naming a sewage treatment plant after the decider. I don't know if they followed through or not. We need more stuff like this!
Dave
http://daveeriqat.wordpress.com/
It's great on one level and very freaking sad on another. Checked your link out. Love the quote from Kung Fu.
Sad, I agree. But when the situation becomes as outrageous as it's become of late, what can you do but laugh or cry? The former is easier for me.
Dave
http://daveeriqat.wordpress.com/
A few days ago there was a link at the top of Common Dream's homepage solicting feedback regarding the "changes" CD managemnt has made regarding posted comments in these discussion groups.
The link was down two or three days, now it isn't there.
Is CD management no longer interested in reader feedback regarding their changes?
W S W S,
Here you go http://www.commondreams.org/home-page-new-cms-announcement
Namaste
Are the conventions having roast baby bar-b-ques?
Children died, America lied.
If at first we don't decieve then lie, lie again, eh?
Just stop complaining and vote for Obama. When it comes to Afghanistan, he's going to "finish the job" (whatever that means).
finish the job
final solution
we know what that means.
Cindy_Sheehan August 26th, 2008 1:56 pm said:
"These are the evil things that Obama and the corporate dems want to perpetuate and escalate in Afghanistan.
It is truly sickening and tragic!"
Not to let the corporate dems off the hook, let's not forget the Repugs and neocons who started it and want to keep doing it for 100 years (Bomb McCain), or forever (Cheney the dick).
Obama is willing to talk to our "enemies", something the war profiteering Repug corporate oligarchy will not do.
Just as negative campaigning wins the sheeple's votes, so evidently does a little saber rattling prior to an election.
That said, you are a brave, exemplary person that deserves our respect. More than that, you deserve Pelosi's seat.
Excuse me, but could you please try to keep your facts straight.
For instance, please cite for me the names of all the Democrats who voted against the attack on Afghanistan. Take a really deep breath, because you are going to need all that air in your lungs to cite this really long list consisting of .....
Rep. Barbara Lee.
That's it. The only damn Democrat that opposed this war. Most the Democrats have been jumping up and down supporting this war. This is Obama's 'good war'. This is the war the Democratic Presidential candidate calls 'the right war.' When Obama does his fake 'withdrawal' from Iraq, this is where he's sending the troops.
So, please cut out the propaganda bull that pretends that this is all the fault of the 'neocons' and the 'Republicans'.
And have you heard Obama lately. That talk to our enemies line is old. Its long been replaced by the new Obama line. That is he won't talk to Cuba without lots of neocon preconditions set by his South Florida Cuban friends being met. This is the classic way in diplomacy to say you'll talk when not really planning all talking. And during his last trip to pay homage to Israel, Obama said that he'd only talk to the Iranians to deliver an ultimatum. Then, just in the fine tradition of Obama\Bush\McCain\Clinton\Bush\Reagan, the bombing can begin.
A new phrase in the Obama talking points is how he will end the war(s) "responsibly". I heard it in Michelle's speech the other night and Clinton's last night. It worries me that they have brought this adverb into their rhetoric. It gives them a lot of wiggle room to find ways to keep the wars going and their corporate contributors well-situated on the gravy train.
Hi Cindy,
I'm wondering if you've heard of:
thermal depolymerization (a process to recycle literally anything)
wave energy (electrical generator based on the motion of ocean waves)
regenerative medicine (use of adult stem cells to cure VERY many diseases)
chelation (medical process that removes heavy metals from people)
oxidative medicine (medical process that is capable of destroying all foreign lifeforms that might parasite the human body)
skyscraper wind turbine (my own invention, a steel skyscraper screened instead of windowed with paddle boat style turbines from top to about the 5th floor)
direct democracy (the whole of the body politic voting on the laws, rather than voting for what criminal to bow down to)
calorie economics (another of my inventions, a total rework of the world economy to where cash is meaningless and calorie expenditure toward democratically agreed on economic purpose is how one acquires consumables)
Your thoughts?
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Hey Ezeflyer
I have been a devout critic of the republicans...and I don't think McCain would be any better or worse in militarism than Obama....
I am here in Denver and this is a city that is under martial law, in reality...the police state of the federal government is supported by the Democrats. But we know that the Democrats don't support the Constitution and our rights.
Many people believe that the Dems are any better than the repugs, but in truth, they are both war parties.
I do support and will vote for Cynthia McKinney, i am not going to vote for anyone who supports killing Afghan children (or Pakistanis or Iranians or Iraqis or American). I don't care if it is McCain or Obama.
Love
Cindy
Hey Cindy;
I'm a Green who voted for Nader.
I love you. But to lump regressive Dems in with progressive ones by condemning ALL Dems is a tactical mistake that favors the Republican monster and punishes progressive Dems.
Instead of condemning the entire Dem Party, I think Greens and Indys could form alliances with progressive Dems that would further the interests of both.
Knowing Obama as I do by reading his books, I'm sure he would be receptive to such an offer coming from you.
He has said he would talk to opponents. Maybe you can take him at his word and hold his feet to the fire.
wrong.
This comment makes the mistake of assuming the Democratic party is a democracy. It is plainly not. The decisions are made at the top and passed down. Policy is set at the top, and passed down. In order for anyone to reach a top position, they have to agree to push this same agenda. Just like Pelosi and Obey and Conyers have all done.
What exactly are these 'progressive Dems' you are talking about? I just heard Cindy Sheehan speak here in Denver last night. She was speaking with Cynthia McKinney, who was run out of the Democratic Party for being a 'progressive Dem'. They just tried to do the same thing to Kucinich this last time around. Suddenly he was facing a well-funded and backed primary challenger. That's the Democratic party you serve so well, and they obviously hate the few progressive Dems left in the party and they are trying to drive them out.
And just what is this little alliance supposed to do. Compete in the money-drenched and rigged Democratic primaries on the Diebold voting machines. That's plainly a rigged game that can't be won. Anyone who watched Kucinich standing on the side of the stage for a half hour or so before being allowed to speak a 'debate' could see that.
If you become a Democrat these days, you vow to support awful policies set at the top that you have no say in. Pelosi and Reid and Obama and the rest aren't listening to the grass roots dems. If they are at all, its only to figure out how to lie to them to get their votes like Obama just did in the primaries.
The lower levels of the Democratic party have no say in policy. How many local groups have passed resolutions calling for impeachment? How many local groups of Democrats have passed resolutions calling for the end of the Iraq war? I'm not sure I've ever heard the top of the Democratic party even acknowledge these.
Its a waste of time. Cindy's got it right. Get out of that diseased and corrupt party and run as an independent (or Green) against them.
Dear eze,
I apologize...I usually say "Democratic leadership" or "Corporate dems."
MOST grassroot's Democrats are wonderful people who don't support Obama's militarism and voting to abolish our 4th amendment.
AND Obama has suggested increasing the size of the military by 92,000 troops and sending more troops to Afghanistan to fight the "real war on terror."
He's not taking any "options" off the table for Iran and has been aggressive towards Pakistan and South America...particularly Venezuela.
I am not exaggerating his militarism and he picked a major Iraq war supporter/militarist: Biden as his running mate.
I am not suggesting anyone not vote for your choice of candidates, but please give me the right to vote for my choice: Cynthia McKinney. I am making a very informed decision. VERY informed, so please vote for whomever you like, and I'll do the same.
All I am saying, is that I am not for killing anyone's children...
Love
Cindy
www.CindyforCongress.org
Dear Cindy,
Since every word a candidate utters is under scrutiny I guess you didn't need mine. Sorry about that.
I'm a veteran and support Obama, like the troops do six to one according to a Huffpost article.
Having 92,000 more troops if it gets rid of many more mercenaries and military contractors that are doing the job of our troops is a bargain compared to what these war profiteers are charging the US taxpayer.
And nothing prevents war as well as a military draft, or having a child in the military as you well know.
Switzerland and other countries have compulsory military service and haven't killed anyone, so having an army does not mean they will.
We go to war by order of the commander in chief (or moron in chief here). Soldiers know better than most what a good commander is. They used to frag bad commanders in Vietnam.
I don't care for Biden either. Seems he had to pick an attack dog because McCain was ahead in the polls due to Obama's refusal to go negative.
BTW, I thought Michelle Obama was brilliant last nite.
"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometime, you just might find, you get what you need".
The Rolling Stones
Funny that you had not one progressive democrat to list as falling prey to Cindy's worldly take on the present vast corruption.
Funny also that you're fooled by lawyer controlled Nader. If Nader was very interested in seeing reform, why would he run against a Green, thereby splitting the Green vote. Rather than dedicating much effort to seeing the Green Party candidate elected...?
http://vdare.com/pb/nader.htm
Read that link to find out who owns Nader, the richest lawyers on the planet...
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Nader won the popular vote in the Green Party primaries. He decided to withdraw from (was forced out of) the nomination process by "Demo-greens" and ACTUAL REGISTERED DEMOCRATS (read Josh Frank's articles on CounterPunch for more on this) within the Green Party hierarchy as well as the unequal weight given to smaller state Green parties due to the ridiculous "consensus" process we employ. I was supposed to be a Nader delegate to the GP convention and I saw the party almost destroyed by the petty infighting and the unfathomable unwillingness to actually mount a serious campaign (the decision to hold the nominating convention so late in the election season was only one example). One high-ranking Green was actually quoted as saying that he didn't join the Green Party to fight with the Democrats! What does that tell you? The ridiculous and anti-democratic "consensus" process shows the party's hypocrisy when it claims to stand for Grassroots Democracy. Most of the party founders and high-profile Greens (including Matt Gonzalez, his running mate) support Nader, even if Cynthia McKinney is a fine candidate. It is not Nader who is splitting the green vote. He won the primary. He should have been the nominee. Many of us who watched the meltdown from the inside would disagree with your characterization of Nader entirely. Ralph Nader has done more to build the Green Party--and raised more money for it--than anyone else and we Greens, as a group, acted like spoiled children and pushed him out, forcing him to run as an independent. And by the way, Ralph Nader IS independent and the idea that anyone "controls" him is simply ludicrous! Anyone who has ever met him or worked with him--even his detractors--would laugh out loud at such an assertion.
I'm confused ezeyflyer. You state you support Ms. Sheehan for running against Pelosi, yet Obama and Pelosi are on the same page on many of the issues.
And you put down comments that support third party candidates who support many of the same issues as Cindy Sheehan. Not to speak for her, but I think that Cindy is closer to Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader's positions on what needs to be done to correct the injustices; where Obama is an enabler of those injustices ie: Funding of the war, FISA, death penalty, lack of universal health care, increasing military spending etc.
And no one who is attacking Obama for his positions would support McCain (except for some of the Hillary supporters). That may be an irrational justification for you to be able to dismiss those criticisms from people who you don't agree with, but it is not valid. Some people see beyond the Obama hype and realize that what he offers will not be a solution. In fact, it makes it more difficult to reach the solution when you have someone who you think in on your team quietly working with the other team to make you lose.
Fish stinks from the head down. Both the democratic party and republican party will always put corporate concerns (profits) ahead of peace and justice. The innocents are dying everyday as a result of the way our society conducts business. This bombing is not the exception.
Why is it that 'fringe' candidates are the only ones speaking up for the innocents? Why is it just the 'fringe' contingent, the ones who actively oppose the war and fight for justice, are the only ones that stand up against the status quo?
I'm not sure why, but that is the way it has always been. And until the peace and justice movement is more than just a fringe element, the bombings of children and the injustices are going to continue. The first step is to stop supporting corporate candidates like Obama and the democratic party leadership.
Now we have a taste of the war heroism that McCain inflicted upon the Vietnamese during his heroic tour of duty.
Is anybody surprised by this? The surprise is that we heard about it at all.
By the way, brilliant comments so far mi gente!
Tex Shelters
texshelters.com
myspace.com/texshelters
Nice job, America! Now the pilots who dropped those bombs can go back to their base and thump their chests and high-five each other. Maybe President Bozo can fly over the carnage for a photo op that can be aired on Fox.
Breaking News:
The Neanderthals in the White House are not really that stupid.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080826/ts_afp/scienceresearchneanderthalbritainus
Nice find, fun article.
About it I must say, humans likely extincted Neanderthal not merely by having better tools but by planning and organization. IF Neanderthals say "Hey lets take these tools and go hunt some food and kill any human that stands in our way..." while humans of the same period say "Hey, lets organize to decimate the Neanderthals." the Neanderthals would widely fall prey to people. So it's not a matter of having much better tools, but using them intently to dispatch their competitors. Other threats to humanity that went extinct at about the same time: the short face beer, a 20 foot lizard in Australia, a 30 foot sloth in South America, the Mammoth, the saber tooth tiger... Now people are extincting frogs, polar bears, sharks, bees, bananas even!
So, there's evidence that humanity played some part in the extinction of Neanderthal. There are no other Earth beings that have ever been implicated in an extinction. Apart from people extincting beings every other extinction has been the result of a high impact collision.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Dear Reuters,
Would you please stop distracting us with bad news from Afghanistan? We're trying to decide on the next Ruler of the World here.
Sincerely,
The Privileged
These are the evil things that Obama and the corporate dems want to perpetuate and escalate in Afghanistan.
It is truly sickening and tragic!
Cindy
www.CindyforCongress.org
Exactly. My first thought was, "Hey, this is supposed to be the 'Good War'!"
US proudly bringing freedom to Afghans (from the Taliban)
By killing all of them nobody left to enjoy the freedom.
There was less killing under Taliban who were supposed to be brutal
Move along......nothing here......just the evil NeoCons with
the continuation of the War on Terror scam. Wake UP America!
Lets torch the village to 'save' it. We are the greatest perpetrators of violence in the world without doubt. We make Osama look like a saint. Like the poster above said ... imagine if someone dropped a 500 pound bomb and blew up 50 white kids (American or otherwise) ...
"Where is the Hague?"
If I remember correctly, the USA doesn't recognise the authority of the International Criminal Court in the Hague. Now why d'you think that might be?
Rah, rah! Support those troops! I wonder how those pilots would feel if someone else's pilots dropped bombs on their children.
Dave
http://daveeriqat.wordpress.com/
One of the best bumper stickers ever: "I support Patrio-Fascist Groupthink"
Thank you CD for giving us a couple of days respite from Bush/McCain enablers and shills.
Yes, please vote Democrat to make sure this sort of slaughter can continue.
After all, Obama is promising to EXPAND the war in Afghanistan. So, you can count on many, many more dead children if you vote Democrat.
Of course, a Democrat just plugs their fingers into their ears and shouts 'NAH-NAH-NAH-NAH-NAH', because they don't want to realize this little bit of truth. They screech that anyone who doesn't support thier choice for new baby-killer-in-chief must be a 'McCain enabler.'
What nonsense. And can't people see just how desperate the Democrats are becoming to fool people into voting for their pro-war candidate.
Can't people see the way Democrats want to shut down dissent? Whether its on a bulletin board where they don't want people to be able to comment on their propaganda, or whether its in the streets of Denver, can't people see that the Democrats are just as hateful and intolerant as the Republicans?
"There must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has and it never will."-- Frederick Douglass 1857
"Cowardice asks the question - is it safe? Expediency asks the question - is it politic? Vanity asks the question - is it popular? But conscience asks the question - is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular; but one must take it because it is right."-- Martin Luther King, Jr.
Vote third party, green party, but don't support the corporate candidates that will always act on the corporate elites concerns first and foremost, just like Obama will. The corporate elite want us to go along with either Obama or McCain. And those who are willing are just making it easier for the corporate elite to get their way.
Those that ask, why didn't Nader work with the Green Party should instead be asking why didn't the Democratic Party Leadership work with the pro-peace progressives, the universal health care progressives, the FISA and pro liberty progressives?
"The U.S. military has launched an investigation into the incident."
I wonder what the fox will find in the hen house? Why don't we have the US military also investigate if the Iraq War was legal and justified? I'm sure their military intellegence (oxymoron) will show that they thought terrorists, Taliban, insurgents, combatants, etc were present and they just placed children there as shields. Just more murder of innocent civilians. Where is the Hague? How many more blatant war crimes can be committed before something is done and someone is held responsible? Why is everyone mute except a few of us?
I think probably the few of us have yet to effectively push this heinous reality we're suffering into the faces of the consumers around us.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Well, yes, "pro-life" when it comes to microscopic groups of cells in a woman's uterus. Pro-DEATH when it comes to wasting insignificant, worthless, invisible sand-nigger children on the other side of the world in some back-woods village. The hypocrisy of the Rethuglicans knows no limits. This is yet another of thousands of examples of U.S. greed, evil, disregard for the rules of war as outlined in the UN Charter and Geneva Conventions (Targeting anything other than military targets is against the law), and hubris.
The biggest terrorist threat in the world today is the United States of America.
"The only thing required for evil to flourish is that good men do nothing."
This administration and most repugs say they are pro-life but they are really "pro-birth." After a child is born, it seems they are on their own. We should always call them pro-birthers instead of pro-lifers - tell it like it is.
Actually they're pretty much all anti-woman. "Freedom" in the hands of women is scary to them.
One of our leadership's main claims is that they're "pro-life," when incidents like this plainly show what murdering devils they really are.
7-8 houses completly destroyed for one "known taliban commander" There is NO WAY to explain this away. Thanks to th U N Special Envoy.