Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
More Troops in Afghanistan, More Troop Deaths in Afghanistan
Fourteen Americans Dead as Helicopters Crash in Afghan Raids
Fourteen Americans have died in Afghanistan in a bloody night for the US, when one helicopter came down under heavy fire and two more collided in mid air.
A UH-47 Chinook helicopter is one of the types used by American troops in Afghanistan
(David Furst/AFP/Getty Images)
Seven soldiers and three civilians were killed in the first incident, moments
after their helicopter took off after extracting soldiers from a daring raid
against one of the region's most wanted drugs smugglers.
A military spokesman confirmed that the US civilians were with "other government agencies".
Elite US troops had launched a pre-dawn, airborne assault against a compound
in western Afghanistan, believed to harbour insurgents linked to the
multi-billion dollar opium trade.
During the operation, insurgent forces engaged the joint force and more
than a dozen enemy fighters were killed in the ensuing fire fight," a
military spokesman said.
"As the joint force was departing the area, one helicopter went down due to unconfirmed reasons. Military casualties are reported and a recovery operation is under way."
A further 26 people, mainly Afghan and US troops, were injured in the crash. Rescue operations have been launched, and details of the units and the types of helicopters involved have been withheld until they are complete.
Senior Afghan generals said that special forces were involved in the raid, in Darpum district of Badghis province in western Afghanistan.
A spokesman for the Taleban claimed responsibility. Qari Yousuf Ahmadi said: "There was fighting in the bazaar between foreign troops and the Taleban. During the fighting the Taleban shot down a foreign helicopter."
But Nato’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said in a statement that the reasons for the crash were still being investigated, and added: "The cause is not believed to be from enemy action."
"Seven US service members and three US civilians were killed," the ISAF statement said.
"Those injured include 14 Afghan service members, 11 US service members and one US civilian."
Meanwhile four US troops died and two were injured in a mid-air heliopter collision in the south of the country.
Col Wayne Shanks, a US military spokesman, said that the military had ruled out hostile fire. He said the injured had been evacuated to hospitals inside Afghanistan.
2009 has been the deadliest year for international forces since the 2001 invasion. The death toll was highest around the presidential vote in August, when 51 US soldiers died.
With more than 30 American troops killed so far in October, this morning's deaths bring the toll to in excess of 44.
Both southern and western Afghanistan have seen a surge of US troops.
- Posted in
18 Comments so far
Show AllLet me unequivocally state that it is a fantastic landmark that the voters elected a black president. That can never be erased. Unfortunately the voters elected a man who should not be in the White House but in a House of Worship because he is a fine preacher but a lousy politician. Apparently many voters fell for the preaching and ignored Obama’s stated intention to escalate the American crusades in Afghanistan and, if necessary, in Pakistan. Our crusades, which still include Iraq, are high wire acts which mean that the CIC/Pentagon must keep moving forward or backward or risk falling into the safety net if there is one. When President Obama declared that our crusade in Afghanistan is not one of “choice but of necessity”, which was consistent with his crippled thinking during the campaigns (and, by-the-way, his earlier published interview in the Chicago Tribune), I wrote that he had dug himself into a deep hole. If, as he believed, it is a necessity one must do everything “necessary” to win. The new “necessary” mantra is counter-insurgency which our Preacher-in-Chief or his brass will try to sell to the American people. I suddenly realized that some other ruler had once assumed that war was not a choice but a necessity and had tried counter-insurgency of the worst kind. Guess who. George III!
In my humble opinion, "More troops in Afghanistan, more Troop deaths in Afghanistan" should have read "More troops in Afghanistan, more profits for the US Military/Industrial Complex."
People dying in war is apparently acceptable while not making a profit from war is not. Why aren't military contractors non-profit entities? Making huge profits off of peoples misery whether war, (Military contractors) or sickness, (Insurance companies) seems pretty unseemly to me.
Why are we in Afghanistan? To combat the opium trade?
I thought that the decision had been made to no longer criminalize opium growing and instead accept it for useful legitimate purposes, such as for medicine.
I guess there's no profit in that; neither for those who get the kickbacks nor for those who profit from the war machine.
Why are we in Afghanistan?
To combat the opium trade? That should read 'to ensure' the opium trade.
With so many of our children coming home Hooked on Heroin
the corporations that sent them there want the business.
With so many of our children coming home Hooked on Heroin
the corporations that sent them there want the business.
Into the valley of death rode the six hundred. More cannon fodder for a less than noble cause as the Afghans defend their country against their occupiers. In a just and an ideal world, resistance forces would be flying in all over the world to assist the Afghans in their fight against the Americans. But in today's upside down world, the Americans are seen as the good guys. As the medical officer stated at the end of the classic film Bridge on the River Kwai, Madness!
Where have all the flowers gone? Where have all the soldiers gone? When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn? I wish I could answer that question.But it seems to me, not until the majority of Americans wake up and realize that they have been duped and conned into believing that the American military exists to protect the average American John Doe against all the ism's. For example: Why was the Castro government so demonized as being a regime dedicated to communism? It would not matter what ism one used, Castro was not a U.S. puppet and would have been demonized, no matter what form of government you call it as he was demonized as a "bad guy" and a threat for one reason and one reason only: he cost the wealthy,elite, shadow government that really are in control in this country $$$$$$$$$$$$$!
I can not help but notice how quickly the Pentagon tries to discredit any suggestion that a helicopter is downed due to "enemy fire".
They are as quick to deny this as they are to deny that there any Civilian casualties after an air strike.
This all speaks to how they seek to control the message and ensure THEIR version of events the one accepted by the Public. This suggests that they ARE concerned about growing Public opposition to the war.
The Rothschild, J.P. Morgan, Rockefeller strategy is the tougher they make it for young people, the more cannon fodder will enlist for their war-profiteering and Zionist wars.
No wait- "a daring raid against " a...what? a DRUG SMUGGLER?! what the f is going on here? is the "war on terror" now morphing into that spectacularly successful war on drugs? brilliant idea if true. what better model for an endless war?
Neat comment. In the big picture, is it inconceivable that the Americans were not given a slice of the profits? Think of it. After all, the production of opium was originally encouraged in the area by, amongst others, the Americans. The signs are Americans have not changed.
The single word that sums up the totality of American action now is ABSURD and the world out here is filled with dark laughter. Nobody is gleeful. It is a sad business.
Until someone can give good reason why America is there, it is simply not extreme to assert that every Afghan death at the hands of Americans is a murder and every single American who kills an Afghan is a murderer and finally that only the murderer's families justifiably worry about Americans dying, but then they should have been worried about themselves a long time ago.
I only worry about the people Americans kill. If it takes massive American casualties everywhere to send the American home then so be it. They can take their guns and their body armour and their drones and all the rest of the trash. There is plenty of evil to kill there.
I am not Islamic. America is Godzilla.
Soon President Obama will decide whether to send as many as 60,000 additional U.S. soldiers to the war in Afghanistan.
Let's urge Obama to live up to his 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. Tell him to withdraw troops from Afghanistan -- not send more:
http://bit.ly/noafghansurge
"More Troops in Pipelinestan, More Troop Deaths in Pipelinestan"
Well duhh! This is like saying "the longer the sun is out the warmer it gets".
Poet
What else would anybody expect from the United States of Amnesia? They can't even learn from their own lessons so it's not as if they're gonna learn from someone else's. Besides, even if the military gets its ass whooped big time and innocent civilians and American kids splatter their guts all over the ME, Lockheed Martin, et al. still make out like bandits.
The following article from Voice of Russia is based on an IHT article.
"US commander in Afghanistan asks NATO for more 85,000 troops"
by Voice of Russia, Oct 24, 2009
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15831
QUOTE:
The US military commander in Afghanistan General Stanley McChrystal had asked NATO leaders additional 85.000 soldiers in Afghanistan, the International Herald Tribune newspaper reported Saturday.
The relevant official request is under consideration by NATO now.
However the newspaper doubts that the General will receive this number of additional troops. According to newspaper, it is most likely that the additional contingent will amount to not more than 40 000 servicemen and the US will have to account for the biggest part of these troops.
END QUOTE
The generals will increase the number of troops requested . . . until the politicians refuse to send that number of troops.
Then the generals will blame the politicians for losing the war.
Andthe politicians will fire the generals--we couldn't make up stuff funnier than this reality.
Poet