3 US Soldiers Dead in Latest 'Green-on-Blue' Attack
Trend of Afghan soldiers killing US counterparts speaks to 'mission failure' in Afghanistan
Three US special forces soldiers were killed Friday when a man in Afghan uniform turned his weapon on them, the US military said, in the third so-called "green-on-blue" attack in less than a week.
Reports varied on the exact circumstances surrounding the killings, but the New York Times reports that "a man dressed as an Afghan police officer" killed the soldiers "after inviting them to eat dinner at a check post in southern Afghanistan." The Times, cited an Afghan official who said that attack appeared to be "a premeditated killing" by American soldiers by their Afghan allies.
"The police checkpost commander invited four foreign special forces soldiers to a (Ramadan) breakfast at 2:30 am in Sangin district," a senior security officer in the Helmand province told Agence France Presse, requesting anonymity.
"He later opened fire on the special forces soldiers, killing three and wounding another, and he managed to run away."
The latest deaths take the green-on-blue toll this year to around 33, in some 23 such incidents, according to an AFP tally.
This trend, according to foreign policy experts, has long been on the rise in Afghanistan, and the most recent incidents -- beyond the immediate loss of life -- speak to a US war strategy in tatters.
"In 2007-2008, there were only four green-on-blue attacks, resulting in four deaths," wrote Tom Engelhardt, editor of TomDispatch.com and a close observer and critic of US policy in Afghanistan, in a recent piece that looked specifically at the increase of green-on-blue attacks.
At first, Engelhardt writes, NATO officials explained away the phenomenon by claiming it was "Taliban infiltrators" who were to blame. As the assaults increased and evidence mounted that it was - at least in many cases - US trained Afghan troops behind the assaults, NATO's narrative became more untenable.
"In fact," he continued, "there is a striking pattern at work that should be front-page news here. Green-on-blue attacks have been countrywide, in areas of militant insurgency and not; they continue to escalate, and (as far as we can tell) are almost always committed by actual members of the Afghan military or police who have experienced the American project in their country in a particularly up-close and personal way."
Engelhardt, who argues that the US and NATO mission, in reality, "died in Afhanistan years ago," says the green-on-blue violence is virtually unprecedented in history, and that NATO officials, members of Congress, and the US media miss the message of this violence by ignoring its significance.
"What we're seeing in the most violent form imaginable is a sweeping message from our Afghan allies, the very security forces Washington plans to continue bolstering up long after the 2014 drawdown date for U.S. "combat forces" passes. To the extent that bullets can be translated into words, that message, uncompromising and bloody-minded, would be something like: your mission's failed, get out or die."
# # #
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Three US special forces soldiers were killed Friday when a man in Afghan uniform turned his weapon on them, the US military said, in the third so-called "green-on-blue" attack in less than a week.
Reports varied on the exact circumstances surrounding the killings, but the New York Times reports that "a man dressed as an Afghan police officer" killed the soldiers "after inviting them to eat dinner at a check post in southern Afghanistan." The Times, cited an Afghan official who said that attack appeared to be "a premeditated killing" by American soldiers by their Afghan allies.
"The police checkpost commander invited four foreign special forces soldiers to a (Ramadan) breakfast at 2:30 am in Sangin district," a senior security officer in the Helmand province told Agence France Presse, requesting anonymity.
"He later opened fire on the special forces soldiers, killing three and wounding another, and he managed to run away."
The latest deaths take the green-on-blue toll this year to around 33, in some 23 such incidents, according to an AFP tally.
This trend, according to foreign policy experts, has long been on the rise in Afghanistan, and the most recent incidents -- beyond the immediate loss of life -- speak to a US war strategy in tatters.
"In 2007-2008, there were only four green-on-blue attacks, resulting in four deaths," wrote Tom Engelhardt, editor of TomDispatch.com and a close observer and critic of US policy in Afghanistan, in a recent piece that looked specifically at the increase of green-on-blue attacks.
At first, Engelhardt writes, NATO officials explained away the phenomenon by claiming it was "Taliban infiltrators" who were to blame. As the assaults increased and evidence mounted that it was - at least in many cases - US trained Afghan troops behind the assaults, NATO's narrative became more untenable.
"In fact," he continued, "there is a striking pattern at work that should be front-page news here. Green-on-blue attacks have been countrywide, in areas of militant insurgency and not; they continue to escalate, and (as far as we can tell) are almost always committed by actual members of the Afghan military or police who have experienced the American project in their country in a particularly up-close and personal way."
Engelhardt, who argues that the US and NATO mission, in reality, "died in Afhanistan years ago," says the green-on-blue violence is virtually unprecedented in history, and that NATO officials, members of Congress, and the US media miss the message of this violence by ignoring its significance.
"What we're seeing in the most violent form imaginable is a sweeping message from our Afghan allies, the very security forces Washington plans to continue bolstering up long after the 2014 drawdown date for U.S. "combat forces" passes. To the extent that bullets can be translated into words, that message, uncompromising and bloody-minded, would be something like: your mission's failed, get out or die."
# # #
Three US special forces soldiers were killed Friday when a man in Afghan uniform turned his weapon on them, the US military said, in the third so-called "green-on-blue" attack in less than a week.
Reports varied on the exact circumstances surrounding the killings, but the New York Times reports that "a man dressed as an Afghan police officer" killed the soldiers "after inviting them to eat dinner at a check post in southern Afghanistan." The Times, cited an Afghan official who said that attack appeared to be "a premeditated killing" by American soldiers by their Afghan allies.
"The police checkpost commander invited four foreign special forces soldiers to a (Ramadan) breakfast at 2:30 am in Sangin district," a senior security officer in the Helmand province told Agence France Presse, requesting anonymity.
"He later opened fire on the special forces soldiers, killing three and wounding another, and he managed to run away."
The latest deaths take the green-on-blue toll this year to around 33, in some 23 such incidents, according to an AFP tally.
This trend, according to foreign policy experts, has long been on the rise in Afghanistan, and the most recent incidents -- beyond the immediate loss of life -- speak to a US war strategy in tatters.
"In 2007-2008, there were only four green-on-blue attacks, resulting in four deaths," wrote Tom Engelhardt, editor of TomDispatch.com and a close observer and critic of US policy in Afghanistan, in a recent piece that looked specifically at the increase of green-on-blue attacks.
At first, Engelhardt writes, NATO officials explained away the phenomenon by claiming it was "Taliban infiltrators" who were to blame. As the assaults increased and evidence mounted that it was - at least in many cases - US trained Afghan troops behind the assaults, NATO's narrative became more untenable.
"In fact," he continued, "there is a striking pattern at work that should be front-page news here. Green-on-blue attacks have been countrywide, in areas of militant insurgency and not; they continue to escalate, and (as far as we can tell) are almost always committed by actual members of the Afghan military or police who have experienced the American project in their country in a particularly up-close and personal way."
Engelhardt, who argues that the US and NATO mission, in reality, "died in Afhanistan years ago," says the green-on-blue violence is virtually unprecedented in history, and that NATO officials, members of Congress, and the US media miss the message of this violence by ignoring its significance.
"What we're seeing in the most violent form imaginable is a sweeping message from our Afghan allies, the very security forces Washington plans to continue bolstering up long after the 2014 drawdown date for U.S. "combat forces" passes. To the extent that bullets can be translated into words, that message, uncompromising and bloody-minded, would be something like: your mission's failed, get out or die."
# # #