Jan 16, 2014
"Afghanistan for years demanded a complete halt in operations in villages but the Americans, contrary to mutual agreement ... once again resorted to bombing a residential area and killing civilians," Reutersreports Karzai as saying in a statement.
The Washington Postreports that
According to Karzai and the governor of Parwan province, the incident occurred about 1 a.m. when U.S. Special Forces attempted to enter a home. A gun battle ensued, resulting in a coalition airstrike that killed the children and a female relative in the house, they said.
The U.S./NATO-led Afghan Security Assistance Force (ISAF) released a statement saying that two civilians and "at least 10 insurgents" were killed "during a deliberately-planned, Afghan-led clearing operation to disrupt insurgent activity in Ghorband district, Parwan province."
According to ISAF's statement, the incident took place in
a high threat area with Taliban activity, some linked to the Haqqani network. The insurgents in this area enjoy freedom of movement allowing them to harass and threaten the local population as well as stage and facilitate attacks.[...]
While moving through Ghorband district, ANSF [Afghan National Security Forces] commandos and their coalition advisers came under heavy fire from insurgents, resulting in the death of one ISAF service member. The force required defensive air support to suppress the enemy fire from two compounds.
As Firedoglake's Kevin Gosztola asks: "If the Taliban targets were among a local population of civilians--and were known to "harass" them as ISAF indicated in the press release, what made any commanding officer think civilians would not be killed if they ordered an air strike on a compound?"
"ISAF regrets any civilian casualties and will continue working with our Afghan partners to determine all the facts surrounding this incident," ISAF's statement added.
The death of the civilians comes a week after U.S. Marines were accused of killing a four-year-old Afghan boy.
The U.S. occupation of Afghanistan, now in its 13th year, could extend another decade.
The U.S. has pressed Afghanistan to sign a bilateral security agreement which would allow extended U.S. military presence there, and even if the number of troops is reduced, critics charge it would mean continued war for the people of Afghanistan.
"Occupation is not defined by how many occupiers are policing someplace," Kimber Heinz of the War Resisters League previously told Common Dreams. "If you reduce the amount of occupation forces but keep them there forever, then the occupation continues and the war on people's everyday lives is not actually over -- no matter what the U.S. government or mainstream media tells us."
________________
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
"Afghanistan for years demanded a complete halt in operations in villages but the Americans, contrary to mutual agreement ... once again resorted to bombing a residential area and killing civilians," Reutersreports Karzai as saying in a statement.
The Washington Postreports that
According to Karzai and the governor of Parwan province, the incident occurred about 1 a.m. when U.S. Special Forces attempted to enter a home. A gun battle ensued, resulting in a coalition airstrike that killed the children and a female relative in the house, they said.
The U.S./NATO-led Afghan Security Assistance Force (ISAF) released a statement saying that two civilians and "at least 10 insurgents" were killed "during a deliberately-planned, Afghan-led clearing operation to disrupt insurgent activity in Ghorband district, Parwan province."
According to ISAF's statement, the incident took place in
a high threat area with Taliban activity, some linked to the Haqqani network. The insurgents in this area enjoy freedom of movement allowing them to harass and threaten the local population as well as stage and facilitate attacks.[...]
While moving through Ghorband district, ANSF [Afghan National Security Forces] commandos and their coalition advisers came under heavy fire from insurgents, resulting in the death of one ISAF service member. The force required defensive air support to suppress the enemy fire from two compounds.
As Firedoglake's Kevin Gosztola asks: "If the Taliban targets were among a local population of civilians--and were known to "harass" them as ISAF indicated in the press release, what made any commanding officer think civilians would not be killed if they ordered an air strike on a compound?"
"ISAF regrets any civilian casualties and will continue working with our Afghan partners to determine all the facts surrounding this incident," ISAF's statement added.
The death of the civilians comes a week after U.S. Marines were accused of killing a four-year-old Afghan boy.
The U.S. occupation of Afghanistan, now in its 13th year, could extend another decade.
The U.S. has pressed Afghanistan to sign a bilateral security agreement which would allow extended U.S. military presence there, and even if the number of troops is reduced, critics charge it would mean continued war for the people of Afghanistan.
"Occupation is not defined by how many occupiers are policing someplace," Kimber Heinz of the War Resisters League previously told Common Dreams. "If you reduce the amount of occupation forces but keep them there forever, then the occupation continues and the war on people's everyday lives is not actually over -- no matter what the U.S. government or mainstream media tells us."
________________
"Afghanistan for years demanded a complete halt in operations in villages but the Americans, contrary to mutual agreement ... once again resorted to bombing a residential area and killing civilians," Reutersreports Karzai as saying in a statement.
The Washington Postreports that
According to Karzai and the governor of Parwan province, the incident occurred about 1 a.m. when U.S. Special Forces attempted to enter a home. A gun battle ensued, resulting in a coalition airstrike that killed the children and a female relative in the house, they said.
The U.S./NATO-led Afghan Security Assistance Force (ISAF) released a statement saying that two civilians and "at least 10 insurgents" were killed "during a deliberately-planned, Afghan-led clearing operation to disrupt insurgent activity in Ghorband district, Parwan province."
According to ISAF's statement, the incident took place in
a high threat area with Taliban activity, some linked to the Haqqani network. The insurgents in this area enjoy freedom of movement allowing them to harass and threaten the local population as well as stage and facilitate attacks.[...]
While moving through Ghorband district, ANSF [Afghan National Security Forces] commandos and their coalition advisers came under heavy fire from insurgents, resulting in the death of one ISAF service member. The force required defensive air support to suppress the enemy fire from two compounds.
As Firedoglake's Kevin Gosztola asks: "If the Taliban targets were among a local population of civilians--and were known to "harass" them as ISAF indicated in the press release, what made any commanding officer think civilians would not be killed if they ordered an air strike on a compound?"
"ISAF regrets any civilian casualties and will continue working with our Afghan partners to determine all the facts surrounding this incident," ISAF's statement added.
The death of the civilians comes a week after U.S. Marines were accused of killing a four-year-old Afghan boy.
The U.S. occupation of Afghanistan, now in its 13th year, could extend another decade.
The U.S. has pressed Afghanistan to sign a bilateral security agreement which would allow extended U.S. military presence there, and even if the number of troops is reduced, critics charge it would mean continued war for the people of Afghanistan.
"Occupation is not defined by how many occupiers are policing someplace," Kimber Heinz of the War Resisters League previously told Common Dreams. "If you reduce the amount of occupation forces but keep them there forever, then the occupation continues and the war on people's everyday lives is not actually over -- no matter what the U.S. government or mainstream media tells us."
________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.