A U.S. drone strike purportedly targeting a suspected ISIS-K vehicle in a residential neighborhood of Kabul, Afghanistan killed at least 10 members of a single family—including six children—as they were getting out of their car on Sunday.\r\n\r\n\u0022Too many children have already died from U.S. drone strikes. We cannot accept one more, let alone six.\u0022\r\n—CodePink\r\n\r\nRelatives of the victims told the Washington Post that the strike—which was the second attack the U.S. carried out in Kabul over the weekend—\u0022hit a nearby vehicle\u0022 that the Pentagon claims was an \u0022imminent\u0022 threat.\r\n\r\nThe civilian victims of the U.S. strike were all \u0022from a single extended family,\u0022 the Post reported.\r\n\r\nSamim Shahyad, a 25-year-old journalism student, told the New York Times that the U.S. attack killed his father, his two brothers, four of his young cousins, his niece, and his sister\u0026#039;s fiancé. Shahyad added that three of the victims were girls who were just two years old or younger.\r\n\r\n\u0022The American aircraft targeted us,\u0022 said Shahyad. \u0022I do not know what to say, they just cut my arms and broke my back, I cannot say anything more.\u0022\r\n\r\nOne neighbor at the scene of the attack said in an interview with CNN that \u0022not much is left of their house and nothing can be recognized, they are in pieces.\u0022 The person estimated that as many as 20 people may have been killed in the U.S. drone strike.\r\n\r\n\u0022Yet another reason why the U.S. must leave Afghanistan,\u0022 said Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. \u0022The military presence, and the civilian deaths it\u0026#039;s brought, has become a key recruiting tool for terrorists.\u0022\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCapt. Bill Urban, a spokesperson for the U.S. Central Command, acknowledged in a statement that \u0022there were substantial and powerful subsequent explosions resulting from the destruction of the vehicle\u0022 that the U.S. military claimed to be targeting.\r\n\r\nUrban suggested that \u0022additional casualties\u0022 from the U.S. strike may have been due to \u0022a large amount of explosive material inside\u0022 the targeted vehicle.\r\n\r\n\u0022It is unclear what may have happened,\u0022 Urban added, \u0022and we are investigating further.\u0022\r\n\r\nLaunched in the wake of a deadly ISIS-K attack on Kabul\u0026#039;s international airport, the drone strike came just two days before the August 31 deadline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan after two decades of devastating war and occupation.\r\n\r\nDespite officials\u0026#039; claims that the drone assassination program is highly precise and targeted at militants, U.S. strikes have killed hundreds of Afghan civilians in recent years. According to documents leaked by former Air Force intelligence analyst Daniel Hale—who was sentenced to nearly four years in prison last month—nearly 90% of the people killed during one five-month period of a U.S. drone operation in Afghanistan were not the intended targets.\r\n\r\nIn 2019, the United Nations released a report accusing the U.S. of killing at least 30 Afghan civilians—including 14 children—and violating international humanitarian law with a series of drone strikes in May of that year.\r\n\r\n\u0022Maybe now would be a good time to retire phrases like \u0026#039;targeted killing\u0026#039; and \u0026#039;precision strike,\u0026#039; since these phrases have nothing at all to do with what we\u0026#039;re actually doing,\u0022 said Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.