What They Do in Our Name

JBeee

Time Out
Jun 1, 2007
1,826
52
48

[FONT=Arial,Geneva,sans-serif]by [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Geneva,sans-serif]Sheldon Richman[/FONT], [FONT=Arial,Geneva,sans-serif]August 10, 2010[/FONT]

[FONT=Times,Times New Roman]
Thanks to Wikileaks and heroic leakers inside the military, we now know the U.S. government has killed many more innocent Afghan civilians than we were aware of heretofore. We also know that American military and intelligence personnel roam Afghanistan assassinating suspected bad guys. Sometimes they kill people they later acknowledge weren’t bad guys at all. “Bad guys,” like “Taliban,” is implicitly defined as anyone who resists the U.S. occupation force and the corrupt puppet government it keeps in power.

What other atrocities are our misleaders and misrepresentatives committing in our name?

Let’s get something straight: to be an enemy of American occupation, bombing, and “nation building” is not the same thing as being an enemy of America or its people. It’s time Americans understood that. When you invade another country and people there object, even forcibly, they are not aggressors. You are. To understand this, imagine our being invaded by a foreign military force. Would resistance be aggression?

The U.S. government goes to appalling lengths to deny this truth. It is about to try before a military commission a young Canadian, Omar Ahmed Khadr, who was taken into custody in Afghanistan eight years ago when he was 15 years old. The charge? War crimes, among them “murder in violation of the rules of war,” which lawyer Chase Madar calls “a newly minted war crime novel to the history of armed conflict.”

Khadr was captured after a four-hour firefight between American forces and so-called militants in the village of Ayub Kheyl near Kabul, during which the Afghans’ homes were flattened by 500-pound bombs. One American died later from wounds inflicted by a grenade. Reports conflict, but Khadr was shot several times in the chest and back, then later was found under the rubble, unconscious and seriously wounded — he lost an eye from shrapnel.

Taken to Bagram Airbase, where the U.S. government maintains a prison, Khadr received some medical treatment and was interrogated about his role that day. He was thought to have information about al-Qaeda, since his father was a jihadist and knew Osama bin Laden. Khadr says he was denied pain killers, subjected to what can only be called torture, and forced to do hard work, aggravating his wounds. It was only after this torture that he said he had helped the militants because America was at war with Islam. Despite Canada’s request, Khadr was transferred to the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he was again tortured and kept in solitary confinement for long spells. He claims that because of the torture he gave false confessions, including that he threw a grenade. Later he said he had no recollection of throwing a grenade and was in fact rendered unconscious by an American-caused explosion.

Unfortunately, the presiding judge has refused to exclude Khadr’s statements made under torture and other cruel treatment, such as threats of gang rape. Militarily commissions are as much the travesty of justice that candidate Obama said they were in 2008. But now he’s in charge.

Even if Khadr threw the grenade and killed an American, how can that be a war crime? At worst his actions look like self-defense but at any rate, fighters in combat aren’t typically charged with murder.

Is the American military to be permitted to go anywhere the politicians wish and expect the people of the invaded countries meekly to accept their fate and pledge allegiance to the United States? Would we receive an invader that way?

The U.S. government and its well-paid military contractors have an agenda in the Middle East and South Central Asia that has nothing to do with the welfare or safety of average Americans.

On the contrary, it is bankrupting them and has made them targets of revenge. There’s a simple way to keep American military personnel safe: bring them home.

Obama has shown himself to be worse than his predecessor and the neoconservative empire enthusiasts. His promises to leave Iraq and Afghanistan are hedged so thick that we can expect the occupations to continue for many years ... all in our name. Despite Obama’s words, the death and destruction at America’s hands are not nearing an end.
[/FONT]
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Yep.

NATO forces are responsible for a full 18 percent of civilian casualties in the conflict.

For the mathematically challenged, that means for every civilian accidentally killed by NATO or other pro-government troops, five are killed by the Taliban. You know, little girls on the way to school, medical teams working to heal the suffering of Afghans, people like that.

CBC News - World - Afghan civilian deaths spike in 2010: UN
 

JBeee

Time Out
Jun 1, 2007
1,826
52
48
What about the number of civillians purposely targeted by NATO?

Jason Ditz
August 12, 2010

Angry villagers took to the streets of Wardak Province today and blocked one of the main thoroughfares in the wake of an overnight raid by NATO troops which killed three brothers in their home.

Locals say that the three brothers were civilians, and were killed in their sleep during the raid. Their father was also detained. NATO insists the father was a “known Taliban leader” and the three brothers were “suspected insurgents.

Night raids have been a serious controversy in Afghanistan, particularly given the history of NATO troops killing civilians and then attempting to cover it up. Gen. Stanley McChrystal had promised on a number of occasions to curb the use of night raids against civilian housing.

But even when McChrystal was there, the night raids continued, albeit at a slowed pace. With him now out of the picture, Gen. David Petraeus is expected to pare away a number of restrictions meant to reduce civilian deaths, citing the damage it does to troop morale. This morning’s raid might be one of the first examples of a policy change.



Yep.

NATO forces are responsible for a full 18 percent of civilian casualties in the conflict.

For the mathematically challenged, that means for every civilian accidentally killed by NATO or other pro-government troops, five are killed by the Taliban. You know, little girls on the way to school, medical teams working to heal the suffering of Afghans, people like that.

CBC News - World - Afghan civilian deaths spike in 2010: UN
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Way to gloss over the fact that you don't actually know who's telling the truth eh.

But, it's OK, you've already made up your mind who's who and guilty or innocent, must be nice to have that kind of knowledge.
 

JBeee

Time Out
Jun 1, 2007
1,826
52
48
Given NATO`s record of lying and exposed cover-ups regarding civillian deaths, I`d be inclined to believe the relatives of those killed first.


Way to gloss over the fact that you don't actually know who's telling the truth eh.

But, it's OK, you've already made up your mind who's who and guilty or innocent, must be nice to have that kind of knowledge.
 

The Old Medic

Council Member
May 16, 2010
1,330
2
38
The World
Yes indeed, even the Taliban is expressing their thanks to Wikileaks. Because of this expose', the Taliban is able to identify people that they believe informed on them, and now they can (and will) murder those people and their entire families.

And the Taliban is encouraging Wikileaks to hurry up and post the rest of the documents, so they can get on with more of those murders.

The people at Wikileaks, and those traitors in the US Military must be so proud.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Yes indeed, even the Taliban is expressing their thanks to Wikileaks. Because of this expose', the Taliban is able to identify people that they believe informed on them, and now they can (and will) murder those people and their entire families.

And the Taliban is encouraging Wikileaks to hurry up and post the rest of the documents, so they can get on with more of those murders.

The people at Wikileaks, and those traitors in the US Military must be so proud.

Yep.

Lovely, isn't it?

If this is true, than those responsible for Wikileaks should be hunted down and killed.

We should spare their families.....we are not the Taliban.

The west has forgotten how to wage war.....and that is a tragedy for mankind.
 

JBeee

Time Out
Jun 1, 2007
1,826
52
48
They, the Afghans, chose to deal with the devil, America, by ratting out or framing thier own, mostly innocent countrymen for a few dollars and a bag of rice. Either killed or still languishing in a US gulag with no contact to the outside world, guilt or innocence be damed.

Those rats must now deal with the consequences.


Yes indeed, even the Taliban is expressing their thanks to Wikileaks. Because of this expose', the Taliban is able to identify people that they believe informed on them, and now they can (and will) murder those people and their entire families.

And the Taliban is encouraging Wikileaks to hurry up and post the rest of the documents, so they can get on with more of those murders.

The people at Wikileaks, and those traitors in the US Military must be so proud.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
JBeee - back again i see - I noted that mnay World Recognized Human Rights organizations have condemned Wiki Leaks founder for publishing names of local that assisted NATO and information on others that make them readily and easily recognized - You opinion on this matter is valued of course - What is your opinion????
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
They, the Afghans, chose to deal with the devil, America, by ratting out or framing thier own, mostly innocent countrymen for a few dollars and a bag of rice. Either killed or still languishing in a US gulag with no contact to the outside world, guilt or innocence be damed.

Those rats must now deal with the consequences.







America’s Warlords in Afghanistan

To fight the Taliban, the United States created a new generation of abusive strongmen that are now running rampant.



“Right from the beginning the United States was here to win the war. They went to the warlords and armed them to wage the war. That pattern was established. And the warlords they all got rich and powerful because of the war and now they run the country the way they want to,” he said.


According to a Human Rights Watch report released in early March, Afghanistan is under siege by a “new generation” of strongmen, warlords, and militias that are terrorizing local populations. Their menacing presence only effectively differs from the Taliban in that they have enjoyed the complicity and support of U.S. forces—including former General Petraeus—and major elements of Afghanistan’s government.


So while Petraeus is busy advising the White House on what to do with Iraq—another country whose reconstruction he left unfinished—unchecked corruption and violence threaten to undo every last good thing the West has tried to accomplish in Afghanistan since 2001.


“The Afghan government and its supporters should recognize that insecurity comes not only from the insurgency, but from corrupt and unaccountable forces having official backing,” Phelim Kine, HRW’s deputy Asia director, said in a March 3 release.
“Kabul and its foreign supporters need to end their toxic codependency on strongmen to give Afghanistan reasonable hope of a viable, rights-respecting strategy for the country’s development.”


HRW found, through numerous interviews with civilians, cross-checked with official inquiries and independent reporting, that Afghan Local Police (ALP) commanders were behind many of the human rights abuses. Petraeus, during his brief time as Commander of the International Security Assistance Forces (ISAF) in Afghanistan (2010-11), was the key facilitator of the ALP, calling it a “community watch” of sorts, and considered it critical to his counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy in Afghanistan




HRW has singled out some of the more infamous American allies, among them Abdul Hakim Shujoyi, who despite outstanding arrest warrants for the murder of more than a dozen people remained the de facto commander of the ALP in the central district of Khas Uruzgan as of June 2014. According to HRW,


An American spokesman denied any ties with Shujoyi at the time of the killings, and said U.S. Special Forces were not active in the area where they occurred. But despite the arrest warrant, Shujoyi still enjoys his freedom, and has been witnessed with U.S. forces since.


“Everyone has seen (Shujoyi) with the Americans,” one witness told HRW. In particular, according to the report, “he was frequently seen entering the international base in the district capital of Khas Uruzgan (known as Forward Operating Base [FOB] Anaconda).”
In 2013, Australian journalist Paul McGeough wrote that “a reputation as a fearless ‘Taliban hunter’ has earned enough U.S. military protection for (Shujoyi) to cast himself as a new warlord—even as the Americans were backing him into the leadership of a new grassroots community protection service, the Afghan Local Police or ALP.”


In other words, McGeough added, “Special Forces has emboldened and protected Shujoyi.”


Meanwhile, in Urgun province, Tajik “Commander Azizullah” made a neat shift to ALP chief after allegedly committing numerous crimes against civilians as a member of the Afghan Security Guards from 2008 to 2010, when the ASG was conducting combat operations with U.S. forces, according to HRW. It was then that he was first accused in a 2010 United Nations report of theft and beatings during search operations, detention and physical abuse of children, and arbitrary killing of civilians. This included one case in which he reportedly drove around with the dead bodies of three locals strapped to his vehicles, announcing they were terrorists, until they started to decompose.



more




America’s Warlords in Afghanistan | The American Conservative