9/11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows & Al Jazeera & RAWA – 2011-04-21 02:24:29
Afghanistan: Ending a Failed Military Strategy
September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows
Ten Reasons to End the Occupation of Afghanistan
(January 9, 2009)
1. US and NATO occupation creates civilian casualties, angering Afghans.
2. Military occupation has hampered humanitarian aid and reconstruction efforts.
3. Afghan women continue to face violence and oppression under the occupation.
4. US policy has empowered warlords, drug lords and the Taliban.
5. The occupation contributes to violence and destabilization for ordinary Afghans, including refugees.
6. NATO allies and military leaders are questioning the occupation.
7. US troop casualties in Afghanistan are on the rise.
8. Afghans are calling for a negotiated end to the war.
9. Military escalation will only increase the violence, and potentially lead to a wider
war involving nuclear-armed Pakistan.
10. Military occupation of Afghanistan does not curb terrorism.
Innocent Afghans Killed by NATO Operation
Al Jazeera
KABUL (October 16, 2009) — The use of air power is growing, raising risks for civilians, University of New Hampshire professor Marc W. Herold says in research.
3,200 Afghan Civilians Killed by NATO,
US Action since 2005: Study
Revolutionary Association of Women of Afghanistan / RAWA
“Air strikes are 4-10 times as deadly for Afghan civilians as are ground attacks”
KABUL (October 7, 2008) — Up to 3,200 civilians have been killed in NATO and US action in Afghanistan since 2005 but compensation payouts have been far lower than in other global cases, according to research by a US professor.
The use of air power is growing, raising risks for civilians, University of New Hampshire professor Marc W. Herold says in research released on the anniversary of the October 7, 2001 launch of the invasion of Afghanistan.
International troops arrived to topple the Taliban and have remained to fight an insurgency in which civilians are killed in military action and attacks, although the government and militaries involved do not release numbers.
Herold says other groups tracking the civilian cost of the war, such as Human Rights Watch, underestimate the tolls while international military and media attach low value to Afghan life in the accounting of events.
Herold, who runs the Afghan Victim Memorial Project, says his research shows between 2,699 and 3,273 civilians were killed in direct action by international forces in Afghanistan from 2005 to so far this year.
His figures, which he says are also underestimates because civilians are sometimes labelled militants by the military and unknown numbers of injured dying, are based on media and nongovernment organisation reports and other research.
“By relying upon aerial close air support attacks, US/NATO forces spare their pilots and ground troops but kill lots of innocent Afghan civilians.
“Air strikes are 4-10 times as deadly for Afghan civilians as are ground attacks,” he says.
Herold says the US military gives families of its victims at most 2,500 dollars as a condolence payment — not “compensation” which would admit wrong-doing.
Canadian per person condolence payments to Afghans since 2006 range from 1,100-9,000 dollars, he says.
This compares to 1.85 million paid for victims of the 1988 bombing of a flight over Lockerbie, Scotland, and 150,000 dollars per victim of a 1999 US bombing on the Chinese embassy in Belgrade that killed three Chinese and wounded 23 other people.
(October 16, 2009) — The use of air power is growing, raising risks for civilians, University of New Hampshire professor Marc W. Herold says in research.
NATO-operation Afghanistan America UK troops killed Taliban Kabul Afghan elections Hamid Karzai Afghanistan NATO operation US foreign policy Obama new administration Israel Iran Kandahar
International troops arrived to topple the Taliban and have remained to fight an insurgency in which civilians are killed in military action and attacks, although the government and militaries involved do not release numbers.
Civilian cost of the war, such as Human Rights Watch, underestimate the tolls while international military and media attach low value to Afghan life in the accounting of events.
Civilians are sometimes labeled militants by the military and unknown numbers of injured dying, are based on media and nongovernment organization reports and other research.
“By relying upon aerial close air support attacks, US/NATO forces spare their pilots and ground troops but kill lots of innocent Afghan civilians.
“Air strikes are 4-10 times as deadly for Afghan civilians as are ground attacks,” he says. US military gives families of its victims at most 2,500 dollars as a condolence payment — not “compensation” which would admit wrongdoing.
Canadian per person condolence payments to Afghans since 2006 range from 1,100-9,000 dollars, he says.
This compares to 1.85 million paid for victims of the 1988 bombing of a flight over Lockerbie, Scotland, and 150,000 dollars per victim of a 1999 US bombing on the Chinese embassy in Belgrade that killed three Chinese and wounded 23 other people.
Comments
It is very doubtful that brutal tactics, whether in Afghanistan, Palestine or Iraq, will ever win the hearts and minds of the victims. These tactics turn even ordinary and decent people into militants and terrorists. Denied justice every victimized human being turns into a kind of uncontrollable beast after a flagrant outrage like the Gujarat pogroms or Gaza killings or Chechnya 21 massacres.
Posted in accordance with Title 17, Section 107, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.
