Afghans Riot Over Air-Strike Atrocity

[Purveyor]

Source: Independent UK

Shouting "Death to America" and "Death to the Government", thousands of Afghan villagers hurled stones at police yesterday as they vented their fury at American air strikes that local officials claim killed 147 civilians.

The riot started when people from three villages struck by US bombers in the early hours of Tuesday, brought 15 newly-discovered bodies in a truck to the house of the provincial governor. As the crowd pressed forward in Farah, police opened fire, wounding four protesters. Traders in the rest of Farah city, the capital of the province of the same name where the bombing took place, closed their shops, vowing they would not reopen them until there is an investigation.

A local official Abdul Basir Khan said yesterday that he had collected the names of 147 people who had died, making it the worst such incident since the US intervened in Afghanistan started in 2001. A phone call from the governor of Farah province, Rohul Amin, in which he said that 130 people had died, was played over the loudspeaker in the Afghan parliament in Kabul, sparking demands for more control over US operations.

The protest in Farah City is the latest sign of a strong Afghan reaction against US air attacks in which explosions inflict massive damage on mud-brick houses that provide little protection against bomb blasts. A claim by American officials, which was repeated by the US Defence Secretary Robert Gates yesterday in Kabul, that the Taliban might have killed people with grenades because they did not pay an opium tax is not supported by any eyewitnesses and is disproved by pictures of deep bomb craters, one of which is filled with water. Mr Gates expressed regret for the incident but did not go so far as to accept blame.

The US admits that it did conduct an air strike at the time and place, but it is becoming clear, going by the account of survivors, that the air raid was not a brief attack by several aircraft acting on mistaken intelligence, but a sustained bombardment in which three villages were pounded to pieces. Farouq Faizy, an Afghan radio reporter who was one of the first to reach the district of Bala Baluk, says villagers told him that bombs suddenly, "began to fall at 8pm on Monday and went on until 10pm though some believe there were still bombs falling later". A prolonged bombing attack would explain why there are so many dead, but only 14 wounded received at Farah City hospital.

Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/afghans-riot-over-airstrike-atrocity-1681070.html

[gratuitous]

1. "A sustained bombardment"

Just fuckin' lovely. And now another nation's population takes to the streets chanting "Death to America." Violence simply cannot overcome violence. It's as simple a concept as the communicative property of mathematics. But our nation and society are so addicted to violence we no longer have the wisdom or the imagination to figure out any other solutions.

[Canuckistanian]

2. BIG mistake. This may be Afghanistan's Guernica

If, at some point, someone asks why the Afghan war is not going so well, point to this.

Shit like this undoes ANY goodwill that the allies are trying to do.

[Turbineguy]

3. Maybe we rely

on the Taliban for our intelligence.

[madrchsod]

6. the problem is the afgan population does.

who knows what the truth is.

[Libertas1776]

4. ...

Freaking America and its damn big feet. Wherever we step we leave big foot prints, especially now in Afghanistan. Sorry Madam Sec of State, this just ain't a simple oops. WE FUCKED UP BIG TIME!! We need to get out of there now. Although on a side note, why can't the Afghans ever get this angry when a suicide bombers kills dozens every other day, and voice out against them.

[madrchsod]

5. obama`s vietnam is afghanistan---"heart and minds"

did`t work for johnson and it will not work for obama.

[ConcernedCanuk]

7. recommended - USA reminds me of a bully who ended up being my best friend

.
.
.

He was (yeah, the shit-head died 2 years ago) a black-belt - 5th dan(?)(whatever that means) - but very tough, and with an attitude.

Anyhoo, we worked for the same employer in 1970, and for one reason and another, we took a dislike to each other.

One argument led to a threat from him that if he ever saw me on the street(we lived in the same small community) he would beat the living daylights out of me, which I was certain was possible.

I responded that sure, he could kick my ass, but he would still be WRONG, and elevated to an asshole in my mind.

Well - something struck a cord in him;

he apologized, and we ended up being lifetime friends until he abruptly passed away at the age of 56 in 2007.

USA is at the kicking ass stage, but still WRONG!

That's my Canuk observation/opinion . .

[David__77]

8. US should withdraw immediately.

That is THE progressive position. Afghanistan should be ruled by Afghans. The Soviet and US occupations are crimes against the people of Afghanistan regardless of stated "humanitarian" intentions on the part of both. The country can only flourish free from external subversion.

[Old Coot]

9. Return the Taliban to power? nt

[David__77]

10. Without foreign interference, that probably wouldn't happen.

But, more crucially, your statement is premised on the notion that it is FOR US to decide that - that U.S. power gives moral authority to occupy other countries. I do not agree.

[HERVEPA]

11. Uh, yeh. They certainly weren't in power when we went in.

:sarcasm:

Not a judgment as to whether we should be there, by the way.

[David__77]

12. There was foreign interference before the invasion as well.

Pakistan's ISI was instrumental in bringing to power the Taliban. I stand by my statement that if Afghanistan were freed from foreign interference, it is likely that the Taliban would not return to power. However, the people of Afghanistan will make that determination.

[reggie the dog]

14. Sure, it is their country

they may not be nice and what we want but Afghanistan is not US territory.

[Igel]

19. Thank you.

I was looking for the authoritative source as to what "THE progressive position" was.

Now that the Supreme Leader has spoken, we can all genuflect as we turn off our collective cerebral cortex.

Or, perhaps, we can try to replace a dictum with some sort of argument? Nah, that's not in accord with correct policy, I guess.

[reggie the dog]

13. Why is the USA in Afghanistan in the first place?

What in the hell did the Taliban have to do with 9-11? not a damn thing! why could the USA be there???? The taliban had basically stopped heroin production....hmmmm heroin???!!! black marked cash???!!! Why is the USA there again???? Wow, look at all the heroin and hash they produce again now that the USA is in control! Why are we there?

[Thothmes]

18. Because of the President of the United States

[Vidar]

15. Get the hell out of there

[bemildred]

16. Why are they always so ungrateful for our help?

:sarcasm:

[ProgressIn2008]

17. Managing a dying empire ain't easy. The deja vu alone will spin your head.

I remember in the frenzied, drooling lead-in to Iraq (at which time, happily, I recall the majority, even most folks here, were unusually sane -- though now that it's a Dem in the WH who knows). But I was told generally: "well what, ya love Saddam, don't you? Why don't you HAAAAATE Saddam?" And I had to say, "I was concerned about human rights in Iraq from GWI right through the Clinton admin when Dems hated me for noticing anything wrong and Repubs hated me because I was criticizing Clinton for the Wrong Reasons."

I'm getting that ol' deja vu shiver down my spine. This is going to be such a fucking mess. How ironic, seeing one more bellowing, thrashing empire bleed itself to death in Afghanistan.

And if it turns out these "American officials" and Gates are playing nasty little propaganda games with their claims of Taliban grenades, they're no more than yet another crew of two-bit, neocon, warmongering thugs.