Afghans Issue Decree

Stonewall · Feb 18, 2013

KABUL—The U.S. general commanding the coalition in Afghanistan said on Sunday he would comply with a decree President Hamid Karzai plans to issue that would ban Afghan forces from calling in airstrikes from their international counterparts in residential areas.

The U.S.-led coalition will work with Afghan forces to "mitigate" civilian casualties, Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford said Sunday.

What civilian casualties do we need to "mitigate?"

Mr. Karzai announced the ban Saturday after Afghan forces called in a coalition airstrike during an operation Tuesday night against Taliban fighters. At least 10 civilians—mostly women and children—were killed in the strike, according to Afghan officials.

Coalition airstrike...at least 10 civilians? Sounds like the footprint of our latest Nobel Peace Prize Winner to me!

The coalition airstrike was called in by Afghan intelligence during an operation overnight Tuesday in a small village in Kunar province, on the border with Pakistan. The strike hit its target—a house filled with insurgents—but also struck a civilian home nearby, according to Afghan officials.

The renewed scrutiny on coalition airstrikes is likely to be a point of contention as U.S. and Afghan officials negotiate a bilateral security agreement, which will determine the legal status of American troops in Afghanistan after 2014. The agreement should be wrapped up by November, according to American officials.

Mr. Karzai has long pressed U.S.-led forces to stop using airstrikes, citing the high civilian casualties they cause, although the coalition has argued that the strikes are effective. A United Nations report last summer said airstrikes resulted in more casualties of ordinary Afghans than any other tactic used by international forces, killing 83 civilians in the first six months of 2012.

Even a blip on the radar for our 2012 elections? Where are all of our anti-war protests? Where are the cries of murder and angering Islam while waging an absolute killing campaign?

Anyone.....anyone at all hold Obama accountable here?

David · Feb 18, 2013

Stonewall said:
What civilian casualties do we need to "mitigate?"

Coalition airstrike...at least 10 civilians? Sounds like the footprint of our latest Nobel Peace Prize Winner to me!

Even a blip on the radar for our 2012 elections? Where are all of our anti-war protests? Where are the cries of murder and angering Islam while waging an absolute killing campaign?

Anyone.....anyone at all hold Obama accountable here?

Nobody whined about civilians during Bush ether, so I'm not getting your point. Everyone got mad at bush because of his concentration camps and choosing Iraq over Afghanistan. A few people also complained about military casualties but people like me (and I'd expect you based on your politics) tended to shut them up by pointing out how few they actually were compared to past wars.

Stonewall · Feb 18, 2013

"Nobody" whined about civilians?

Short post, but then so is your memory.

David · Feb 18, 2013

Stonewall said:
"Nobody" whined about civilians?

Short post, but then so is your memory.

In relation to Bush? No.

tecoyah · Feb 18, 2013

There were quite loud protests during Bush's little adventure when civilian died...however, it was hard to bitch too loud when most of the deaths were at the hands of themselves. There was also a lingering respect for the Office, as well as a sense of national interest (accurate of not) that had a tempering effect, as I remember.

It seems today that respect no longer exists (which is a thread unto itself), and those who once would claim traitor for questioning the Government are instead questioning everything possible. I no longer recognize the party I used to vote for and respect largely due to this viral attitude.

Likely, we will soon see someone questioning I was ever Republican, probably someone who was too young to vote for Reagan, read about the first Gulf War, and thinks Rumsfeld was a nobody.

Go Tea Party.

Stonewall · Feb 19, 2013

No one cares who was once Republican, no one cares nor is it relevant to any thread topic we're discussing. With all due respect, tecoyah, everything isn't about you.

The tactic of using drone or air strikes was raised numerous times during Bush's tenure. Civilian deaths were placed right at his feet, impeachment proceedings were even mentioned. Anti-war protests, the Cindy Sheehans of the world on point and covered by the media.

Civilian casualties not counted in this war of Obama's. Gitmo a forgotten prison, the prison at Bagram not even a subject for review, detention policies, 60,000 troops still in Afghanistan, drone strikes, strikes called in by coalition forces, the impact this is having on the Muslim world....none of this is even relevant anymore.

We're being attacked.....in Libya and other arenas in the world....is anyone asking why? Is anyone even suggesting that heavy handed policies by this joke of a Nobel Peace Prize winner is having a negative influence. Are we even concerned why militant Islam hates us still today and targets us consistently?

Not while Prince Poppycock sits on the throne. The anti-war protestors will be back......but not for 4 years.

David · Feb 19, 2013

Stonewall said:
No one cares who was once Republican, no one cares nor is it relevant to any thread topic we're discussing. With all due respect, tecoyah, everything isn't about you.

The tactic of using drone or air strikes was raised numerous times during Bush's tenure. Civilian deaths were placed right at his feet, impeachment proceedings were even mentioned. Anti-war protests, the Cindy Sheehans of the world on point and covered by the media.

Civilian casualties not counted in this war of Obama's. Gitmo a forgotten prison, the prison at Bagram not even a subject for review, detention policies, 60,000 troops still in Afghanistan, drone strikes, strikes called in by coalition forces, the impact this is having on the Muslim world....none of this is even relevant anymore.

We're being attacked.....in Libya and other arenas in the world....is anyone asking why? Is anyone even suggesting that heavy handed policies by this joke of a Nobel Peace Prize winner is having a negative influence. Are we even concerned why militant Islam hates us still today and targets us consistently?

Not while Prince Poppycock sits on the throne. The anti-war protestors will be back......but not for 4 years.

And thru it all (well until about the last year at least) the Repubs were silent except to call his opponents traitors and un-American. I really wish you and your ilk would get of your non-existent high horse.

Stonewall · Feb 20, 2013

David said:
And thru it all (well until about the last year at least) the Repubs were silent except to call his opponents traitors and un-American. I really wish you and your ilk would get of your non-existent high horse.

The fact that you and 'your ilk' deafen us with your silence today means you're off of your high horses...and that's the thread topic here. Deflecting to me doesn't change the fact that the anti-war fervor and all of this indigestion over Bush policies was disingenuous at best, treason at its' worst.

David · Feb 20, 2013

Stonewall said:
The fact that you and 'your ilk' deafen us with your silence today means you're off of your high horses...and that's the thread topic here. Deflecting to me doesn't change the fact that the anti-war fervor and all of this indigestion over Bush policies was disingenuous at best, treason at its' worst.

I was never anti-war so... Ya, you have no point.

Stonewall · Feb 20, 2013

David said:
I was never anti-war so... Ya, you have no point.

No one today was ever anti-war. And no one will be until a Republican gets into office. Should Hillary win in 2016 that will be another 4 years where no one will be anti-war. Should she win re-election, 4 more years will go by...without a peep from the Left or the vociferous observers we enjoyed during the Bush Presidency.

Now.....should a Republican....like a Ben Carson or Marco Rubio or Condaleeza Rice be elected President.....the anti-war forces will come out of the woodwork like roaches when the lights go out.

count on it

tecoyah · Feb 20, 2013

As far as I know...Obama has not started any wars. If he does....there will be protests and bitching by many I am sure.

Stonewall · Feb 20, 2013

tecoyah said:
As far as I know...Obama has not started any wars. If he does....there will be protests and bitching by many I am sure.

No one here is talking about "starting" any wars. I believe the thread start is very specific, I believe it concerns civilian casualties, it concerns those policies that were criticized heavily while Bush being President are ignored today. Thus, your irrelevance here is a distraction and attempt to deflect the thread. Please help us towars the goal of making "us" a more informed forum, if you're not part of the solution...you're part of the problem.

thanks again.

tecoyah · Feb 20, 2013

Stonewall said:
No one here is talking about "starting" any wars. I believe the thread start is very specific, I believe it concerns civilian casualties, it concerns those policies that were criticized heavily while Bush being President are ignored today. Thus, your irrelevance here is a distraction and attempt to deflect the thread. Please help us towars the goal of making "us" a more informed forum, if you're not part of the solution...you're part of the problem.

thanks again.

I see....wonderful commentary which ignores your own post to which I was replying:

No one today was ever anti-war. And no one will be until a Republican gets into office. Should Hillary win in 2016 that will be another 4 years where no one will be anti-war. Should she win re-election, 4 more years will go by...without a peep from the Left or the vociferous observers we enjoyed during the Bush Presidency.

Now.....should a Republican....like a Ben Carson or Marco Rubio or Condaleeza Rice be elected President.....the anti-war forces will come out of the woodwork like roaches when the lights go out.

count on it

The unpleasant nature with which you seem to interact with me is not productive and has driven me to no longer address you as a member. I cannot physically place you on ignore, but have now mentally done so.

Aeonpax · Feb 20, 2013

`
Study Shows Civilian Death Toll in Iraq More Than 100,000 - When Bush was Commander In Chief. For more stats on this, go here: Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Make no mistake about this, Barack Obama is just as complicit in the deaths of innocent civilians as Bush, albeit to a much lower degree. Still, neither party hold the moral hihj ground here.

Stonewall · Feb 21, 2013

tecoyah said:
I cannot physically place you on ignore, but have now mentally done so.

A man's got to know his limitations.

Stonewall · Feb 21, 2013

Aeonpax said:
`
Study Shows Civilian Death Toll in Iraq More Than 100,000 - When Bush was Commander In Chief. For more stats on this, go here: Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Make no mistake about this, Barack Obama is just as complicit in the deaths of innocent civilians as Bush, albeit to a much lower degree. Still, neither party hold the moral hihj ground here.

Where is the study showing civilian deaths in Afghanistan?

David · Feb 21, 2013

Stonewall said:
No one today was ever anti-war. And no one will be until a Republican gets into office. Should Hillary win in 2016 that will be another 4 years where no one will be anti-war. Should she win re-election, 4 more years will go by...without a peep from the Left or the vociferous observers we enjoyed during the Bush Presidency.

Now.....should a Republican....like a Ben Carson or Marco Rubio or Condaleeza Rice be elected President.....the anti-war forces will come out of the woodwork like roaches when the lights go out.

count on it

Except I was never anti-war... You still don't have a point.

Stonewall · Feb 22, 2013

David said:
Except I was never anti-war... You still don't have a point.

Neither was anyone else, that is the entire point. No one on these threads are raising an issue with these policies. It's clear the media is no longer interested. No one is keeping a daily Afghan body count. No one wants to hear about drones, or detention policies, or civilian casualties.

You were never anti-war. I was never anti-war. No one was ever anti-war. We all agree. Now. What's wrong with being in complete agreement, I would think that's a good thing?

David · Feb 22, 2013

Stonewall said:
Neither was anyone else, that is the entire point. No one on these threads are raising an issue with these policies. It's clear the media is no longer interested. No one is keeping a daily Afghan body count. No one wants to hear about drones, or detention policies, or civilian casualties.

You were never anti-war. I was never anti-war. No one was ever anti-war. We all agree. Now. What's wrong with being in complete agreement, I would think that's a good thing?

You need to work on your sarcasm.

The point remains, the Repubs had no issue with the gov't when it was under their control (until about the last year in as I noted before, even a hermit could tell how messed up things were at the end) and so to complain about Dems doing the same thing is both illogical and hypocritical.

Stonewall · Feb 26, 2013

David said:
You need to work on your sarcasm.

The point remains, the Repubs had no issue with the gov't when it was under their control (until about the last year in as I noted before, even a hermit could tell how messed up things were at the end) and so to complain about Dems doing the same thing is both illogical and hypocritical.

I just finished explaining to you that no one is complaining. Not the Republicans who you are correct, never complained. And neither are the Democrat....who once complained on a daily basis.

Please read before responding to my posts, thanks.

Afghans Issue Decree

Similar threads