Jana,
You miss the point-as usual. No doubt you are unaware that your beloved afghan taliban have killed most of those afghans who've died in this war despite all that western airpower-
Please read-
Mid-Year Bulletin On The Protection Of Civilians In Armed Conflict-UNAMA July 2009
I doubt you will so let me assist you-
"A continuing trend seen through 2008 and into the first six months of 2009 is that AGE [anti-government elements] tactics have shifted, from frontal or ambush attacks on PGF [pro-government forces], to insurgent or guerrilla type activities, including asymmetric attacks such as IEDs, VBIEDs, BBIEDs, (that remain responsible for the largest number of civilian deaths), and targeted assassinations.
10. Between January and June 2009, 595 civilian deaths were attributed to AGE activities; 400 of those deaths were the result of indiscriminate IED and suicide attacks. This represents 67% of all deaths attributable to AGEs, or 39.5% of the total 1013 civilians killed in the first half of 2009. AGE operations are frequently undertaken regardless of the impact on civilians in terms of deaths and injuries or destruction of civilian infrastructure. Based on investigation of specific incidents conducted by UNAMA Human Rights, information suggests that AGEs are basing themselves in civilian areas so as to deliberately blur the distinction between combatants and civilians, and as part of what appears to be an active policy aimed at drawing a military response to areas where there is a high likelihood that civilians will be killed or injured. Also of great concern to UNAMA Human Rights, is the frequency by which AGEs conduct attacks in, or against, civilian locations. UNAMA Human Rights continues to document IED attacks carried out on roads used by civilian traffic, residential compounds, and market places. In some areas, UNAMA Human Rights has also noted targeted assassinations of civilians through the use of IEDs, particularly in the South-East."
Do you get the point?
Maybe not so let me help you some more-
The Human Cost: The Consequences Of Insurgent Attacks In Afghanistan-HRW April 2007
Finally, you are correct that we've made egregious and horrific mistakes. Our response has been heartfelt. We've been the ones to evacuate those whom we've injured and, further, we've gone later and begged forgiveness and made recompense-
A Vow To Cut Afghan Civilian Deaths-NYT May 19, 2009
Let's be clear with what I've given you. The first is an accounting of UNAMA's assessment of civilian afghan casualties. If you actually take the time to read, you'll see that it's their assessment that the afghan taliban are killing afghan civilians at nearly 2:1 despite all of ISAF's so-called firepower.
The second link is a report from Human Rights Watch on the nature of the taliban's conduct which not only indicates that they kill, but do so by intent. Jana, not once has anybody accused ISAF of intending to kill civilians. NOT ONCE. The taliban have also made use of afghan civilians as human shields when faced with imminent destruction at the hands of ISAF forces.
Finally, please remind me when MULLAH OMAR has visited the families of those he's killed and offered his sincerest apologies. That's Karl Eikenberry, our newly-appointed ambassador and recent commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan in that story by Carlotta Gall of the NYT last May.
You are so far off the mark with your twisted justifications that I'm truly embarassed for you.
So let me answer your question now-
"why this should be different than US bombardment of Civlians in Afghanistan????"
Jana, it should be different because every gathered statistic tells us it happens more than US bombardment and that it does so all-too-often by intent. Get it? MORE DIE BY TALIBAN HANDS AND TOO OFTEN AS INTENTIONAL TARGETS OF THE TALIBAN.
Don't know how more clear I can be. You really need to grow up and start to study instead of relying upon your smug and all-too-inaccurate assumptions because, truthfully, you repeatedly display that you don't know sh!t about this war.
Thanks.
