Western airstrikes and civilian casualties due to them in Afghanistan-Statistics

[Xeric]

Afghan airstrikes and civilian casualties


By The Associated Press (AP) – 1 hour ago

A glance at Western airstrikes and civilian casualties in Afghanistan:

June 2007: 41 civilians killed, nine inside the Pakistani border. 448 munitions expended. No data on individual airstrikes immediately available.

June 2008: Five civilians killed. 154 airstrikes. 984 munitions expended.

June 2009: 10 civilians killed. 127 airstrikes. 437 munitions expended.

July 2007: 27 civilians killed. 491 munitions expended. No data on individual airstrikes immediately available.

July 2008: 89 civilians killed. 156 airstrikes. 752 munitions expended.

July 2009: Six civilians killed. 222 airstrikes. 369 munitions expended.

August 2007: Reports of 25 civilians killed, but 18 are disputed by NATO. 875 munitions expended. No data on individual airstrikes immediately available.

August 2008: 110 civilians killed. 630 munitions expended. No data on individual airstrikes immediately available.

August 2009: As of Aug. 10, Four civilians killed, and report of five killed disputed by NATO.

___

Airstrike figures from U.S. Air Force Central Command. One munition equals one bomb, one missile or one cannon strafing run.

Civilian casualties figures are based on an AP tally of daily reports from witnesses, Afghan officials, the U.S. and NATO.

 

[Righteous_Fire]

And these are supposed to be GPS and Laser guided precision munitions/bombs

God Bless cuz those statistics are just BAAD

Most show gross overkill

Poor People

 

[S-2]

and to know that the taliban have killed two-thirds more in that same time-frame, often by intentional targeting, says what to you Xeric?

Of course, PAF is perfectly accurate and would NEVER bomb it's own. Correct?

Or more likely, you won't hear or read about it...

No link, btw. No context.

Just a flame...

 

[Xeric]

and to know that the taliban have killed two-thirds more in that same time-frame, often by intentional targeting, says what to you Xeric?

Of course, PAF is perfectly accurate and would NEVER bomb it's own. Correct?

Or more likely, you won't hear or read about it...

No link, btw. No context.

Just a flame...

Oh i was waiting for you sir!

i deliberately missed the link as i knew that you are going to ask the stupid question regarding the link despite the fact that it cleary says on the news that it is from the AP, anywaz here's the link The Associated Press: Afghan airstrikes and civilian casualties, see how bewildered you are by the facts!!

And as for the flame, sir i thought let me show you what the yanks here want to see; how anti-american is a serving Army Officer in Pakistan . Happy and savvy now?? Also see some other threads that i opened today.

 

[Conscientious objector]

and to know that the taliban have killed two-thirds more in that same time-frame, often by intentional targeting, says what to you Xeric?

The Taliban never target civilians you need to stop parroting your neo con propaganda and those civilians that are killed accidentally are as a direct result of american occupation. No occupation = no civilian casualties, its as simple as that.

 

[Righteous_Fire]

The Taliban never target civilians you need to stop parroting your neo con propaganda and those civilians that are killed accidentally are as a direct result of american occupation. No occupation = no civilian casualties, its as simple as that.

Look I'll take your word for it but words are no good in real discussions!

You have to post links of real statements or articles to support your point!

 

[Conscientious objector]

Look I'll take your word for it but words are no good in real discussions!

You have to post links of real statements or articles to support your point!

What is it exactly that you disagree with? The fact that the Taliban never intentionally target civilians? The leadership released a list of guidelines recently in which they clearly instructed all Islamic freedom fighters to avoid engaging in any resistance operations in which civilians would be put at risk.

Noe tell me how is it possible that they would intentionally target their own brethren when they are commanding their fighters to take utmost precautions with regard to civilians even in instances where the crusaders are targeted?



As well as this bro do you know what the Islamic term Husn ul Dhan means?

 

[Righteous_Fire]

The leadership released a list of guidelines recently

This is what I referred to, you should provide us with a link to an article or page with this stuff !!

 

[Conscientious objector]

This is what I referred to, you should provide us with a link to an article or page with this stuff !!

It has thirteen chapters, 67 articles and it lays out what one of most secretive organisations in the world today, can and cannot do.

Al Jazeera has obtained a copy of the Taliban's new military code of conduct, approved by Mullah Omar, its Afghan leader.

It appears to be an attempt to consolidate a disparate movement.

Following are some key quotes that outline the new code of conduct:

On asylum:

"Every Muslim can invite anyone working for the slave government in Kabul to leave their job, and cut their relationship with this corrupt administration. If the person accepts, then with the permission of the provincial and district leadership, a guarantee of safety can be given."

On prisoners:

"Whenever any official, soldier, contractor or worker of the slave government is captured, these prisoners cannot be attacked or harmed.

"The decision on whether to seek a prisoner exchange, or to release the prisoner, with a strong guarantee, will be made by the provincial leader. Releasing prisoners in exchange for money is strictly prohibited."

"If the prisoner is a director, commander or district chief or higher, the decision on whether to harm, kill, release or forgive them is only made by the Imam or deputy Imam."

If a military infidel is captured, the decision on whether to kill, release or exchange the hostage is only to be made by the Imam or deputy Imam."

On civilian casualties:

"Governors, district chiefs and line commanders and every member of the Mujahideen must do their best to avoid civilian deaths, civilian injuries and damage to civilian property. Great care must be taken."


On suicide attacks:

"Suicide attacks should only be used on high and important targets. A brave son of Islam should not be used for lower and useless targets. The utmost effort should be made to avoid civilian casualties."

On unity:

"Creating a new mujahideen group or battalion is forbidden. If unofficial groups or irregular battalions refuse to join the formal structure they should be disbanded. If a governor or leader has in the past had a unit or active group in another province, they should bring it to the attention of the leader of that province. That leader should then take over command of the group."

On relations with the Afghan people:

"The Mujahideen have to behave well and show proper treatment to the nation, in order to bring the hearts of civilian muslims closer to them. The mujahideen must avoid discrimination based on tribal roots, language or their geographic background."


Al Jazeera English - AJE

 

[Righteous_Fire]

Now thats how its done! "Conscientious objector" it wasnt so hard, atleast you have a link to prove your previous statement!

But still you didnt post a direct link

 

[Conscientious objector]

Try this one


Al Jazeera English - CENTRAL/S. ASIA - Key quotes from new Taliban book

 

[S-2]

"The Taliban never target civilians..."

Human Rights Watch says otherwise-

The Human Cost: The Consequences of Insurgent Attacks In Afghanistan- HRW

And your basis for such nonsensical drool as above would be...?

"No occupation = no civilian casualties, its as simple as that."

Occupied by forty countries under U.N. mandate and by permission of the legitimate gov't of Afghanistan?

No Pakistani sanctuary for a taliban proxy army that is only "strongly" or "somewhat" supported by 9% of afghans (Question #18) means no civilian casualties-

BBC/ABC/ARD Afghan Poll- Feb. 9, 2009

You, of course, offer nothing. Nada.

This data clears your muddled efforts to dissemble the truth about your beloved afghan insurgents, Mr. Irhabist. Try to respond with something remotely as responsible aside from your typically empty pontifications.

I doubt, seriously, your ability to do so.

 

[PAFAce]

S-2, don't go after the easy target above. I'd recommend you focus your energy for more productive dialogue.

In any case, I think what Xeric is trying to prove is that American air strikes alone are not going to be very useful, unless and until they are coupled with reliable information, as in the case of the Baitullah Mehsud strike. Air-strikes all willy-nilly in Afghanistan, and previously in Pakistan, without proper prerequisites is a major no-no if the US really wants to win this "war of hearts".

 

[Thomas]

It has thirteen chapters, 67 articles and it lays out what one of most secretive organisations in the world today, can and cannot do.

Al Jazeera has obtained a copy of the Taliban's new military code of conduct, approved by Mullah Omar, its Afghan leader.

It appears to be an attempt to consolidate a disparate movement.

Following are some key quotes that outline the new code of conduct:

On asylum:

"Every Muslim can invite anyone working for the slave government in Kabul to leave their job, and cut their relationship with this corrupt administration. If the person accepts, then with the permission of the provincial and district leadership, a guarantee of safety can be given."

On prisoners:

"Whenever any official, soldier, contractor or worker of the slave government is captured, these prisoners cannot be attacked or harmed.

"The decision on whether to seek a prisoner exchange, or to release the prisoner, with a strong guarantee, will be made by the provincial leader. Releasing prisoners in exchange for money is strictly prohibited."

"If the prisoner is a director, commander or district chief or higher, the decision on whether to harm, kill, release or forgive them is only made by the Imam or deputy Imam."

If a military infidel is captured, the decision on whether to kill, release or exchange the hostage is only to be made by the Imam or deputy Imam."

On civilian casualties:

"Governors, district chiefs and line commanders and every member of the Mujahideen must do their best to avoid civilian deaths, civilian injuries and damage to civilian property. Great care must be taken."


On suicide attacks:

"Suicide attacks should only be used on high and important targets. A brave son of Islam should not be used for lower and useless targets. The utmost effort should be made to avoid civilian casualties."

On unity:

"Creating a new mujahideen group or battalion is forbidden. If unofficial groups or irregular battalions refuse to join the formal structure they should be disbanded. If a governor or leader has in the past had a unit or active group in another province, they should bring it to the attention of the leader of that province. That leader should then take over command of the group."

On relations with the Afghan people:

"The Mujahideen have to behave well and show proper treatment to the nation, in order to bring the hearts of civilian muslims closer to them. The mujahideen must avoid discrimination based on tribal roots, language or their geographic background."


Al Jazeera English - AJE

don't think his followers are listening. take for example the 21 people they just killed with a roadside bomb.

 

[Thomas]

here is a nice video of insurgents trying to set a roadside bomb but getting caught.

Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com