Surprised none of the usual suspects have posted about this yet. it certainly seems as bad as Abu Ghraib, and as much The Once's fault as the former was ChimpyMcHitlerBurton's. US Army 'kill team' in Afghanistan posed for photos of murdered civilians Commanders brace for backlash of anti-US sentiment that could be more damaging than after the Abu Ghraib scandal Jon Boone The Guardian, Monday 21 March 2011 Commanders in Afghanistan are bracing themselves for possible riots and public fury triggered by the publication of "trophy" photographs of US soldiers posing with the dead bodies of defenceless Afghan civilians they killed. Senior officials at Nato's International Security Assistance Force in Kabul have compared the pictures published by the German news weekly Der Spiegel to the images of US soldiers abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib in Iraq which sparked waves of anti-US protests around the world. They fear that the pictures could be even more damaging as they show the aftermath of the deliberate murders of Afghan civilians by a rogue US Stryker tank unit that operated in the southern province of Kandahar last year. Some of the activities of the self-styled "kill team" are already public, with 12 men currently on trial in Seattle for their role in the killing of three civilians. Five of the soldiers are on trial for pre-meditated murder, after they staged killings to make it look like they were defending themselves from Taliban attacks. Other charges include the mutilation of corpses, the possession of images of human casualties and drug abuse. All of the soldiers have denied the charges. They face the death penalty or life in prison if convicted. The case has already created shock around the world, particularly with the revelations that the men cut "trophies" from the bodies of the people they killed. An investigation by Der Spiegel has unearthed approximately 4,000 photos and videos taken by the men. The magazine, which is planning to publish only three images, said that in addition to the crimes the men were on trial for there are "also entire collections of pictures of other victims that some of the defendants were keeping". The US military has strived to keep the pictures out of the public domain fearing it could inflame feelings at a time when anti-Americanism in Afghanistan is already running high. In a statement, the army said it apologised for the distress caused by photographs "depicting actions repugnant to us as human beings and contrary to the standards and values of the United States". The lengthy Spiegel article that accompanies the photographs contains new details about the sadistic behaviour of the men. In one incident in May last year, the article says, during a patrol, the team apprehended a mullah who was standing by the road and took him into a ditch where they made him kneel down. The group's leader, Staff Sergeant Calvin Gibbs, then allegedly threw a grenade at the man while an order was given for him to be shot. Afterwards, Gibbs is described cutting off one of the man's little fingers and removing a tooth. The patrol team later claimed to their superiors that the mullah had tried to threaten them with a grenade and that they had no choice but to shoot. On Sunday night many organisations employing foreign staff, including the United Nations, ordered their staff into a "lockdown", banning all movements around Kabul and requiring people to remain in their compounds. In addition to the threat from the publication of the photographs, security has been heightened amid fears the Taliban may try to attack Persian new year celebrations. There could also be attacks because Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, is due to make a speech declaring which areas of the country should be transferred from international to Afghan control in the coming months. One security manager for the US company DynCorp sent an email to clients warning that publication of the photos was likely "to incite the local population" as the "severity of the incidents to be revealed are graphic and extreme". --- thread title cheerfully cribbed from Drudge. Insty, and about 50M other online sources.
utter condemnation. Obama Admin will probably posit a through review, but it won't be enough. still, just a reminder that war is an ugly mess that has to be taken VERY HEAVILY. taking notes, neo-cons?
Then again, makes me once again wonder what is in the top secret files that caused Hillary and co to fall in such a huff when there was the slightest possibility of them being released--- http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/coldwar/korea_usa_01.shtml maybe if more of those documents were declassified with the current conflict-people would be mad as hell at what the government they're electing is doing in their name. Maybe we wouldn't have as much war, when the hidden costs are brought to the forefront now rather then much much later. Maybe, just maybe, we will understand why so many people are willing to die for the cause of resisting America.
I agree only that these issues should be brought to light because the fact is war is hell. Korea is the last war where we were actually losing on the battlefield. The reason commanders made such orders is because soldiers would pretend to be friendly then pull out AK47's and start unloading. Today the military is directed to (orders are not always followed) to play much cleaner because we can win without such terrible actions. People (namely Obama and anyone supporting the ongoing clusterfudge in Afghan) should realize bad bad stuff happens in war where it is kill or be killed, and then i like you hope we will have less war.
I was going to post this. But I figured it wouldn't do any good. I don't think this is common or systemic. It's a sad and unfortunate isolated incident. These are trained killers, and in an army full of trained killers, someone might go overboard. That's unfortunately what happened here.
haven't searched, so forgive me if you've addressed, but were you similarly understanding wrt W and Abu Ghraib?
a totally different situation, in abu ghraid, soilders were put in positions they were not likely trained for. they are not investigating officers, they are not prison guards.
what is your point. abu ghraid was representative of an overall policy. these were some rogue soilders. and i don't know if you remember this or not basso, obama wasn't president when this war started.
I'd actually like to know what your understanding of Abu Ghraib was? Look at the bottom of this thread, the main Abu Ghraib thread is at the bottom, a 17 page 322 post monster, and, despite your omnipresence here, this is your contribution: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/search.php?do=process&searchthreadid=77390
Excesses at Abu Ghraib are probably not unrelated to the wider problem we've had with the use of torture as official American policy, including Executive Orders authorizing the use of extraordinary interrogation tactics, redefining what "torture" means, and shifting interrogation responsibilities to entities with less accountability (subcontractors, CIA, and foreign countries). Maybe maybe maybe, there was no cover-up at Abu Ghraib and it was all simply a matter of low-level soldiers indulging their sinful natures. Even then, you should see it in the wider context of a high Executive tolerance and implicit and even explicit support for torture. That's where Bush comes in. In contrast, this episode consists of a team of men out and about in Afghanistan as they are supposed to be and doing things they are explicitly told not to do. Does this particular atrocity fall into a wider tapestry of intentional Executive use of war crimes? If it does, someone will have to help me connect the dots.
Because it's just a floor for direct confirmed casualties, which are probably much higher, given the 60,000 unknown deaths. And the indirect body count(you know, the Mao Great Leap Forward number) is well over 100,000. Congrats Bush on entering the century club - first man since Nixon or LBJ probably.
