http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7501538.stm

A US air strike in eastern Afghanistan on Sunday killed 47 civilians, 39 of them women and children, an Afghan government investigating team says.

Reports at the time said that 20 people were killed in the airstrike in Nangarhar province. The US military said they were militants.

But local people said the dead were wedding party guests.

Correspondents say the issue of civilian casualties is hugely sensitive in Afghanistan.

Even if you believe 9/11 was completely legit and some tiny subset of these people had a hand in it, when is enough enough? How many innocent women and children have to die, be tortured, and generally have their lives ruined before we're "even"?

I shudder to think about the orders of magnitude increase in credibility that we've given terror groups in the last decade or so. Even if our country survives this Romanesque over-imperialism, we will have created enemies in almost every corner of the world for decades to come.

Unless absolutely ignorant to the realities of them, I just cannot imagine how ethically and morally bankrupt someone must be to support these wars at this point.

The whole thing is a bit ridiculous at this point. Who supports this imperialistic process? Basically two kinds of people, those who are so fearful of their own thoughts and actions that they bury themselves in a religious shroud to justify every shitty thing they do. It's A-OK to kill muslims because they are a false religion that is controlled by Satan, and the same though can be applied to Muslims, Jews and some others who feel their religion is so superior that it is a justification for the very things their "books" speak against.

I would say that the masses are victims of the leaders and the leaders use everything at their disposal to control the masses and religion is the easiest way to do that. Carlin, in a humorous way hit it dead on, we are taught to fear an invisible man in the sky who will be displeased if we masturbate, love someone of the same sex, use seven specific words, and he gets really mad if we don't go to this building at least once a week, listen to a guy bullshit us then give him money. But the invisible guy doesn't mind so much if you bomb, burn and shoot other people in a far off land because they also believe in an invisible man in the sky who is the same invisible guy we believe in but he has a different name...somehow.

Those are one group of people who aren't sick of it yet and probably won't be unless they actually go and witness it first hand, but they won't because they just don't have the intestinal fortitude to do so.


The other group is just simply retarded.

We certainly do seem to be bombing a lot of wedding parties in Afghanistan....

We certainly do seem to be bombing a lot of wedding parties in Afghanistan....


My thought as well. How many times now have the Afghani folks raised the casualty rate and claimed they were civilian casualties from a wedding party?
And, I have to wonder if the habit of firing weapons into the air when celebrating may be a contributing factor in some of these "killings".

Does it seem so far fetched? Everyone has an AK in afghanastan, and I'm sure weddings which attract a large group of people to the same place are easily thought to be insurgents meeting.

The problem is that they are not insurgents. They are as far as we can tell innocent people. The good guys that we are supposed to help, not kill.

It is hard for us to show compassion, as pressing a button leads to little remorse, no matter how many innocent people die because of it.

And, I have to wonder if the habit of firing weapons into the air when celebrating may be a contributing factor in some of these "killings".

You mean exactly like virtually every other civilization with access to firearms did during celebrations until urban density made it inadvisable? I sort of doubt it, as actual enemy forces seem unlikely to be randomly firing weapons at nothing while shouting hurray.

This makes me laugh. I remember in 2003 when someone posted on this board that we had bombed an entire wedding party in Iraq.

I think some utterly retarded wanker replied "well it serves them right for discharging firearms."

So the real solution here for these damn Afghani's to stop getting married! like we need to support thier efforts in breeding more terrorists anyway! it's as if these where normal people who "might" actually be falling in love or such!


I think I'm actually starting to the hang of this whole right wing thing. Woot, shooting of the resume to Fox tomorrow. Arrrghhh!

You're thinking too narrowly!

Why stop at weddings? Let's go after funerals too - that'd be ironic!

So 47 civilians killed, 39 of them women and children? Where were all the husbands of those women? I thought they didn't really do anything like that without their husbands keeping a close eye on them making sure they don't peep out of their black chadors. Maybe the men ran and hid and left their wives and children for dead?

I'm supposing that the facts in this case are, at worst, somewhere in between the two reports. If indeed that large number of women and children were somehow killed without their husbands being nearby, this indeed was a terrible occurence. My condolences in any case.

So 47 civilians killed, 39 of them women and children? Where were all the husbands of those women? I thought they didn't really do anything like that without their husbands keeping a close eye on them making sure they don't peep out of their black chadors. Maybe the men ran and hid and left their wives and children for dead?

I'm supposing that the facts in this case are, at worst, somewhere in between the two reports. If indeed that large number of women and children were somehow killed without their husbands being nearby, this indeed was a terrible occurence. My condolences in any case.


Some men have more then one wife and child.

It is a terrible tragic occurence. But has anyone looked at whether this was a set-up by the Taliban in order to create a backlash against nato forces?

Well, our track record is against us.

It is a terrible tragic occurence. But has anyone looked at whether this was a set-up by the Taliban in order to create a backlash against nato forces?


What, investigative reporting in this age? That's a good joke.

It does seem unlikely that people are intentionally gathering at various social celebrations to try and get themselves blown up given their lack of knowledge about when adversaries they can't even see are going to appear out of nowhere and put a guided munition through the window. It's within the realm of possibility that these sorts of events are the only time they come out of the mountains, in which case you have the interesting conundrum of us deciding that 45 innocent fatalities is worth 1 or 2 dead "teh bad guyz."

So 47 civilians killed, 39 of them women and children? Where were all the husbands of those women?

We killed them years ago.

You mean exactly like virtually every other civilization with access to firearms did during celebrations until urban density made it inadvisable? I sort of doubt it, as actual enemy forces seem unlikely to be randomly firing weapons at nothing while shouting hurray.

Yeah, well most places that sparsley populated generally don't have Predator Drones flying overhead as well. It's also kind of hard to hear of they are screaming "Horray" or "Jihad" when the Kalashnikov is set to 'auto'.

I know when I see people at a wedding, I usually assume they're screaming "Jihad".

Why not set off firecrackers?
I mean if I had armed airplanes flying overhead, the last thing I would be doing is firing my automatic weapon off into the air....

I've never been to a wedding with people shooting automatic weapons in the air, have you?

Actually, yes, I have. It's just their custom, no matter how odd it may be to us. And imagine if getting ammo for that Kalishnakov is easier than getting firecrackers?

Not assigning blame to anyone or anything here, it's just another tragic event and sucks no matter how you want to spin it.

Edit, Oh, think I read somewhere that you can't hear the predator drones flying around when they are at altitude, so they just might not have heard it. I'll admit though, I've not ever seen a drone live, nor heard one flying. So what the hell do I know? :)

Actually, yes, I have. It's just their custom, no matter how odd it may be to us. And imagine if getting ammo for that Kalishnakov is easier than getting firecrackers?

Not assigning blame to anyone or anything here, it's just another tragic event and sucks no matter how you want to spin it.

Edit, Oh, think I read somewhere that you can't hear the predator drones flying around when they are at altitude, so they just might not have heard it. I'll admit though, I've not ever seen a drone live, nor heard one flying. So what the hell do I know? :)

And a long standing custom at that! You know, seeing as the AK-47 was invented in 1947. It's as deep seated as religion.

I wonder how differently you would see this if it were an Afghan drone that shot up one of our military funerals giving a 21-gun salute.

Well, last time I checked, a 21 gun salute didn't include the setting 'auto', but what do I know?

Not a lot Sixee :P

Unfortunately, there have been multiple situations in which rounds shot during the 21 gun salute have resulted in deaths of innocent citizens. One such case, on October 22, 1999, it was concluded in the Supreme Court of the United States that rounds shot at a Massachusetts State Policeman's funeral killed a 15 year old girl. Due to this, it was ruled that blanks must be used in the 21-gun salute.

So they should use blanks at Afghan weddings, then?

*waits to hear the 'but it's easier to get live rounds' argument.*

The point is that it's not as if firing guns at certain occasions is exclusive to Afghanistan or brown people.

So, again, what would your response be if an Afghan drone decimated a military funeral here for the same reasons? Hey, they could say they were trying to save innocent little 15 year old American girls!

If it was done after October 22, 1999 I'd say they'd have a leg to stand on....
Is it your contention, then that law enforcement officers at an Afghan wedding, were shooting into the air?

Are you contending that the murder of these women and children is justified because they hadn't imported the latest revision of our Western culture?

Or, is it their fault because they didn't have radar to detect a predator drone stalking their wedding?

I cannot fathom the thought process required to justify something like that, just because they aren't like us.

Are you contending that the murder of these women and children is justified because they hadn't imported the latest revision of our Western culture?

Or, is it their fault because they didn't have radar to detect a predator drone stalking their wedding?

I cannot fathom the thought process required to justify something like that, just because they aren't like us.

I am not trying to say that at all. I'm not saying a 21 gun salute is a bad thing either. What I am saying is that people shooting off rounds from an AK is going to appear in a distinct fashion to a spy drone. I'm not trying to excuse the wholesale slaughter of innocents at all. I can just understand how such an incident can occur.

I felt the same way after the first several incidents. At this point, dozens later, it's getting hard to swallow.

And a long standing custom at that! You know, seeing as the AK-47 was invented in 1947. It's as deep seated as religion.

They used other weapons before that, just like everyone else. For extra irony power, there's a reasonably good chance that the AK47s and other Soviet bloc weapons possessed by people in Afghanistan were shipped there on the United States' dime during our mass arming of various insurgent groups there in the 1980s.

We're all about the Second Amendment as long as it's not here ;-p

The way I see it you have three choices to choose from:

A) The USA doesn't give a rats ass about killing innocents (women and children).

B) The USA does care but is too incompetent to avoid it. As good as the technology is we make mistakes.

C) The USA does not intend to kill innocents but actions are being taken by terrorists to dupe the US (through false intelligence, firing at planes from near the groups, etc.) into firing into these gatherings.

Unless you're Jedd (joke), it has to be B and/or C. It happens way too often to be only B IMHO.

The whole thing stinks!

War sucks, war is bad, war is confusing, war is never the answer, war is about the PR as much as it's about the killing, war kills innocents, some leaders expend their own for the sake of bringing bad PR down on the other side, war creates everlasting friendships, war creates everlasting animosities, war is hell, war is brutal, war is....

The only possible reason why someone would deliberately target a wedding would be to incite such agression in the Afghans against us so the war goes on forever which would make it a money driven situation and a social control issue.

Is that possible that someone or some corporate entity would do that?

Ailwon, I can't + rep you for that post, but you are spot on.
Hear, hear!

What happens then we start adopting a policy that says you can't shoot any any crowd that appears to be a wedding celebration?

How much you want to bet wedding parties in Afghanistan increase tenfold?

Hopefully, someone will exercise the modicum of brainpower necessary to get us out of there long before that matters, and before external events force our hand.

They used other weapons before that, just like everyone else. For extra irony power, there's a reasonably good chance that the AK47s and other Soviet bloc weapons possessed by people in Afghanistan were shipped there on the United States' dime during our mass arming of various insurgent groups there in the 1980s.

We're all about the Second Amendment as long as it's not here ;-p

Oh come on, that's just a horrible argument. The second amendment doesn't guarantee irresponsible/stupid usage of firearms.

The way I see it you have three choices to choose from:

A) The USA doesn't give a rats ass about killing innocents (women and children).

B) The USA does care but is too incompetent to avoid it. As good as the technology is we make mistakes.

C) The USA does not intend to kill innocents but actions are being taken by terrorists to dupe the US (through false intelligence, firing at planes from near the groups, etc.) into firing into these gatherings.

Unless you're Jedd (joke), it has to be B and/or C. It happens way too often to be only B IMHO.

B and C are my choices. I don't for a minute believe anyone on these boards is in any manner approving of these civilian deaths. Looking for a reason why they occurred is only natural though, and should not be looked at as trying to justify anything.

I am a cynic when it comes to these events and the ensuing investigations. Lt. Calley(sp) of the My Lai massacre in Viet Nam received a punishment that could not even qualify as a slap on the wrist in the context of what he had done. The varied investigations of Iraqi "crimes" have yet to convince me that there is any sincere intent to punish any of our troops who may cross the line.

So, I will feel bad for innocent deaths, but I will not hold my breath for any form of a productive outcome of any investigation. And I will expect to see more of the same as long as we are engaged in chasing the Taliban and OBL and his group.

War sucks, war is bad, war is confusing, war is never the answer

I have very serious reservations about Predator drones. they fly these out of California I believe. imagine clocking in at work fly your drone out and blow up a wedding party. then you log off and run up to McDonalds for lunch.
We really are turning war into a freaking video game.


http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/07/09/remote.fighters/index.html?iref=newssearch

I want to drive a tank like it's gran turismo, modify that abrams and shit! Needs more horsepower and lower weight. Drop it and adjust the spoiler!

Years ago, back in the '80s I read a great Tom Clancey book called "Red Storm Rising" had a great part in it where a battalion of Abrams tanks was able to completely outflank the Soviets as they moved across West germany.

They took the governors off of the Abrams engines and ripped down a power line road at about 60mph. That book rocked was also a great part about the Soviets invading Iceland.

Oddly enough, every 21 Gun Salute I've been involved in we used blanks. Who in their right minds would use live ammunition? Gravity dictates what goes up, must come down right?

My unit did several rotations on Funeral Detail during our Red Cycle out at Ft. Lewis. Was an eye opening experience to a young 19 yr old kid.

In defense of our "accidental" killing of so called innocent brown people, could it be argued we are simply saving them from the fate handed down to nine in Iran, who were sentenced to death by stoning?

Eight women and one man have been sentenced to death by stoning for adultery. Six of the nine were convicted solely on judge's decisions with no witnesses or the presence of their lawyers during their "confessions".

Under Iran's Islamic laws, adultery is the only capital offense punishable by stoning.

I realize the laws may be somewhat different in Afghanistan, but Islamic law does rule and there have been cases of female teachers being killed, as well as male teachers who taught female students. So, could we not view these as "mercy" killings, saving them from a worse fate down the road?


Please note tongue is firmly in cheek.



Sorry I cannot link the article regarding the Iranian sentencing. :(

Lol such trash

Lol such trash


I am unable to link the article jedd, but maybe you with your expertise at digging stuff up can extract it from the July 21 issue of the St Paul Pioneer Press, located in the Nation & World briefing section. The heading over the blurb was "Nine are sentenced to stoning in Iran", and it was on page 2A.

The trash is you bringing Iran into a thread about Afghanistan and our killing innocent people there.

If every gamer in the US had his/her own tank, we'd blow up the world with cheeto stained fingers.

The trash is you bringing Iran into a thread about Afghanistan and our killing innocent people there.


I guess you missed the reference to Islamic law.

I guess you missed the reference to Islamic law.

And how does that Islamic law apply to us bombing a wedding party?

Well, I have to assume, the US military doesn't intentionally bomb wedding parties. I wish they had bombed mine.. that's another subject though.

Does Islamic law say that it's ok to car bomb the Indian embassy killing 41 (edit: mostly) civilians either?

Two wrongs don't make a right, but does an accident equal the intentional car bombing of civilian targets?

Does Islamic law say that it's ok to car bomb the Indian embassy killing 41 (edit: mostly) civilians either?


It's ok as long as they are 'Infidels'. And even if they aren't, they aren't part of your sect, so it's all cool.
And if they are part of your sect, then they are going to Heaven to claim the promised 72 virgins.
It's a Win/Win/Win situation for everyone involved....

How did this thread turn into a bash Islam thread? You guys are fucking pathetic!

The same way you manage to turn every thread into a pro-Iranian tirad.

Indeed it is pathetic.

Any thread about this subject is going to eventually return to the root causes (and I do realize this is only one), the radicalization of Islam.

The reason it surfaced here is because of my contention that the radical muslim terrorist actively work to give false intelligence to try to get the US to bomb innocents...they love it. Granted, plain old human error is factor too.

PS - You really need to watch gross generalizations like "you guys are pathetic", you just invite abuse at that point.

The same way you manage to turn every thread into a pro-Iranian tirad.

Indeed it is pathetic.


Notice how I didn't turn this into a thread about Iran...

Notice how I didn't turn this into a thread about Iran...

Not yet. :devil

But isn't it interesting that Iran....nm.:)