NATO says coalition troops may have killed 3 Afghan civilians

[News_Editor]

NATO says coalition troops may have killed 3 Afghan civilians

2010-11-11 04:48:42 GMT+7 (ICT)

KABUL (BNO NEWS) -- The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) on Wednesday said coalition troops may have accidentally killed several Afghan civilians.

The alliance said four Afghan civilian casualties were brought to an ISAF base in the Sangin district of Helmand province, in Afghanistan's south, after combat operations with insurgents in the area.

Three of the four Afghan civilians died later, while the fourth is being treated for his or her injuries. "Our thoughts and concerns are with the families of this terrible accident," said U.S. Army Col. Rafael Torres, director of the ISAF Joint Command Combined Joint Operations Center, without providing other details.

In August, the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) released its 2010 Mid-Year Report on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict. It revealed that the number of civilian casualties in Afghanistan rose by approximately 31 percent in the first semester of 2010.

The Taliban and other insurgent groups, however, are the main causes of these casualties. "Afghan children and women are increasingly bearing the brunt of this conflict. They are being killed and injured in their homes and communities in greater numbers than ever before," said Staffan de Mistura, Special Representative of the Secretary-General.

From January 1 to June 30, UNAMA registered a total of 3,268 civilian casualties, including 1,271 deaths and 1,997 injuries. From this number, insurgents were responsible for 2,477 casualties (76 percent of all casualties, 53 percent more than in 2009) while 386 were attributed to pro-government forces such as NATO. It accounted for 12 percent of all casualties, which is 30 percent less than in 2009.

UNAMA said that the increase in the number of casualties is attributed to the use of a greater number of larger and more sophisticated improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and the number of civilians assassinated and executed by anti-government forces (which included public executions of children).

"The devastating human impact of these events underscores that, nine years into the conflict, measures to protect Afghan civilians effectively and to minimize the impact of the conflict on basic human rights are more urgent than ever. All those concerned must do more to protect civilians and comply with their legal obligations not to attack civilians,†said Georgette Gagnon, Director of Human Rights for UNAMA.

IEDs and suicide attacks by insurgents killed 557 Afghans and injured 1,137 in the first six months of 2010. On the other hand, aerial attacks by ISAF remained the most harmful pro-government tactic, causing 69 of the 223 civilian deaths attributed to pro-government forces in the period.

The southern region witnessed more than half of assassinations and executions in Afghanistan, where more than one hundred Afghan civilians were killed in such incidents. These civilians killed included teachers, nurses, doctors, tribal elders, community leaders, provincial and district officials, other civilians including children, and civilians working for international military forces and international organizations.

UNAMA recommended insurgents in its report to stop the use of IEDs as these cause a great number of fatalities. The agency also suggested the Afghan Government to create a public body to lead its response to major civilian casualty incidents and its interaction with international military forces.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2010-11-11

[hobanse]

how many more have to die, for the 9/11 lie???

[beechguy]

how many more have to die, for the 9/11 lie???

Actually, much of this was a long time coming and not just about the 9/11 atack. Al Qaeda or their predecessors, were responsible for several attacks, Khobar Towers 1996, another bombing before then in Saudi, 2 Embassies(Kenya, Tanzania) on the same day in Africa 1998, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen 2000, numerous attacks in Saudi since then, just to name a few. Then they managed to get the Taliban involved.

Curious you didn't comment about the remarks that the insurgents were responsible for 76% of the civilian casualites

But, if people choose to ignore facts, or be misinformed by propagandist websites that's certainly they're choice.

Edited November 11, 2010 by beechguy

[hobanse]

how many more have to die, for the 9/11 lie???

Actually, much of this was a long time coming and not just about the 9/11 atack. Al Qaeda or their predecessors, were responsible for several attacks, Khobar Towers 1996, another bombing before then in Saudi, 2 Embassies(Kenya, Tanzania) on the same day in Africa 1998, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen 2000, numerous attacks in Saudi since then, just to name a few. Then they managed to get the Taliban involved.

Curious you didn't comment about the remarks that the insurgents were responsible for 76% of the civilian casualites

But, if people choose to ignore facts, or be misinformed by propagandist websites that's certainly they're choice.

No occupation, no insurgents, no civilian casualites, so simple!!

[beechguy]

how many more have to die, for the 9/11 lie???

Actually, much of this was a long time coming and not just about the 9/11 atack. Al Qaeda or their predecessors, were responsible for several attacks, Khobar Towers 1996, another bombing before then in Saudi, 2 Embassies(Kenya, Tanzania) on the same day in Africa 1998, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen 2000, numerous attacks in Saudi since then, just to name a few. Then they managed to get the Taliban involved.

Curious you didn't comment about the remarks that the insurgents were responsible for 76% of the civilian casualites

But, if people choose to ignore facts, or be misinformed by propagandist websites that's certainly they're choice.

No occupation, no insurgents, no civilian casualites, so simple!!

You do seem to have a way of ignoring the facts. The insurgents and terrorists were there first, and they exported their activities outside the region, they deserve whatever bad they get.

[hobanse]

"The insurgents and terrorists were there first"

The first insurgents and terrorists!

[beechguy]

"The insurgents and terrorists were there first"

The first insurgents and terrorists!

Perhaps you need to review your geography, since when was Palestine/Israel in Afghanistan? Anyway, you're in the wrong topic with that.

[chuckd]

Beechguy:

Give our friend a break. At least he got the correct continent.

[Ulysses G.]

"The insurgents and terrorists were there first"

The first insurgents and terrorists!

[cdnvic]

I am getting so sick of propaganda. Discussion is fine, but lobbyists I`m going to silence.

[geriatrickid]

I don't think anyone dismisses the civilian casualties, but this is the unfortunate part of wars. Noncombatants suffer. Whatever wrongs the Nato troops can be accused, the fact that they are willing to investigate such incidents, are willing to put themselves in harms way and even risk their own lives to minimize civilian casualties and are quick to offer medical care to both combatant and non combatant alike speaks volumes about the moral integrity of the Nato troops.

[SergeiY]

I don't think anyone dismisses the civilian casualties, but this is the unfortunate part of wars. Noncombatants suffer. Whatever wrongs the Nato troops can be accused, the fact that they are willing to investigate such incidents, are willing to put themselves in harms way and even risk their own lives to minimize civilian casualties and are quick to offer medical care to both combatant and non combatant alike speaks volumes about the moral integrity of the Nato troops.

its murder. its a crime.

I think they are trying their best to hide such 'accidents' before it even come to an investigation or they do a 'weapon drop'.

They murder civilians, they use coward weapons like drone bombings, they invade a foreign country. there is no moral in murder. there is no moral in war.

There a better ways to make the world a better place then starting wars, dropping bombs and kill people.

What kind of "moral" you are talking about? Are you a Christian?

[hobanse]

Can the arms business afford peac in the world??

[SergeiY]

Can the arms business afford peac in the world??

If there wouldn't be any natural resources to get the moralists in the Nato states would care much less. But of course having the 'Muslim terrorists' as the next big enemy after the cold war is over and since the communist threat has disappeared is a nice side effect. keeps the war business and patriotic US vs. Them mentality running.

[hobanse]

Can the arms business afford peac in the world??

If there wouldn't be any natural resources to get the moralists in the Nato states would care much less. But of course having the 'Muslim terrorists' as the next big enemy after the cold war is over and since the communist threat has disappeared is a nice side effect. keeps the war business and patriotic US vs. Them mentality running.

Meet the Carlyle Group

best reg.