September 16, 2012
Why Do They Hate "Us"?
Reason MCCLXXI: 8 women killed in NATO airstrike, Afghan officials say
Afghan officials say a NATO airstrike killed eight women and girls who were out gathering firewood before dawn Sunday in a remote region on the east of the country. The coalition says it believes only insurgents were hit.
Villagers from Laghman province's Alingar district brought the bodies to the governor's office in the provincial capital, said Sarhadi Zewak, a spokesman for the provincial government.
"They were shouting 'Death to America!' They were condemning the attack," Zewak said.
Posted by b on September 16, 2012 at 09:10 AM | Permalink
"Airstrikes have been a particularly sensitive issue between the Afghan people"
These Afgans are weird people, they don't like being massacred.
"[...] NATO forces [...] maintain that [air strikes] are a key tactic for going after insurgent leaders."
Now it's funny because in this particular case the invaders had not even the faintest idea who they'd massacred. I can't believe NATO people seriously think they can stop a determined insurgency like the Afgan one with "taking out" the leaders. Actually, IMHO, they are very well aware that the people they kill are usually farmers, who happen to hate the invaders. What they want with these air raid and night raids is literarly terrorizing the Afgans into submission. Ie. if you are not careful we will get you.
Posted by: balu | Sep 16, 2012 9:31:39 AM | 2
Syrian Commando ✩ @syriancommando
"You can commit any crime you like as long as you takbeer alongside said crime" ~ Salafi sheikh
Retweeted by Linda Juniper
americans have a similar notion
Posted by: brian | Sep 16, 2012 9:35:21 AM | 3
I would think that with all the hatred Uncle Weasel has generated towards itself, not a single US embassy would be safe from Iran-supplied rocket-propelled grenades, missiles and artillery in the event that Iran is attacked. Certainly the embassies in Turkey, Azerbaijan, Kuwait, Pakistan, the UAE, Lebanon and Iraq & Afghanistan, of course, would be vulnerable.
Posted by: Arash Darya-Bandari | Sep 16, 2012 9:52:10 AM | 4
Taliban are still bleeding them pretty good though 2 news stories over the weekend:
1) Six US fighter jets were destroyed and two significantly damaged on Friday when insurgents stormed a heavily fortified Afghan base. Lieutenant Colonel Hagen Messer conceded that the scale of damage, carried out by more than a dozen attackers dressed in US Army uniforms and armed with guns, rockets and suicide vests who managed to storm the airfield, was unprecedented. Three coalition refuelling stations were also destroyed and six aircraft hangars damaged in the assault at Camp Bastion in southern Helmand province.
Read somewhere else that the fighter jets were Harriers, so likely pretty old, around 7-15 Million per jet. Also notice that the fighters were wearing "US Army Uniforms" to infiltrate the base. This is the first time I have heard of Taliban fighters dressed as US soldiers. Likely got the uniforms from spies planted in the Afghan Army that would be able to steal a few uniforms from bases.
2) Six Nato troops, including two British soldiers, have been killed in Afghanistan this weekend in suspected "insider" attacks. In the most recent incident, four Nato troops were found dead and two wounded in Zabol province. The attack came a day after two British soldiers were shot dead by an Afghan policeman while returning from a patrol in southern Helmand province, one of the strongholds of the Taliban-led insurgency.
The soldiers, from 3rd Battalion The Yorkshire Regiment, were killed at a checkpoint in the south of Nahr-e Saraj district in Helmand province. At least 51 foreign military personnel have been killed in "insider" attacks this year.
Source: The Guardian
In all of 2011 Insider attacks killed 21 occupation troops. Now in 2012 that number is 9 deaths away from being a 300% increase on the year.
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Sep 16, 2012 10:10:40 AM | 5
Winning hearts and minds is tough.Killing and placing the hearts on the left,and minds on the right(the ears and fingers go in the back) of our trophy belts is much easier and less costly.
Posted by: dahoit | Sep 16, 2012 10:40:09 AM | 6
....why shouldnt 'they'?
Posted by: brian | Sep 16, 2012 11:03:31 AM | 7
Iran-supplied rocket-propelled grenades, missiles and artillery in the event that Iran is attacked. Certainly the embassies in Turkey, Azerbaijan, Kuwait, Pakistan, the UAE, Lebanon and Iraq & Afghanistan, of course, would be vulnerable.
Posted by: Arash Darya-Bandari | Sep 16, 2012 9:52:10 AM | 4
you make it sound as if Iran and not USrael is arming terrorists
Posted by: brian | Sep 16, 2012 11:04:45 AM | 8
Wall to wall on the Sunday News Talk: Martin Indyk, Richard Haas, Thomas Friedman,
not to mention Bibi.....more false propaganda....God help us....
Posted by: georgeg | Sep 16, 2012 11:05:43 AM | 9
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Sep 16, 2012 10:10:40 AM | 5
this is pretty slim pickins! given the US has killed > 2 million iraqis afghans in 10 years
Posted by: brian | Sep 16, 2012 11:06:17 AM | 10
brian @ 8.
Not at all. "...not a single US embassy would be safe..." The 'would' indicates a future conditional tense. Besides, in the event that Uncle Weasel initiates a war or aggression, that act in itself turns their embassies and staff in the region into fair game. And they would not have any standing to make such accusations against Iran anyway, which of course is nothing new.
Posted by: Arash Darya-Bandari | Sep 16, 2012 11:41:52 AM | 11
Why do they hate us? . . .The coalition says it believes only insurgents were hit.
Putting the tragic case of the women aside for a moment, what is an insurgent?
Chris Stevens was an insurgent at one time. And he was a real insurgent, criminally acting to overthrow a sovereign government, whereas the Afghan "insurgents" being killed are not true insurgents because they are acting against a foreign invader and its puppet government. Insurgent Stevens is a hero -- "our best." The fake insurgents, defending their country, are killed.
Were members of the French resistance insurgents? No. Which makes the whole US "counter-insurgency" thing a farce. And it's more than mere semantics because it necessarily describes the situation and the motivations of the people involved, as well as the legalities.
So yes the "mistakes" of war are atrocious and ought to be condemned. Military pilots killing people for the sport of it ought to be punished. But so is the war itself a crime, an illegal killing operation that were it conducted against the US or any of its puppet allies would be a recognized crime and not simply a foreign policy option. In that sense the whole war (or any war) is killing people for the sport of it.
That's why they hate us, as they should. Not just for a film, but for hunting them down and killing them for the sport of it, like they were animals.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 16, 2012 11:54:36 AM | 12
The Rosh Hashanah Riots were timed just right. Triggered 911 crisis and set off the pent up rage of the Muslim community that has been bombed, bullied and hammered for years now. When will people begin to expose those who are really behind all of this Arab world unrest? Why does everybody cover for them and their crimes?
Posted by: Seattle10 | Sep 16, 2012 12:28:56 PM | 13
They ‘hate us’ because of useless, sadistic, arbitrary, aggression.
The US is the supreme military / world power.
US wars now cost too much, in terms of money, energy (fossil fuels), and don’t provide much, if any, return.
(Ask Gorby. Heh.)
War is a dead-end road, except for the fact that it keeps the Pentagon, defense, the military, etc. super flush.
The industry is staggering.
Arms and milit. materiel of every kind, planes, bio, informatics, new technologies, studies, think tanks, test grounds, research, etc. etc.
Primary and sub > contractors in the US offer millions! of ppl a good living wage in the military-industrial complex (as in GB, actually more ...)
Each worker probably supports at least 4 family members.
The slag is used of course by the US but the main point is to sell it to others. E.g. to KSA.
War and strife must be kept up to sell it.
Red US states are the first recipients of contracts, which is why they are pro-war. At first a compensatory mechanism, poorer states would get contracts, today, also, see the prison industry.
All is done to lead USA citizens into ignoring war, such as doing all to minimize US deaths, by hiring mercenaries, shoddy stats, etc. (Then leaving aside vet med care.)
Murdered children in Yemen serve no purpose to the US, except for selling its arms. To Yemen! Which in turn impoverishes the ppl.
So there is the 'light' drone killings, no more massive war, just enough to slaughter some, outrage, etc.
Here a list of countries and the % of gvmt budget devoted to buying arms - national prod. not incl. They buy from the US, from China (a huge exporter), France, GB, Germany, and others. Nation master, it is rough.
Posted by: Noirette | Sep 16, 2012 1:03:44 PM | 14
Colm @ 5 -- When did the term "insider attacks" begin to be used?
I've noticed over the weekend in NPR reports.
Posted by: jawbone | Sep 16, 2012 3:42:18 PM | 15
Arash Darya-Bandari @ 4 -- Do you have a link or citation which shows the RPG's or other weapons are of Iranian provenance? It seems to me the US has been flooding the zone with US light weaponry, either directly or through the Saudis and Gulf Coasts emirs....
Posted by: jawbone | Sep 16, 2012 3:44:58 PM | 16
"Why do they hate Us?" Laughing... let me count the ways.
Perhaps it would be simpler if someone could say why they shouldn't hate Us?
Posted by: Eureka Springs | Sep 16, 2012 4:04:15 PM | 17
I think General Allen went to "insider" recently, sometime this past summer, to get away from green-on-blue, partly b/c some of them are allegedly imposters -- "infiltration, impersonation, coercion,. . .-- and we think that's about 25 percent or so -- it's less about the precision of 25 versus 10 than it is acknowledging that the Taliban are seeking ultimately to have some impact in the formation . . ." blah blah
Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 16, 2012 4:05:26 PM | 18
The incisive military mind at work: We should acknowledge that the people that the US forced from their government eleven years ago "are seeking ultimately to have some impact in the formation."
Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 16, 2012 4:09:17 PM | 19
@b re: headline...
Heh! Roman numerals. As my wife says, if Americans hate Arabs so much, why don't they go back to doing math with Roman numerals. Oh, and stop teaching algebra.
Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Sep 16, 2012 7:23:00 PM | 20
Yeah Martin Dempsey got it started around August on his visit to Afghanistan to discuss the issue. His point was that using "Green on Blue" was a misnomer and that "Insider attacks" was what the US Military was referring to them as.
The thinking was that for much of 2002-2010 "Green on Blue" was a term used for Friendly Fire deaths, if say an Afghan soldier was firing and a US soldier ran out in front of him. But these recent attacks are not accidental shootings in the heat of battle but planned attacks so a different phrase should be used.
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Sep 16, 2012 7:44:58 PM | 21
Dr. Yueh @ 19
Oh, and stop teaching algebra. And give up Chess and stick to Checkers...! ;-)
Posted by: CTuttle | Sep 16, 2012 8:00:41 PM | 23
Perhaps they have...but Grand Checkerboard just doesn't have the same ring to it.
Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Sep 16, 2012 8:40:13 PM | 24
And stop using Arabic loanwords like admiral and apricot. In fact go the other way, and call the Persian Gulf the Arabian Gulf like the US Navy does.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 16, 2012 8:45:45 PM | 25
Jawbone: that is not what I was saying at all; Iran does not arm terrorists. What I was saying is that IF the US attacked Iran, THEN her embassies would be targets of asymmetric attacks by local forces allied to Iran in various countries in Middle East.
Posted by: Arash Darya-Bandari | Sep 16, 2012 9:38:36 PM | 26
And maybe the "international community" should stop using magazines and give up its arsenal (both words from Arabic)?
And shouldn't America give up each base, which translates into Arabic as al-qaeda? America claims to be spooked by "al qaeda," when it has 700 of its own around the world!
The operative behavior being, "behave as we tell you, not as we do."
Posted by: JohnH | Sep 16, 2012 10:38:42 PM | 27
Perhaps they have...but Grand Checkerboard just doesn't have the same ring to it.
Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Sep 16, 2012 8:40:13 PM | 23
Posted by: brian | Sep 16, 2012 10:56:25 PM | 28
FYI protests in Paris
8 hours ago via Twitter
Pro- #Syria pro #Assad rally today in Paris, France against #NATO intervention in Syria, over 2,000 protesters:
Posted by: brian | Sep 17, 2012 12:31:03 AM | 29
"Why do they hate us?"
Dumbest question I've seen in a long time.
Ask that scumsucking bigot Netanyahu. But I'm sure he'll tell ya its all the nasty sand nigger's fault. Truth is, our continued subsidy of Israeli behaviour, actions, policies, agressions and oppressions can only be described as despicably immoral. Of course, our collusion with Israel is only the tip of the iceberg, but it serves as a glaring and realistic example of the cause of the hatred festering in the global Muslim community. We deserve the hatred. We've earned it.
Go to sleep tonight knowing that these sacks of shit in Washington DC are spending your hard earned money purchasing this hatred. Billions and trillions, while your little Jimmy goes without health insurance, and you fight to keep your home. Only scum is left in DC. All the good left long ago. Its a shithole of corruption and greed, and there are no white knights riding to the rescue. This grand experiment is OVER.
Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Sep 17, 2012 12:45:31 AM | 30
iopenedthe link titled "Afghan police officer kills 4 U.S. troops" and under it is the tiniest font reading "Karzai angered by civilian deaths in NATO airstrike".
then after 3 paragraphs about the 4 dead troops the 4th begins.."Meanwhile, according to Afghan officials, airstrikes by NATO planes killed eight women and girls in another remote part of the country."
the disrespect is galling. meanwhile? meanwhile? MEANWHILE?
Posted by: annie | Sep 17, 2012 1:10:22 AM | 31
s'posed to read "i opened the". my space bar needs fixing.
Posted by: annie | Sep 17, 2012 1:11:58 AM | 32
The deaths we read about are only the ones that get reported. The fighters and bombers that are constantly flying sorties over Afghanistan aren't dropping lollipops for the kiddies. The US military is the best equipped, best armed force the world has ever seen, and they are trained to kill and destroy. That's what they do, despite the PR photos, and everyone they kill is an insurgent. There used to be some "suspected" dead insurgents but they got burned for that, so now they all are insurgents, insurging against the US invaders which makes no sense, but that's the story.
It's Obama's war but the average American doesn't care. Why should he? It doesn't affect anyone except the misguided people who are involved in it, and their survivors. Now they're slowly reducing down to 68,000 US troops, getting out of territory that young guys died to control, ceding territory back to the Taliban and handing over firebases and expensive larger facilities to the Afghan military who can't possibly defend, support nor maintain them. Sixty-eight thousand, more than twice as many as when Obama took over. Obama's flacks used to brag on that, but they don't any longer. Afghanistan is so yesterday.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 17, 2012 1:59:52 AM | 33
Taliban camp bastion attack cost $150 million damage.
highest material losses in a single day in the entire Afghanistan War
Posted by: nikon | Sep 17, 2012 5:23:06 AM | 34
Benghazi, Helmand ... these insurgents are getting really good at commando operations (only 15 people against Camp Bastion making all that damage???) ... could NATO training and equipment have something to do with it?
Posted by: claudio | Sep 17, 2012 10:12:22 AM | 35
CTuttle @ 21: Thanks for the link and video, short and to the point.
PoA @ 29: "We deserve the hatred. We've earned it." Exactly!
Posted by: ben | Sep 17, 2012 10:19:45 AM | 36
I am sorry to make this off-topic comment. I don't follow military drills all that much. In case there is anyone here, who follows the military drills that Iranians stage: does anyone know of a precedence for this type of military drill in Iran?
Are such exercises common place in Iran? Or could it have anything to do with the developments in Syria?
I found the following part of the commander's comment especially interesting:
"As regards the specification of the exercises, Kazzemeini stressed the up-to-date nature of the exercises, and said the drills have been designed and planned based on enemy's today conditions"
Posted by: pirouz_2 | Sep 17, 2012 11:36:53 AM | 37
There is a big 'world community' exercise going on right now in the Gulf. Minesweeping we're told. The Iranians are well placed to observe.
Posted by: dh | Sep 17, 2012 12:04:12 PM | 38
Re: # Pirooz_2
It's for Sacred Defense Week Anniversary of Imposed Iraq war.
It's done mostly by Baseej . It's military, security and cultural events .This year programs are little different and more cultural.
Posted by: LOYAL | Sep 17, 2012 12:14:44 PM | 39
Thank you very much.
Posted by: pirouz_2 | Sep 17, 2012 12:18:16 PM | 40
Noirette (13) makes the central point most clearly: the USA is institutionally structured for a state of perpetual war. The US does not need the enormous military parades, like that of Nazi Germany's Nuremberg, to "justify" its wars; war is accepted as a natural way of life by a huge proportion of the population. And of these probably most only dimly perceive their participation (and benefits) from this institutionalisation.
Posted by: JohnE | Sep 17, 2012 2:14:21 PM | 41
Arash Darya-Bandari @ 26 -- Thnx, now I get it. And, yes, if the US attacks Iran I imagine all hell will break loose, with arms from everywhere being brought against US facilities.
But...even in Sunni countries? Will the bonds of being Muslim overcome the sectarian divides?
Posted by: jawbone | Sep 17, 2012 3:53:16 PM | 42
Less than half a platoon launched a complex attack on one of the most heavily fortified NATO bases in Afghanistan. Three coordinated teams of only five guys each were able to breach the base perimeter, kill two Marines and destroy $200 million worth of airplanes. Where can we get fighters like that?
Killed: Lt. Col. Christopher K. Raible, 40, of Huntingdon, Pa. and Sgt. Bradley W. Atwell, 27, of Kokomo, Ind.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 17, 2012 8:14:35 PM | 44
Maybe not quite as big, and of course there's nothing on the ISAF site (as usual)
“We are not going to be conducting as many operations together,” said Maj. Martin Crighton, a coalition spokesman, who said it is inaccurate to describe the scaling-back as a suspension of joint operations in Afghanistan.
It has become the norm for NATO troops to go out on patrols together with their Afghan partners. These partnered operations are meant to help ease Afghan forces into handling security on their own, as NATO forces pull out by the end of 2014.
Under the new directive issued Sunday by Lt. Gen. James Terry, the commander of ISAF Joint Command, Afghan and NATO troops will still live and operate together at bases, but when they go on patrol they will go out independently, not together. Sometimes insider attacks occur during joint patrols far from a base. Lt. Gen. Terry’s directive requires that any joint patrols or operations must now be approved by a regional commander, usually a one- or two-star general.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 17, 2012 11:32:35 PM | 46