What's new

US/NATO accused of War Crimes

waraich66

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
4,641
Reaction score
-2
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
Why the war criminals must leave Afghanistan
The US-NATO forces’ indiscriminate killing of unarmed, civilians — wedding parties, mayors and many, many children — has been condemned by the UN and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC).
Pip Hinman


The body of Afghan child who was killed with his brother and father named Nurullah by U.S-led troops in Kabul early September 1, 2008.While the war in Afghanistan has dropped off the front pages, seven years on, 56% of Australians say the 1000 Australian troops there should be brought home. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s talk about reconstructing the country haven’t fooled many.

Most of the rebuilding projects have been handed over to profit-driven private corporations. Most roads and buildings remain in tatters. Average life expectancy is 44 years. Between 53% and 80% of Afghan people live below the official poverty line (depending on which part of the country).

Adult literacy is 29%. In some regions, less than 1% of the population is literate. One in five children dies before the age of five. If anything, the war is preventing progress being made.

The other myth is that the war is making Afghanistan safer. But this year is now being described as the “bloodiest” so far.

The US-NATO forces’ indiscriminate killing of unarmed, civilians — wedding parties, mayors and many, many children — has been condemned by the UN and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC).

AIHRC reported in September that civilians are killed in most US operations, and that 98% of civilian casualties caused by coalition forces in Afghanistan are “intentional”. “War criminals” is how it described the occupying forces.

Just 3% of Afghan women are literate and infant mortality is now among the highest in the world. Warlords and other US-backed factions’ backward attitudes to women mean that women are worse off than before the war began.

This is an unwinnable war for the Western occupiers, because the people of Afghanistan, like those in Iraq, do not want to be occupied.

But the occupiers have not given up. The US has just appointed General David Petraeus — architect of the failed “surge” in Iraq — to take charge of a region that includes Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Unsurprisingly, he wants tens of thousands more troops to be sent to Afghanistan. A new “surge” for 2009 is being planned.

While most Australians do not support the war, they are worried about calling for the occupying troops to be pulled out, lest this be perceived as giving tacit support to the reactionary Taliban.

But, if anything, the occupation has assisted the rise of this reactionary group. Journalist and commentator Tariq Ali says that the occupation forces and the corrupt Karzai government are so hated that the authority of the Taliban warlords is increasing.

The [Afghan] government appears to have been run for the financial benefit of 20 families. From the allocation of mineral rights to the awarding of contracts, ministers frequently intervene to favour families and friends. Even more disturbing, the beneficiaries of this corruption are old-time warlords and faction leaders responsible for past atrocities. Today, they operate with impunity, even over acts of violence and attempted murder. Many public officials, from police chiefs to governors to ministers, have acquired multi-million dollar fortunes in office.

David Davis, The Independent, October 20, 2008The people surrounding Karzai, Ali says, are “milking the foreign agencies; [and] growing rich at the expense of the bulk of the population”.

The result is a huge rise in Pashtun nationalism (the dominant ethnic group strong in the border area of Afghanistan and Pakistan) which, in turn, has delivered more recruits to the Taliban.

Malalai Joya, a courageous MP and one of the few elected, rather than appointed, Afghan politicians, is now living in hiding for daring to expose the crimes of the warlords who dominate the parliament.

Joya described the parliament as being like a “mafia”, “80% of which are warlords or drug lords”. “They either snatched their places in parliament at gun point or bought these seats off with US dollars”, she told a Pakistani journalist in September.

Asked if she thought the security situation would worsen if the US-NATO forces left, she said: “We have to continue to expose the crimes of this occupation, and not let our opposition to the Taliban blind us to the fact that foreign interference and military occupation is not helping bringing democracy.”

She went on: “They [the US-NATO coalition forces] are even embracing the Taliban. Recently, in Musa Qila, a Taliban commander Mulla Salam was appointed as governor by Karzai. The US has no problem with the Taliban so long as it’s ‘our Taliban’.

“People here believe that the warlords are cushioned by the US troops. If the USA leaves, the warlords will lose power because they have no base among our people. The people of Afghanistan will deal with these warlords once US troops leave Afghanistan”, Joya added.

We should also heed Joya’s call to “support the democratic forces in Afghanistan” and to send doctors, nurses and teachers, not soldiers. We must support self-determination for the people of Afghanistan and force the Rudd government to withdraw the troops.

Pip Hinman is an activist in Sydney Stop the War Coalition.
 
can you please post us the exact link on Afghan Human Rights report? because it was from Rawa and it looked like more of a comment than a report.
 
The news artical is about US-NATO forces, not the ISAF. Please change the thread title.
 
i went through the whole report and it is all about social and welfare issues. in one occasion according to a survey over 75% of people blame the taliban about security situation, i dont understand where you got those ideas from.

‘US troops are committing war crimes’

‘US troops are committing war crimes’ Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008

By Parwiz Shamal | AN AFGHAN human rights organisation has accused the United States army of committing war crimes in Afghanistan.

The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) said on Tuesday that, according to their own investigations, civilians are killed in most operations conducted by US forces.

AIHRC expressed strong concern about the death of innocent Afghans during military operations and urged those responsible for the killings to face trial.

“According to our investigations, 98% of civilian casualties caused by the coalition forces in Afghanistan are intentional,” the head of the AIHRC, Lal Gul, said.

“The actions of the coalition forces, especially the American forces, are not only against the human rights laws, but are considered war crimes. Therefore, these forces have committed war crimes in Afghanistan,” he said.

Foreign forces maintain that they try their best to minimise civilian casualties in their operations.

They also accuse the Taliban of using civilians as human shields by taking shelter in residential homes and areas.

A spokesman for the AIHRC, Nadir Nadiri, said: “Whenever a military force, or one of the two sides in a war, kill innocent people intentionally, it has broken the international human rights law, and according to the human rights law, such people must be tried.”

NATO and the US-led coalition have come under fire from Afghan politicians, ordinary people and the local media for killing innocent civilians in recent weeks.

On Monday, residents accused foreign troops of killing four members of the same family during a midnight raid in Kabul, a claim the international troops strongly deny.

On August 22, a coalition raid on a village in the western province of Herat killed as many as 90 civilians, 60 of them children, a United Nations investigation into the ground and air operation revealed.

Karzai, who has also chided western generals for their failure to minimise civilian casualties, says the death of innocent Afghans only plays into the hands of the Taliban, who use the killings to turn people against the government.

More than 500 civilians have been killed during operations led by foreign and Afghan forces against militants this year, according to the Afghan government and some aid groups.

The UN says the civilian death-toll has increased “sharply” this year on last.
 
Once again Fundamentalist, i request you change the title of the thread. Your news story is on US-Nato forces, not the whole ISAF force.

Please change the title immediatly.
 
Since its establishment on June 6, 2002, the AIHRC has received about 13,581
complaints as part of its human rights protection, out of which it has addressed 12,752
complaints. Additionally, the AIHRC has received over 130 human rights-related
complaints against North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)-led International Security
Assistance Force (ISAF), which have been addressed.

This came out of the Fundo's provided link of alleged war crimes against ISAF forces of any country. This goes to show you, they just aren't too bright. 130 complaints against 13,581.
 
i appreciate that link, but can you provide something from Afghan Human Rights committe? all these links you provided are not from AIHRC. and i dont think anybody is denying that the civilians are killed by NATO fire power as well as the taliban, so nothing new to me. let me know if you want the link for the taliban atrocities against the civilians according to AIHRC.
 
Once again Fundamentalist, i request you change the title of the thread. Your news story is on US-Nato forces, not the whole ISAF force.

Please change the title immediatly.

What is difference between ISAF AND US-NATO forces they are under single cammand and control .

Hence no need to change title .
 
The thread has no business here and mods need to move it. ISAF-good, bad, or indifferent is not a part of the central theme of this particular section and simply connotes another attempt by the irhabist taliban mouthpiece to needlessly flame.

Thanks.:usflag:
 
i appreciate that link, but can you provide something from Afghan Human Rights committe? all these links you provided are not from AIHRC. and i dont think anybody is denying that the civilians are killed by NATO fire power as well as the taliban, so nothing new to me. let me know if you want the link for the taliban atrocities against the civilians according to AIHRC.

“According to our investigations, 98% of civilian casualties caused by the coalition forces in Afghanistan are intentional,” the head of the AIHRC, Lal Gul, said.
 
“According to our investigations, 98% of civilian casualties caused by the coalition forces in Afghanistan are intentional,” the head of the AIHRC, Lal Gul, said.

Thanks i can read that much english. but give me the original link. anybody can write anything about anyone.
 
What is difference between ISAF AND US-NATO forces they are under single cammand and control .

Hence no need to change title .

Their is a huge difference. The use of ISAF in the title suggests that all ISAF forces are involved in these crimes, when it's only US-NATO forces.

You do reliaze that not all countries in ISAF are U.S-NATO forces correct?

Australia is in ISAF and is not a NATO forces, so i take offence to the title which implies my country is involved in all of this. I am sure other people from non nato ISAF countries would be offended too.
 
The thread has no business here and mods need to move it. ISAF-good, bad, or indifferent is not a part of the central theme of this particular section and simply connotes another attempt by the irhabist taliban mouthpiece to needlessly flame.

Thanks.:usflag:



I think this article is very much related to this section , it is good reference for neutral members to judge the blame game of US that Talaban are killing civilians.

US is also blaming Pakistan that they are not doing much , infact ISAF failed to perform but involved in war crimes
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom