US/NATO accused of War Crimes

[waraich66]

It still says nothing about war crimes. And your claims in the other thread about 98% of civilian casualties are caused by ISAF is way off as well. you seem to like to quote AIHRC but then provide no direct link to them actually saying what you attribute to them. Instead you link blogs and news articles based on supposed quotes by AIHRC. Then when a person goes to the AIHRC web site there is no such report or article.

You still have not responded to the AIHRC report I posted. That would seem to contradict your assertion that 98% of civilian casualties is caused by ISAF.

Insurgent Abuses against Afghan Civilians

"The AIHRC has documented cases of widespread and systematic intimidation, abductions, shootings, beheadings, hangings, mutilations, perfidious suicide attacks, and indiscriminate rockets attacks by insurgents against civilians around the country and especially in the southern, southeastern, eastern and central regions of Afghanistan over the past two years. Media reports and other sources have corroborated many of the testimonies included in this report and have reported on many additional cases in these and other regions."

98% of civilian death caused by coalition forces in Afghanistan are intentional :AIHRC head

links are below

'US troops are committing war crimes' - Afghan human rights group | asia-pacific-action.org

“US troops are committing war crimes”, AHRO « RAWA News

 

[Thomas]

98% of civilian death caused by coalition forces in Afghanistan are intentional :AIHRC head

links are below

'US troops are committing war crimes' - Afghan human rights group | asia-pacific-action.org

“US troops are committing war crimes”, AHRO « RAWA News

Again you quote blogs that post comments attributed to AIHRC But when you go to AIHRC web site they made no such comment. And you still refuse to respond to AIHRC report I posted that contradicts what you say. have you actually read through this report?

AIHRC report "Insurgent Abuses against Afghan Civilians"

I recommend everyone to read this report

 

[Always Neutral]

Again you quote blogs that post comments attributed to AIHRC But when you go to AIHRC web site they made no such comment. And you still refuse to respond to AIHRC report I posted that contradicts what you say. have you actually read through this report?

AIHRC report "Insurgent Abuses against Afghan Civilians"

Thomas the delay maybe due to him being unable to contact his Leaders in a cave you know where for advice since you have convincingly exposed his trival lies.

Don't bother waiting for an informed reply.

Regards

 

[waraich66]

Again you quote blogs that post comments attributed to AIHRC But when you go to AIHRC web site they made no such comment. And you still refuse to respond to AIHRC report I posted that contradicts what you say. have you actually read through this report?

AIHRC report "Insurgent Abuses against Afghan Civilians"

Agreed , AIHRC report dont have comments about 98% civilian casualties in Afghanistan by coalition forces intentional,it mean there is contradiction in quote blogs links and AIHRC report.

 

[waraich66]

Thomas the delay maybe due to him being unable to contact his Leaders in a cave you know where for advice since you have convincingly exposed his trival lies.

Don't bother waiting for an informed reply.

Regards

It is a serious issue , dont be silly

 

[gambit]

Again you quote blogs that post comments attributed to AIHRC But when you go to AIHRC web site they made no such comment. And you still refuse to respond to AIHRC report I posted that contradicts what you say. have you actually read through this report?

AIHRC report "Insurgent Abuses against Afghan Civilians"

I recommend everyone to read this report

He is still waiting for permission from Osama bin Laden to read it.

 

[waraich66]

He is still waiting for permission from Osama bin Laden to read it.

Report is completely baised , Afghanistan is under US occupation therefore Jhad to liberate Afghanistan is valid.

Afghan Mujahdeen are freedom fighters , who ever suport Kufar forces is crime in light of Islam.

 

[Solomon2]

Afghanistan is under US occupation therefore Jhad to liberate Afghanistan is valid.

Is the U.S. occupying Afghanistan or merely liberating the country from terrorist rule?

Afghan Mujahdeen are freedom fighters , who ever suport Kufar forces is crime in light of Islam.

Saudi Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud calls al Qaeda (and by implication its ally, the Taliban) an "evil cult". How "Islamic" can they be?

Don't you wonder who the people of Afghanistan believe is closer to the "light of Islam", the Americans or the Taliban? After all, they have experienced both.

 

[Thomas]

Report is completely baised , Afghanistan is under US occupation therefore Jhad to liberate Afghanistan is valid.

Afghan Mujahdeen are freedom fighters , who ever suport Kufar forces is crime in light of Islam.

They are far from pro Afghan Government/ISAF organization. And since you bring Islam into the discussion. The report talks about Islamic law regarding the targeting of civilians.


"The abuses documented in this report are contrary to Islamic law, domestic law, and international law. Islamic Law safeguards the security of civilians, provided they do not take part in combat. The
Muslim fighter must differentiate between combatants and noncombatants while fighting the enemy. Every (Muslim) combatant has two duties: The first is to differentiate between the combatants and noncombatants and to only target the combatants. The second is to differentiate between military and nonmilitary target and to only target military ones. "Every Muslim fighter, under any circumstances, is bound to target only his fighting enemy. A Hadith of the Prophet
Mohammad (PBUH) has certified this matter:

‘At the end of one of the wars against infidels in which the Prophet (PBUH) had participated, he saw that a group of people has gathered. He sent a man to know the reason. The person came back and told Prophet (PBUH) the reason for the gathering is the death of a woman. The Prophet (PBUH) said: Why was she killed, as she surely was
unable to participate in the fighting?”

An example of the requirement to guarantee the safety of the civilian population has also been referenced by Shaibani, listing a few of the deeds which are banned during war:

“Whenever the Prophet of God Mohammad (PBUH) sent a group of fighter into battle, he
would personally instruct their commander: Have the fear of God, go in the name of God and on the way of God to fight with those who deny God, but do no fraud or disloyalty. You (the fighters) have no right to mutilate or kill the children and those not fighting.”

We have another example of civilian protection being implemented in Islamic history, in the Success of Makka. There the Prophet said:

“Whoever goes to Abusufian’s house is safe, and whoever goes to Masjidul-haram is protected and whoever goes to his own house and closes the door is also safe.”

As one of the bases for Islamic Law is the Hadith (The Sayings of Prophet

 

[Ahmad]

I recommend everyone to read this report

i read it all. it was mostly about social and welfare issues. if the report was from Human Rights Committe we should have the direct link rather than some other blogs making comments. by the way, nobody is denying the fact that civilians have been killed by the nato fire power. they have been killed by ANA fire power and they have been killed by Pakistan Army fire power, but they are not intentional.

 

[Ahmad]

Report is completely baised , Afghanistan is under US occupation therefore Jhad to liberate Afghanistan is valid.

Afghan Mujahdeen are freedom fighters , who ever suport Kufar forces is crime in light of Islam.

So you eventually came to conclusion that you are not able to provide the proof. Yes, killing the innocent civilians is Jehad. I want to ask you again about the beheading of that young Journalist by the Taliban, the masacare of school children in just a single attack etc? Are they Jehad too?

 

[Thomas]

i read it all. it was mostly about social and welfare issues. if the report was from Human Rights Committe we should have the direct link rather than some other blogs making comments. by the way, nobody is denying the fact that civilians have been killed by the nato fire power. they have been killed by ANA fire power and they have been killed by Pakistan Army fire power, but they are not intentional.

oops... maybe I attached wrong link try this one

http://www.aihrc.org.af/2008_Dec/PDF_Anti_G/Eng_anti_G.pdf

 

[Ahmad]

oops... maybe I attached wrong link try this one

http://www.aihrc.org.af/2008_Dec/PDF_Anti_G/Eng_anti_G.pdf

I have seen this report before, it categorically condemns the taliban atrocities. I couldnt open it now,but i think it might be the same link.

 

[Thomas]

i read it all. it was mostly about social and welfare issues. if the report was from Human Rights Committe we should have the direct link rather than some other blogs making comments. by the way, nobody is denying the fact that civilians have been killed by the nato fire power. they have been killed by ANA fire power and they have been killed by Pakistan Army fire power, but they are not intentional.

I agree! in fact I just watched a news video on a special forces unit in Afghanistan. one of the soldiers tried to stop an approaching truck and fired warning shots into the road. what he didn't count on was a ricochet hitting 2 people. Was he stupid for firing into the road the way he did? Yes! But he didn't intend to hurt them. You could tell from his reaction he was sorry for what happened. both people were medical evacuated and survived.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

so what else is new , kill civilians you get free , women is accused of shoting someone with no finger prints and bullet proofs gets life -

This is exactly why Roman Empire fell becasue , Roman citizens were deemed above every one else who were not of Roman Empire ...

Every thing comes back and bites back in arse hard one day