Skip to main content

This is what you call a "responsible conclusion?"

The politicians can blather on as much as they like, but the realities for the people of Afghanistan is that 2014 was the worst for them for civilian casualities, killed or wounded.   The details.....


"On the cusp of 2015, the people of Afghanistan pass another grim milestone: this calendar year saw the greatest number of civilians killed and wounded on record.

According to the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA), the devastation faced by Afghan civilians is the worst it has been since the global body began making reports in 2009. Civilian casualties overall are up 19 percent from 2013, rising to 33 percent among children.

By November, 3,188 civilians had been killed and 6,429 wounded, according to UNAMA records, bringing the total number to 9,617—a number that has since climbed even higher.

A majority of these killings and woundings are a result of "ground engagements between parties to the conflict, improvised explosive devices, and suicide and complex attacks," according to UNAMA.

The UN's data flies in the face of recent claims by Pentagon and U.S. government officials that more than 13 years of U.S.-led war in Afghanistan are, in the words of President Barack Obama, coming to a "responsible conclusion."

In recent statements, Obama claimed that "our courageous military and diplomatic personnel in Afghanistan—along with our NATO allies and coalition partners—have helped the Afghan people reclaim their communities, take the lead for their own security, hold historic elections and complete the first democratic transfer of power in their country's history."

Amid public ceremonies marking the supposed end of the war in Afghanistan, the U.S. has, in fact, locked in at least another decade of military presence in the country, including up to 10,800 U.S. troops into next year, and continued combat through 2015.

Critics charge that the past 13 years of war show that continued occupation will only worsen the human toll, which includes social upheaval, mass displacement, poverty, and starvation."

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...
Post a Comment
Read more

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...
6 comments
Read more