Wednesday, May 24, 2006

What the Times didn't bother to tell you. 
Strategy Page has more background on the strike:

Coalition forces found that about a hundred Taliban gunmen were staying at a religious school near Kandahar in southern Afghanistan. Smart bombs hit the school in the middle of the night, but several dozen of the Taliban fled to nearby homes. As Afghan and Coalition forces closed in, the surviving Taliban fired back from nearby homes. So smart bombs were used on the homes as well, which killed about 16 civilians and wounded another twenty. Over 80 Taliban were killed, with no Afghan army or Coalition dead. The Taliban promptly spun their use of civilian homes, as human shields, as a Coalition atrocity.

Strategy page usually has good sources within the military. So we know that the strikes were directly observed from close to within small-arms range. We know that the Taliban were actually shooting from those positions (despite the New York Times' implication that they weren't trying to fight). We know that the Taliban commandeered civilian homes after first having been spotted occupying a school.

The Times reported none of this.

I guess if you want to know what actually happens in Afghanistan, don't bother with the Times.

We already knew that. (About the Times that is).
Again, why won't they specify the nation's troops on the ground or the nationality of the aircraft that dropped the bomb?

I'm wondering if it's inconveniently NOT American troops / aircraft involved and would not show us in a bad light, so they just say "US led coalition" instead.

Strategy Page mentioned British and French troops along with Brit aircraft...

Or am I being too suspicious?
Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Site Meter

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!