Afghan children killed in Nato attack

2012-10-15 13:02

Kandahar - Afghan officials said on Monday that a Nato air strike killed three children while it was targeting Taliban insurgents planting mines on a road in southern Afghanistan.

Nato's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) confirmed an air strike in Helmand province's Nawa district on Sunday, saying that three insurgents died and it was investigating reports that children were also killed.

"Two Taliban mine-planters were identified and targeted by ISAF from the air and killed," district police chief Ahmad Shah Khan said.

"Three children, two boys and a girl, who were nearby collecting firewood were also killed," Khan added.

Farid Ahmad Farhang, a spokesperson for Helmand police, confirmed the incident and said the raid killed two insurgents and three children.

Civilian casualties caused in Nato operations against insurgents are a sensitive issue in relations between the US-led force and the government of President Hamid Karzai.

Karzai often reacts angrily, arguing that such incidents turn people against his administration amid an ongoing insurgency by Taliban Islamists trying to bring him down.

Thousands of civilians are killed in the war each year, with the United Nations saying the vast majority of such deaths are caused by insurgents.

  • bloulig.brigadeer.3 - 2012-10-15 13:09

    This is absolutely disgusting!!! I wish we could have world peace!

      Tony Lapson - 2012-10-15 16:53

      Some may say you are a dreamer, but you're not the only one.

  • fred.fraser.12 - 2012-10-15 13:34

    Tragic. My heart goes out to the families of the children.

  • Desilusionada - 2012-10-15 13:41

    Ah well, just necessary collateral damage. These things are unavoidable. Or at least that is what every suicide bomber is saying, when they kill innocent children.........

      gerald.nchabeleng - 2012-10-15 14:29

      @ stupid, Gee...let's all be as stupid as suicide bombers

  • peter.j.cock - 2012-10-15 13:49

    Why does every body get up in arms about this headline when EVEN MORE kids and women are killed ( slaughtered ) by the "insurgents" themselves - Example, that young girl who was shot in the head by Al Quieda because she wanted to go to school?

      tom.guy.37669528 - 2012-10-15 14:44

      Your an idiot.

      allcoveredinNinjas - 2012-10-15 14:45

      Planting land mines , like they know who those are going to hit . Could be a military truck ? could be a group of kids?

      fidel.mgoqi - 2012-10-15 17:48

      I thought pleading extenuating circumstances was only for liberals. Any quick google search with the words "Nato civilian death" will show any honest person that these deaths are not accidental but purposeful "collateral bombings".

  • fort.horseman.7 - 2012-10-15 13:58

    Has the new term to justify the killing of innocent children been coined as 'necessary collateral damage'??How much 'NCD' will it take for people to realise ,its an unwinnable war?

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-10-15 14:06

      The freer world is not going to allow the Taliban to control Afghanistan and provide a safe-haven for Al-Quaida to carry out attacks on innocent civilians the world over.

      fort.horseman.7 - 2012-10-15 14:11

      So Fred,will the sacrificial lambs have to pay the price of what you guessing.And guessing is no substitute for the truth.

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-10-15 14:13

      The Taliban and Al-Quaida are being squeezed from the East, North and South by the freer world through Afghanistan, and from the West, North and South by Pakistan. Their power and presence are being drastically reduced. At the end of that day, however, I believe they will have to be given an area of land to practice their beliefs, provided they do not contravene the laws of the country they reside in. Like our ultra-rights in Oranje.

      fort.horseman.7 - 2012-10-15 14:30

      Fred,you got the African culture,the European,Middle Eastern,the Asian,now if each had to go to war to impose 1 on the other,what would happen.You seem very sure of yours though.How?

      tom.guy.37669528 - 2012-10-15 14:53

      Fred, the more innocent people that are killed by these strikes. The more people will join the Taliban. Its called blowback. maybe its best not to occupy other nations for their resources. Calling it the freer world really makes your ignorance shine through.

      fort.horseman.7 - 2012-10-15 15:15

      Fred.Im not attacking anyones belief,im just trying to say respect and tolerance.SA for eg. has many different races,and all need each other,and if you removed 1 then that would create a void,they live together but have different cultures,and share it without a problem.

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-10-15 15:53

      Tom, which country is occupied for its natural resources? WHile you're about answering this question, be sure to study how the international oil markets work as well and explore exactly how much oil there is in Afghanistan. None.

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-10-15 15:54

      I completely agree with you about tolerance, Fort. The freer world is in Afghanistan precisely because of the intolerance of Al-Quaida and the Taliban.

      tom.guy.37669528 - 2012-10-15 18:04

      Fred, Afghanistan is worlds number 1 supplier of heroine. Production has gone up 10 fold since the US invaded, as before the Taliban didn't let farmers grow opium. . I mentioned "resources" not oil.

      tom.guy.37669528 - 2012-10-15 18:05

      tom.guy.37669528 - 2012-10-15 18:06 . happy reading

  • derek.bredenkamp.3 - 2012-10-15 16:14

    And some people still wonder why they resort to suicide bombing, wouldn't you if these were your kids?

  • hudayfah.newman - 2012-10-15 19:41

    Hey atleast this time its not a 100 000 civilians, as was the case in Iraq. They won't be labled scum of the earth either, nor will there be a mass call for them to be annihilated. These people are no better than the Taliban they so much detest. Infact they are worse.

      fidel.mgoqi - 2012-10-15 21:06

      True that........state terrorism at its best, and yet these scum still want to claim the moral high ground!

  • fidel.mgoqi - 2012-10-15 21:11

    There seems to be a widespread mindset that to kill children during a military attack is somehow legitimate provided the killer is in uniform. There is a skewed view that provided you wear a uniform it is OK to kill children and/or their mothers notwithstanding that they are unarmed and pose no threat to heavily armed troops. The truth is that a child in Afghanistan is the same as a child in France, Britain or America. They all deserve to live not to die by a gun, whether that gun is held by a terrorist or a soldier.

      AnthonyfromAfrica - 2012-10-15 21:36

      Fidel, Strange comment , coming from someone who has made hundreds of comments re Syria, but not ONE, condemning the butcher from Damascus, who is responsible for the deaths of HUNDREDS , if not THOUSANDS of children. Maybe a Syrian child, is not that important compared with a child in Afghanistan !!!

      fidel.mgoqi - 2012-10-16 07:22

      Anthony, not condemning is not the same as supporting, obviously not. What's so great about condemning? It's meaningless.

  • Thomas Mugayi - 2012-10-16 09:01

    i heard all your comment guys,but remember the war itself has rules®ulations,i guess the west led forces are guilty,they mighty appear so modern but i guess they are not so tacticful like other forces in the world which might not show themselves coz these so called nato will be already occupy the chance for peace keeping.

  • pages:
  • 1