http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6615781.stm
'Western forces have been accused of carelessness over civilian lives when attacking Taleban fighters.'
By whom? Evidence? Times? Places? Context? Mmmmmm. Didn't think so. Hamid Karzai is not a reliable source. For one thing, he has to maintain at least the illusion that it is he who is in control of Afghanistan, not the NATO commanders. Also, he is a Pashtun and so are most of the people currently providing the cannon fodder for the Taleban.
No hint is given in this story, or any other story I have read on the BBC website, that the NATO forces in Afghanistan have strict rules of engagement which prevent many civilian deaths every day. If NATO forces see suspicious groups of men running about, they cannot engage them unless they see weapons. The Taleban know this and get women to carry weapons under their burquas, or they hide the weapons in goods vehicles. Al Qaeda and the Taleban have no rules of engagement, and if they think they can kill a few Afghan soldiers or NATO soldiers think nothing of blasting thirty innocent bystanders into the next world. Yet the stories are always framed to make NATO look like monstrous killers bludgeoning whoever gets in their way, and the Taleban/Al Qaeda tactics are ignored and glossed over. The Taleban/Al Qaeda have killed many hundreds of innocents for every NATO soldier they succeed in killing, yet this is not presented by the media as scandalous or worthy of condemnation. What has happened to the morals of our journalists and news editors? The side who are trying their best to preserve innocent life are presented as baby killers, while the baby killers get no censure at all.
If we constantly frame debate within these completely false terms of reference, we are going to make bad decisions about our future conduct.
No comments:
Post a Comment