Wikileaks: leak thousands of Afghan War logs

skelliser

A huge cache of secret US military files today provides a devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan, revealing how coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents, Taliban attacks have soared and Nato commanders fear neighbouring Pakistan and Iran are fuelling the insurgency.

Main points:

• How a secret "black" unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for "kill or capture" without trial.

• How the US covered up evidence that the Taliban have acquired deadly surface-to-air missiles.

• How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

• How the Taliban have caused growing carnage with a massive escalation of its roadside bombing campaign, which has killed more than 2,000 civilians to date.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-war-logs-military-leaks

video summary here: http://gu.com/p/2th59

Biggins

How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

Actually thats been reported by the British Times as well.
Except that the GCHQ is actually providing the Americans in the information of location of targets due to better phone detection capabilities - which in turn has come about due to their more in numbers and technology, advanced listening stations based all across Europe.

I will go dig up the article.

Great website for doing this... I would absolutely hate to be American reading what the government do with their money.

Biggins

As mentioned above, here you go:

Pittens

Nothing too shocking here. The killing of the Taleban is legal if they are Taleban. It is a war. People get killed. Cant really get due process in a war.

pablomakaveli

I was watching a documnetary about Green Berets in Afghanistan the other day on National Geographic. They were posted in some remote base and were expected to cover a huge area. It seems to be easier for the Taliban in rural areas and they are intimidating villagers into helping them which makes it more difficult for the soldiers fighting the Taliban.

The main threat to them was roadside bombs as well. A couple of them were killed by one when the documentary was being filmed.

cashville

How a secret "black" unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for "kill or capture" without trial.


Money well spent in my opinion.

Manic Moran

My post on military for the same OP.
____________________________
Those are concerns?

The first one certainly isn't new. We've been trying to kill or capture TB leaders since day one. What do you think all those predator strikes are about?

The second isn't particularly surprising either. Why should the US advertise what it knows about the enemy?

The third? Hell, that's in the newspapers. There was even quite a discussion on the psychological effects of the operators, who have to transition from a 'war' mindset to a 'home' mindset during their commute.

As for the last, I don't see why that's a negative impression on ISAF. Seems to be more a negative impression on the opposition.

NTM

Biggins

Manic Moran wrote: »

...There was even quite a discussion on the psychological effects of the operators, who have to transition from a 'war' mindset to a 'home' mindset during their commute....

Yea, thats a bizarre one.


"Right honey, I'm off to war"

"What time will you be home at dear?"

"The usual"

"Ok dear. Just don't get any more paper cuts filling those death forms in after you kill those Taliban from your desk monitor dear.
...See you after seven then!"

Bonito

Wikileaks: Does exactly what it says on the tin.

Manic Moran

Here's an example of one of those horrendous incidents. I pick it, because it was one of ours. The Guardian lists it as it's supposedly one of the 300 most significant in the leak.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/afghanistan/warlogs/828A3108-9C87-CE85-8422D033C54A407C

Hardly an example of excessiveness or even impoliteness. It also took a couple of hours out of that patrol's day as they dealt with the incident.

We kept tabs on him at the hospital. He was fine, held no grudges. Standard accident. Probably happens every third day in Dublin.

NTM

Manic Moran

Biggins wrote: »

Yea, thats a bizarre one.


"Right honey, I'm off to war"

"What time will you be home at dear?"

"The usual"

"Ok dear. Just don't get any more paper cuts filling those death forms in after you kill those Taliban from your desk monitor dear.
...See you after seven then!"

It's as much an issue of the families not quite helping. For example, let's say the guy has to stay longer at a shift because he's supporting a Troops In Contact incident. He doesn't get the gory visuals all that much, but he does hear all the radio chatter, the panic, and whatnot. Maybe he launches a missile and kills people, maybe not.

Then when he gets back, the wife yells at him for missing his kid's soccer game. Which, in the scheme of things, doesn't really rate all that highly on the man's concerns that day. Our conclusion was that for all the hassles of being away from home, actually being deployed did at least allow you to focus on the war.

NTM

My name is URL

Manic Moran wrote: »

Here's an example of one of those horrendous incidents. I pick it, because it was one of ours. The Guardian lists it as it's supposedly one of the 300 most significant in the leak.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/afghanistan/warlogs/828A3108-9C87-CE85-8422D033C54A407C

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/afghanistan/warlogs/826B488C-EA6F-A132-511610DB68C2EDBD

300 is a big number when the seriousness of failings are as terrible as that

Biggins

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's as much an issue of the families not quite helping. For example, let's say the guy has to stay longer at a shift because he's supporting a Troops In Contact incident. He doesn't get the gory visuals all that much, but he does hear all the radio chatter, the panic, and whatnot. Maybe he launches a missile and kills people, maybe not.

Then when he gets back, the wife yells at him for missing his kid's soccer game. Which, in the scheme of things, doesn't really rate all that highly on the man's concerns that day. Our conclusion was that for all the hassles of being away from home, actually being deployed did at least allow you to focus on the war.

All very true and a good point.

I suspect (and I could be wrong) there is also the aspect that going from that life stressful situation (at desk battle work) with a participant at home doing their bit, when they return to home they can't probably discuss to a great degree what they have been doing.
They might have just witnessed the deaths of many from a drone camera, seen bodies ripped apart, been helping to get someone out of a ongoing tense battlefield situation and when they finally get home later that day or the next, there is no way to de-stress or "unload" after what they have been through.

Trying to explain to a significant other half might not be a possibility who just might be just as mad at the person returning home because they forgot to make the kids appointment for the local dentist!

...I hope I'm making sense what I'm trying to say.

Long story short: its a new side aspect to "war" that not many think about but could have buried deep repercussions later via buried stress and switching of/on of emotional aspects, departmentalising in effect.

laugh

Would the blacks not stand out, in Afghanistan?

cashville

cashville wrote: »

How a secret "black" unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for "kill or capture" without trial.


Money well spent in my opinion.

Thankfully, your opinion means nothing.

starbelgrade

laugh wrote: »

Would the blacks not stand out, in Afghanistan?

Your username really doesn't suit you.

Manic Moran

Biggins wrote: »

Long story short: its a new side aspect to "war" that not many think about but could have buried deep repercussions later via buried stress and switching of/on of emotional aspects, departmentalising in effect.

Here's the article that I read when I was in Afghanistan.

http://www.stripes.com/news/the-war-room-daily-transition-between-battle-home-takes-a-toll-on-drone-operators-1.95949

“We have 5,000 years of one type of warfare and only a couple of years of this new kind,” said P.W. Singer, author of “Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century.” “These guys are simultaneously at home and at war. It may be that human psychology isn’t designed for that. We don’t know yet.”

NTM

Biggins

Manic Moran wrote: »

Here's the article that I read when I was in Afghanistan.
http://www.stripes.com/news/the-war-room-daily-transition-between-battle-home-takes-a-toll-on-drone-operators-1.95949
NTM

Cheers. Much appreciated.

Manic Moran

300 is a big number when the seriousness of failings are as terrible as that

Whilst this is true, that particular incident was well reported at the time. Certainly no need for a leak. I'll bet you looked specifically for it, as you knew about it.

I did not reference the most publicly known incident. I looked to see what was reported from what we were up to as a 'random sample'. And I got 'bicycle accident'.

I'll lay bets most of the 300 are closer to that, than 56 people killed in a bombing.

NTM

Manic Moran

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'll lay bets most of the 300 are closer to that, than 56 people killed in a bombing.

NTM

5euro that over half the reports contain unnecessary death?

It wasn't me!

Deleted User wrote: »

5euro that over half the reports contain unnecessary death?

10 euro that you'll then disagree on the definition of necessary death?

It wasn't me!

It wasn't me! wrote: »

10 euro that you'll then disagree on the definition of necessary death?

Civilian or friendly fire seems like a good definition?
I'm not gonna get gay about it and say any war in death is unnecessary.. Civilian deaths like the helicoptor video from a few months ago are though.

Manic Moran

Deleted User wrote: »

Civilian or friendly fire seems like a good definition?
I'm not gonna get gay about it and say any war in death is unnecessary.. Civilian deaths like the helicoptor video from a few months ago are though.

You can't just say 'civilian' and have that be the end of it. The closest we came to killing a non-combatant that I'm aware of was an incident when we hit an 8-year-old girl with a .50 cal. Didn't do her legs any good whatsoever. What had happened was one of our units was engaging enemy in a treeline. The girl was some 300m behind the treeline, in a field, and completely unknown to us. Some of the bullets went through the trees and one hit her.

Utterly unavoidable, but had she been killed, the report would have said 'Civilian killed by ISAF.'

NTM

Unavoidable can still mean unnecessary.. Of course her death should go down as civilian killed by ISAF. What else could it go down as? Death from bullet of an invading force's rifle?

Her death would have been unnecessary so the bet would count.

It wasn't me!

Deleted User wrote: »

Unavoidable can still mean unnecessary.. Of course her death should go down as civilian killed by ISAF. What else could it go down as? Death from bullet of an invading force's rifle?

Her death would have been unnecessary so the bet would count.

To argue on such a point, we would have to question whether in the first place, the engagement which resulted in the injury was a necessary thing, and then whether the injury was an inevitable consequence of the engagement. If the answer to both is yes, then the only conclusion is that it was a necessary injury. Since the answer to the first part can't be determined without knowing the circumstances of the confrontation, and since the second part is just impossible to determine, since it's sheer random chance, it's impossible to determine whether the injury is necessary.

Biggins

The Times write-up: http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/83/wwwthetimescoukttonewsw.jpg

SugarHigh

Does anyone know if these leaks are thanks to that hacker guy who was arrested a few months back? He was in the army and abused his clearance and was boasting about it to another famous hacker who decided to report him.

Biggins

SugarHigh wrote: »

Does anyone know if these leaks are thanks to that hacker guy who was arrested a few months back? He was in the army and abused his clearance and was boasting about it to another famous hacker who decided to report him.

I'd say these latest items come from a different source but thats just a guess.

90,000 reports/items. Crikey!

SugarHigh

Biggins wrote: »

I'd say these latest items come from a different source but thats just a guess.

90,000 reports/items. Crikey!

The guy I was talking about downloaded 150,000
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/world/middleeast/07wikileaks.html?_r=1

Biggins

SugarHigh wrote: »

The guy I was talking about downloaded 150,000
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/world/middleeast/07wikileaks.html?_r=1

Its a hell of a lot of stuff to wade through for research alone.
I wouldn't like the job.

clived2

this is from that video that was released a while back,

check it out if you havent already

aidanodr

For sake of completion this is the video of events from the Apache helicopter mentioned by Ethan McCord which caused the scene of carnage he witnessed. ITS OVER 18:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0&has_verified=1

Aidan

Zebra3

Deleted User wrote: »

Great website for doing this... I would absolutely hate to be American reading what the government do with their money.

Whereas we Irish only allow them to stop off here and refuel on their way to their illegal wars..... :mad:

Manic Moran wrote: »

The closest we came to killing a non-combatant that I'm aware of was an incident when we hit an 8-year-old girl with a .50 cal. Didn't do her legs any good whatsoever.

No sh*t Sherlock. :rolleyes:

Clawdeeus

Zebra3 wrote: »

Whereas we Irish only allow them to stop off here and refuel on their way to their illegal wars..... :mad:



No sh*t Sherlock. :rolleyes:

Afghanistan isnt illegal, so you obviously ment to say THE illegal war ie Iraq.

So far it dosent look like there is any real (new) news in the leaks, except that the leak happened.

Also, a treasure trove of intelligence for the Taliban.

Einhard

Zebra3 wrote: »

Whereas we Irish only allow them to stop off here and refuel on their way to their illegal wars..... :mad:

The war in Afghanistan is sanctioned by the UN.

Clawdeeus

Deleted User wrote: »

Thankfully, your opinion means nothing.

Has alot in common with our own then.

Hardy har har

Clawdeeus

Deleted User wrote: »

Great website for doing this... I would absolutely hate to be American reading what the government do with their money.

I really think you should think about it for a few seconds, some of what was released has very little has no news value, but would be of immense help to the Taliban in forming a strategic overview of the war. Completly disagree that it is unambigously "great" when information is released that will inevitablly get people killed, because it assuages the curiosity of the public.

Although I agree all this information should be released, it has to be done with this in mind.

Also, I hope they had the presence of mind to at least censor the names of local Afghanis who helped the goverment/ NATO forces. Hate to think that possible dozens of people will be killed in awful ways so we could have a vaguley interesting news story for a few days.

Snake Pliisken

Im waiting to see what happens to wikileaks, becuase it's at least going to be as interesting as what they manage to leak.

Clawdeeus

Clawdeeus wrote: »

I really think you should think about it for a few seconds, some of what was released has very little has no news value, but would be of immense help to the Taliban in forming a strategic overview of the war. Completly disagree that it is unambigously "great" when information is released that will inevitablly get people killed, because it assuages the curiosity of the public.

Although I agree all this information should be released, it has to be done with this in mind.

Also, I hope they had the presence of mind to at least censor the names of local Afghanis who helped the goverment/ NATO forces. Hate to think that possible dozens of people will be killed in awful ways so we could have a vaguley interesting news story for a few days.

But I want the Americans to get absolutely destroyed over there.. I want them to get bombed to bits until they leave and stop invading countries around the world.

Clawdeeus

Deleted User wrote: »

But I want the Americans to get absolutely destroyed over there.. I want them to get bombed to bits until they leave and stop invading countries around the world.

Charming.

And that's that.

Snake Pliisken

It's not America that's doing this, it's the system that has allowed corparate interest to steer policy toward their interest- the Americans are just brainwashed at this point into thinking that they're policing the world, I don't want them all to die, I want all the greedy parasites dead.

Nodin

Deleted User wrote: »

But I want the Americans to get absolutely destroyed over there.. I want them to get bombed to bits until they leave and stop invading countries around the world.

They lost roughly 60,000 dead in Vietnam. Did they learn much?

Nodin

Snake Pliisken wrote: »

It's not America that's doing this, it's the system that has allowed corparate interest to steer policy toward their interest- the Americans are just brainwashed at this point into thinking that they're policing the world, I don't want them all to die, I want all the greedy parasites dead.

Well its a UN approved mission for starters. In theory it was supposed to be a team effort. Had Bush not gone into Iraq, it might have stayed that way.

Clawdeeus

You people are creepy :rolleyes: outta here.

Zebra3

Clawdeeus wrote: »

Afghanistan isnt illegal, so you obviously ment to say THE illegal war ie Iraq.

Einhard wrote: »

The war in Afghanistan is sanctioned by the UN.

:rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)#Legal_basis_for_war

Clawdeeus

Zebra3 wrote: »

:rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)#Legal_basis_for_war

No less a scource than wikipedia... :rolleyes:

My name is URL

Clawdeeus wrote: »

No less a scource than wikipedia... :rolleyes:

Why do people say that?

It's cited y'know

They say it when they've no other argument..