Wikileaks: leak thousands of Afghan War logs

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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 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.

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

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.

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 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! 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.

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.

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.

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