Gen. Confirms Afghan Civilians Wounded
Last Updated 1:23 p.m. ET.
The top NATO commander in Afghanistan said Saturday that local villagers were among those wounded at the site of an airstrike on hijacked fuel tankers, declaring his resolve to limit civilian casualties that threaten to undermine the war against the Taliban.
U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal inspected the spot where .
McChrystal also visited a hospital Saturday where the wounded were taken, stooping low to talk with a 10-year-old boy with severe burns, his arms and legs swathed in gauze.
Local officials have said scores of people died in the fiery blast, but it was unclear how many were militants and how many were villagers who rushed to the scene to siphon fuel from the stolen trucks.
A NATO team began an official investigation Saturday amid a clamor from European leaders for answers, with some calling the airstrike a "tragedy" and "a big mistake" that must be investigated.
"From what I have seen today and going to the hospital, it's clear to me that there were some civilians that were harmed at the site," McChrystal told reporters in Kunduz. He did not say if any civilians were killed.
Friday's pre-dawn strike occurred despite McChrystal's new orders restricting use of airpower if civilian lives are at risk. High civilian casualties in military operations have enraged Afghans and undercut support for the war against the Taliban.
Before traveling to the site of the bombing, McCrystal met with local Afghan leaders in the provincial capital. He expressed sympathy for any civilian losses and said the fight against the Taliban should not come at the expense of civilian lives.
"I am here today to ensure that we are operating in a way that is truly protecting the Afghan people from all threats," he told the officials.
At least one local official supported the allied bombing, saying it would help drive the insurgents from the area.
"If we did three more operations like we did yesterday morning, the Kunduz situation would be peaceful and stable," said Ahmadullah Wardak, a provincial council chief.
An aide to McChrystal, who briefed reporters, said the general was taking reports of civilian deaths "very seriously."
McChrystal discussed the incident with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and later told senior commanders that "we need to know what we are hitting," the aide said, speaking on condition of anonymity under command policy.
McChrystal told reporters Saturday in Kabul that he wanted to find out what happened in Kunduz "so that we first can prevent it from happening again - or minimize the chances that it happens again - and correct anything that we might be able to correct about it like helping the injured."
A 10-member NATO investigative team flew over the site on the Kunduz River where the U.S. jet, called in by the German military, bombed the tankers, which reportedly had become stuck trying to cross a river. German officials have said the Taliban may have been planning a suicide attack on the military's nearby Kunduz base using the tankers, which were hijacked carrying NATO fuel supplies from neighboring Tajikistan.
The investigative team led by U.S. Rear Admiral Gregory J. Smith, NATO's director of communications in Kabul, also spoke to two wounded villagers in the Kunduz hospital, including a boy and a farmer with shrapnel wounds.
Smith said it was unclear yet how many civilians were at the site of the blast. "Unfortunately, we can't get to every village."
Mohammad Shafi, 10, who was injured in the blast and shifted to Kabul for treatment, said that his father had told him not to go near the stolen tankers, but he went anyway. "While I was going to get the fuel, on the way I heard a big bang, and after that I don't know what happened," he said from his hospital bed, with bandages on his arm and leg.
A bomb blast, meanwhile, hit a German military convoy Saturday, damaging at least one vehicle and wounding four troops, none seriously. Kunduz provincial police chief, Abdullah Razaq Yaqoobi, said a suicide car bomb caused the blast, though German military officials said it was a roadside bomb.
An AP reporter at a nearby German base said the blast created a shock wave that could be felt inside the base. The thousands of German troops in Kunduz have come under increasing militant attack in a region that had largely escaped the scale of violence seen in the east and south of Afghanistan.
Germany said 57 fighters were killed in Friday's airstrike and no civilians were believed in the area at the time, based on surveillance of the tankers by a drone aircraft. NATO secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen, however, acknowledged some civilians may have died, and the U.S.-led coalition and the Afghan government announced a joint investigation.
Local government spokesman Mohammad Yawar estimated that more than 70 people were killed, at least 45 of them militants. Investigators were trying to account for the others, he said.
The local governor, Mohammad Omar, said 72 were killed and 15 wounded. He said about 30 of the dead were identified as insurgents, including four Chechens and a local Taliban commander. The rest were probably fighters or their relatives, he said.
Many of the bodies were burned beyond recognition, and villagers buried some in a mass grave.
The deputy U.N. representative to Afghanistan, Peter Galbraith, said Saturday he was "very concerned" about the reports of civilian deaths.
"Steps must also be taken to examine what happened and why an airstrike was employed in circumstances where it was hard to determine with certainty that civilians were not present," Galbraith said.
By Associated Press Writers Frank Jordans and Jason Straziuso
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. The top NATO commander in Afghanistan said Saturday that local villagers were among those wounded at the site of an airstrike on hijacked fuel tankers, declaring his resolve to limit civilian casualties that threaten to undermine the war against the Taliban.
U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal inspected the spot where .
McChrystal also visited a hospital Saturday where the wounded were taken, stooping low to talk with a 10-year-old boy with severe burns, his arms and legs swathed in gauze.
Local officials have said scores of people died in the fiery blast, but it was unclear how many were militants and how many were villagers who rushed to the scene to siphon fuel from the stolen trucks.
A NATO team began an official investigation Saturday amid a clamor from European leaders for answers, with some calling the airstrike a "tragedy" and "a big mistake" that must be investigated.
"From what I have seen today and going to the hospital, it's clear to me that there were some civilians that were harmed at the site," McChrystal told reporters in Kunduz. He did not say if any civilians were killed.
Friday's pre-dawn strike occurred despite McChrystal's new orders restricting use of airpower if civilian lives are at risk. High civilian casualties in military operations have enraged Afghans and undercut support for the war against the Taliban.
Before traveling to the site of the bombing, McCrystal met with local Afghan leaders in the provincial capital. He expressed sympathy for any civilian losses and said the fight against the Taliban should not come at the expense of civilian lives.
"I am here today to ensure that we are operating in a way that is truly protecting the Afghan people from all threats," he told the officials.
At least one local official supported the allied bombing, saying it would help drive the insurgents from the area.
"If we did three more operations like we did yesterday morning, the Kunduz situation would be peaceful and stable," said Ahmadullah Wardak, a provincial council chief.
An aide to McChrystal, who briefed reporters, said the general was taking reports of civilian deaths "very seriously."
McChrystal discussed the incident with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and later told senior commanders that "we need to know what we are hitting," the aide said, speaking on condition of anonymity under command policy.
McChrystal told reporters Saturday in Kabul that he wanted to find out what happened in Kunduz "so that we first can prevent it from happening again - or minimize the chances that it happens again - and correct anything that we might be able to correct about it like helping the injured."
A 10-member NATO investigative team flew over the site on the Kunduz River where the U.S. jet, called in by the German military, bombed the tankers, which reportedly had become stuck trying to cross a river. German officials have said the Taliban may have been planning a suicide attack on the military's nearby Kunduz base using the tankers, which were hijacked carrying NATO fuel supplies from neighboring Tajikistan.
The investigative team led by U.S. Rear Admiral Gregory J. Smith, NATO's director of communications in Kabul, also spoke to two wounded villagers in the Kunduz hospital, including a boy and a farmer with shrapnel wounds.
Smith said it was unclear yet how many civilians were at the site of the blast. "Unfortunately, we can't get to every village."
Mohammad Shafi, 10, who was injured in the blast and shifted to Kabul for treatment, said that his father had told him not to go near the stolen tankers, but he went anyway. "While I was going to get the fuel, on the way I heard a big bang, and after that I don't know what happened," he said from his hospital bed, with bandages on his arm and leg.
A bomb blast, meanwhile, hit a German military convoy Saturday, damaging at least one vehicle and wounding four troops, none seriously. Kunduz provincial police chief, Abdullah Razaq Yaqoobi, said a suicide car bomb caused the blast, though German military officials said it was a roadside bomb.
An AP reporter at a nearby German base said the blast created a shock wave that could be felt inside the base. The thousands of German troops in Kunduz have come under increasing militant attack in a region that had largely escaped the scale of violence seen in the east and south of Afghanistan.
Germany said 57 fighters were killed in Friday's airstrike and no civilians were believed in the area at the time, based on surveillance of the tankers by a drone aircraft. NATO secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen, however, acknowledged some civilians may have died, and the U.S.-led coalition and the Afghan government announced a joint investigation.
Local government spokesman Mohammad Yawar estimated that more than 70 people were killed, at least 45 of them militants. Investigators were trying to account for the others, he said.
The local governor, Mohammad Omar, said 72 were killed and 15 wounded. He said about 30 of the dead were identified as insurgents, including four Chechens and a local Taliban commander. The rest were probably fighters or their relatives, he said.
Many of the bodies were burned beyond recognition, and villagers buried some in a mass grave.
The deputy U.N. representative to Afghanistan, Peter Galbraith, said Saturday he was "very concerned" about the reports of civilian deaths.
"Steps must also be taken to examine what happened and why an airstrike was employed in circumstances where it was hard to determine with certainty that civilians were not present," Galbraith said.
By Associated Press Writers Frank Jordans and Jason Straziuso
Popular on CBSNews.com
- Mexico's drug war 20 Photos
- U.K. official: London attack suspects probed before
- Graphic video: Man dead in "truly shocking" London attack Play Video
- Man dead in "truly shocking" London attack 250 Comments
- London soldier slaying homegrown Islamic extremism?
- Tokyo's rockabilly scene 16 Photos
- Slain London soldier was 25-year-old drummer, father
- Mexican volcano on verge of eruption 15 Photos
We are the former SouthVietnam Army offers want to congratulate and agree most of what you are trying to do.We support your course of actions.We need more better human intelligeny.
WE MUST GAIN THE AFGHANI PEOPLE TO WIN THIS WAR.We had sent a letter of suggestions and support to president Obama. Our new strategy will require a lot more resources.
Regards,
John
I'm really sorry to see Afghanistan as the weakpoint stategy of Obama, the Clinton's, this great Military of one, and the free world in general.
Because if they fail, sharks will take the lead, for ten years or so.
More wars, more victims and more blood on the ground.
mohammed suerte bennani.
surgeon and author.
casablanca September the 6th, 2009
http://www.suertebennani.com
"I am here today to ensure that we are operating in a way that is truly protecting the Afghan people from all threats," he told the officials.
------------------------------------------------------
This is the situation. There have been many times when the "enemy" has been entrenched into a site. We could send in our guys and the death/wounding of many is certain. Or, we could send in a drone/aircraft with bombs to flatten the place with little damange to our guys. Which option would an American commander concerned about his troops pick? Remember the latter option would certainly result in deaths/wounding of innocent people. This is called collateral damange.
In the article General McCrystal stated that he was there to ensure that innocent lives would not be put at risk. Any bets as to how many Afrans believed him? Did his visit/statement prevent more recruits flocking to the Taliban?
i) war crime
ii) crime against humanity
iii)terrorism (to send a political message)
iv) terror to punish a populace
v) slaughter of indigenous people
vi) cowardice at best
Above are facts, not opinions-NO argument about them
I am pretty convinced that a large majority of Americans simply do not value human life......
It's called war. Those tankers, or the fuel in them, would have probably ended up blowing up in some marketplace killing far more innocents.
====================================
They aren't that stupid to get them blown up in a crowded area -- at least they weren't. They did, however, pull some stupid stunts like welding on tankers with fuel/fumes still in them (albeit not in crowded areas). Missile or no, it still makes one hell of a kaboom.
"Winning" what? How do you define winning?
How do you justify the US creating the harm in whose way they find themselves, in their own land?
You say "If they were truly innocent they would not have been looting the truck." This is a fool's remark.
If you lived in a land where fuel was not cheap or easy to get, you would also take advantage. the truck was abandoned in the mud, therefore it was not theft.
If you found a $100 dollar bill on the street in your own neighborhood, then you call yourself a criminal or thief if you pick it up.
Anyone able to think would understand that a full truck abandoned in a mud pit full of fuel would attract civilians looking to take advantage of a rare "lucky" break.
Death did indeed occur in the commission of a crime, the crime being that the US should not be there in the first place dropping bombs. The crime is ours.
But I digress, back to this idea of "winning.
Is it when the Afghan people are forced to accept our puppet as their government? Are they supposed to stop defending themselves by resisting a hostile invasion of their land? Are they supposed to simply give up their land for Bush's pipeline without any compensation?
Just what do you mean by "winning"?