An insider attack has killed two Americans in Afghanistan a mere two days after the US resumed operations with Afghan security forces that were suspended in response to such attacks.
US and NATO officials initially refused to label the incident an “insider attack,” in which Afghan forces turn turn their guns on their NATO trainers and counterparts, in an apparent effort to obscure the immediate return of such attacks following a suspension in which the US was supposed to have addressed the problems.
The attack took place after US soldiers had a cordial chat and then tea with their Afghan counterparts. One Afghan soldier then opened fire and killed one American soldier, and then a number of the other Afghan soldiers in the area, from all directions, began shooting at the Americans.
“A top Afghan military official denied that what took place was an insider attack and said the shooting was caused by a misunderstanding,” reports the Washington Post. “A preliminary military report, however, has concluded that the gunfight began only after an Afghan soldier opened fire on US troops, according to the American official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.”
“What sets this apart is that there were multiple attackers from multiple positions and there was zero provocation,” said the official. “Typically we are talking about a single gunman who acted in a somewhat rouge fashion, but in this case we are talking about an entire Afghan army unit and a large loss of life on both sides.”
At least 51 NATO troops have been killed this year in these “insider attacks,” as vast majorities of the American public and the Washington establishment begin to acknowledge the failure of the war.
How many times has this story changed? It's beginning to remind me of the attack in Benghazi.
How exactly does someone act in rouge fashion? Don't they know paisley is in this season?
Typos aside, the news is as tragic as it is predictable… not just the attack itself, but the idea that anyone could say there was "zero provocation" with a straight face.
so soon after the 2000 mark
It's happening often enough that the descriptor 'rogue' should be spelled correctly.
Rouge is make-up
"Zero provocation?" As if being there isn't provocation..