Adding to evidence of the humanitarian nightmare the Afghan War has become, Australia is now investigating soldiers from their special forces related to evidence that at least twice in raids in Kandahar Province, those troops killed children in rural areas, then tried to cover up their deaths.
“Cover it up” might be overstating it, really. Indeed, the evidence suggests that the Australian forces who were present at the killings just plain never reported them up the chain of command, and it was only because local villagers found the bodies that those deaths became public knowledge.
This comes as Australia’s Inspector General is already investigating the special forces over other unlawful killings, and that those special forces were killing so many civilians they routinely carried spare “drop weapons” with them just to plant on the corpses to make it look like they were combatants.
The investigations serve as just another embarrassment from the perspective of Australia’s military, but also appears to be the result of broad changes in the priorities and tactics of the US and its coalition allies in fighting in Afghanistan, as they moved away from the “clear and hold” tactics of the war’s first decade.
Those familiar with the situation say that once “clear and hold” was abandoned, the collateral damage of raids stopped being a major concern for the troops, since they weren’t going to be there after the operation anyhow, and that often helicopter-based raids became “land, kill, and leave.”
This attitude was plainly in evidence when the Australian forces engaged in the raids in question, heading into rural Kandahar in the middle of the night and shooting anything that moved, even if they weren’t in a combat situation yet. If the slain turned out to be children, the expectation was that this could simply be swept under the rug.
It is this same attitude that has other nations involved in the operations facing similar question, from New Zealand’s probes into “revenge raids” to US special forces desecrating the bodies of slain enemies. It’s also the latest in a long list of reasons why they aren’t “welcomed as liberators” and aren’t anywhere near winning the war.
We Canadians had this problem when we sent our Airborne Regiment, may it rest in peace, to Somalia. Where they proceed to, surprise, not help the people there, but instead, to kill them.
The lesson is simple. If you set about collecting your country’s worst killers, putting them into uniforms, and giving them guns, it’s not a good idea to send them anywhere at all, unless you want everyone there dead.
I don’t think the young men that join the military are our countries worst killers . At least not when they first join the military .
Ours were. We collected the worst of the worst of the worst and put them in the Airborne regiment. If you washed out of a regular unit for insubordination: off to the Airborne. If you were just a little too gun-happy: the Airborne. Insisted on Nazi tattoos: to the Airborne.
Was a very bad idea to send them anywhere… we should have saved them for a real war.
So what is it about Afghanistan that all these supposed developed nations who go there go nuts and end up acting worse than the putative enemies?
The realization of the sheer futility of the nebulous mission.
Baby killing cowards.
When ever congress goes to war 1/2 of the Senate should be required to go too .for 6 mo duty than trade positions with the other 1/2 of the senate . keep alternating senators until the war is over .I bet these wars would not last long .
That would be the old Roman system! And then, as at Canae, Senators who led badly could get chopped up along with everyone else.