US crash sparks Afghanistan riot

#1
At least seven people have been killed in the Afghan capital Kabul after a traffic accident involving a US military convoy sparked mass rioting.
Hundreds of anti-US protesters clashed with Afghan security forces for two hours, in one of the worst riots since the fall of the Taleban in late 2001.
The protesters moved on to attack buildings in the diplomatic quarter.
There are conflicting reports over whether the US troops in the military convoy fired into the crowd.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/5026350.stm

The unrest began after a US military vehicle apparently lost control and smashed into at least 12 civilian cars during morning rush-hour in Kabul's northern suburbs.
Coalition spokesman Col Thomas Collins said a large cargo truck in the US convoy had suffered a mechanical failure, hitting the cars at a busy intersection.
"This was a tragic accident and we deeply regret any deaths or injuries resulting from this incident," he said, adding that a full investigation was under way.
Hundreds of Afghans gathered after the accident, chanting "Death to America" and "Death to Karzai".
They pelted the US military vehicles with stones before scattering when the shooting began.
Some eyewitnesses say the US troops shot at protesters, while others say it was the Afghan police who came to the aid of the under-siege convoy. Some say it was both.
The US military said there were "indications" that at least one of the vehicles in the convoy "fired warning shots over the crowd".
and remember kids, like George Bush said, its all freedom and democracy now in Afganistan.

US President George W Bush has praised the progress of Afghan democracy on his first visit to the country, where the US helped eject the Taleban in 2001.
On a surprise first stop of his maiden trip to South Asia, Mr Bush told Afghan President Hamid Karzai his country was "inspiring others".
He said he was still confident Osama Bin Laden would be brought to justice.
 
#2
The details are sketchy, but it seems that this, like most incidents involving US troops, very quickly escalated to the laying down of rounds. Is it just a misconception or are they not able to deal with lower levels of public disorder, accepting a little punishment in the pursuit of a calmer resolution?
 
#4
Kabul has without doubt got the most driving lunacy I've experienced, and thats just the NGOs/UN/PSDs

The locals are even worse

When I retire I'm gonna open up a bodyshop for landcruisers in downtown Kabul
 
#5


that copper on the left dont look to bothered about stopping the kids from bricking the trucks,
looks like round hits on the windshield too.
 
#6
I would go far as to say that they just do not have the same sense of professionalism.

They get flustered far to easy and over react. That's how simple I see it!
 
#7
The American Junior Commanders on the ground should be getting a grip of these situations before it escalates into the situation they have now, they have to realise they are in Afghanistan through invite only, and if they keep this behaviour up, then like every other foreign Army that has been there including the UK, they will be ejected from the country.

The Americans are seriously close to fcuking everything up with the latest slaughters of 24 people in Iraq recently in the news, and now this.
They have to realise that this isn’t the Hollywood, and the hero won’t be walking away with some foxy slut. This is a dirty bloody hole they are digging themselves into. Never mind the Iraq’s or Afghans hating them, I hate them, because every time they do this they make our job fcuking harder..
 
#9
The thing is Chief_Joseph, this is a major problem within American ground units in both theatres with a shoot first ask questions later attitude. All the efforts you and your friends, have put into sending aid and helping young Iraqi’s, is now in the bigger scale of things a wasted effort.
The British are not completely innocent of making bad decisions on the ground in the heat of the moment: i.e. kicking fcuk out of 3 Young Iraqis, and filming it ffs.

But when the Americans do it, they do it with style, and junior commanders are letting this happen when they should be stepping in and controlling what the fcuk is going on, a little thing called the law of armed conflict is something they should be reading and then applying to these situations.

We used to have a saying in the British Army of:
You are noticed for the things you do right, but you are always remembered for the things you fcuk up.

This simply fuels sympathy and propaganda for these insurgent bast@rds . Local people will give you intelligence if they think you can help them, but it’s a survival thing. They wont be going near American patrols to give them info, because they just don’t know, it could be their house next.
 
#10
I watched this story develop over the day, and i must say that it seems to be yet another example of 'blame the yanks'.

It was first reported with the headline : "US service personnel fire on civilians."

The report then went on to state that it was infact the afghani police and army that opened fire on the crowd when they came under sustained attack. Slightly different to your headline, no?

With every oncoming report, casulaties rose, and uncertainty got thicker and thicker. US commanders insist that no shots were fired by US personnel. Afghani civilians claim they saw americans firing at them.

The one constant was the good old anti-american agent-provocateurs who were willing to be filmed and protest about the presence of the great satan, whilst calling for the return of the taliban.

Lets just wait to see what actually happened before we blame the spams for being trigger happy (on this occasion :wink: )
 
#11
TartanTerror said:
This simply fuels sympathy and propaganda for these insurgent bast@rds . Local people will give you intelligence if they think you can help them, but it’s a survival thing. They wont be going near American patrols to give them info, because they just don’t know, it could be their house next.
I won't argue with that, your right. Your following the right train of logic and I'm not disputing it. My concern is how much of it is already propoganda.

Most units from what I understand don't take that approach. But as you said "You are noticed for the things you do right, but you are always remembered for the things you fcuk up". It only takes a handful of idiot walts to mess up the hard work everyone has put into it, all the work being put in by brits, yanks, aussies, and everyone else. No reporters were to be seen in Haditha when my friend's unit was there last year trying to protect people from foreign fighters from Syria. Voter turnouts in the area went from 15% to 70% while they were there. However, once a handful of pricks commit a crime out there, reporters flock there to get the big story.

I'm not making excuses for what happened. The problem is that Rummy is trying to send green National Guard and Reserve units out there with little training or self control. The quality of troops is in decline since Rummy tried to shift all of the Military Budget into missiles and jets, while downsizing infantry and special forces. He thought that everything could be won with shiny beepy things. But a tomahawk can't win hearts and minds.
 
#12
Agent_Smith said:
I watched this story develop over the day, and i must say that it seems to be yet another example of 'blame the yanks'.

It was first reported with the headline : "US service personnel fire on civilians."

The report then went on to state that it was infact the afghani police and army that opened fire on the crowd when they came under sustained attack. Slightly different to your headline, no?

With every oncoming report, casulaties rose, and uncertainty got thicker and thicker. US commanders insist that no shots were fired by US personnel. Afghani civilians claim they saw americans firing at them.

The one constant was the good old anti-american agent-provocateurs who were willing to be filmed and protest about the presence of the great satan, whilst calling for the return of the taliban.

Lets just wait to see what actually happened before we blame the spams for being trigger happy (on this occasion :wink: )
What actually happened? Dear oh dear. The site will have been swept by now and news management is just kicking in, with some catching up to do. So what's the point of waiting? Unless you're keen to hear the carefully-crafted creative US version of events.
 
#13
frenchperson said:
Agent_Smith said:
I watched this story develop over the day, and i must say that it seems to be yet another example of 'blame the yanks'.

It was first reported with the headline : "US service personnel fire on civilians."

The report then went on to state that it was infact the afghani police and army that opened fire on the crowd when they came under sustained attack. Slightly different to your headline, no?

With every oncoming report, casulaties rose, and uncertainty got thicker and thicker. US commanders insist that no shots were fired by US personnel. Afghani civilians claim they saw americans firing at them.

The one constant was the good old anti-american agent-provocateurs who were willing to be filmed and protest about the presence of the great satan, whilst calling for the return of the taliban.

Lets just wait to see what actually happened before we blame the spams for being trigger happy (on this occasion :wink: )
What actually happened? Dear oh dear. The site will have been swept by now and news management is just kicking in, with some catching up to do. So what's the point of waiting? Unless you're keen to hear the carefully-crafted creative US version of events.
Not that you are biased or anything eh Frenchy?
 
#14
frenchperson said:
What actually happened? Dear oh dear. The site will have been swept by now and news management is just kicking in, with some catching up to do. So what's the point of waiting? Unless you're keen to hear the carefully-crafted creative US version of events.

Frenchperson has a point I have never heard a yankee wait before shooting his mouth off about us brits, so never give them the satisfaction of explaining themselves, not that they care anyway's. :D :D :D
 
#15
Propaganda is only as good as it is plausible. Unfortunetly this is one of those beleivable episodes. Unfortunately another own goal for the yanks.












Edited for spelling
 
#16
Agent_Smith said:
I watched this story develop over the day, and i must say that it seems to be yet another example of 'blame the yanks'.

It was first reported with the headline : "US service personnel fire on civilians."

The report then went on to state that it was infact the afghani police and army that opened fire on the crowd when they came under sustained attack. Slightly different to your headline, no?

With every oncoming report, casulaties rose, and uncertainty got thicker and thicker. US commanders insist that no shots were fired by US personnel. Afghani civilians claim they saw americans firing at them.

The one constant was the good old anti-american agent-provocateurs who were willing to be filmed and protest about the presence of the great satan, whilst calling for the return of the taliban.

Lets just wait to see what actually happened before we blame the spams for being trigger happy (on this occasion :wink: )
There you go being thoughtful, see what that'll get you.
 
#17
TartanTerror said:
The thing is Chief_Joseph, this is a major problem within American ground units in both theatres with a shoot first ask questions later attitude. All the efforts you and your friends, have put into sending aid and helping young Iraqi’s, is now in the bigger scale of things a wasted effort.

But when the Americans do it, they do it with style, and junior commanders are letting this happen when they should be stepping in and controlling what the fcuk is going on,
I wonder how much of it is a result of the policies mandated from above? If you are under instructions that you will always wear armour and helmet, and always go around in convoys of a minimum size, and so on, basically what the higher-ups are telling you is that you are in an environment which is already hostile, not one which is sortof neutral with the potential to get worse if you screw up. As a result, the troops, to include the junior leaders, are going to be a lot more nervous, and less reluctant to hold back. After all, it's dangerous out there, it must be, the highers said so.

Just a thought.

NTM
 
#18
It's not a surprise that something like this happened. The Americans drive like absolute maniacs - high speed, on the wrong side of the road, blasting their horns. It was only a matter of time until they caused an accident serious enough to set something like this off.
 
#19
The aggressive posture of the driving is relative to the current threat level. There are VBIED's about!?!

Had the convoy not have stopped (or not had to stop due to U/S vehcile) I doubt the riots would have been as bad, there would have been no immediate target on which to vent frustration.

The media is being its usual military bashing, yank hating, bunny kissing selves. A warning shot would be perfectly legitimate under those circumstances, and besides its still not known wether US/Afghan/Insurgent forces shot first....however the media, if theorectically interested in accuracy, should have reported that most rounds down in these riots came from insurgents....


www.cnn.com

generally accurate and unbaised ive found...and gets it faster than int.
 
#20
frenchperson said:
Agent_Smith said:
I watched this story develop over the day, and i must say that it seems to be yet another example of 'blame the yanks'.

It was first reported with the headline : "US service personnel fire on civilians."

The report then went on to state that it was infact the afghani police and army that opened fire on the crowd when they came under sustained attack. Slightly different to your headline, no?

With every oncoming report, casulaties rose, and uncertainty got thicker and thicker. US commanders insist that no shots were fired by US personnel. Afghani civilians claim they saw americans firing at them.

The one constant was the good old anti-american agent-provocateurs who were willing to be filmed and protest about the presence of the great satan, whilst calling for the return of the taliban.

Lets just wait to see what actually happened before we blame the spams for being trigger happy (on this occasion :wink: )
What actually happened? Dear oh dear. The site will have been swept by now and news management is just kicking in, with some catching up to do. So what's the point of waiting? Unless you're keen to hear the carefully-crafted creative US version of events.
The point is that in the past, news stories like this have provoked outrage on Arrse (amongst other forums), that once viewed with hindsight was misplaced and ill-judged.
 

Latest Threads