Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military documents

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
Tapani's picture
Tapani
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: May 3 2009
Posts: 69
Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military documents

Surprised nobody else has posted this yet:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/

Der Spiegel

Wikileaks has leaked 92,000 classified military reports on the war in Afghanistan. This has been front page news in Europe, not the least here in Sweden.

Rarely an event occurs when I feel that this might "change the world". This is one of them.

Swedish foreign minister said in his extra press conference about this leak: "nothing sensational is leaked, the leak is the sensation". That is my iniital assessment too.

The change to the world I fear is that this might be the beginning of the end for the free interenet as we know it. The powers to be cannot have it so this much secret material can be made public, anonymously, so easily. Also I felt person-of-the-year awards or even a Nobel peace prize going Wikileaks way. If they are still alive.

Otherwise, Swedish media has reported the leaked material containing evidence of war crimes (I don't think anyone doubts atrocities being commited by all parties there), with some interesting analyses on how civilian casualties are being covered up (it is apparantly not centrally orchestrated, but each unit tends to portray themselves more favourably when reporting... more glory in killing enemies than children).

How has this leak been reported in the US?

thomasjjason's picture
thomasjjason
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 1 2010
Posts: 3
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

With a large spin thus far.  The focus has been on Pakistan's role in the war, how the leak endangers our troops, if the documents are legitamite, and a host of other headlines that seem to ignore the fact a lot of human beings are losing their lives in this war.

frank_begbie's picture
frank_begbie
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 26 2010
Posts: 2
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

As you say it could be a good excuse to try and close down the internet...."national security".

Wouldn't surprise me if the leak was intentional.

 

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

Tapani,

Thanks for posting this. The New York Times was the third newspaper given access to the WikiLeaks papers several weeks in advance of their publication yesterday.

What this event rhymes with is the publication on June 13, 1971 of the leaked 'Pentagon Papers' pertaining to the Vietnam war. Perhaps more damaging than the Wikileaks release, the Pentagon Papers revealed a greater extent of official lying. For instance, the American people were not told that the war was being expanded into Cambodia and Laos. Moreover, Johnson had claimed during his 1964 presidential campaign that there were no plans to expand the war, although such plans already existed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers

By contrast, Nobel Peace laureate O'Bomber stated plainly enough during his campaign in the summer of 2008 that he would expand the Afghanistan war if elected. So he is not guilty of the breach of trust that Johnson was.

However, what corresponds exactly in these two historic sets of leaked documents is the shambles of the war strategy. In both South Vietnam and Afghanistan, the US and its allies were attempting to work with corrupt local regimes of questionable legitimacy, in the forlorn hope of training local troops with poor motivation and competence, to take over the job from the western invaders. In both cases, there wasn't and isn't a chance in hell of such a preposterous fantasy coming true.

As in the last go-round, trial balloons are being floated about negotiations with the Taliban, just as the Nixon administration ultimately negotiated with the Viet Cong. Regardless of the negotiations' outcome, the certain finale is that the defeated US/NATO/Europe clown posse will exit with tails between their legs, as Afghanistan reverts to its long-established feudal warlord character. The whole stupid farce conceived by Field Marshall George Bush the Lesser will be revealed as a gigantic, useless, negative-return debacle.

For the U.S., the larger issue raised by the WikiLeaks revelation is the utter dysfunctionality of its government. It can't plan, it can't abide by the law, it can't win, and it can't pay for its criminal exploits. The USSR fell apart after getting whipped in Afghanistan. It is not too far-fetched to say that Usgov faces the same risk.

For Europe, the issue is that it is still occupied by U.S. troops 65 years after V-E Day, and still enmeshed in an anachronistic, US-dominated defense alliance called NATO. Via NATO, the US has dragged Europe into its Afghan occupation, since Europe lacks full sovereignty in foreign and defense policy.

And as you pointed out, the repercussions for internet freedom could be serious. At a time when Obamacare mandates that every American have a centralized medical record by 2014, the WikiLeaks debacle shows that the sprawling Usgov can't even protect its military secrets, much less civilian files.

As in 1971 when the Pentagon Papers emerged, the issue is trust. The US government doesn't merit trust:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 23% of voters nationwide believe the federal government today has the consent of the governed. Sixty-two percent (62%) say it does not, and 15% are not sure.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics...

As the insolvency of the US government becomes more obvious, it will command less and less respect. Already its draconian Drug Control Act of 1970 is openly flouted in 14 states. Usgov does nothing, because 14 states have nullified its laws, and juries would not convict.

Now economists such as Michael Rozeff are openly advocating to bring it down:

People gain leverage and power against the national Leviathan by acting as citizens of their respective states. They need to act through their state legislatures, not as citizens of the United States. In the old days of whaling, the method of bringing down the whale was by several crews working together in several boats. It was not by individual whalers rowing around by themselves and confronting Leviathan on their own.

A tax revolt that works from and through the state legislatures directly undermines the Union. It directly challenges the power of Congress to tax. That’s a far stronger political platform for restructuring the United States.

All that has to happen at present is a spark lit by one or more States and the Union will go up in smoke. The Empire will fall. The tinder is very dry right now. One bolt of lightning will set the U.S. ablaze.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff328.html

Rozeff is right. If a state ordered its employers to remit withholding taxes to the state capitol rather than to Washington (thus providing legal cover against individual attack), the Obama regime would be brought to its knees in a matter of days, if not hours. 

And then it might occur to state governors to command their National Guard reservists to return from Afghanistan to their state barracks. And the whole federal clown show would collapse like a circus tent with its guy wires cut. 


goes211's picture
goes211
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 1114
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...
machinehead wrote:

Now economists such as Michael Rozeff are openly advocating to bring it down:

People gain leverage and power against the national Leviathan by acting as citizens of their respective states. They need to act through their state legislatures, not as citizens of the United States. In the old days of whaling, the method of bringing down the whale was by several crews working together in several boats. It was not by individual whalers rowing around by themselves and confronting Leviathan on their own.

A tax revolt that works from and through the state legislatures directly undermines the Union. It directly challenges the power of Congress to tax. That’s a far stronger political platform for restructuring the United States.

All that has to happen at present is a spark lit by one or more States and the Union will go up in smoke. The Empire will fall. The tinder is very dry right now. One bolt of lightning will set the U.S. ablaze.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff328.html

Rozeff is right. If a state ordered its employers to remit withholding taxes to the state capitol rather than to Washington (thus providing legal cover against individual attack), the Obama regime would be brought to its knees in a matter of days, if not hours. 

And then it might occur to state governors to command their National Guard reservists to return from Afghanistan to their state barracks. And the whole federal clown show would collapse like a circus tent with its guy wires cut. 

I read lewrockwell daily but I have never been a fan of Rozeff.  The Leviathan will not go down without a fight and there are NO WHERE NEAR enough people that are interested in getting rid of the Federal government to make this anything but a fantasy.  I am reading Tom Wood's book Nullficication right now.  I am only about 1/3 through it but it does provide a lot of historical precedent for the idea of state nullification of unconsitutional laws.

I love the concept of states reasserting their sovereignty by collecting taxes and withholding them from the Federal government until the Federal government acknowledges its limited role but I am afraid that the 16th amendment let that cat is out of the bag.  It would have worked kind of reverse of how the Federal government threatens to withhold funds from the states if they don't set speed limits or follow any of the thousands of directives that come out of Washington every year.  Too bad it won't happen.

It seems 1913 was the year our constitutional republic died.

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

Wikileaks’ War Logs Highlight Global Intelligence Facade Of ‘War On Terror’  - Complete article link

CIA funds ISI – ISI funds Taliban, Al Qaeda

The Wikileaks Afghanistan War Logs, publicly released today, highlight and corroborate what we already know about the “war on terror” – it is a vast and decompartmentalised intelligence operation.

The London Guardian reports:

“A stream of U.S. military intelligence reports accuse Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) spy agency of arming, training and financing the Taliban insurgency since 2004, the war logs reveal, bringing fresh scrutiny on one of the war’s most contentious issues.”

The reports are said to have been mostly collated by junior officers relying on informants and Afghan officials, prompting one senior U.S. intelligence officer to describe them as a mixture of “rumours, bullshit and second-hand information”.

However, it has been common knowledge for years that the ISI created the Taliban and Al Qaeda as we now know them, acting in its capacity as a direct front for U.S. intelligence.

Before 9/11, Pakistan worked directly with the CIA to create the Taliban in Afghanistan. Selig Harrison from the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars stated:

“The CIA made a historic mistake in encouraging Islamic groups from all over the world to come to Afghanistan. The U.S. provided $3 billion for building up these Islamic groups, and it accepted Pakistan’s demand that they should decide how this money should be spent.

The old associations between the intelligence agencies continue. The CIA still has close links with the ISI (Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence).

Today that money and those weapons have helped build up the Taliban, Harrison said. The Taliban are not just recruits from ‘madrassas’ (Muslim theological schools) but are on the payroll of the ISI. The Taliban are now “making a living out of terrorism.”

Al Qaeda was a joint CIA/ISI intelligence database of mujahudeen fighters they had recruited in the late 70s and eighties to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

It was later revealed via de-classified Defence Intelligence Agency documents of 2001 that the DIA was aware that the ISI was sponsoring the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but the Bush Administration chose to ignore its findings.

No surprise then that in 2003 two senior members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee...told the New York Times that there was evidence that ISI might be helping the Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives along the border infiltrate into Afghanistan.

Then in 2005 CIA officer Gary Schroen, who spearheaded U.S.’ search for Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, stated that ISI officials are very well aware of the whereabouts of the leadership of Al Qaeda, including Bin Laden himself.

Then the so called “missing link” came when it was revealed that the head of the ISI was the principal financier of the 9/11 hijackers.

“The U.S. has provided $5.6 billion in coalition support funds to Pakistan over the past five years, with zero accountability,” said Congressman Patrick Murphy, D-Pa., at the hearing.

“Why is Pakistan still being paid these large sums of money, even after publicly declaring that it is significantly cutting back patrols in the most important border area?” he asked.

Pakistan and the ISI is the go between of the global terror explosion. Pakistan’s military-intelligence apparatus, which literally created and sponsored the Taliban and Al Qaeda, is directly upheld and funded by the CIA. These facts are not even in dispute, neither in the media nor in government.

Last November, the LA Times, citing current and former U.S. officials, reported that the CIA has paid millions of dollars to the ISI since 9/11, accounting for as much as one-third of the foreign spy agency’s annual budget, and that the funding, initiated covertly under Bush, has continued under Obama.

A major London School of Economics study, released last year, also highlighted the ongoing relationship between the ISI and the Taliban.

The Pakistani ISI is a CIA front and controls terror cells at the discretion of the highest levels of the U.S. military-industrial complex.

There is a great need to perpetuate the mythical war on terror in order to maintain the pretext for the geopolitical genocide currently being undertaken by globalist advances into the middle east “rogue” (independent) nations.

As our governments assert that they are doing everything in their power to dismantle the global terror network, the reality is the exact opposite. The criminal intelligence networks assembled it, they sponsored it and they continue to fund it using our tax dollars. As any good criminal should, they have a middleman to provide plausible deniability. That middleman is the ISI and the military dictatorship of Pakistan.

The CIA is a national security threat and should be eliminated.

Larry

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

Did the Abu Ghraib incident have any effect on the bottom line of the military industrial complex? Has the well documented corruption of the U.S. installed Hamid Karzai government changed anything? I suspect that this latest WikiLeaks "bombshell" will go the way that all other offerings of enlightenment will go --- into the trash bin of America's corporate-controlled subconscious. The "global war on terror" is just a tool used under the guise of "capitalism" and "democracy" to justify the invasion of Iraq and the continuation of our debacle in Afghanistan - all for oil and war profiteering interests. Iran appears to be next on the list. 

Every year you pay your fed taxes, just remember that 53% of your Tax Dollar goes to the Military

Tapani's picture
Tapani
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: May 3 2009
Posts: 69
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

machinehead,

I was not aware of the Pentagon papers! Thank you! Seems history repeats itself.

And don't complain about your healthcare reforms privacy implications -- you have no idea how bad things are here in Sweden... (but that is entirely another topic).

 

Larry,

you are aware you just linked to infowars? Isn't there an equivalent of Godwin's law for that? There should be ;-)

 

xraymike79,

afraid what you say is true in the short perspective and in the US. The resistance to having troops in Afghanistan is much larger in Europe (but as Machinehead points out, European foreign and military policy is complicated -- with individual nations, EU, and the two partially overlapping military alliances (NATO and EU under the treaty of Lisbon). This leak could (and will) influence the European participation in Afghanistan.

You mention Abu Ghraib, which reminds me of another oddity found in the leaked documents -- the number of prisoners claimed to be taken does not match what is official, with a large discrepancy. The question is what has happened to the rest? Shot under the military commisions act, or boiled alive in Uzbekistan?

I still find the leak awesome, historical, and eye-opening -- we have dissidents even in the west!

V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

Yup! goes

1913

16 th Amendment

17 th Amendment

Federal Reserve Act

The Trifecta. Game, Set, Match

V

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

Tapani wrote:

Larry,

you are aware you just linked to infowars? Isn't there an equivalent of Godwin's law for that? There should be ;-)

I hope you are not implying that the mainstream, corporate media is an honest and accurate alternative?  No doubt the MSM does a fine job reporting on Lindsay Lohan but when it comes to real news, they offer propaganda, misinformation and illusion. 

The information on Infowars, like any news outlet, should be carefully scrutinized and taken with a grain of salt.  If there is to be Godwin's law for the Internet, it should be against people attacking the messenger rather than ideas and information.  If there is something in that article that you disagree with, why not be specific?

Larry 

Tapani's picture
Tapani
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: May 3 2009
Posts: 69
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

Larry,

sorry for being dismissive, and it was not intended to be personal or too serious (hence, the smiley). The article you linked to was informative,  well above the average of infowars. The usual view on the communities I frequent is that either there is a credible source in addition to infowars, and then that should be used instead, and when not  -- the news item has no value. There are cases when Alex Jones publishes a story even when he knows it is false. (For instance a report on the see-through scanners used at some European airports).

I do not imply anything about US MSM since I am not from the US. I did notice a discrepancy between the International and US versions of CNN on this leak. The international version had the leak as main news, with an additional report on the operation of Wikileaks. The whole webpage was allocated to it. The US version of CNN's webpage had some celebrity in prison as main news (guess it was Lindsay Logan, whoever she is). The leak was a smaller note on the side.

 

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

Hello Tapani,

Sorry if I directed my skepticism of the corporate media towards you.  It seems like we are on the same page. 

It looks as though the same financiers are funding both sides in a war that has no identified conclusion - how will we ever know if we won when we don't even know what we are fighting for.

As far as Infowars; I think it offers some credible stories ignored by the corporate media but I think it also sabotages the growing consciousness of the masses by portraying things in a sensational manner.  I'm sure we've all read about the supposed links between AJ and the Bronfmans - I don't have an opinion but find myself more careful with the information presented.

Back to the original point...I think the war on terror is phony justification to attack whomever we deem is against us.  We know that the U.S. was preparing to attack Afghanistan prior to 9/11:

US 'planned attack on Taleban' before 9-11-2001

A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week's attacks.  Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.

  Russian troops were on standby

Mr Naik was told that if the military action went ahead it would take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.  He said that he was in no doubt that after the World Trade Center bombings this pre-existing US plan had been built upon and would be implemented within two or three weeks.

And he said it was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taleban.

MSNBC Reported a similar story:

U.S. sought attack on al-Qaida White House given plan days before Sept. 11

President Bush was expected to sign detailed plans for a worldwide war against al-Qaida two days before Sept. 11 but did not have the chance before the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, U.S. and foreign sources told NBC News.

The document, a formal National Security Presidential Directive, amounted to a “game plan to remove al-Qaida from the face of the earth,” one of the sources told NBC News’ Jim Miklaszewski.

The plans also called for a freeze on al-Qaida financial accounts worldwide and a drive to disrupt the group’s money laundering. The document mapped out covert operations aimed at al-Qaida cells in about 60 counties.

In another striking parallel to the war plan adopted after Sept. 11, the security directive included efforts to persuade Afghanistan’s Taliban government to turn al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden over to the United States, with provisions to use military force if it refused.

Like the phony WMDs of Iraq, Afghanistan was a planned war waiting for a reason or trumped up justification.

"The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was an American think tank based in Washington, D.C. that lasted from early 1997 to 2006. It was co-founded as a non-profit educational organization by neoconservatives William Kristol and Robert Kagan. The PNAC's stated goal was "to promote American global leadership."[1] Fundamental to the PNAC were the view that "American leadership is both good for America and good for the world" and support for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity."[2] The PNAC exerted influence on high-level U.S. government officials in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush and affected the Bush Administration's development of military and foreign policies, especially involving national security and the Iraq War.[3][4] 

Section V of Rebuilding America's Defenses, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", includes the sentence: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor" (51).[13]"

Larry

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

US paying Pakistan to kill American troops?

WASHINGTON: A treasure trove of US documents implicating Pakistan in its support for terrorism exploded in the public domain on Sunday, sending officials in both countries scurrying to defend a dubious alliance and straining a phony partnership based on a misreading of the ground sentiment and situation.

In effect, the chronicles suggested that Washington was blindly paying Pakistan massive amounts of money for access to Afghanistan even as Islamabad uses its spy agency, ISI, to plot the death of American and Nato troops, allied Indian personnel, and undermines US policy. The most devastating leaks showed that Pakistan allows representatives of its spy service, ISI, to meet directly with the Taliban in secret strategy sessions to organize attacks against American soldiers in Afghanistan, and even hatch plots to assassinate Afghan leaders, including President Hamid Karzai.

 "Americans fighting the war in Afghanistan have long harboured strong suspicions that Pakistan's military spy service has guided the Afghan insurgency with a hidden hand, even as Pakistan receives more than $1 billion a year from Washington for its help combating the militants," the New York Times said in its assessment of the report. "The records also contain firsthand accounts of American anger at Pakistan's unwillingness to confront insurgents who launched attacks near Pakistani border posts, moved openly by the truckload across the frontier and retreated to Pakistani territory for safety," it continued.

Will this herald the end of the war against Afghanistan or will it precipitate a war against Pakistan?

Larry

Tapani's picture
Tapani
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: May 3 2009
Posts: 69
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

Larry wrote:

It looks as though the same financiers are funding both sides in a war that has no identified conclusion - how will we ever know if we won when we don't even know what we are fighting for.

Back to the original point...I think the war on terror is phony justification to attack whomever we deem is against us.  We know that the U.S. was preparing to attack Afghanistan prior to 9/11:

It is a grab for resources, mainly to protect and control the natural gas pipelines from the Caspian basin. US companies have the rights to many of them. (Source: the presentation with the British diplomat Craig Murray @ 3:20 -- btw, if anyone did miss his testimonies back when they was headline news, they are a must watch).

Regarding planning an attack before 9/11, it wouldnt suprise me. Having permanent bases in Afghanistan had been a strategic US goal ever since the negotiations with the Taleyban about protecting the pipelines failed (1998?). The PNAC documents mention permanent bases in the middle east. After 9/11 and before launching the invasion of Afghanistan, US had demands to the Taleyban. One of the demands was to have permanent military bases in Afghanistan. This demand was refused by the Taleyban (and not the demand to hand over bin Ladin, they agreed to that, but with some strings attached (like a fair trial)).

V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...
DrKrbyLuv wrote:

US paying Pakistan to kill American troops?

WASHINGTON: A treasure trove of US documents implicating Pakistan in its support for terrorism exploded in the public domain on Sunday, sending officials in both countries scurrying to defend a dubious alliance and straining a phony partnership based on a misreading of the ground sentiment and situation.

In effect, the chronicles suggested that Washington was blindly paying Pakistan massive amounts of money for access to Afghanistan even as Islamabad uses its spy agency, ISI, to plot the death of American and Nato troops, allied Indian personnel, and undermines US policy. The most devastating leaks showed that Pakistan allows representatives of its spy service, ISI, to meet directly with the Taliban in secret strategy sessions to organize attacks against American soldiers in Afghanistan, and even hatch plots to assassinate Afghan leaders, including President Hamid Karzai.

 "Americans fighting the war in Afghanistan have long harboured strong suspicions that Pakistan's military spy service has guided the Afghan insurgency with a hidden hand, even as Pakistan receives more than $1 billion a year from Washington for its help combating the militants," the New York Times said in its assessment of the report. "The records also contain firsthand accounts of American anger at Pakistan's unwillingness to confront insurgents who launched attacks near Pakistani border posts, moved openly by the truckload across the frontier and retreated to Pakistani territory for safety," it continued.

Will this herald the end of the war against Afghanistan or will it precipitate a war against Pakistan?

Larry

No Larry it will not herald a new war against Pakistan. We are already kinda sorta in a war with them. At least through the use of drones killing civilians. However I digress. Pakistan has no reserves of oil. As a matter of fact they have a three day supply, kinda like out just in time supermarkets. 

If you will look closely at a map of the area you will see that we have Iran surrounded by being in Afghanistan and Iraq. Iran being I believe the worlds 4th largest producer of oil. So we sew them up and it just about guarantees an endless war ( keeping the military industrial complex humming and the Pentagon jumping forever) 

V

John99's picture
John99
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 27 2009
Posts: 490
Re: Wikileaks publishes 92,000 classified US military ...

Recently made from the military documents.....

The short vid. shows home-made bomb attacks since 2003 to '09. 
Green colours = no causality, yellow = injuries, and red = deaths.
The 'deaths' columns below are for 'friendly' and enemy' deaths.

The increasing number of attacks show increase resistance from the
Afghani people.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments