top
Afghanistan
Afghanistan
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Red Cross Views the US War Crimes Carnage

by Justice
The war crimes perpetrated by the United States with the bombing and slaughter of 800 prisoners of war in Afghanistan during the week ending 11/25/01, many of whom were bound, is causing a major outcry around the world as the Red Cross and others enter the jail after this war crime to view the carnage. In the United States, the World Socialist Website is currently running a series on this story, the latest of which can be found at:
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/mass-n29.shtml
The war crimes perpetrated by the United States with the bombing and slaughter of 800 prisoners of war in Afghanistan during the week ending 11/25/01, many of whom were bound, is causing a major outcry around the world as the Red Cross and others enter the jail after this war crime to view the carnage. In the United States, the World Socialist Website is currently running a series on this story, the latest of which can be found at:
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/mass-n29.shtml

The full list of articles is as follows:
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/afgh-n27.shtml
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/afgh-n28.shtml
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/mass-n29.shtml

The legal definition of war crimes and the coverage of the capitalist press are thoroughly discussed and the conclusion is inescapable: the United States has committed war crimes.

This is only the latest criminal aspect of this attack on Afghanistan. We should remember that only Congress can declare war, which it did not do. It merely gave the president some war powers. Further, the government of Afghanistan never attacked the United States, and thus the claim of self-defense does not hold. Finally, the United States waited 3 weeks before it started bombing Afghanistan, thus proving the United States government did not feel it was in immediate danger of attack by Afghanistan.

This is another colonial war of mass pillage and murder, with oil being the primary resource being sought by the United States, in particular the oil in the Caspian Sea region. This attack on Afghanistan was long planned, as any serious research shows, and Unocal's desire for a pipeline through Afghanistan from the Caspian Sea to the Indian Ocean is well-established and is the primary reason for this attack.

This is Nazi Germany all over again, looting the resources and murdering the poor people of the world. It was stopped by the Red Army, in particular the Battle of Stalingrad of 1942-1943, the turning point of World War 2. The Soviet Union drove the Nazis all the way back to Berlin, arriving in Berlin first, where a woman military officer planted the Soviet red flag. In spite of the counter-revolutionary Stalin, the workingclass was able to defeat the Nazis. The workingclass will prevail today, too.
by Jon

Geneva Convention
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/93.htm
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Article 47.-Mercenaries
1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.
2. A mercenary is any person who:
(a) Is specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;

(b) Does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;

(c) Is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;

(d) Is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;

(e) Is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and

(f) Has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


in other words, geneva conventions didn't apply, therefore no war crime.


however, assuming that they weren't mercenaries. the fact remains, they were POW's. as POW's you must NOT take up arms or else you forfeit your geneva rights as a POW.

guess what those idiots did.
by Jon
the Times article in question is here:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2001540008-2001551563,00.html

tells quite a different story.

blames in part the CIA, but more b/c of its incompetence.

2 CIA agents interviewing a large number of taliban. things got out of control and the uprising then took place.
by thinking person
If 250 were tied up and then blown to pieces by US warplanes, that is a war crime, pure and simple. It really doesn't matter what other prisoners were doing. Sure, control the situation, attack the prisoners, whatever. But you don't retreat from the building and then blow it up. 250 people are important people; their lives are not less important that those who died in the world trade center.

But of course, the US has been bombing women and children for the past few weeks and no one seems to care about that. So why should they care about blowing up prisoners? In this country we treat our prisoners horribly and no one gives a fuck. Americans are basically spoiled self-centered brats who stomp and moan if you dare suggest that their government is just as bad as any other government. its pathetic really. its why we need revolution.
by Jesse
You know, the thing that gets me about this whole slaughter is how did these pows get to the weapons? Weren't they searched after being captured in Kunduz? I could see how the NA could overlook this, but I find it VERY hard to believe that trained US and British soldiers could overlook something like that. Especially with a CIA agent so close to the prisoners.
by Pat Kincaid (laughter [at] aol.com)
Apparently the weapons were obtained from a depot adjacent to where the prisoners were being held.

As for why people's hands were tied - prisoners hands had been tied earlier. If the rebellion then broke out, and these prisoners were among the first killed - that would explain that.

Why the NA does not insist on everyone surrendering naked (I'm not kidding) is beyond me.

There's already been one instance of one 'prisoner' detonating a grenade he was carrying in a suicide attack.

PK
by Jon
250 tied prisoners?
not quite.

more like a handful in a few rooms that were being prepped for interogation, not quite 250.

nice try
by anarchist
"Rebellion may also have been sparked by efforts to tie up the Taleban prisoners, many of whom apparently believed they were about to be killed. About 250 had been bound, according to one report, before the rest rebelled."

This is from the Times article, Jon. So according to them it is 250 people who were bound and then murdered. Like I said, this is a war crime.

Now, are you saying that if it is 250 people as this Times article indicates, you agree it is a warcrime?

Or will you just ignorantly deny it again?
§.
by Jon
read b/w the lines, yes i know its quite difficult but do try.

"About 250 had been bound, according to one report, before the rest rebelled"

so, some rebelled while others were tied.
nowhere does that say that these 250 bound prisoners were killed while still bound, or were freed by their friends and then killed in combat.

by bound
But you agree that the slaughter of 250 bound people would be a warcrime, if that is what happened? Of course, you have to.

Now, care to explain how we will find out the truth? Maybe ask the CIA? hahaha.

In fact, many of the dead found had their hands tied behind their back, and this was widely reported by the BBC etc.

Dont worry, Jon. Your precious US government will never have to answer for this warcrime or any of the others they are responsible for.
§.
by Jon
the intentional and deliberate killing of 250 noncombatants would constitute a war crime.

but so what? you have yet to establish that this is what had happened.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$190.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network