U.S. Inaction Seen After Taliban P.O.W.’s Died---God help us

[spanone]

WASHINGTON — After a mass killing of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Taliban prisoners of war by the forces of an American-backed warlord during the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, Bush administration officials repeatedly discouraged efforts to investigate the episode, according to government officials and human rights organizations.

American officials had been reluctant to pursue an investigation — sought by officials from the F.B.I., the State Department, the Red Cross and human rights groups — because the warlord, Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum, was on the payroll of the C.I.A. and his militia worked closely with United States Special Forces in 2001, several officials said. They said the United States also worried about undermining the American-supported government of President Hamid Karzai, in which General Dostum had served as a defense official.

“At the White House, nobody said no to an investigation, but nobody ever said yes, either,” said Pierre Prosper, the former American ambassador for war crimes issues. “The first reaction of everybody there was, ‘Oh, this is a sensitive issue; this is a touchy issue politically.’ ”

It is not clear how — or if — the Obama administration will address the issue. But in recent weeks, State Department officials have quietly tried to thwart General Dostum’s reappointment as military chief of staff to the president, according to several senior officials, and suggested that the administration might not be hostile to an inquiry.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/11/world/asia/11afghan.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

[Subdivisions]

1. INVESTIGATE IT NOW!!! n/t

[spanone]

2. the evidence against the war criminals is mounting

soon President Obama will have no choice.

[MadMaddie]

4. I agree

This isn't just about Dems getting Repugs.

This is just the tip of the iceberg...

[aquart]

5. Why? What power do we have over a warlord?

And what bloody business is it of ours? We backed him? HE BACKED US. And I'll bet money we want to keep it that way.

As for your tender belief that the goal of fighting the Taliban isn't to kill sufficient numbers of them to render them ineffective, well, best write that letter to Santa early this year so he has time to make your gift himself.

How imperialist and racist is it to believe WE have the right to regulate life and death in Afghanistan? How arrogant.

Do you also plan to investigate the number of women killed by Taliban policies such as not allowing them to see a doctor?

[spanone]

7. he was on the cia payroll, the blood is on our hands.

he worked closely with united states special forces.,

[aquart]

12. Because we, of course, are natural leaders.

And the warlord was a mere third world primitive. So unevolved he could not possibly be considered responsible for his own actions and his own orders. No, as his natural masters, we must accept that we are responsible for what he does. Just as if our dog bit a child.

Me, I respect him enough to believe HE was responsible for his actions and his people were abundantly approving. They had years of reasons to want those men dead.

[Subdivisions]

9. Ummmm....

What?

[Lebam in LA]

3. They Better not be hostile to an inquiry

Ifeel sick

[aquart]

10. LOL!

And if they ARE hostile to an "inquiry"? If they DO mind us butting in to their internal affairs? Whatcha gonna do about it?

The casually arrogant insular imperialist racism of this board continues to boggle my mind.

[aquart]

6. You thought Taliban men would be released to go home?

You're funny.

[spanone]

8. you're not.

[aquart]

11. No. I'm not.

The murder of thousands is serious business. Although I suppose there was a certain amount of glee at being able to do it so neatly.

See, that's the risk one takes in imposing one's will upon an unwilling population. We would do well to pay attention.