They used to teach us that WHO you killed was as important as killing 'em.
As the Brits who were there said, these guys seem shoot first, then try to justify it. They don't seem to be trying very hard to stop the friendly fire. And, this isn't a war where US forces are under attack in any meaningful manner, there aren't pitched battles with no time for decisions. It's not like Vietnam, Korea, WWII.
The fact that Karzai now needs US forces for a bodyguard sorta says something about how well the "they get used to it" and "give 'em some goodies" philosophy is working. With a bit more care it might have been that Karzai could have stayed pro-American and still been popular with his own people.
We now have a US installed and US guarded political regime, not great for long-term stability. And that's a shame, the people there and the US deserve stability for all the effort that's gone into it.
Killing innocent civilians in the name of fighting terrorism seems especially tragic.
Arf
Current Events » in reply to U.S. Forces Have Yet to Field Systems to Prevent 'Friendly Fire' . . .
My old refrain.
