Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Report Points to Irregularities in Farah Air Strike Incident
American Forces Press Service ^ | Jim Garamone

Posted on 06/08/2009 5:04:53 PM PDT by SandRat

WASHINGTON, June 8, 2009 – The investigation into a May 4 close-air support incident in Afghanistan’s Farah province that caused civilian casualties has pointed to some deviations from established tactics, techniques and procedures, but those involved showed extraordinary care in the incident, the Pentagon’s press secretary said today.

Click photo for screen-resolution image
Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell responds to questions posed by members of the news media during a June 8, 2009, Pentagon press conference. DoD photo by R. D. Ward
  

(Click photo for screen-resolution image);high-resolution image available.
Geoff Morrell said Army Brig. Gen. Raymond Thomas conducted the review and briefed Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates on the recommendations of his report.

Thomas conducted the investigation on orders from U.S. Central Command chief Army Gen. David H. Petraeus. The full report will be released later this week.

“It appeared to me … that the personnel involved took extraordinary care in tracking the militants that they had come under attack from,” said Morrell, who attended Thomas’s briefing.

An Afghan unit had come in contact with Taliban militants and asked for back-up from U.S. Marines. “That unit came in, and over the next several hours beat back this attack, killing several dozen Taliban in the process, and required some close air support to ultimately prevail,” Morrell said.

The investigation found some problems with the way in which close-air support was used. A B-1 bomber, because of the way the aircraft makes its approach, had to break away from positive identification of its targets, Morrell said.

“There's no way to determine whether or not that had anything to do with the fact that civilian casualties did incur in this incident, but they did note that as one of the problems associated with how this all took place,” the press secretary said.

Between 20 and 30 Afghan civilians died in the incident, U.S. officials have said. “I'm going to let [Central Command] speak to the final numbers,” Morrell said. “But they were greatly outnumbered by the Taliban killed in this incident.”

Morrell called the Thomas report “exhaustive” and said that the Americans on the ground went to great lengths to limit civilian casualties.

American forces already have tightened rules for close-air support, Morrell said, and there will be a further review of procedures. Since the beginning of the year, civilian casualties in Afghanistan are down 40 percent, he noted. Meanwhile, he added, “American casualties and that of our coalition partners and Afghan security forces have shot up 75 percent.”

Morrell said coalition officials want to reduce civilian casualties to zero, but that it’s impossible to do so. “I would be foolish to stand up here and say that we'll ultimately eliminate civilian casualties, but we are going to make every effort we can to reduce them,” he said.
Related Articles:
Petraeus: Video Shows Air Strikes Aimed at Taliban Targets
Central Command Team Releases Interim Findings on Farah Battle
U.S. Regrets Any Loss of Innocent Lives in Afghanistan, Gates Says


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; airstrike; frwn; irregularities

1 posted on 06/08/2009 5:04:53 PM PDT by SandRat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Clive; girlangler; fanfan; DirtyHarryY2K; Tribune7; manic4organic; U S Army EOD; Chode; tillacum; ..
FR WAR NEWS!
If you would like to be added to / removed from FRWN,
please FReepmail Sandrat.

WARNING: FRWN can be an EXTREMELY HIGH-VOLUME PING LIST!!

2 posted on 06/08/2009 5:05:23 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandRat

I s she still alive


3 posted on 06/08/2009 5:11:19 PM PDT by al baby (Hi Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandRat

A B-1 bomber has a much larger footprint on the battlefield than an F/A 18 in pinpoint strikes against Taliban in amongst a civilian setting. No doubt the Americans on the ground should have called for a smaller platform to make the strike, if they had a choice. The timing of the relief of General Davis McKiernan with this accident suggests that McKiernan took the blame for it, since he was in overall command of the area.


4 posted on 06/08/2009 5:21:00 PM PDT by ArtyFO (I love to smoke cigars when I adjust artillery fire at the moonbat loonery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ArtyFO

Looks like Obummer wanted to take a high scalp to appease the muzzies. No lieutenant would do in his mind. A full general would do just fine.


5 posted on 06/08/2009 5:53:58 PM PDT by ArtyFO (I love to smoke cigars when I adjust artillery fire at the moonbat loonery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson