Posted on 11/18/2001 7:55:39 AM PST by grahm_crackers
U.S. , SAS's unreported casualties
Sunday, 18 November 2001 11:30 (ET)
U.S. , SAS's unreported casualties
By RICHARD SALE, UPI Terrorism Analyst
NEW YORK, Nov. 17 (UPI) -- The Pentagon is not reporting battle casualties suffered by U.S. Special Forces fighting near the southern Taliban stronghold of Kandahar and some other one-time Taliban strong points, administration sources speculated.
"Some fatalities could be involved," an administration source said, speaking on condition of anonymity. He said there are estimates reported that between 25 to 40 Americans had been killed so far in clashes, but acknowledged that these were figures contained in "hard copy reports," and had not been confirmed.
A U.S. government official said: "The Pentagon takes casualties from one operation and extrapolates."
While some casualties have been due to friendly fire, most have been the result of intense battle clashes with the Taliban, with fighting rising to its most savage levels to date in some areas, these officials said.
These sources added that the British Special Air Services (SAS) troops in action in Afghanistan have also suffered casualties that were not being reported.
The British Embassy did not return phone calls.
"The administration is managing the war differently," one U.S. intelligence official said when asked about casualties. "We've begun to do what the British used to do so well -- lie. It's an `all of our aircraft returned safely' approach."
This source said that he had seen reports of 25 to 40 U.S. fatalities, but said the figures were in "cables and reports" and not confirmed.
But as to casualties, he emphasized they had occurred: "Look, you cannot wage a hard war in earnest without taking casualties. We are waging war in earnest."
John Pike, president of Washington-based GlobalSecurity. Org, told United Press International: "The press can't say it wasn't warned," and he referred to a press conference last month where Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was quizzed about the Taliban displaying a wheel of a helicopter, torn off in an accident, but which the Taliban claimed was shot down.
At the end of his explanation, Rumsfeld looked at the reporters and according to Pike, Rumsfled stated the equivalent of: "This is the last time I'm telling you the truth."
Pike added: 'I think he meant it."
One U.S. intelligence official told UPI that during the war in Bosnia: "There were U.S. casualties in that campaign that simply were never declared. I think the Pentagon thought, hell, we got away with it then, why not now?"
Rumsfeld acknowledged yesterday, during a trip to Illinois, that U.S. commando teams in the south are working to foment anti-Taliban rebellion by Pashtun tribal leaders. He added: "They're looking for information, they're interdicting roads, they're killing Taliban that won't surrender and al Qaeda that are trying to move from one place to another."
Rumsfeld said the teams were also scouting potential landing fields for U.S. and coalition aircraft.
Asked if the troops were engaged in ground combat, Rumsfeld said: "The answer is yes. In the south, they've gone into places and met resistance and dealt with it."
But Rumsfeld said that no Americans had been killed in such operations, a remark one State Dept. official called: "Crazy."
"The rationale in denying the losses is that you don't want to give aid and comfort to the enemy," this source said.
The question of casualties first arose in the wake of an Oct. 20 raid involving Delta commandos who arrived in five helicopters to ransack the fortified home of reclusive Taliban leader Mullah Mohamed Omar in the village of Baba Sahib in the Arghandab district, five miles northwest of Kandahar.
A large body of 200 Rangers, plus helicopters and AC-130 gunships were sent in to back up the Delta force.
The raid, whose execution was described by a senior Pentagon official, as "flawless in execution" was to be the start of new, fast-paced hit-and-run ground strategy that would alter the course of the war, said Pentagon officials at the time.
But instead of being deft and fast paced, the mission proved to be cumbersome, noisy, and maladroit, and not only because of the back-up forces, according to one administration official.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, he said: "We were unfamiliar with the area, and we had poor intelligence. We didn't expect the Taliban to be there."
The Taliban opened fire as the Delta emerged from the house, he said.
Another U.S. government official said that Taliban resistance around Mullah Omar's fortified house, built for him by bin Laden, was "surprisingly stiff," in spite of 13 days of pervious aerial bombardment.
Initial reports of casualties were as high as 22 wounded, but this figure was later "downgraded," he said.
When a DIA official was queried about reports of casualties, he said: "I have absolutely nothing to give you on that," and recommended that United Press International talk to public affairs.
According to other U.S. government officials, in the Oct. 20 raid, some hostile fire initially was mistakenly identified as coming from Taliban dug-in tanks or large mortars, U.S. government officials said. Actually, most of the fire proved to be coming from shoulder-fired Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs), which caused serious shrapnel, wounds among the attackers and slowed them to a stall, U.S. government sources said.
The counterattack by the Taliban was "amazingly swift and tough," one U.S. intelligence official said.
The Oct. 20 raid was mounted from the remote Pakistan airstrip at Dalbandin, Pakistan, only 37 miles from the Afghan border, U.S. officials said. The raid was similar in character to the joint 1998 FBI/Kenyan security forces raid of the Kenya house of Wadhi El-Hage, sentenced last month in Manhattan Federal District Court to life in prison without parole for his part in the August 1998 bombings of two U.S. Embassies in East Africa in which 224 were killed and 4,600 wounded.
In the raid on El-Hage's house, the FBI seized hard drives containing details of bin Laden cells in East Africa and inflicted "significant damage" on his al Qaeda organization, according to U.S. intelligence officials.
But in this raid, the Delta force came away "with little of intelligence value," according to one administration official. "We wanted their Rolodexes, their plans, their chit-chat, the names of Taliban commanders. We didn't get them," he said.
Top-ranked investigative reporter Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker Magazine first made the allegation of casualties and the mishandling of the mission.
Hersh told United Press International, "The standard for being wounded was very flexible. If you had a shrapnel wound which could be stitched up and you could still walk, then you weren't classified as a casualty."
A U.S. government source confirmed this. "Hersh right is on the money," he said. "The Pentagon doctored the figures of casualties. We are back in the Gulf War syndrome where we won a great victory with hardly any casualties. I think it's a mis-reading of the U.S. public mood."
Wow Mr. Sale, there is nothing like putting words into Rumsfeld's mouth. How about actually reporting what he said.
But somehow I don't think it's happening.
The equivalent? Why can't this writer tell us what Rumsfeld really said, instead of interpreting it? After all, it either is or is not what he said. If it's not what he said, don't use quotation marks. Shoddy reporting.
This is the one area I dont mind being lied to about if it will help the war effort.
I know most people dont believe any US soldiers died in that raid but I do.I pray that God puts a hedge of angels around our brave men and we dont lose many if any at all.
Hmmmmmm I wonder if angels die when they go into battle against each other?
About that many NY cops were killed responding to the WTC attacks. About 10 times that many NY firefighters were killed in the initial rescue operation. Yes, fighting a war is dangerous. People can get hurt. But we do it anyway because we have to.
To coin an overused phrase, if we don't defeat the terrorists, then the terrorists will have won.
that is why i cannot 100% trust the pentagon anymore, especially after the kosovo conflict!
those of us like myself who ignores reports that come from the pentagon and taliban sources, etc... and seek the truth are in a better position to make a judgement about this conflict.
the pentagon will fabricate, cover-up and deny as usual, just look at the kosovo conflict. the pentagon needs to come clean from kosovo before i will ever accept their conclusions again!!!
More like outright fraud, IMHO.
But Rumsfeld said that no Americans had been killed in such operations, a remark one State Dept. official called: "Crazy."
"The rationale in denying the losses is that you don't want to give aid and comfort to the enemy," this source said.
Obviously, there are still a lot of Communists and their fellow travelers in the State Department giving aid and comfort to the enemy! McCarthy was right!
an administration source said, speaking on condition of anonymity
A U.S. government official said
one U.S. intelligence official said
One U.S. intelligence official told UPI
according to one administration official. Speaking on condition of anonymity, he said:
Another U.S. government official said
When a DIA official was queried
one U.S. intelligence official said.
according to U.S. intelligence officials.
A U.S. government source confirmed this
Hell,I could write this,so and so said...
Oh, but wait! They've written the story so that they're not responsible… They're simply quoting "administration sources speculating on condition of anonymity". < sarcasm> No problem with that! Why should someone be responsible for such an outrageous anti-administration claim of domestic deceit? No need for extraordinarily evidence to support extraordinary claims here. No sign of malicious intent from UPI here! </sarcasm>
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.