AP: Obama's right on civilian casualties

Posted: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:29 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Democrats, 2008, Security

From NBC's Mark Murray
As we predicted this morning, this Obama statement yesterday regarding Afghanistan -- "We've got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there" -- drew a response from the Republicans. "It is hard to imagine that anyone who aspires to be commander-in-chief would say such a thing about our brave men and women in uniform," RNC chairman Mike Duncan said today in a statement. "Obama owes our armed forces an apology -- today.”

Yet the AP has this fact-check: "A check of the facts shows that Western forces have been killing civilians at a faster rate than the insurgents [in Afghanistan]... As of Aug. 1, the AP count shows that while militants killed 231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can't be attributed to one party."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

eat that, republicans! is obama the only brave candidate to talk candidly about what's going on overseas?

sure he'll stumble on the issues every once in a while, but at least he has the guts to talk about it. that's more than everyother presidential candidate.

scott (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:38 PM)

We all know that we're killing civilians, but we're not supposed to talk about it. That way we can pretend to be the good guys.

Deferrment Dick, D. C. (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:38 PM)

Well I see the RNC Chairman has lost his head too. Maybe a colonoscopy would find it for him.

Marty in KC (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:45 PM)

Typical Repugnant response to anyone who critizes the way this despicable administration is failing miserably on both fronts. Wrap themselves around the flag, bible and if that does not work let use the troops. As the recent election showed.....It does not work with the people anymore. The majority around 65% sees right through that sham.

juan,ft lauderdale,fl (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:49 PM)

"Yet the AP has this fact-check: "A check of the facts shows that Western forces have been killing civilians at a faster rate than the insurgents [in Afghanistan]..."

Lets get a little more accurate with our facts eh?

It's US special Forces with air power who're killing civilians NOT "Western forces" which would include the "on the ground footpatrol" British Troops.

Mark Arthur (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:51 PM)

Do not apologize Obama, tell the RNC and all to eat
dirt. You said what you said end of story. I know this does not have legs.

H P Boston (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:51 PM)

I like Karl Rove, he would make a great President.

Hubert Humphry Jr., Allentown,Pa. (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:51 PM)

A British commander recently (days ago) told the news media he requested U.S. forces not operate in his area for the same reason. Our special forces units deploy in small teams, calling in fire support on suspected targets, resulting in civilian casualties. The Brit says it is making it harder for him to gain cooperation from the people there.

Karzai also has criticized the tactic in this situation.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:56 PM)

If anyone owes our armed forces an apology it is this miserable excuse for an administration that got us into this quagmire in the first place.

Steve A. Jonesboro IN (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:57 PM)

It's been said often since Senator Obama joined the race - he's not experienced enough.

It's also been said that the experienced ones have gotten us into more messes in our lifetime - LBJ, Nixon, Cheney, Rumsfeld.

Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, McCain, Clinton, Obama, Edwards -

Is it experience we're looking for? Is it judgment? Is it honesty? Is it religion?

Who was our best President - Abraham Lincoln?

Why?

Because he could admit mistakes. Because he could reach across the aisle. Because he knew what was best for our country. Because he was able to take criticism for his unpopular decisions.

He was a man with many faults. But a man who believed in the Constitution and a man who believed in what our Founding Fathers were grasping for, for all of us.

Democrat (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:57 PM)

The RNC thinks Obama should apologize for being honest, what a surprise; it must be hard for them to understand how Obama would say something honest about our military operations, when so many Republicans have put so much effort into lying about them.

What's scary is the RNC actually thinks that the way to national security and changing hearts and minds around the world is ignoring any civilians we're responsible for killing. Someone should remind them that the people who don't take responsible for killing civilians are called terrorists, and that unlike them, our army makes coordinated efforts to minimize collateral damage, efforts which are undercut when RNC officials try to deceive the public about the number of civilians dying; that kind of misleading talk makes it look like there's some sort of cover up about the figure, which sends a message around the world that our servicemen are untrustworthy, when they have in fact only done their very best to serve this country. Why does the RNC hate our troops?

Shadow, Hamden, CT (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:04 PM)

The latest foriegn policy blunder by a bright man who is simply NOT ready to be president.

But Hillary IS ready ...now.

csh, chicago (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:05 PM)

Do not apologize because you are right. But you must....

1. Counterattack them as the true deceivers of the American people. But keep your poise while counterattacking.

2. Demand that they apologize to the American people for telling these "lies of context."

If you don't then all of the people who here their lies of context will assume that they are right and you are wrong.

Darrius, Arkansas (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:05 PM)

Typical repub response, WRONG!!

bb (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:06 PM)

All the USA does is airraids and kill civilians? really? I think you wingnuts need to get over your bush derangement syndrome, stop hating america and look at some facts.

Sorry, but your boy Barry stands no chance with stuff like that. There're an awful lot of veterans who vote.

Bruce, NV (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:09 PM)

csh - Clinton is not ready. She doesn't understand U.S. nuclear policy. She doesn't understand U.S. policy toward China and Taiwan. In instances where she and Obama have made similar statements, she can't remember her own words before criticizing Obama's.

Obama, on the other hand, has taken on issues most candidates won't talk about. And thus far, despite some early negative press, which only parroted the candidate criticisms, he seems to be walking that minefield without stepping on any.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:13 PM)

I'm waiting for H.Clinton to chime in with a line similar to that of the RNC.

Asad (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:15 PM)

csh- how is telling the truth a foriegn policy blunder?! Just because Hillary doesn't say anything spontaniously doesn't make her ready to be president- it makes her Bush-Cheney Lite.

Obama keeps telling us that he's an honest man who will be an honest president- he's just proving that.

Jennie Denver,CO (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:17 PM)

Obama is right and the Bush administration is wrong. He deserves credit for speaking out, as any democrat who stands up to this bunch does.

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:25 PM)

Duncan, shut your stupid yap about "our brave men and women in uniform". As a Republican pig, anyone with a brain knows you are saying what you think sounds good and you could care less about the troops. Peddle your demagoguery on Fox News and keep your filthy Republican nose out of stuff that you know nothing about.

JIrby, Colorado (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:25 PM)

csh, chicago, I'm not sure your old enough to be posting on here because there is no possible way, with a response like that, that you have any idea what your talking about! It's responses like that from Obama that proves he has a lot more gut's than Hillary and the RNC when it comes to speaking the truth. Go ahead and stick with the rest of the Bush Lite's and then you will be the first to complain when they balk on every promise they make to ensure the best interest of big business! Idiot's!

DStormVet, IL (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:29 PM)

RNC chairman Mike Duncan-- Sir, there are many apologies owed the troops and the American people but none are due from Senator Obama. They are due from President Bush and the top levels of his Administration and from members of Congress in both houses and from both parties who failed our troops by allowing this gross misuse of American power and by failing to use American power where it was required. These apologies will never be made as the act of accepting responsibility for mistakes requires a sense of honor and humility that is foreign this Administration, this Congress and apparently to you, sir.
For you to demand an apology, today from a Presidential candidate who has little to no responsibility for our current debacle would be laughable if it weren't such a sad indictment of the failure our President, his Administration, his party and unfortunately the opposition party, which appears spineless and ineffective, to correct this mistake and prevent anymore unnecessary US Casualties.
We sail on...rudderless and with a broken moral compass while men like you huff and puff and feign outrage and talk loudly as if to convince us of the correctness of your position.
September 15 - Washington DC

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:37 PM)

Democrat, I would disagree with your statement regarding Abraham Lincoln. If he had success reaching across the aisle, then there would not have been a Civil War. Actually he may have been more stubborn and entrenched in his beliefs than Bush. Thankfully it was for the right reasons.

TEC-Spring-Tx. (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:38 PM)

Apologize for what?
RNC should tell Bush and all those who authorized and engineer the biggest foreign policy disaster to apologize to the arm and the general public.

jay (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:40 PM)

I am always amazed when the US and its allies are so shocked when civilians get killed or are mistreated by our forces. I guess Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and Abu Ghraib are just considered "collateral damage".

Robert Catalano, Salem, OR (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:45 PM)

It is refreshing to have a candidate who speaks the truth, even if it is painful. If our forces had the numbers and arms they needed in Afghanistan from the start, they could have done the job right. They might even have been able to draw down by now, rather than need more forces to face a stronger Taliban and resnascent al Qaida. That is the fault of Bush and the Republicans who keep him in power.

Mark in Burlington (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:47 PM)

Karzai, the president of Afghanistan said something very similar a few weeks ago. He said the level of civilian deaths at the hands of the Americans was intolerable. I guess he also owes an apology. While they are at it the RNC and Mike Duncan donuts should also demand that the civilian victims in Afghanistan apologize for getting in the way of our bullets and maybe get them to re-imburse the US for the cost of those bullets.

nuanced (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 5:55 PM)

The issue is not that civilians are being killed, that is an unfortunate element of any conflict be it gang violence or war. Rather it is Obama's implication that our forces are conducting indiscriminate air raids and do not care if civilians are killed--nothing could be farther from the truth...the young Senator and Presidential hopeful should know better than to say our forces are "just air-raiding villages and killing civilians"

Steve, Boston Mass (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 6:06 PM)

How do you like them apples?????

Once again Obama justifies his remarks with facts...whereas the RNC and the Repub. candidates use unfounded arguments to justify their patriotism.

As for the rest of the Democratic field....where is the leadership? All this talk about experience is for naught because they want to play it safe. They talk about being different than the Republicans, but their rhetoric does not match their inaction. They want to stick with the status quo. Aside from Sen. Obama...the rest of the Dem. field is a dissapointment.

Ashe, SF CA (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 6:25 PM)

I'm sure Obama's disgraceful and disgusting comment plays well with his loon-bat base. Beyond that, he just lost any chance of even getting picked as a running mate by Hillary.

The guy is a complete idiot.

Kirk in NY (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 6:43 PM)

231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can't be attributed to one party."

Nuh-Uh.... I attribute all the deaths to the Republican Party

Greg R., Spokane, WA (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 6:44 PM)

This is an issue that is purely commonsensical. If there were fewer US boots on the ground per sq mile, then for the commander to achieve its goal would be to rely on air-support. With air-support comes collateral damage. Senator Obama is calling to increase US boots on the ground in order to minimize the level of collateral damages caused by air-attacks on their targets.

Joanest, Sacramento -CA (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 6:52 PM)

To Bruce, NV: Typical GOP response to label any criticism of military policy as an attack on individual US soldiers. Where were you when Bush/Cheney were sending troops to war without body armor, with paper-thin vehicles, and by-passing weapons depots, leaving them unguarded on their rush to Baghdad under Rummy's direction so they could declare "mission accomplished"???

Schleppe, AZ (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 6:57 PM)

What's astonishing to me is that a poll after the SC debate showed most people agreed with Obama on talking to foreign dictators. And he was criticized. Most Americans agree that we should go after Osama bin Laden if we have actionable intelligence, yet he was criticized. Does anyone seriously think we need to use a nuclear weapon to go after Al Qaeda in Pakistan? Yet he was criticized. We're killing more Afghan civilians than the Taliban. And he's criticized. Every one of these statements was deemed to be a flub by his opponents or serious pundits, yet on each of these points, he's either taking the majority position with the American people or he's objectively right.

PBS (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 7:24 PM)

Obamas strategy remains indefensible. No amount of ''AP fact checking'' [with the AP having serial problems of its own in that Dept],can erase the fact
that the absence of the air war,as Obama himself acknowlages,necceitates greater ground operations creating more dead American soldiers. The Taliban uses civilians deliberately as shields. So does Palestinian HAMAS, AL AQSAS and HEZBOLLAH. Such tactics invite collateral damage which in NO way is as deliberate as the Obama camp is painting it. [Reid Charlin,Obama manager quotes that this is a ''sole''strategy of the Bush administration which is patent BS].
Then too,ignored by anti-Bush partisans is the ''Just War''principle. Leaving Iraq behind for the moment,no-one[sans tinfoil at least] can argue that Afghanistan was not the seedbed for 9/11. Thus those who condemn our presence in Iraq may allow for our military action in that country. The same principle applied to the Kosovo War which was initiated in order to stop the suspected genocide of Muslim Kosovars at the hands of the Serbs. NATO commanders[Gen.Wesley Clark as chief architect],decided to go to the air in order to reduce or eliminate Allied casualites. Yet by the use of cluster bombs,more Serbian civilians were killed in just one month of the air war and more villages destroyed than in nearly five years of NATO participation in Afghanistan and without an enemy who used civilians as human shields.
Obama comes across as a foreign policy and military neophyte,who will be unable to reckon both greater US military AND civilian casualties should this nation,in an unprecedented move since the beginning of the air age and its use in all of Americas wars [everyone elses as well],decides to go to ground in order to settle the conflict with the Taliban. This mans decisions are uneven and confusing.

Lee Holmes (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 7:33 PM)

Actually, ground troops are responsible for far more collateral damage...do you really think all those unguided rounds hit their target. The difference is that the bullets, missiles, and rounds used by ground forces do not have video to prove, or figure out for that matter, where they hit

Louis, Lompoc California (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 7:36 PM)

Schleppe et al, are any of you fluent in English? Obama didn't say "the US is killing too many civilians" or "more civilians are being killed by the US than the Taliban".

He said that we are "just air-raiding(sic) villages and killing civilians". The sentence doesn't even require parsing. He fell into the usual lefty rhetoric trap, the "winter soldier" syndrome. It's the rhetoric that has dogged the Dems since the 60s; they (and many on this blog) seem to be genetically unable to separate their disdain for military action from slandering US troops. It cost them in 2004. It may cost them in 2008, especially if Obama is the nominee and continues to speak extemporaneously about foreign affairs.

BTW, Schleppe, I find the way that this administration has conducted this war to be reprehensible. Unlike you, I can criticize both sides, and also listen to criticism of both sides. Knee-jerk reactions, like yours, and most of the commentors on this site, have poisoned the body politic, so that it is neither.

Cheers.

Bruce, NV (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 7:48 PM)

I'm so glad Obama continues to boldly describe his perspective. I'm sooo sick of politicians that win by being the least offensive. We all know practically nothing about what Clinton would do for her foreign policy, and she wants it that way so we'll have nothing to misconstrue and belittle. Obama is smart enough to look upon our foreign policy with fresh eyes, and produce fresh ideas. He knows how to weigh the important underlying factors and does so in a transparent, honest way. Hillary is smart, very smart, but Barack is brilliant.

Mark Morris, Cupertino CA (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 8:00 PM)

Seems the press has alot of mistakes regarding obama lately. They always seem to get it wrong and end up having to back track. But, that is the point. In order to promote their beloved Hillary they will twist whatever Obama says and later say, oops. But, the damage is already done.
Just like that speech. They set out to destroy this man's credibility and today, most people think Obama is a fool and wants to invade pakistan.
Our so called fair and unbiased press.

diane (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 8:22 PM)

Hey Kirk in N.Y., isn't it funny how you Bush Lite supporters alway's slam the compitition for telling the truth to the american people. I bet you voted for Bush on both election's didn't you? I bet you are actually sad to see Karl Rove retire. It amazes me how blind some people are and how they are content with the status quo. Obama has gut's and he calls a spade a spade. If you had some common sense maybe you could understand what this country really need's and that is not just a change in the type of politics in Washington, but a change in the typical personality that is voted into office! Hillary don't know squat about being a leader and bringing people together and if she win's the primary then I can almost guarantee you that the Repub's will win the Presidential election. The media takes everything that Obama says and they put their little twist on it to make him look bad, because if there is one thing that those narrow-minded people will let happen, it's to let an african-american get elected president. It really is a shame that the best leader this country could have won't get elected because he is black! Narrow-minded fool's!

DStormVet, IL (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 9:58 PM)

Amazing. The defense of Obama when he showing his true liberal colors and his desire to undermine the gallant efforts of our troops.
The revolution is coming. Choose your wall soon.

Mr. T (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 10:17 PM)

Obama should stick to talking about things he knows about, such as "hope" and what pot-holes should be filled in on Illinois highways. Murray should stick to writing celebrity obituaries.

Marty Rustin, Rockford, IL (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 11:18 PM)

JIrby goes on the warpath: \\Duncan, shut your stupid yap about "our brave men and women in uniform". As a Republican pig, anyone with a brain knows you are saying what you think sounds good and you could care less about the troops. Peddle your demagoguery on Fox News and keep your filthy Republican nose out of stuff that you know nothing about.//

Someones got their pullups in a bunch, aaaaagggain.

JIrby, it must take you a lot of time to keep trying to clean up Barack's messes. Don't run out of paper towels even before the first primary.

Sister Liz (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 11:25 PM)

The sad fact is that Americans don't want to know the truth, so they will jumo on Obama for stating the facts. Americans want to hear that we are perfect, do no wrong, are right about everything and should not be criticized.
The Afghan President himself has been complaining about the mounting civilian deaths, so why is Obama suddenly the bad guy here? He stated the FACTS, and no, he did NOT attack the troops...hell...he said we need MORE troops on the ground to reduce the number of civilian deaths that are resulting from our current tactics of using air raids.
It's common sense...but Americans do not like common sense, they want to be lied to.

Chima Ordu, York, PA (Sent Tuesday, August 14, 2007 11:41 PM)

That's the nature of relying on dropping bombs. Lots of civilians get killed. This is nothing new. Are the Republicans going to pretend we didn't kill civilians as indiscriminately in WWII bombings as the AXIS did? That we didn't bomb any civilians in Korea and Vietnam? Do these Republicans really think war is like an old Hollywood John Wayne movie? Neat wounds, nothing graphic, all the soldiers are played by mature men at least in their thirties and only the enemy ever harms a civilian? What a bunch of ignorant bozos.

Felice (Sent Wednesday, August 15, 2007 1:43 AM)

Uumm, it's called war! Hello! Of course people will die,including innocent people, (911). How many terroist attacks have hit the US since? And because this is a free country you have our permission to set up residence in Kwait, Iraq, where ever your bleeding heart liberal thinking takes you. You too Billery and Mr. O

Georgette, New Mexico (Sent Wednesday, August 15, 2007 3:04 AM)

To the surprise of nobody, and to the glee of the Genocides Our Priority party

WDRussell, East Liverpool, Ohio (Sent Wednesday, August 15, 2007 8:41 AM)

The terrorist fly airplanes loaded with people, into skyscrapers loaded with people, and kill indiscriminantly, but in war, we are supposed to only kill discriminantly. How stupid! If Afghanis are being killed, perhaps they should have thought twice about allowing the Taliban and Al-Qaeda to set up shop in their country. If you play with fire, your going to get burned.

David, New Braunfels, Texas (Sent Wednesday, August 15, 2007 8:57 AM)

Who the heck is AP to fact check a candidates statement. If the democrats believe in the fairness doctrine, maybe they should force AP to fact check every single candidate's controversial statement.

jt, okc (Sent Wednesday, August 15, 2007 9:25 AM)

To the Obama fans, you can still compliment another democrat eventhough you support another democrat. I think Obama was spot on with that comment about Afghanistan. Do you see how I did that. I'm not sure which democrat I'm voting for but I don't feel the need to attack other democrats. If a candidate is right on the issue, it's okay to say it. Unlike many of you Obama fans who critisize everything Hillary says even know deep down you know she's right.

Any Democrat in 08'!!!

Timothy, Rochester, NY (Sent Wednesday, August 15, 2007 9:36 AM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=316864