In another recent operation in the Zhari district, U.S. soldiers fired more than a dozen mine-clearing line charges in a day. Each one creates a clear path that is 100 yards long and wide enough for a truck. Anything that is in the way - trees, crops, huts - is demolished.The highlighted section is, to put it simple, really just stupid.
"Why do you have to blow up so many of our fields and homes?" a farmer from the Arghandab district asked a top NATO general at a recent community meeting.
Although military officials are apologetic in public, they maintain privately that the tactic has a benefit beyond the elimination of insurgent bombs. By making people travel to the district governor's office to submit a claim for damaged property, "in effect, you're connecting the government to the people," the senior officer said.(italics added)
Why not be honest? The military is blowing up mine fields . . . so troops can conduct their operations without worrying about stepping on them or driving over them! Since many of these mine fields are sown in areas of intense agriculture, there is the added benefit of reducing the risk of civilian casualties, particularly if safe paths are marked out. Is it more than regrettable that civilian property is being destroyed in the process? Yes.
Last time I checked, war sucks. It means that stuff gets blown up.
So, to be clear, Glenn Greenwald tweets this crap, John Cole calls the whole thing "agitprop", even as the article itself not only outlines the introduction of heavier equipment, but also some of the bureaucratic infighting and just plain weird nonsense within the American military itself (and what the hell does it mean that Petraeus can "manage the optics" better than ousted Gen. Stanley McChrystal?).
Now, what if the military didn't clear paths through minefields? Of course, we should ask, whose minefields are they? Are they ones sown by the Taliban? By the American/coalition forces? They might even be minefields left over from the days of Soviet occupation. Anyway, let's assume the military didn't clear the minefields. They found some way to move around areas, costing a whole lot more money and time, and leaving the mines, which seem in some instances awfully close to human habitation. Civilians keep tripping the mines, dying or being severely maimed in the process. Then, of course, most of these same people who are complaining about the military blowing stuff up would be up in arms that we aren't doing more to protect the civilian population from the threat of mines.
So, we have a choice. We can go about doing war-related stuff, that sad to say includes blowing stuff up, including the homes of people who are, indeed, innocent and sadly in the line of fire. Or, we can play a game where war isn't destructive and costly, leave the mines in place, and face other consequences.
We aren't going to pull all our troops out of Afghanistan tomorrow, like the war there or not. In the meantime, pretending we can conduct wartime operations without some destruction is ridiculous. Admittedly, the kind of bogus stuff the military spokesman offered about connecting people with local governments is more than silly; it would be nice if these people treated us like adults.
