WikiLeaks ? WTF ?

[Lachlan09]

I’ve just seen in local papers and on TV about a NATO missile strike in Afghanistan last week which killed 52 people, described as civilians including women and children. The source of the allegation is WikiLeaks.

WikiLeaks ? Would that be a “leak forum” provided by the makers of Wikipedia ? Wikipedia is of course that well-respected website which is recognized by leading universities throughout the World as the internet's foremost valuable learning resource . (Aye right !)

So WikiLeaks has been propelled to the forefront of whistle-blowing agencies ! The missile strike is possibly true enough, but I was kind of expecting the news to come via Al Jazeerah, CNN or Reuters rather than a Wikipedia spin-off.

Before this news is plastered all over the place, it will first need verification by a reliable independent source – my Granny. Unfortunately, she’s deid, so it can’t be verified in my family. Is anyone else’s granny able to confirm or deny the story ?

PS When they say NATO, is that true ? Is NATO involved in Afghanistan ? Or is it Coalition forces ? Or UN (ahh the toothless UN – who can ever forget their hopeless mandate in Rwanda and Sierra Leone ?)

[Lachlan09]

I may stand corrected. It appears that WikiLeaks is not directy related to Wikipedia, but is a Swedish-based whistle-blowing organisation (according to Wikipedia)

PS I like Wikipedia, some of their content is very informative, other areas are poorly written. eg I had to correct info on the 51st Highland Div for them.

[Saorsa1]

These leaks are all made possible and brought to you by the team of Blair and Bush.

I suspect if these are the reported figures the true figures are inevitably higher.

[ANDY-J3]

Officially it is a NATO operation in Afghanistan- it commenced long before any coalition existed and the idea of a coalition was manufactured to help bolster support for the invasion of Iraq. Effectively however combat operations in Afghanistan are limited to a few nations such as the US, UK and Canada however the latter have suffered as a result of several American friendly fire incidents which obviously caused them to reconsider their level of commitment. German troops in particular have been criticised for remaining in base rather than carrying out combat operations and the French scaled back their commitment after several of their special forces were captured and later found executed and minus certain parts of their anatomy. Afghans seem to have a fixation with castrating prisoners- they used to do it to British prisoners in the Victorian era and they're still doing it today.

[Saorsa1]

Originally Posted by ANDY-J3

Officially it is a NATO operation in Afghanistan- it commenced long before any coalition existed and the idea of a coalition was manufactured to help bolster support for the invasion of Iraq. Effectively however combat operations in Afghanistan are limited to a few nations such as the US, UK and Canada however the latter have suffered as a result of several American friendly fire incidents which obviously caused them to reconsider their level of commitment. German troops in particular have been criticised for remaining in base rather than carrying out combat operations and the French scaled back their commitment after several of their special forces were captured and later found executed and minus certain parts of their anatomy. Afghans seem to have a fixation with castrating prisoners- they used to do it to British prisoners in the Victorian era and they're still doing it today.

Thanks Andy, for the clarification that we've all forgotten after Bush and Blair AND the castration thing is horrid but to be expected from a group stuck in the middle ages.