Talk:Azizabad airstrike

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article created prior to release of US military findings[edit]

Just a note to say that this article was created a few days after the airstrike. The findings of a US military investigation had not yet been released. The article will need to be updated as more information becomes available. - Damian Doyle (talk) 11:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suitable image[edit]

I find that the image of the gunship and its caption is emotive. Perhaps a more appropriate image would be a map showing the location of Azizabad. This could also be used to illustrate the Azizabad, Herat article, which does not yet exist. - Damian Doyle (talk) 07:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • People have to get use to, that emotions will get mixed into it, when 60 children have been killed. And if someone find it a terrible stress on their emotive register to view an image of a c-130 gunship, I can only say : You are trying (very hard) to understand the feelings the Aghans had, when they caught their first - which was also to be their last - glimpse of this monster.Nick Finnsbury (talk) 08:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The attack has driven a wedge between allies[edit]

Can this info go in the existing section dealing with Afghanistan's reaction? Or could the heading perhaps be changed to read something like "Political implications of the attack"? - Damian Doyle (talk) 09:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • As you may be aware, I have now created this page Azizabad. The problem for myself, was at all finding the relevant article about the attack, as you may know, calling the article: "2008.." in the beginning, make quick searches on the village name difficult. Therefore, now it will be easier for people to find the article about the attack. The question is, whether it wouldn't have been wise for you, from the start to name the article, for example: "Azizabad airstrike", as no one expect there will ever occur anything similar, so adding the year at all, seems unnecessary. But it is a question of approach; you may have noticed that I am very concerned about people getting interested in the article, ie. public relation, letting it be known, and testify for posterity what have happened. and if people cant find it quickly, it has in my view lost some value. Therefore, I will right away change the similar danish page, that I am also editing to: Azizabad luftangrebet Nick Finnsbury (talk) 12:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why was it difficult to find? This is what google turns up when you search for "Azizabad airstrike". The "2008" suffix was included as that is often the case with articles dealing with events, eg. 2008 Indian Floods. Still, if you would like to change it then go right ahead. BTW I still have issues with some of your edits not reflecting NPOV. Can you look at that, please? - Damian Doyle (talk) 12:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


U.S. says review backs its reported toll in Afghanistan airstrike, Joint investigation planned in disputed Afghanistan death toll[edit]

[1] [2] Grey Fox (talk) 13:12, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of text inserted on 10 Sept by Nick Finnsbury[edit]

The following text was removed as it is not NPOV, is not written in encyclopedia style, does not belong in the "reaction" section, and is poorly written. I'll attempt a rewrite when I have time, retaining relevant information including that supplied by Grey Fox above, and inserting in a new section. - Damian Doyle (talk) 05:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NEW!! UPDATE!! Video showing up to 40 bodies revealed[edit]

On the 7.th of September 2008, a video recorded on a mobile phone emerged, showing around 40 bodies. Fearing a backlash for its hitherto maintained position (ie. that only 7 had been killed) the United States quickly announced the need for an independent enquiry into the matter.[1]

US TRIED TO GET AROUND IT; HOPING NOBODY WOULD DISCOVER THE TRUTH[edit]

"In light of emerging evidence pertaining to civilian casualties in the August 22 counter-insurgency operation in the Shindand District, Herat province, I feel it is prudent to request that U.S. Central Command send a general officer to review the U.S. investigation and its findings with respect to this new evidence," Gen. David McKiernan - the senior U.S. officer in Afghanistan and the commander of the 40-nation NATO-led mission - said in a statement.[2] Do you See this jerk's dispicable behaviour! Only when confronted with the facts, do this sub-human find it prudent to 'investigate further'!!!

References

  1. ^ Cellphone Video of Afghan Casualties - New York Times, September 9, 2008
  2. ^ US re-examines Afghan civilian deaths from attack - KansaCity.com, September 9, 2008

No Aftermath?[edit]

Was there anything done to repair the damage, and was anyone who executed the airstrike charged? Even if there isn't it should be at least mentioned that there should be in normal cases. 75.147.179.37 (talk) 05:18, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Azizabad airstrike. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:09, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Azizabad airstrike. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:36, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Azizabad airstrike. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:12, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Azizabad_airstrike&oldid=1195327660"