Nato’s bombs fall like confetti, not containing conflict but spreading it
Natos bombs fall like confetti, not containing conflict but spreading it
George Monbiot
The Guardian (ViewPoint)
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/06/nato-bombs-conflict-syria-isis-iraq-afghanistan
The strike may have resulted in collateral damage to a nearby medical facility. This is how an anonymous Nato spokesperson described Saturdays disaster in Afghanistan. Lets translate it into English. We bombed a hospital, killing 22 people. But people, hospital and bomb, let alone we: all such words are banned from Natos lexicon. Its press officers are trained to speak no recognisable human language.
The effort is to create distance: distance from responsibility, distance from consequences, distance above all from the humanity of those who were killed. They do not merit even a concrete noun. Whatever you do, do not create pictures in the mind.
Collateral damage and nearby also suggest that the destruction of the hospital in Kunduz was a side-effect of an attack on another target. But the hospital, run by Médecins Sans Frontières, was the sole target of this bombing raid, by a US plane that returned repeatedly to the scene, dropping more ordnance on a building from which staff and patients were trying to escape. Curiously, on this occasion, Nato did not use that other great euphemism of modern warfare, the surgical strike though it would, for once, have been appropriate.
Shoot first, suppress the questions later. The lies and euphemisms add insult to the crime. Natos apparent indifference to life and truth could not fail to infuriate perhaps to radicalise people who are currently uninvolved in conflict in Afghanistan.
Continued:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/06/nato-bombs-conflict-syria-isis-iraq-afghanistan
https://pmatep5f7b.execute-api.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/ProdStage