Afghan Children Reported Among Dead in U.S. Strike

For the past few news blog posts I have read articles involving our country's military action in Afghanistan.  This week Azam Ahmed of the New York Times wrote an article exploring the recent U.S. strike in Afghanistan that resulted in civilian death. Ahmed begins the article by blatantly stating the current situation when he writes, "An American military air strike in eastern Afghanistan near the Pakistan border was reported to have killed 18 people, including at least one senior Taliban commander but also women and children, raising the thorny issue of civilian casualties for the third time in roughly a week."  Ahmed describes the current situation, but also includes the fact that this is a repeated problem.  Ahmed continues on to give further facts about the women and children killed in the strike.  He emphasizes these facts because he knows the death of innocent women and young children pulls in pathos.  This aspect of the situation causes Americans to pay much more attention to the strike as a result of emotions linked to innocent death. However, Ahmed demonstrates both sides of the situation as he goes on to describe the American military justification for this attack.  He quotes a military leader when he writes, "“Government officials might tell you that Afghan and foreign forces only have the right to use air strikes in unpopulated areas, but in practice it is different. Americans will use their air support whenever they need it, no matter where it is and no matter how many presidential decrees are issued.” For example, this leader explains the argument that these strikes are launched in an effort to protect American soldiers. However, Ahmed immediately returns to pathos when he supplies more statistics on the attack by writing: "That attack, the deadliest for Americans in Afghanistan this year, was preceded last week by one of the worst Taliban attacks since the start of the war, when more than 44 Afghan civilians were killed in a complex assault in Farah Province."  By including the statement in the conclusion of his article, Ahmed reiterates the severity of the attack.  Although he demonstrates both sides of the situation, his tone clearly is regrettable toward the situation. The unbalanced amount of information and pathos included regarding the innocent deaths demonstrate his message that Americans need to consider all aspects of attacks.