KABUL: An Afghan soldier who shot dead four French troops says he did it because of a recent video showing US Marines urinating on the dead bodies of Taliban insurgents, security sources say.
The attack on the soldiers, who were unarmed, happened last week at a base in eastern Afghanistan and left 15 other French troops wounded, eight of them seriously.
Cause and effect? Case closed? NATO, ISAF, the White House, and, probably, France's Sarkozy (above) wish.
What a relief it would be to pin the murders of four French troops and the additional wounding of 15 (all unarmed) onto a video of four Marines urinating on the bodies of dead Taliban. The solution to the "problem" -- the epidemic of Afghan Muslim security forces murdering Western infidel troops and contractors -- then becomes so simple: more cultural sensitivity training. More submission to Islam's law.
( See this, this and this.)
Maybe the Marines should bring back to Afghanistan Shafiq Mubarak, the Afghan Muslim contractor currently advising pre-deployment Marines on official Islamic urination law here in the States. While serving as "cultural advisor" to Marines in Afghanistan last summer, Mubarak was singled out for praise to General Petraeus himself, hailed by Marine Colonel David Furness as "my right hand ... I can't do anything without him. Mr. Shafiq directly assists in direct engagements with Afghan leaders and political decision makers. He has been instrumental in the pursuit of the U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, the winning of hearts and minds."
If there's one thing the slaughter of over 50 Western troops and contractors by their Afghan counterparts inside the wire tells our leaders, it's this: "We need more `hearts and minds' strategy. We need to make an example of those Marines whose urination video caused the Afghan Army soldier (unclaimed by the Taliban to date) to gun down 19 unarmed French troops, killing four."
This would be ridiculous if there weren't so much blood involved -- which is why this mindset is so dangerous. It is the same mindset that blames the burning of a copy of the Koran -- even the suggestion that a Koran will be burned -- for indiscrininate murder and mayhem; that blames a cartoon, a political speech, a papal sermon, a novel, a movie, a teddy bear named Mohammed for Muslim acts of bloodletting in the name of Islam. According to this line of thought, stopping or preventing the violence becomes an exercise in submission to Islamic law prohibiting ridicule, dissent, or debate. It is the thinking of dhimmitude.
Meanwhile, is it at all odd that the ANA murderer (to date not claimed by Taliban) regarded a non-lethal act of disrespect toward enemy soldiers he has himself presumably been trained to kill as cause to slaughter his own "allies," trainers and benefactors?