On the battlefield, a maneuvering tactic that becomes of immediate import is “cover and concealment.” As the term implies, it is a tactic by which one searches for cover (protection from enemy fire) and/or concealment (protection from enemy observation). In the military, there is a time when such a tactic is inappropriate and, based on a New York Times report that has now been confirmed, that may have happened. For, as per President Joe Biden’s orders, in its rush to conduct a revenge strike against ISIS-K, the group responsible for the Kabul airport suicide bombing last month, the Department of Defense (DOD) may have sought to provide cover and concealment for the commander in chief.
It was bad enough to learn, after the suicide bombing claiming 13 American lives, U.S. intelligence had advanced knowledge it would occur and that the suspect vehicle had even been identified beforehand – but Biden, for some unknown reason, refused to authorize action to take it out. Now, it turns out a subsequent Biden-authorized drone attack conducted against an alleged member of ISIS-K mistakenly killed an Afghan civilian, along with his children.
DOD’s initial report on the drone strike indicated the target was an ISIS-K member who had been involved in planning the airport attack. It also reported that 10 Afghan civilians were, unfortunately, killed as well, but only as a result of a secondary explosion caused when the terrorist’s vehicle was hit, detonating the explosives contained therein.
That initial DOD report was suspect for two reasons. First, since the drone strike took place less than 24 hours after the airport bombing, it was surprising the target was located so quickly. Second, despite doing so, his name was not released.
The Times article explained the DOD report concealed what really happened.
The vehicle that was hit by the drone strike had drawn the attention of intelligence sources due to suspicious activity. A suspect was observed placing canisters – the contents of which were believed to be explosives – into a white Toyota. How it was determined he was an ISIS-K member allegedly involved in planning the airport bombing is unknown. However, the activity in question was all innocent – it was not a terrorist loading explosives into his car but Zemari Ahmadi, who worked for the California NGO Nutrition and Education International. It was not canisters of explosives he was loading into his car but canisters of water – part of his daily routine to distribute them to local Afghans. Tragically, included among the 10 others killed in the drone attack were seven of his own children.
As he did with the Afghanistan withdrawal effort, Biden rushed his revenge strike against ISIS-K for the airport bombing. Ironically, while lacking the good judgment to authorize taking out the bomber’s vehicle beforehand, Biden exercised bad judgment – undoubtedly hoping to take some of the heat off of himself for his earlier failure – in so quickly authorizing a strike lacking accurate target identification, claiming so many innocent lives as a result.
News of the drone strike resulted in the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS), Gen. Mark Milley, stating it was a “righteous” attack. He went on to clarify, the drone strike did not directly cause the death of the 10 innocent victims as it was a secondary explosion from within the vehicle that did. However, unless drinking water in Afghanistan has a high level of volatility, that did not happen. Security footage of the strike, obtained by the New York Times, is said to support the fact no explosives were in Ahmadi’s car. Thus, there could not have been an alleged secondary explosion responsible for the loss of innocent lives.
Interestingly, while a rushed decision by Biden to conduct a drone strike claiming innocent lives resulted in little media criticism, it was quite a different media that criticized President Donald Trump for his successfully planned and well-executed 2020 drone attack against Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani that killed the terrorist mastermind without causing any collateral damage. A media that claimed Trump’s attack was impulsive and dangerous has largely been silent about Biden’s drone strike.
Biden has made a career out of repeatedly telling lies, to the extent of even having to drop out of his 1988 presidential campaign for doing so. Lying in furtherance of his political objectives has continued into his presidency, as evidenced by his effort during a telephone call with Afghanistan’s President Ashraf Ghani, encouraging him to lie on his behalf. It has become clear what he practices so freely, he expects others beholden to him to do when so beckoned. It is most worrisome if our Defense Department leadership has adopted Biden’s “lie or die” philosophy.
The question now arises: When did Milley know the drone strike celebrating the death of a terrorist was, in no way, “righteous” but instead a terrible mistake? And did it lead to giving priority to providing concealment for the president, as well as himself, over telling the truth to the American people? Regardless, and even if we ignore Milley’s support for teaching Critical Race Theory to our military, after his involvement in both a botched Afghanistan withdrawal and admitted phone calls to his Chinese counterpart inappropriately raising the issue of President Donald Trump’s mental state without authorization from his civilian superior, the drone tragedy represents a third strike against him.
Former CJCS Adm. Mike Mullen noted there should “absolutely” be accountability for the botched drone strike. If a Milley resignation fails to flow now, heads should roll – not in the Taliban sense but in the sense of accountability for the irresponsible actions of those involved.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.