Friendly fire,really?

Friendly fire, really?
21 June 2007
IT'S called “friendly fire”, as yet another unfriendly act kills more civilians in Afghanistan. How much can one country bear this collateral damage by air strikes which are supposed to be state-of-the-art precision strikes? It precisely misses the mark or kills civilians, especially children.The American forces claim they targeted terrorists and blame terrorist groups for whatever loss of civilians and children on the ground that these terrorists used them as human shields. By the ill-coordinated and drastic actions by American forces, the future of these unfortunate children is lost and the wrath of the public is all they accumulate instead of winning the hearts and minds of the people. Their mission in Afghanistan will be hard to achieve if they do not accept responsibilities for their action and do the best to correct and halt the killings by friendly fire or whatever euphemisms they tacitly use. I do not understand how easily they shift the blame onto the terrorists and evade responsibilities for their actions.
— Ahsan Ghori, Abu Dhabi