Talk:Rights group in Afghanistan investigating claim of US use of phosphorus bombs

From what I gather after reading the article is that the rights group is investigating claims by a doctor that the US used white phosphorus. If that's the case, then the article title is misleading since the rights group isn't making the claim, but rather investigating it. 198.209.225.230 (talk) 14:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed and changed accordingly. Thanks for your comment! Sean Heron (talk) 19:31, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

referring to same event ?
As many as 100 civilians die in Afghan raid. Both were start of next week, both in the Bala Baluk district - not that that means anything. But I was wondering if both articles are referring to the same event - as I think then linking the other article would make sense, (and I'd just like to know!). Sean Heron (talk) 19:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I don't have a clue. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 19:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Check this out: http://digitaljournal.com/article/272460 looks like the same issue, but claiming the Taliban is responsible. --206.126.170.20 (talk) 22:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That would be the only link i see claiming this. In fact it contradicts everything all the sources here say, only switching the blame on the Taliban. I am not defending them by any means, but the Taliban simply do not have access to such weapons. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 22:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

US alleges militants used the white phosphorus
This contradictory claim seems important enough to include in the article and perhaps the title should be changed. See [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090511/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan Yahoo! News]. --SVTCobra 22:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Here's another link to a relevant article. http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=105&sid=1479035 --206.126.170.20 (talk) 23:05, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * All stem form a single report by an AP article to which, IMO, is utter crap. I am not saying the AP is not reliable, but its like they are forcing others to pick which propaganda to believe. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:21, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add an adjustment. I am not against it. I just find it odd that all day the reports were the US was being investigated and suddenly, as of one single AP report, they just switch the blame literally. But I do warn that its nearly May 12 UTC so if the update is to be made, it should be soon...or at least a new article maybe? Anyways I am late and must get going. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the HRC is just as likely to be crap. But here is The Washington Post (via Reuters) and the BBC News Online saying the exact same thing. I think the Wiknews article should adhere to WN:NPOV and not just represent one side. --SVTCobra 00:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course I agree, but also realize that both of those links still yet make no mention of the Taliban being responsible in this incident. It still goes back to the doctor at the hospital who reported the event to the rights group. Although the US, according to BBC, says the Taliban does use WP in IEDs, it still does not say this was the case in this incident. Just want to make that clear. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 00:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I added as much as I could to balance out the sides. I still think its all finger pointing. I left the title as is based on what the sources were at the time of publish. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 00:59, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you've done a good job with the changes - I'll admit I've not looked at the further sources, but it reads well altogether, and what you've added seems a fair portrayal of the US militaries take on things. Sean Heron (talk) 11:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)