KABUL, Afghanistan — A helicopter crashed in southern Afghanistan on Saturday, killing one member of the U.S.-led coalition and injuring a second in what was the second fatal air crash in the country in a week, NATO officials said.
Capt. Luca Carniel, a spokesman for the coalition, said there was no enemy activity in the area and that the cause of the crash was being investigated. The helicopter went down in Daman district, a few miles east of Kandahar, said Javeed Faisal, the spokesman for Kandahar province.
On Monday, a Black Hawk crashed outside Kandahar, killing five U.S. soldiers. Two were killed that day by an insider attack, making Monday the deadliest day for troops so far this year.
In addition to the casualties, officials are trying to contend with Afghan President Hamid Karzai's remarks that were so anti-American, they prompted top NATO commander Gen. Joseph Dunford to issue a warning to his commanders by confidential email to be on watch for violent blowback, in the form of more insurgent and insider attacks.
When the email was leaked, Karzai's office responded by saying his comments “were meant to help reform, not destroy the relationship.”
Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel spoke on the phone with Karzai on Saturday to discuss Karzai's concerns, including the handover of the U.S.-run detention facility next to Bagram Air Field, according to Pentagon press secretary George Little.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.