|
|
May 25, 2013
|
|
|
|
 The Afghanistan RiddlePosted on May 4, 2012
Show of hands: Does anybody really understand the U.S. policy in Afghanistan? Can anyone figure out how we’re supposed to stay the course and bring home the troops at the same time? I’m at a loss, even after President Obama’s surprise trip to the war zone. The president’s televised address from Bagram air base raised more questions than it answered. Let’s start with the big one: Why? According to Obama, “the United States and our allies went to war to make sure that al-Qaida could never use this country to launch attacks against us.” I would argue that U.S. and NATO forces have already done all that is humanly possible toward that end. The Taliban government was deposed and routed. Al-Qaida was first dislodged and then decimated, with “over 20 of their top 30 leaders” killed, according to the president. Osama bin Laden was tracked to his lair in Pakistan, shot dead and buried at sea. To the extent that al-Qaida still poses a threat, it comes from affiliate organizations in places such as Yemen and from the spread of poisonous jihadist ideology. Al-Qaida’s once-extensive training camps in Afghanistan have long been obliterated and the group’s presence in the country is minimal. That smells like victory to me. Yet 94 American troops have lost their lives in Afghanistan so far in 2012, U.S. forces will still be engaged in combat until the end of 2014, and we are committed to an extraordinary—and expensive—level of involvement there until 2024. Why? Advertisement A report, now classified, commissioned by the Pentagon last year concluded that what it called “the rapidly growing fratricide-murder trend” of attacks by Afghan soldiers and police against U.S. and allied troops reflects “the ineffectiveness in our efforts in stabilizing Afghanistan, developing a legitimate and effective government, battling the insurgency (and) gaining the loyalty, respect and friendship of the Afghans.” Policies such as nighttime raids, in which civilians have been killed, and incidents such as the burning of Qurans by allied soldiers have generated increasing resentment in a country that has never taken kindly to foreign occupation. These friendly-fire killings are not just isolated incidents, the report says, but a “continuing pattern” that is leading to a “crisis of trust” between allied and Afghan forces. Unless there is reform of “profoundly dysfunctional Afghan governmental systems and key leaders,” the report predicts, “any efforts in developing a legitimate, functional and trustworthy Afghan army and police force will continue to be futile.” It should be noted that U.S. commanders in Afghanistan strongly disagree. They express confidence that the Afghan army is becoming a much more competent and professional fighting force. But they acknowledge that the process requires time and a continuing commitment of troops and funding. As Obama knows, however, polls indicate that Americans are weary of this war. He told the nation Tuesday night that 23,000 troops would be withdrawn by the end of the summer. This will reduce troop levels to about 65,000—still far above what Obama inherited in 2009. By the end of 2014, Obama said, “the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country.” But how many Americans will remain? And, again, why? At that point, Obama said, we will leave behind just enough personnel to support the Afghan government in counterterrorism operations and provide continued training for Afghan forces. At present, however, we’re in the midst of a counterinsurgency campaign of the kind that takes decades, at best, to succeed. If we’re going to switch to counterterrorism in a couple of years, why not just make the switch now? Another question: Obama said we will establish no permanent bases in Afghanistan. But the agreement he signed with Afghan President Hamid Karzai gives the United States continuing use of bases that we built and intend to transfer nominally to Afghan control. What’s the difference? The United States has agreed to support Afghanistan’s social and economic development and its security institutions through 2024. Does this sound like nation-building to you? Because that’s what it sounds like to me. “Tonight, I’d like to tell you how we will complete our mission and end the war in Afghanistan,” Obama said Tuesday. We’re still waiting. Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.  TAGS:
|
A Cooler Century? Wait and See
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By cfasw, May 6, 2012 at 8:52 am Link to this comment
It seems that the U.S. is the military for hire. In this way the U.S. stays in business and eventually can dominate the earth.
Report thisBy Samson, May 6, 2012 at 8:24 am Link to this comment
This is funny. Its like watching one of those sci-fi
robots start to smoke after its given conflicting
commands.
The key to the riddle is something that an Obama
apologist and paid Obama propaganda writer like poor
Mr. Robinson just simple can’t do.
The first step to solving the riddle is to admit that
Obama is lying. Once you realize that Obama is a
massive liar. Then it becomes very easy to see what’s
going on.
Just remember, this is the “anti-war” Obama who then
twice surged the Afghan war after conning the anti-
war voters to his side in the last election. Just
remember, this is the Obama who campaigned against
NAFTA in the last campaign, only to turn the economy
over to Wall Street and only gave workers police
batons and tear gas to break up their protests.
Once you understand that Obama is a massive and
Report thisconstant liar, then you can correctly put the pieces
together about how he can say he’s ending the war,
but can still be planning to keep as many troops as
Bush had in the country for another 10 years.
By Aarky, May 5, 2012 at 10:50 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Let’s presume that the US did kill OBL last year and that he didn’t die from Marfans Syndrome. The reason for all the weasel words and lies about pulling our troops out, but keeping enough there to continue the night time raids; bribing the right Afghans to sign that Agreement; keeping another huge embassy with a bloated staff; I will spell it out; “Face Saving Charade”. I give it no more than one-two years after most of out troops are out before the Taliban takes
Report thisover. They are smart enough to keep any Al-Qaida survivors from starting any trouble. The big problem will be the bureaucrats at State and the military who will look for reasons to re-invade.
By JH Gordon, May 5, 2012 at 10:23 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
A show of hands… For what, which nutshell has the pea under it? Well, it ain’t under any of them.
Recall the troops- That’s for all the families with sons and daughters in harm’s way.
Stay the course- That’s reassurance to the military Industry that profits will remain high and the current action will be renamed.
We have never pulled out of any nation we’ve occupied unless we were run out.
Panama, Philippines, Colombia, Peru, Somalia, Europe, Japan, all feel our military presence. Cuba, Argentina, and Viet Nam are a few of the rare exceptions.
The question is why? Perhaps we should ask United Fruit, W. R. Hearst, and Standard Oil. We should ask the CIA who they really work for. The answer is Wall Street in one form or another.
The USA has all the natural resources necessary to sustain us. We do not need to be imperialists except for lower cost labor elsewhere. Why is labor lower cost elsewhere? Because the workers want to eat and will do what is necessary to survive. They live in a grinding poverty Americans cannot imagine under regimes designed to oppress for profit utterly. Regimes rigged to enslave.
American workers understand the difference between slavery and voluntary servitude is nothing. Instead they expect fair value for their work. It is the work they own and the time they own that is traded, not the “opportunity” for servitude.
Wealth is not created on Wall St. it is siphoned off of the lives of labor. Capitalism unregulated becomes Naziism. The state is not more important than the individual. The “greater good” is not a moral argument against individual liberty because there is no conflict. Government that is not by the people oppresses them.
The people also understand time; We all have only so much of it. What value can you place on any one minute of your limited time on earth? So, rather than answer that question honestly, big business moves to where they don’t have the question. Where they can create goods cheaply and compete unfairly against the labor of the American people.
Bad Tax Law creates oppression. The People’s taxes should go to the support and well-being of the tax payers. Loophole deductions used by corporations impoverish us. They are used to control us. Is it any wonder why everyone hates the IRS?
But if we could use the IRS to restore equality, shouldn’t we do it? If loophole deductions allow control of elections and influence our State Department and Intelligence community, shouldn’t we put a stop to it? All tax law should be for the greater good, but who is deciding what the greater good is? I believe it is our choice, not that of corporations or Wall Street.
There are few things more important to the people than our Constitution and Bill of Rights. We must stop alphabet agencies from usurping the fundamentals of liberty and equality of the individual for the greater good. Start with the Tax Code. Because we need to be represented, not robbed.
JH Gordon
Report thisFireclosure
How to burn down Wall Street and get away with it.
http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/98807
Because it’s all just fiction when you read between the lines.
By DornDiego, May 5, 2012 at 10:21 am Link to this comment
Keeping troops in Afghanistan another 12 years maintains the likelihood another
Report thistwo or three will either piss on bodies, burn the Koran or walk off base and start
shooting women and children. Worse, some could be taken hostage and we’ll
have to launch the Seals to rescue them and we’ll be there for a second
administration after Obama’s because we will have killed more women and
children…
By M Henri Day, May 5, 2012 at 7:56 am Link to this comment
But Mr Robinson, how can you expect to understand how the US government and its military can simultaneously «bring home the troops» from Afghanistan and «stay the course» when you buy into the convenient assumption that the US attack on that country was motivated mainly by a desire to destroy al-Quaida and overthrow the Taliban ? Nothing on Afghanistan’s strategic position in Central Asia, nothing on the fact that it borders on China, Pakistan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan, in all of which those who run the US have interests. Of course, inquiring all too curiously into such matters is not necessarily compatible with a position as a Washington Post columnist….
Henri
Report thisBy Giybh, May 5, 2012 at 3:31 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Riddle? U.S. Policy in Afghanistan? For crying out
loud. What a question. There is no riddle, people!
But here’s my answer to this “riddle”.
U.S. policy there is a mixed bag of fruitless and
evil enterprises begun by criminals, continued by
criminals, excused by criminals, and financed by the
rest of us.
The driving purpose is profit.
U.S. policies there since late 2001 to gain profits include
Robbery, Piracy, Murder, Ecocide, Deceit, Waste,
Fraud, Aggression, Terror, Treason, Genocide.
To the extent these things occur happen,
they happen not as accidents, but as policy, or as the predictable consequences of policy.
U.S. actions speak louder than U.S. words.
Ask all the dead people over there what the U.S. policy is.
Isn’t it time we stopped asking all these stupid
questions that go nowhere?
It just wastes more time and more people die and more
people lie and more criminals walk the longer we
debate all the ridiculous non-ideas, and ask all the
questions that have been answered quite well already-
but the right answers aren’t good enough for
Americans, because that could mean a loss of face. I
swear, if false pride doesn’t utterly destroy this
nation, it will be a miracle.
Further “why” answers:
It’s business. If you want to know why look at the
quarterly profits for certain corporations whose
business is the war.
As long we are dumb enough to just watch like
oxen, as the U.S.Treasury’s money, our money, keeps
on rapidly flowing uphill and out the door and often
out of the country forever, to traitors and criminals
and “Good Germans” and all the rest of the little
suckling piglets which feed from the MIC trough, I
don’t believe the war will end.
There. Now you know. ;>)
Report thisBy cfasw, May 4, 2012 at 7:26 pm Link to this comment
It seems to me there is too much big money to be made off war.
Report thisPlease sign a petition to stop advanced war technologies from being used on the world-wide public. http://signon.org/sign/stop-harmful-energy-based Read the comments by the signers. This issue must be brought out to the light of day; there is too much evidence showing that energy-based technologies, toxins and cointelpro tactics are used on the public.
Get a different perspective; these wars use outward war technology and now drones to make us believe this is how wars are fought. The reality is that unseen weapons of war have long suppressed and tortured victims. You cannot see energy that tortures people. Here’s a sample article for those who have never heard of this: “Satellites and Citizens United” http://www.examiner.com/article/satellites-and-citizen-s-united
My website with more links and information is http://www.cfasw.net
Please sign the petition and help spread the word this is happening to innocent people - torture that the U.S. and world-governments are sweeping under the rug. Thank you.
By bd6951, May 4, 2012 at 12:42 pm Link to this comment
This is the kind of essay that makes my head want to explode. Mr. Robinson asks all the right questions but then resorts to the same litany of lies that permeates the mainstream media at every level as it continues to reinforce the fable of Bin Laden. The tool of the CIA died in 2002 of marfan syndrome, this according to numerous dependable sources yet never, ever acknowledged by writers like Mr. Robinson. The AP recently reported that the DoD has no photographic evidence at all supporting the claim that Bin Laden was killed as has been claimed by Obama just over a year ago.
This stems from continuing to lie about 9/11. There is only one question to answer about 9/11 - what is WTC7? As long as the ruling class is allowed to insist that 19 tiny little men, at least 7 of whom are still alive, were able to carry out the false flag operation that 9/11 was Mr. Robinson can ask all the correct questions he wants but the correct answers will remain secreted away as they have been since the “day that changed everything”.
Report thisBy steve, May 4, 2012 at 11:37 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
WW2 ended 67 years ago and we’re still in Germany and
Report thisJapan. The Korean War ended 59 years ago; yup, still
there. If we had prevailed in Viet Nam it is a
certainty that we would still be there also.
By felicity, May 4, 2012 at 11:22 am Link to this comment
For the last 60 years, at least, the ratio of civilian
Report thisdeaths to military deaths during any given war has been
10 to 1. Had the Afghani people been consulted on our
seemingly never ending military presence in their
country, they would have demanded that we get out now.
By balkas, May 4, 2012 at 6:30 am Link to this comment
i do not expect that world supremacists, of which most americans are an
Report thisintegral part, will ever give up on the wish to possess or at least to
control all of the planet and in order to keep society divided in wealth,
influence, power, etc.
the IDEOLOGY that a person has an inalienable right to control-
command another person must be defended by ALL MEANS necessary.
to me that is the only logical explanation why personal supremacists
went to war against afgh’n, et al and why they will continue to occupy
lands or threaten others with invasions, bombings, sanctions-
blockades…