The 800-pound gorilla standing in the auditorium at West Point is still waiting for an answer to why Obama made his surge-speech for 30,000 more troops and $30 billion to pay for them. That gorilla wonders “why” Obama pitched so hard for the US to stay and surge through Afghanistan and Pakistan. The reasons given were that the Afghanistan Taliban and Al Qaeda led by Osama bin Laden were the people that attacked us on 9/11, which was an iteration of George W. Bush’s reasons for the War on Terror. They are as phony now as the day Bush promised to smoke out Bin Laden.
But, here are Obama’s actual words, pointed out by Christopher Bollyn on page 2 of his article, Why Afghanistan?
“1. I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the epicenter of the violent extremism practiced by al-Qaeda. It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak.
“2. It is important to recall why America and our allies were compelled to fight a war in Afghanistan in the first place. We did not ask for this fight. On September 11, 2001, 19 men hijacked four airplanes and used them murder nearly 3,000 people.
“3: If I did not think that the security of the United States and the safety of the American people were at stake in Afghanistan, I would gladly order every single one of our troops home tomorrow.”
Also, as early as Oct. 14, 2001, a month and three days after 9/11, Bollyn wrote in The Great Game – The War For Caspian Oil And Gas: “President Bush’s ‘crusade’ against the Taliban of Afghanistan has more to do with control of the immense oil and gas resources of the Caspian Basin than it does with ‘rooting out terrorism.’
“Once again an American president from the Bush family is leading Americans down an oil-rich Middle Eastern warpath against ‘enemies of freedom and democracy.’
“President George W. Bush, whose family is well connected to oil and energy companies, has called for an international crusade against Islamic terrorists, who he says hate Americans simply because we are ‘the brightest beacon of freedom.’
“The focus on religion-based terrorism serves to conceal important aspects of the Central Asian conflict. President Bush’s noble rhetoric about fighting for justice and democracy is masking a less noble struggle for control of an estimated $5 trillion of oil and gas resources from the Caspian Basin.
Given: The news today that our peaceful President Obama is sending a bunch more troops to AFPAKistan to die for nothing as in the following article:
“Obama will try to sell a skeptical public on his bigger, costlier war plan Tuesday by coupling the large new troop infusion with an emphasis on stepped-up training for Afghan forces that he says will allow the U.S. to leave.
Obama formally ends a 92-day review of the war in Afghanistan Tuesday night with a nationally broadcast address in which he will lay out his revamped strategy from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y. He began rolling out his decision Sunday night, informing key administration officials, military advisers and foreign allies in a series of private meetings and phone calls that stretched into Monday.”
As the realization dawned on me that yes, indeed, we really are going to continue this AFPAK war based on falsehoods – I decided to take a drive and listen to what the pundits on AM radio had to say. My expectations – the leftys would come up with all kinds of excuses to explain why the President of Peace is morphing into just another Wager of War. The righties would ignore the fact that they started this loser of a war and find ways to pin it on the Democrats. But now – Obama has no way out – instead of ending it – he’s getting right in line making the right-wing propaganda stick. Although the following is disorganized – it matches the jumble of memories as I flipped through the various stations – left and right wing.
I’m almost embarrassed to admit listening to the Rush Limbaugh show because the propagandistic nature of it is so obvious to me. Rush is a divider helping maintain the Demopublican vs. Republicrat paradigm that is keeping the American public frustratingly paralyzed- but some sick curiosity within me made me listen to his drivel anyway. Today – on an AM station here in Charlottesville, Virginia at 13:29 Rush said he believes bin Laden is dead – killed at Tora Bora. This was during a rant to his flock saying something to the effect that one should vote Republican and not consider switching to the independent party because third parties are just people standing in a room together shouting while getting nothing done. So, Rush, let’s hear you educate us some more from your excellence in bullshitting network – what is the mission in Afghanistan? What is the mission in the AFPAK war? Are they the same? By the way – how is “getting nothing done” different from what is going on now? By ‘nothing’ I refer to the interests of the non-super-rich in America. You’ll never hear answers to these questions on Rush’s propagandathon – just like you’ll never hear any complete truths or facts from him. His show is light on facts – heavy on red meat blather.
Another AM radio propaganda show, starring right wing shill Fred Thompson, attempted to blame this nightmare on Obama. While answering a caller he said Democrats can’t keep bringing up the past – “lead” he said as he referred to Obama taking over the Bushies war in Afghanistan – which – remember – was to “smoke’em out” (bin Laden). Whew – after all those years of guys just like him blaming Clinton for everything under the sun this idiotic blather almost made me puke. I guess we’ll have to wait for Obama to tell us the reason our troops need to spend Christmas fighting in an unconquerable land.
Consider this NY times article CLICK HERE where we see the original excuses we were given to embark on a disaster:
“But we’re going to smoke them out,” he said.
“The Taleban,” he said, referring to the fundamentalist rulers of Afghanistan, “must take my statements seriously.”
Mr. Bush, who visited the Pentagon as military planners were preparing call-up orders for 35,000 reservists, said the military was prepared to pay “any cost” as it mounted a long and difficult campaign against terror.
His comments appeared in part spontaneous, reflecting a rage that seems to have been building for days, and that aides say was stoked by the horror he witnessed Friday on his visit to New York. “I want justice,” he said. “There’s an old poster out West that said, ‘Wanted, dead or alive.”
Later in the same article:
“Secretary of State Colin Powell said that “all roads lead to” Mr. bin Laden as the man behind the four hijackings that yielded the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York, the attack on the Pentagon and a death total exceeding 5,000.
He praised Pakistan for sending envoys to demand that the Taleban government in Afghanistan, which believed to be sheltering Mr. bin Laden, hand him over.”
Seems pretty clear to me that the Republicans started this mess …so what is the mission in AFPAKistan? back to the radio…
A left-wing show host, Stephanie Miller, reacted a little to the news that Obama is sending more of our troops to die for some undefinable reason, but the show was so infantile I just turned it off. I’m sorry Stephanie – I know you have to appeal to your audience – and I know you have to get ratings – but by Jupiter your gonna’ have to get tough on these “statesmen” or we’re all gonna’ go down together. Maybe I’m overestimating the audience. Don’t know. I will say Stephanie sounded a bit stunned and at a loss when grasping for reasons to continue supporting our new rock star prez. Maybe the “rock” in his star is in reference to the terrain of Afghanistan. Oh well, I can’t get too harsh with Stephanie – after all she called for the execution of sh*tbaugh – on Larry King. Click here where she’s beat up for making this comment which was probably a joke. Hell I thought it was funny. My problem with her call for his execution is I didn’t hear anything about a trial first.
…so what is the mission in Afghanistan? I’ve stated in the past that Osama bin Laden has been dead since 2001. Not too long ago people like myself were laughed at for making such assertions based on the research done by David Ray Griffin in his book Osama bin Laden Dead or Alive?
Finally – I heard a bit of the beginning of the Thom Hartmann show – he stated that he isn’t giving up on Obama yet. Geez Thom – what on Earth is it going to take? I will, however, say thanks to Thom Hartmann for showing the courage to conduct the following interview of David Ray Griffin which I suggest you listen to. There are more like it – see No Lies radio link on left side of this page. Here’s the Hartmann interview – thanks again Thom.
So – what is the mission in AFPAKistan? If bin Laden is indeed dead – we have a ‘disconnect’ – a disconnect with reality. Unless the mission has more to do with Opium and a purported pipeline. Once one takes into consideration more covert motives, the exercise in futility, the butcher shop that is Afghanistan, begins to take shape. And it doesn’t seem to have anything to do with capturing a dead guy.
What can we learn from all of this? We all need to talk – especially with those we disagree with. As long as everybody keeps talking I think we’ll be alright. The old saying is “Divide and Conquer” – it is no secret we are divided. Let’s listen to why this phony war must be continued, write it down, then hold them accountable – and that may mean trials.
Barack Obama’s much-vaunted eloquence faces the biggest test of his presidential career this week when he takes to the stage at West Point military academy to explain to a nation that thought it had elected an anti-war president why he is escalating the conflict in Afghanistan.
After almost three months of agonising, nine war councils and endless leaks, the president will finally make his views known on Tuesday when he is expected to announce that he is sending about 30,000 more troops. This will push up American forces to 100,000 and the total number of allied forces to almost 140,000, as many troops as the Soviet Union had in Afghanistan.
PHOENIX — President Obama urged more than 5,000 veterans gathered here to brace for a daunting and perhaps bloody period ahead in Afghanistan, but told them he believes this war is “fundamental to the defense of our people.”
“As I said when I announced this strategy, there will be more difficult days ahead,” the president said at the annual convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. “The insurgency in Afghanistan didn’t just happen overnight, and we won’t defeat it overnight. This will not be quick. This will not be easy.”
In a 35-minute speech to a group that harbors, in some cases, deep reservations about the president’s war policy, Mr. Obama took firm ownership of the long-running Afghan initiative. The speech came as Afghanistan prepares for presidential elections on Thursday.
KABUL — It is the open secret no one wants to talk about, the unwelcome truth that most prefer to hide. In Afghanistan, one of the richest sources of Taliban funding is the foreign assistance coming into the country.
Virtually every major project includes a healthy cut for the insurgents. Call it protection money, call it extortion, or, as the Taliban themselves prefer to term it, “spoils of war,” the fact remains that international donors, primarily the United States, are to a large extent financing their own enemy.
“Everyone knows this is going on,” said one U.S. Embassy official, speaking privately.
It is almost impossible to determine how much the insurgents are spending, making it difficult to pinpoint the sources of the funds.
Mullah Abdul Salaam Zaeef, former Taliban minister to Pakistan, was perhaps more than a bit disingenuous when he told GlobalPost that the militants were operating mostly on air.
Julian E. Barnes
The Los Angeles Times
July 24, 2009
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Military officials in Afghanistan have ordered a halt to the practice of releasing the number of militants killed in fighting with American-led forces as part of an overall strategy shift and an effort to portray to the Afghan people a different U.S. approach to the war.
The decision has triggered a quiet but fierce debate among military officers, one with echoes of the U.S. experience in Vietnam, when military officials routinely exaggerated body counts and used them as a measure of success — a practice that proved counterproductive.
Under the new order, issued by Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, the military will not release specifics on how many insurgents are killed in fighting and will instead provide estimates.
The change is part of a strategy to make the Afghan people feel safer, and it comes as U.S. commanders are instituting measures to avoid civilian casualties.
It could be argued that the single biggest contributor to President Barack Obama’s election victory was voter dissatisfaction with former President Bush’s neoconservative warmongering foreign policy (which was embraced by Republican presidential candidate John McCain). Ironically, since taking office, Obama has turned out to be eerily similar in the warmongering department.
One of Obama’s first foreign policy decisions as the commander-in-chief was to copy Bush’s Iraq troop “surge” with a surge of his own in Afghanistan. The U.S. troop presence has drastically increased from 32,000 at the start of 2009 to about 57,000 presently with an anticipated cap around the 68,000 mark (which would more than double the U.S. commitment to the region). Like the salesman on a late-night infomercial typically proclaims, “But wait — there’s more!” Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced that the number of boots on the ground could climb even beyond the 68,000 number. In a question and answer session at Fort Drum, Gates said that what U.S. General Stanley McChrystal, who was recently appointed as the new commander of NATO, reports back to him could influence the decision to send even more troops to war. McChrystal is preparing a classified report for the Defense Secretary on Afghanistan according to CNN.
ERIC SCHMITT and JANE PERLEZ
Herald Tribune
July 22, 2009
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan is objecting to expanded American combat operations in neighboring Afghanistan, creating new fissures in the alliance with Washington at a critical juncture when thousands of new American forces are arriving in the region.
Pakistani officials have told the Obama administration that the Marines fighting the Taliban in southern Afghanistan will force militants across the border into Pakistan, with the potential to further inflame the troubled province of Baluchistan, according to Pakistani intelligence officials.
Pakistan does not have enough troops to deploy to Baluchistan to take on the Taliban without denuding its border with its archenemy, India, the officials said. Dialogue with the Taliban, not more fighting, is in Pakistan’s national interest, they said.
Editor’s note: If we use Gallup as a yardstick, the American public has once again revealed they know absolutely nothing about what is really going on in Iraq and Afghanistan, thanks to the corporate media.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Americans remain much more likely to say U.S. involvement in Iraq was a mistake than to say the same about Afghanistan, despite the fact that Americans are more likely now than at any point since 2003 to say things are going well for the U.S. in Iraq.
Fifty-eight percent of Americans say U.S. involvement in Iraq was a mistake, contrasted with 36% who say involvement in Afghanistan was a mistake. Americans’ views of the way things are going in each war are roughly the same — 56% say Iraq is going well for the U.S., while 54% say this about Afghanistan.
Since March 2003, Gallup has asked Americans on 79 different occasions whether the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, compared to having asked the same question about Afghanistan only nine times since November 2001. This relative emphasis on measuring public opinion about Iraq versus Afghanistan reflects the fact that Iraq dominated news coverage and political debate in the years after the initial invasion in March 2003, consigning Afghanistan until more recently to a status as the “other” or forgotten war.
Each equipped with $48,000 worth of GPS components, electronic maps, and wearable computers, troops of the Army’s 5th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division are heading to Afghanistan as part of the resurrected Land Warrior program. The Army is hoping the revised, eight-pound set of gear will be more beneficial than when the $500 million program was canceled in 2006.
As the latest futuristicmilitary program to be made real, Land Warrior gear will allow troops to identify comrades and enemies on the battlefield, receive updated objectives, locate buildings and find the nearest exit–all through a head-mounted eyepiece.
This is the long-awaited realization of the Army’s 15 year plus program to help out troops who were previously buying their own walkie-talkies and GPS units to stay in contact with their team.
PortalScape 