REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Taliban winning in Afghanistan

POSTED BY: MAGONSDAUGHTER
UPDATED: Friday, October 22, 2010 05:28
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1638
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, October 16, 2010 12:29 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


http://www.theage.com.au/national/troops-overwhelmed-and-cannot-defeat
-taliban-20101016-16odk.html


Quote:

THE Taliban have ''overwhelmed'' foreign troops and cannot be defeated by military means, one of Australia's top combat soldiers has warned.

Brigadier Mark Smethurst says securing Afghanistan could take decades, but success is uncertain without a fundamental change in strategy.

His critical assessment comes in a report that contrasts sharply with federal government claims of progress in Afghanistan.

While the key role of Australian troops is mentoring local forces, he says the Afghan army cannot operate independently, despite seven years of training, and the police are even worse.

The Afghan government is ineffective and has failed to deal with corruption, human rights abuses and a non-existent justice system. Aid distribution, he says, has been ''wasteful, ineffective and insufficient''.

Brigadier Mark Smethurst implicitly criticises the Howard government's approach, and poses questions about the present government's agenda.

While successive governments have stated we are in Afghanistan to deny al-Qaeda terrorists a base, the brigadier says the key reason is to maintain the US alliance.

In a paper that makes uneasy reading for MPs before this week's parliamentary debate on Afghanistan, he implies that if we haven't achieved our primary aim by 2012 - training Afghan troops - we should pull out.

''Compared with other counterinsurgency campaigns, the chance of a solution in the short term appears remote,'' he says. ''Even with the strongest possible action and co-operation at the national level, it is difficult to see solutions emerging in less than 10 years unless proactive action is taken now.''

Brigadier Smethurst is a highly regarded special forces officer, with service in East Timor, Iraq and Afghanistan in a 28-year career. At present deputy commander of Special Operations Command, he is tipped for a key coalition post in Afghanistan.

While his paper was written last year, he told The Sunday Age the basic tenets held true.

Called Creating Conditions for the Defeat of the Afghan Taliban: A Strategic Assessment, it was recently published online by the Australian Defence College.

He describes the Taliban as a ''very capable adversary'' who are winning the propaganda war and whose tactics had ''overwhelmed the coalition''.

The insurgents ''cannot be crushed by a conventional military campaign'', he says. As public support for the nine-year-old war in the West wanes, foreign efforts have made limited progress.

He calls for a co-ordinated military and political strategy aimed at providing security, building Afghan forces and creating a functioning Afghan government. Yet all three aims face massive obstacles, he writes.

The number of troops in Oruzgan, where Australians are based, is less than half the number recommended.

If Australia fails to reach its 2012 target, ''any further commitment should be questioned, as Australia could be drawn into a greater security dilemma as the Taliban and al-Qaeda networks expand their control further into Pakistan and the region''.

While Australian and Dutch troops in Oruzgan had made substantial achievements, creating ''ink spots'' of security, ''there is little real security beyond the areas of operations''. The lack of security means Australian aid workers and police trainers have had limited impact and ''struggle to maintain a presence''.

Greater progress could have been made if Australia had adopted a ''whole of government'' approach when the Howard government sent reconstruction troops to Oruzgan in 2006.

The nature of Australia's commitment also raises ''many questions'' about the agenda of Labor governments, with the defence white paper issued by the Rudd government last year declaring conflict in the Middle East was not the ADF's principal task.

He warns the coalition must not be seen to fail in Afghanistan, because of the boost it would give to the Taliban in nuclear-armed Pakistan. A solution lies between the extremes of defeating the Taliban and reconciling with them.

He says walking away from Afghanistan risks allowing the country to flourish as a breeding ground and haven for Islamic extremism.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 16, 2010 1:50 PM

DMAANLILEILTT


Gee, don't you wish you hadn't funded, trained and armed them?

"I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 16, 2010 4:43 PM

FREMDFIRMA



Indeed.

Still, as I said at the beginning of this mess...

Would-be conquerers come and go, but end of the day, Afghanistan, is Afghanistan.

We also made the mistake of trying to prop up yet another puppet, Kharazi, who is the Afghan version of Ahmed Chalabi, a useless corrupt sleazeball only out for himself who told us what we wanted to hear instead of anything remotely resembling the realities of the situation.

And I don't buy that "if we leave it'll become a breeding ground for terrorists" bullshit, it's ALREADY one, mostly due to our own actions - every civvie who gets killed as "collateral damage" from our ineffective thrashing... every relative they have then becomes a potential threat to us, this also I warned of going into the situation.

EXCERPT FROM CROSS THE STARS
Quote:

Marilee sat down with the abruptness of a gun returning to battery. She laughed as she looked out the window through which she could see nothing but sky from her present low angle. "Well," she said, "Danny, I suppose you'd better explain that. I hadn't expected to hear from a mercenary that force doesn't accomplish anything."
"Ex-mercenary," Pritchard corrected. The smile was back. "And force accomplishes a lot of things. They just aren't the ones you want here. Bring in the Slammers and we kick ass for as long as you pay us. Six months, a year. And we kick ass even if the other side brings in mercs of their own—which they'll do—but that's not a problem, not if you've got us." Unit pride lasted even after the unit's work became a matter of distaste. Pride beamed now from Danny Pritchard's face, and his hand caressed a tank that only his mind could see.
"So," the man went on. He got up without thinking about the action because he was focused on plans, on possibilities. "There's what? Three hundred thousand people on Tethys?"
Marilee's eyes narrowed. "On the Council Islands, about. There's a lot more in little holdings on the unclaimed islands, but I don't think anyone can be sure of numbers."
"So," Pritchard repeated. The word was his equivalent of the Enter key when his mind was computing possibilities. "You want to kill fifty kay? Fifty thousand people, let's remember they're people for the moment."
"I don't want to kill anybody!" the woman snapped. She swung abruptly to her feet again. Her boots rapped on the inlaid floor over which her visitor's heels had glided unheard. "I don't even want to kill Bev Dyson. I grew up with him, after all, I . . . maybe he did kill my husband. But I don't want to know that for sure. And I don't want him killed."
"You see," said Danny Pritchard, as if he had not heard his companion expose a part of herself that she had not known existed, "if we go in quick and dirty, the only way that has a prayer of working is if we get them all. If we get everybody who opposes you, everybody related to them, everybody who called them master—everybody."
"They aren't all dangerous!" Marilee shouted. She turned to the wall of trophies and went on in nearly as loud a voice. "They aren't any of them dangerous, except maybe a few. What are you talking about?" She spun back to Pritchard.
The ex-soldier nodded in agreement. "They're not dangerous now, but they will be after the killing starts. Believe me—" he raised a hand to forestall another protest— "I've seen it often enough. Not all of them, but one in ten, one in a hundred. One in a thousand's enough when he blasts your car down over the ocean a year from now. You'll see. It changes people, the killing does. Once it starts, there's no way to stop it but all the way to the end. If you figure to still live here on Tethys."

"M—Danny!" the woman said. "I told you, I don't want killing. Why do you keep saying that?"
"What do you think the Slammers do, milady?" asked Danny Pritchard. His grin was wide as a demon's, as cruel as the muzzle of the guns he remembered using so well. "Work magic? We kill, and we're good at it, bloody good. You call the Slammers in to solve your problems here and you'll be able to cover the Port with the corpses. I guarantee it. I've done it, milady. In my time."


Available via the Baen Free Library.
http://www.baen.com/library/

That's just the way it is, folks - you either solve your problems ANOTHER WAY, or you fucking kill EVERYBODY.

Or we could, you know, get out of their damn country and stop fucking with em, something we ain't managed to do for near fifty some odd years, cause they're very turf oriented and beyond some smack talk, once we're off their turf they got better things to do, most of em, than come screw with us - not to mention insufficient forces to be any kind of real threat, save to provoke us to doin more damage to ourselves in our panicked flailing than they could ever hope for - not to mention our stupidity at sending our guys over there to be pop-up targets for folks who have EVERY DAMN REASON to hate our guts.

It didn't work for the Soviets, it ain't gonna work for us - nobody takes Afghanistan...
Nobody.

Also reccommended, this film.
The Beast
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beast_%281988_film%29

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 16, 2010 4:53 PM

CHRISISALL


I agree.


The laughing Chrisisall


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 16, 2010 4:58 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


As one of the mujahideen once told a Westerner...

"This is Afghanistan. You in the West have the watches; we have the time."


The modern definition of "socialist" is anyone who's winning an argument against a tea-bagger.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, September 24, 2010
I hate Obama's America. You're damn right about that.


Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 16, 2010 6:36 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2010/10/20101016133711604
162.html




Injustice in the age of Obama
Barack Obama, a former law professor, should have a healthy respect for civil liberties, but his actions suggest not.

Since being the defendant in about six trials after I was arrested for protesting the Iraq and Afghanistan occupations, it’s my experience that the police lie. Period.

However the lies don’t stop at street law enforcement level. From lies about WMD and connections to "al Qaeda," almost every institution of so-called authority - the Pentagon, State Department, CIA, FBI, all the way up to the Oval Office and back down - lie. Not white lies, but big, Mother of all BS (MOAB) lies that lead to the destruction of innocent lives. I.F Stone was most definitely on the ball when he proclaimed, "Governments lie".

Having clarified that, I would now like to examine a case that should be enshrined in the travesty of the US Justice Hall of Shame.

In February of this year, Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakistani mother of three, was convicted in US Federal (kangaroo) Court of seven counts, including two counts of "attempted murder of an American." On September 23, Judge Berman, who displayed an open bias against Dr. Siddiqui, sentenced her to 86 years in prison.

The tapestry of lies about Dr. Siddiqui - a cognitive neuroscientist, schooled at MIT and Brandeis - was woven during the Bush regime but fully maintained during her trial and sentencing this year by the Obama (in)Justice Department.

Before 9/11/2001, Aafia lived in Massachusetts with her husband, also a Pakistani citizen, and their two children. According to all reports, she was a quietly pious Muslim (which is still not a crime here in the States), who hosted play dates for her children. She was a good student who studied hard and maintained an exemplary record, causing little harm to anything, let alone anyone.

After 9/11, when she was pregnant with her third child, she encouraged her husband to move back to Pakistan to avoid the backlash against her Muslim children - which was a very prescient thing to do considering the Islamophobia that has only increased in this country since then.

Tortured 'truth'

Following the move to Pakistan, Dr. Siddiqui and her husband divorced. Her life took a horrendous turn justly after. While Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) - supposed mastermind of the 9/11 plot - was being water-boarded by the CIA 183 times in one month, he gave Dr. Siddiqui up as a member of al-Qaeda. Was this a case of stolen identity, or was Mohammed just saying random words like you or I would to stop the torture?

There is some disputed "intelligence" that Aafia had married KSM’s nephew, a tenuous allegation at best, and even so, guilt by association has no place in the hallowed US legal system.

Following KSM’s torture-induced 'insights', Dr. Siddiqui was listed by Bush’s Justice Department as one of the seven most dangerous al-Qaeda operatives in the world. A mother of three equipped with a lethal ability to 'thin-slice' your cognitive personality in seconds. If alleged association and a healthy interest in neuro-psychology are the definitive hallmarks of a 'terrorist operative,' then Malcolm Gladwell better start making some phone calls to Crane, Poole and Schmidt.

A culture of falsehoods

Face it, we all know that since 9/11, there have been numerous false "terror" alerts and lies leading to the capture and torture of hundreds of innocent individuals - and the heinous treatment we have all witnessed to from Abu Ghraib. Additionally, we are supposed to believe that multi-war criminal, Colin Powell, was "fooled" by faulty intelligence so much so that he paved the way for the invasion of Iraq by his false testimony at the UN but we are also supposed to unquestioningly believe the US intelligence apparatus when they lie about others such as Dr. Siddiqui.

In any case, in a bizarre scenario - to make a very long story short - Dr. Siddiqui and her three children disappeared for five years from 2003 to 2008, resurfacing in Ghazni, Afghanistan with her oldest child, a son who was then 11. She claimed that for the years she was missing, she was being held in various Pakistani and US prisons being tortured and repeatedly raped. Many prisoners, including Yvonne Ridley, maintain she was incarcerated in Bagram AFB and tortured for at least part of the five missing years.

After Dr. Siddiqui resurfaced, she was arrested and taken to an Afghan police station where four Americans - two military and two FBI agents - rushed to "question" her through interpreters. The FBI and military, claim that they were taken to a room that had a curtain at one end and that they did not know that Dr. Siddiqui was lying asleep on a bed at the other side of the curtain. As you read below it will become blatantly obvious that personnel involved from both institutions totally fabricated their stories.

This is the Americans' version: They entered the room and one of the military dudes said he laid his weapon down (remember, they were there to interrogate one of the top most dangerous people in the world), and Siddiqui got up, grabbed the weapon, yelling obscenities and that she wanted to "kill Americans." All 5'3" of her raised the weapon to fire and she fired the rifle twice, missing everyone in the small room - in fact she even missed the walls, floor and ceiling since no bullets from the rifle were ever recovered.

Then one of the Americans shot her twice in the stomach "in self-defence." It was shown at the trial that her fingerprints were not even on the weapon. The only bullets that were found that day were in Dr. Aafia's body. How many stories of military cover-ups have we heard about since 9/11? I can think of two right away without even trying hard: Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch.

Hopeless injustice

Dr. Aafia's side is this: After she was arrested, she was again beaten and she fell asleep on a bed when she heard talking in the room she was in so she got out of the bed and someone shouted: "Oh no, she’s loose!" Then she was shot - when she was wavering in and out of consciousness, she heard someone else say: "We could lose our jobs over this."

Even with no evidence that she fired any weapon, she was convicted (the jury found no pre-meditation) by a jury and sentenced to the aforementioned 86 years. It's interesting that the Feds did not pursue "terrorist" charges against Dr. Siddiqui because they were aware that the only evidence that existed was tortured out of KSM - so they literally ganged up on her to press the assault and attempted murder charges.

Even if Dr. Siddiqui did shoot at the Americans, reflect on this. Say this case was being tried in Pakistan under similar circumstances for an American woman named Dr. Betty Brown who was captured and repeatedly tortured and raped by the ISI - here in the states that woman would be a hero if she shot at her captors - not demonized and taken away from her life and her children.

I believe Dr. Aafia Siddiqui is a political prisoner and now the political bogey-woman for two US regimes.

In Pakistan, the response to her verdict and sentencing brought the predictable mass protests, burning of American flags and effigies of Obama and calls for Pakistan to repatriate Dr. Siddiqui. They know who the real criminals are and who should be in prison for life! At present, Hilary's state department harps on about 'soft power' and diplomacy, but what better way to quell US distrust in the Muslim world than to try such cases with due diligence and integrity.

In the US, not many people know about this case. Obviously many people were Hope-notized by the millions of dollars poured into the Obama PR machine - and believed when he said that his administration would be more transparent and lawful than the outlaws of the Bush era.

I guess they were mistaken.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 16, 2010 6:38 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


http://english.aljazeera.net/photo_galleries/middleeast/20101061135121
96166.html


Israel 'declares war on its people'

You could easily miss the thin, gravel road that leads to Al Arakib, a Bedouin village in the north Negev. It is a bit ironic, given the enormity of the struggle there and its deep implications for the Jewish state.

Israeli forces have razed the village five times since late July, sparking cries of ethnic cleansing and leaving more than 300 Bedouin homeless. But the equally determined residents, along with a handful of Jewish activists, continue to rebuild.

The government claims that Al Arakib was abandoned and, as such, belongs to the state. Israel calls the Bedouin squatters who "infiltrate" the area and settle it illegally. According to the state, these people must be removed to make way for a forest to be planted by the Jewish National Fund.

Villagers, some of whom hold Ottoman-era deeds to the property, say that the Israeli army asked them to leave temporarily in 1951. Believing they would be able to move back, they left. It was then, they say, that the state declared Al Arakib abandoned and expropriated it.

'Peace in your own house'

But the Bedouin maintained a connection to the earth. They continued to cultivate the village land, harvesting olives, pomegranates, and other produce. And more than a decade ago, they rooted themselves in Al Arakib once again, building houses and families.

A graveyard, established more than a century ago, also signals the villagers' attachment to the area.
Speaking just days after his home was demolished for the fifth time, Aziz Abu Mudegem points towards the cemetery and remarks: "My grandfather was buried here in 1908. He was the first to be buried here."

Abu Mudegem, a member of the al-Turi family, adds: "We have a purchase agreement from Ottoman times. The British came after that and, now, our government."

"They say that we're squatters, but it's not true," he continues. "Squatters are people who sit on the state's land. [Al Arakib] isn't the state's land. It's ours."

Their story is emblematic of the Palestinian struggle; it also touches on questions about Israel's treatment of non-Jewish citizens.

Facing the ruined houses, Ismail Mohammed Abu Mudegem al-Turi takes his wallet from his pocket. He pulls out his Israeli identity card and tosses it onto the sand. "I want someone to take this," he says. "What do I need it for? It doesn't protect me. It's just paper in my pocket."

"We don't have water. We don't have electricity. We don't have honour," al-Turi says, referring to both the demolitions and the scores of unrecognised Bedouin villages in Israel. The continued destruction of Al Arakib, he says, is like "declaring war on the people".

Just days before the village was destroyed for the first time, Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, declared that "an international campaign is being waged against the definition of Israel as a Jewish state .... The significance of these attacks is that various elements are liable to demand their own national rights and the rights of a state within the state of Israel - in the Negev, for example, if it becomes a region without a Jewish majority". Netanyahu added that such a change would be "a real threat" to the Jewish state.

Al-Turi simply remarks: "Go make war with Syria, not with your own people. If you want peace, do it first in your own house."

Battling the system, not the bulldozers

Ismail Mohammed Abu Mudegem al-Turi tosses his Israeli identity card to the floor [Credit: Mya Guarnieri]
Oren Yiftachel, a geography and urban studies professor at Ben Gurion University and the author of Ethnocracy: Land and Identity Politics in Israel/Palestine, comments: "Citizenship is empty of any substantive content if you don't have basic services or recognition.

"The land issue [at Al Arakib] serves as a reminder that citizenship in Israel is very unequal."

Yiftachel has served as an expert witness in the lawsuit filed by Nuri al-Uqbi, another Bedouin who lays claim to Al Arakib. Some observers say that al-Uqbi's case could open the door for dozens more like it. And such proceedings could call into question the validity of the Jewish claim to the whole of the land.

While al-Uqbi lives in a nearby town, preferring to battle the system rather than bulldozers, his case is deeply connected to the al-Turis' fight. Yiftachel explains that the al-Turis bought the land from the al-Uqbis and the al-Huzzails in 1907, during Ottoman rule, and in 1929, under the British mandate. Together, the two purchases totaled 1600 dunams.

When asked about the continued destruction of Al Arakib, Yiftachel responds: "My position is history. The land belongs to the al-Turi family ... it should be maintained and the property rights should be respected. [Israel] claims it is state land by the fact that [the Bedouin] never registered it [with the British]. But in court I showed that the British allowed them to hold the land according to [the Bedouins' own] traditional law."

Yiftachel explains that the Bedouins enjoyed a similar autonomy under the Ottomans. And this accounts for the lack of registration from that era, as well.

The state's expert witness is Ruth Kark, a professor of geography and the Middle East at Jerusalem's Hebrew University. Speaking to the Israeli daily Haaretz, she argues: "[The Bedouin] came to the Negev and took control of the land by force of arms."

But the same article discusses "inconsistencies" between Kark's court testimony, which disputes Bedouin claims to the land, and statements from her 1974 book about early Jewish settlement of the area.

Under the Ottomans, Kark wrote: "Land ownership relied on a tradition that was recorded in deftars, notebooks that were held by sheikhs and mukhtars." As property changed hands, it was noted in these ledgers, "which the Bedouin treated with respect and trust". When this discrepancy emerged in court, she retracted her early writing.

Kark declined Al Jazeera's request for an interview. "[At] this stage of the court proceedings, I prefer not to do so," she responded.

That the judge has yet to issue a decision about the case makes the demolitions "malicious," says Yiftachel. "While this is debated, let the people live there."

'Eating from one plate'

Yiftachel points out that at as Israel has sought to push the Negev's 175,000 Bedouins into economically and socially depressed towns - a trend that began in the early 1970s - it allows Jews to settle the area.

"The Israeli government is constantly trying to say that this is a zero sum and that if the Arabs get human rights, the Jews will be denied. This is wrong, you can have both."

Israeli activists like Amit Ramon agree.

Ramon says he feels a responsibility to stand against any injustice the government commits in his name. He has been with the village since the beginning and witnessed the first demolition, when some 1,500 police came to evacuate the 300 residents.

"They came with power like they thought the citizens would open war against them," Ramon says.

The police forcibly removed the villagers, who resisted non-violently. And then they destroyed Al Arakib.

"They ruined all the houses, they tore out the trees, they knocked over all the water tanks. There were hen cages. They ruined everything."

Ramon pauses and looks at the ground. He seems to be struggling to come to terms with the memory. "It was the end of July. It's hot here, people need to drink water. They need to drink water," he says, "and [the police] spilled all the water. They broke [the tanks] so it's impossible to use them."

"It was sad to see people behaving like that," Ramon says. "I have different expectations for people."

"It hurts what happened here in Al Arakib," Sheikh Sayah Abu Mudegem al-Turi says. "What's happening here hurts everyone [in Israel]."

Like other villagers, he emphasises that he is not against Jews. "God decided we would be here together, so we have to guard each other," he says. "I think that we have to stand hand in hand, build together, and eat from one plate."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 16, 2010 10:17 PM

CATPIRATE


That is bullshit. Look the taliban what is left is in Pakistan. We the USA as always is building up huge in Kabul. Nobody is gonna invade like Russia and China so they can have a jumping off point into the gulf. The stinky French and gay ass liberals of England get there oil from Iraq so we are gonna stay for a long time. Cut the oil off to your Europe see how quick they come to Uncle Sam for help. Please Please Mr America.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 16, 2010 10:24 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


What?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 17, 2010 1:57 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by CatPirate:
That is bullshit. Look the taliban what is left is in Pakistan. We the USA as always is building up huge in Kabul. Nobody is gonna invade like Russia and China so they can have a jumping off point into the gulf. The stinky French and gay ass liberals of England get there oil from Iraq so we are gonna stay for a long time. Cut the oil off to your Europe see how quick they come to Uncle Sam for help. Please Please Mr America.




Y'know, either people are really ignorant of geography, or they're relying on OTHER people being really ignorant of geography when they float out comments like this. I heard a pundit and a policy wonk repeating this exact same kind of statement a while back - they insisted that Russia invaded Afghanistan to get a warm-water port.

Where IS the port in Afghanistan?



Saying Afghanistan is the gateway to the Gulf is like saying that Nebraska is the gateway to the Pacific.


The modern definition of "socialist" is anyone who's winning an argument against a tea-bagger.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, September 24, 2010
I hate Obama's America. You're damn right about that.


Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 17, 2010 2:33 AM

DMAANLILEILTT


Apparently you have not heard about the oil platforms off the coast of Scotland.

"I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 17, 2010 7:45 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Gee, don't you wish you hadn't funded, trained and armed them?
Are you from another country? If not, who do you mean by “you”, given it was Presidents of both sides who did so...
Quote:

Would-be conquerors come and go, but end of the day, Afghanistan, is Afghanistan.
Yes, Frem, as we and others know, Afghanistan has been conquered innumerable times throughout history, but nobody’s ever HELD it for long.

Back when we lived there, the common wisdom was that Russia wanted Afghanistan as a “buffer country”, nothing more. It certainly has little to offer in any other way, and it’s no “gateway” as far as I could ever see. As I’ve said before, back then it was a game to them; America built them an airport and an airline (there reason my dad was sent there), Russia built them a road (ironically, TO Russia); America built schools, Russia built grain silos. They made out great by playing one against the other; unfortunately THAT gambit doesn’t work forever.

And yes, everything else you said, Frem. It’s sad that these things are SO obvious to so many of us, yet either our politicians are deaf, dumb and blind, or they don’t care and just want a war for their own purposes.
Quote:

provoke us to doin more damage to ourselves in our panicked flailing than they could ever hope for - not to mention our stupidity at sending our guys over there to be pop-up targets for folks who have EVERY DAMN REASON to hate our guts.
Right on. Wasn’t that Al Qaeda’s stated purpose? To get us involved in so many little “wars” around the world that we exhaust our military resources, and to cause dissention within our country, etc.? Which is happening quite effectively, as far as I can see.

Interestingly I’ve read that “terrorism never works”...would be interesting to see what whoever wrote that would have to say about the current situation, in which terrorism abroad, one strike against us which was possible because of our own complacency, the stupidity/stubbornness of our government, the desire to divide by our politicians, and our own susceptibility to terror, has been quite effective. I think that puts the lie to the statement. Terrorism WITHIN a country might not work, in that it causes people to rise up against it, but it seems terrorism all over the place is quite effective in terrorizing a country which is actually little in danger of being its victim, but whose imaginations can be stimulated to be terrorized!

Hee, hee, hee, I love that quote, Mike. How apropos! Time has always been their ally and their conquerors' enemy.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 17, 2010 7:45 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Gino, GREAT to see you again!! Gawd, that story is horrendous but, unfortunately, doesn’t surprise me in the least. I couldn’t read beyond
Quote:

As you read below it will become blatantly obvious
I don’t have to know the details, my imagination and knowledge of other such stories suffices, and it would be like reading about an animal in a testing lab, it happens so often and in so many of the same ways. Absolutely
Quote:

since 9/11, there have been numerous false "terror" alerts and lies leading to the capture and torture of hundreds of innocent individuals - and the heinous treatment we have all witnessed to from Abu Ghraib. Additionally, we are supposed to believe that multi-war criminal, Colin Powell, was "fooled" by faulty intelligence so much so that he paved the way for the invasion of Iraq by his false testimony at the UN but we are also supposed to unquestioningly believe the US intelligence apparatus when they lie about others such as Dr. Siddiqui.
And yet so MANY blind, brainwashed people still deny this, say we are “justified” in what we do, say torture “works” (which it’s conclusively been proven NOT to) and act on “information” given by those who tortured, when surely they must know that, just like McCain, people will name a football team to stop the torture! Why are humans susceptible to ignoring what they know to be true and defending what they know is false, and be so determined to keep doing so no matter what? It’s a conundrum, to me.

I don’t often read stories about Israeli atrocities for the same reason, and scratch my head about people who blindly defend Israel, no matter what, for the same reason.

I found it amusing but sad and disgusting that McCain backs torture when he stated HIMSELF that he named anyone he could think of to stop the torture. What hypocrisy!

Cat, once again we need to go into the non-ownership of oil. It’s traded on a worldwide stage, from what I’ve read, so nobody knows “who’s” oil they’re buying. Which again gives the lie to our need to drill for “our own” oil, as the companies who bring it up (often foreign) sell it on the world market and we buy off the world market, so it’s never “our” oil in the first place. The only positive is that the companies pay a fee to us to drill, and I believe for however much they bring up, and the only true argument about getting “free of foreign oil” is that we need to find alternatives TO oil.

The rest of what you wrote makes no more sense to me than it did to Magons. Nor did the remark about oil platforms off Scotland.

Mike, I know Russia has used other countries as “gateways” to further conquest, and Afghanistan is certainly a poor enough country to easily conquer (but, as anyone who has learned, not to hold!), but I maintain that what was true when we lived there still holds; they want a buffer country, some place poor enough to control but not important enough to need dealing with or putting money into. Perhaps it could be viewed as a “gateway to the Mideast”, but gateway to any kind of port? That’s not just absurd because there IS no port in landlocked Afghanistan, but because the terrain and distance make even using it as a gateway to ports in Iran or Pakistan totally unfeasible. Which idiot came up with that concept??


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2010 5:45 PM

CATPIRATE


Kwicko you are a dumbshit. Strike base idiot. But I'm sure you know all about military operations. What's going on right now. Oh if ya talk to soldiers you would know. The airbase is getting huge. No war in that area. We will be there a long time. Protecting the Gulf Region.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 18, 2010 8:36 PM

DMAANLILEILTT


I was saying the United States Of America funded, trained and armed Afghani militia to beat back the Soviet Union. One of these militia groups trained in a camp called Al-Qaeda. I was saying that don't Americans wish they hadn't funded extreme groups in Afghanistan because now there have been thousands of deaths because of it.

And I'm aware that the article is about my country and not your's. I was making a satirical comment.

And the oil comment was a response to CatPirate. And I was refering to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_oil

"I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:20 AM

KANEMAN


With the crock of barak running things I'd be suprised if they don't take us over.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:28 AM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


Quote:

Originally posted by kaneman:
With the crock of barak running things I'd be suprised if they don't take us over.

We we always lose ANY war in Afghanistan. It's all about terrain. You invade my house with 4 trained soldiers and I'll off 3 of em before they've reached the first floor landing.With zero training.Knowing your battleground is everything.

Peacekeeper---keeping order in every verse!!!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 19, 2010 2:45 PM

DREAMTROVE


Let them win.

The more we fight, the stronger they become. This is because there are more powers on this Earth with a vested interest in us losing than there are with an interest in us winning. These powers will pour resources into the Taliban and anyone else fighting us until we lose. Hence, the longer we fight, the stronger they become. Ultimately, we lose.

Think about it:

Russia and a number of European country oppose a US-dominated middle east. Add that together, and that's most of Europe.

The communists and the muslim world wishes us to fail, that's most of Africa, and ultimately, when you add in the drug lords who also want us to fail with the communists, that's most of Latin America as well.

China, Russia, Pakistan, Iran, other muslim nations are dead set against our victory, and India has doubts. That's almost all of Asia.

So, add it up. It's the US, with the support of Israel, and now it's really losing or lost the support of the UK. That means up to 95% of the world is against us.

And it gets worse: Apparently, WE are arming the enemy ourselves, because elements within our own govt either seek to profit from it, want to undermine the mission, or claim it for themselves, or are just too hopelessly disorganized to know who they are helping...

So, almost 100% of the world is helping the enemy. So, the longer conflict goes on, the stronger the enemy becomes.

So let them win. Better today than tomorrow, and better tomorrow than the day after...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:16 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by CatPirate:
Kwicko you are a dumbshit. Strike base idiot. But I'm sure you know all about military operations. What's going on right now. Oh if ya talk to soldiers you would know. The airbase is getting huge. No war in that area. We will be there a long time. Protecting the Gulf Region.





You say "we will be there a long time" and "protecting the Gulf region" as if those are GOOD things.

And yeah, I know a little about military ops. I know you can do more from a carrier battle group than you can from a static base, especially when that base is in a land-locked country swarming with natives who absolutely hate you and are willing to give their lives to drive you from their land.

You were in the navy, right? So what you know is all about things that are long, hard, and full of seamen, right? ;)

Hey, maybe you'll get your wish and they'll try to put a Navy base in Afghanistan...


The modern definition of "socialist" is anyone who's winning an argument against a tea-bagger.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, September 24, 2010
I hate Obama's America. You're damn right about that.


Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:37 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Oh hell yes, of COURSE the Russians are laughing up their sleeve and funnelling weapons, equipment and money to anyone willing to shoot at us, all the while thinkin "Paybacks a bitch, ain't it ?".

You really think Putin didn't laugh his ass off the minute we invaded that place, and start shipping guns not thirty seconds later ?

We dare not call em on it either, do we now ?

We should just cut our losses and GTFO, honestly.

-Frem


I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:52 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Let them win.

The more we fight, the stronger they become. This is because there are more powers on this Earth with a vested interest in us losing than there are with an interest in us winning. These powers will pour resources into the Taliban and anyone else fighting us until we lose. Hence, the longer we fight, the stronger they become. Ultimately, we lose.

Think about it:

Russia and a number of European country oppose a US-dominated middle east. Add that together, and that's most of Europe.

The communists and the muslim world wishes us to fail, that's most of Africa, and ultimately, when you add in the drug lords who also want us to fail with the communists, that's most of Latin America as well.

China, Russia, Pakistan, Iran, other muslim nations are dead set against our victory, and India has doubts. That's almost all of Asia.

So, add it up. It's the US, with the support of Israel, and now it's really losing or lost the support of the UK. That means up to 95% of the world is against us.

And it gets worse: Apparently, WE are arming the enemy ourselves, because elements within our own govt either seek to profit from it, want to undermine the mission, or claim it for themselves, or are just too hopelessly disorganized to know who they are helping...

So, almost 100% of the world is helping the enemy. So, the longer conflict goes on, the stronger the enemy becomes.

So let them win. Better today than tomorrow, and better tomorrow than the day after...




Yup, to pretty much all of that. India likes that we're a bit of a thorn in the side of Pakistan at the moment, and they also like anything which drags our attention away from their area of the world for a bit, so of course they're happy. Naturally, China likes that, too. While we're distracted and hemorrhaging money, they're only too happy to keep gobbling up our debt, because they know that sooner or later we either have to pay up, or quit, and either way, they win big.

Also, nobody in the area wants the U.S. trying to put the squeeze on Iran by having bases in the surrounding countries, because they know that only leads to a shooting war with Ira, and frankly, China, India, Pakistan, and Russia want access to Iranian oil more than they want us in the area.

That doesn't mean that they aren't happy to see us trapped their and bogged down, but they don't seriously want us winning or making any real headway in the area. Much better for their respective spheres of influence if we stay put and don't make any real progress.

The real fools are those who think any of them are on our side. There aren't "sides" anymore - there's only influence, money, power, and resources, and it's every nation for itself.


The modern definition of "socialist" is anyone who's winning an argument against a tea-bagger.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, September 24, 2010
I hate Obama's America. You're damn right about that.


Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 19, 2010 5:55 PM

DMAANLILEILTT


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Let them win.

The more we fight, the stronger they become. This is because there are more powers on this Earth with a vested interest in us losing than there are with an interest in us winning. These powers will pour resources into the Taliban and anyone else fighting us until we lose. Hence, the longer we fight, the stronger they become. Ultimately, we lose.

Think about it:

Russia and a number of European country oppose a US-dominated middle east. Add that together, and that's most of Europe.

The communists and the muslim world wishes us to fail, that's most of Africa, and ultimately, when you add in the drug lords who also want us to fail with the communists, that's most of Latin America as well.

China, Russia, Pakistan, Iran, other muslim nations are dead set against our victory, and India has doubts. That's almost all of Asia.

So, add it up. It's the US, with the support of Israel, and now it's really losing or lost the support of the UK. That means up to 95% of the world is against us.

And it gets worse: Apparently, WE are arming the enemy ourselves, because elements within our own govt either seek to profit from it, want to undermine the mission, or claim it for themselves, or are just too hopelessly disorganized to know who they are helping...

So, almost 100% of the world is helping the enemy. So, the longer conflict goes on, the stronger the enemy becomes.

So let them win. Better today than tomorrow, and better tomorrow than the day after...

That post is exactly why the Coalition is losing the war and it has nothing to do what you say. If America actually thinks that 95% of the world is helping the Taliban because they aren't helping them is the reason why the Taliban is able to keep recruiting.

Russia and the E.U. might not want a US-dominated Middle East, but they sure as hell don't want a fundamentalist regime that will just as likely kill them than deal with them.

Communists don't want the Taliban to win because the Taliban defeated the Democratic (Soviet) Republic of Afghanistan.

Obviously the extreme Islamic regimes (Iran et al) want the US to fail. And I'll pay you the drug lords but the CIA was the ones that enabled the Afghanis to set up their drug trade.

China might want America to fail but, again they don't want an unstable regime on their western border considering they have troubles enough with Tibet. You said Russia twice. Pakistan and India also don't want unstable neighbours.

So you not trusting your own "allies" could have something to do with it if they do want you to fail. You're like the head bitchy cheerleader; every wants to be your friend, but everyone cheers when you break your arm.

"I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, October 20, 2010 5:08 AM

DREAMTROVE


Mike,

India just likes us handing them our empire on a silver platter the way the Brits handed it to us. I'm not sure if they're down with the rise in terrorist we create though.

Meanwhile, as to why we're there, you should keep your WTO map updated. It ain't the oil, though that's a nice benny



If you're not colored in, then we might have to invade. This particular map contains some errors: Turkey keeps jumping in, and Somalia and Eritrea keep jumping out.

Oh, and one of those white things is the Caspian Sea, not a country. yet. :)



gloablists are getting confused. Never did master jigsaw puzzles.

But remember, the crazy guy with a machine gun in McDonalds isn't a genius, he's just got the power because he's doing something the rest of us never thought of: Killing us all.

The globalists aren't an elite force for world peace and prosperity, they're the crazy guy with a machine gun in McDonalds


Quote:

DMAAN

That post is exactly why the Coalition is losing the war and it has nothing to do what you say.



Your logic does not resemble our Earth logic.

The taliban is 30,000 guys. They appear to be kicking our ass at the moment. We seem to out number them 10,000 to one in people, (we're all behind this war effort, since that's where our taxes are going) and we out dollar them million or billions of times, and we out gun them far more than anything else, with about 1/2 the world's firepower to their almost nothing. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

Quote:


Russia and the E.U. might not want a US-dominated Middle East, but they sure as hell don't want a fundamentalist regime that will just as likely kill them than deal with them.



China has also said how much it doesn't want a US-dominated middle east, but you're very wrong if you think any of them cares if a funadmentalist muslim regime controls afghanistan. They don't give a fuck. In fact, the Taliban were in charge for years, and they did nothing, because they didn't care. And still don't. Actually muslim extremists have controlled Afghanistan for centuries.

And yes, no one wants an unstable regime as a neighbor. We and Karzai are an unstable regime. Look how many enemies are trying to topple us. I don't see that the Taliban were an unstable regime, even we weren't trying to topple them until a deal fell through. It wasn't that pipeline either.

I said russia twice, intentionally. And, I'm not America. America doesn't really have any allies. It has one master with a whip, and some little mice that fear us, or them. It's a dysfunctional relationship.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, October 21, 2010 6:59 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 5:28 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
... every civvie who gets killed as "collateral damage" from our ineffective thrashing... every relative they have then becomes a potential threat to us, this also I warned of going into the situation.



But that's the whole point, dontcha see?

They can't have an endless war against terror unless they can guarantee a steady stream of terrorists.

How to have an endless war:
1. Find some whackjob nuts, no matter how insane and how lame.
2. Carry out a false flag operation and blame said lame whackjob nuts.
3. Go kill a bunch of innocent people under the pretext of hunting said lame whackjob nuts.
4. Whackjob nuts grow in membership in response to senseless killing, thus become a real threat.
5. Get more money and repeat step # 3, except this time, they are no longer as lame.

-----
Intolerance of ambiguity is the mark of an authoritarian personality.
-Theodor Adorno, philosopher and composer (1903-1969)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
FOUND YOU!
Sat, November 22, 2014 22:25 - 13 posts
Benghazi - The Shocking Truth!
Sat, November 22, 2014 20:35 - 13 posts
Hands up of everyone who thinks Bill Cosby raped his way through his career??
Sat, November 22, 2014 19:00 - 48 posts
Lerner emails found!
Sat, November 22, 2014 17:25 - 7 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine
Sat, November 22, 2014 17:04 - 735 posts
I don't even know what most of you are talking about anymore.....
Sat, November 22, 2014 16:23 - 101 posts
TV and football.
Sat, November 22, 2014 16:15 - 6 posts
Ferguson
Sat, November 22, 2014 16:05 - 51 posts
Is Ferguson just another Ukraine?
Sat, November 22, 2014 16:01 - 10 posts
Deletion of Obamacare Truth is reversed.
Sat, November 22, 2014 15:58 - 17 posts
Rep. Mo Brooks and Backpedaling
Sat, November 22, 2014 10:23 - 4 posts
Finally - A Bi-Partisan Bill for Good
Fri, November 21, 2014 22:38 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL

OUR SPONSORS