Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)   
| | QUOTE | Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:55 pm
Major Hasan's killing 13 unarmed soldiers and wounding 30 others was a senseless and unjustified act of violence. The U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are also senseless and unjustified acts of violence. One does not justify the other(s). Neither God nor humankind is served by senseless acts of violence. It is incumbent on United States as the most powerful military, political, and economic force in the world to seek peace instead of waging senseless wars. The bottom line is that if United States continues to wage war in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan it will not end well for United States no matter what course of action the United States military is ordered to take. The U.S. wars in Iraq and in Afghanistan will not succeed from a moral perspective or from a pragmatic (military) standpoint. The further United States proceeds down the road of war, the more intractable the situation becomes and the worse the ultimate consequences (end results) of these immoral, senseless wars become. I am profoundly saddened by the loss of human life and immensely troubled by the implications of the killings (murders) at Ft. Hood, but I am not surprised. |
| |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| | QUOTE | "Hasan lives in the most religiously tolerant country on Earth." This is the faith-based opinion of The Augusta Chronicle editorial staff (ACES) which goes on further to falsely suppose that Maj. Nidal Hasan was harassed not because of his religion but because he was an outspoken opponent within the U.S. military community of US was in Iraq & Afghanistan. That sort of dissent simply is not tolerated by the gung-ho group mentality of military killer bees. I am appalled by the religious hatred I heard on right-wing "Christian" stations today towards Islam & towards President Obama. ACES parrots the faux Christianity & false patriotism of both the religious right & secular war hawk media. 3, 2, 1...attack Obama over the Fort Hood shooting. Yeah, that's the ticket for the disgruntled Republican rabble! Exactly what America does not need is more Islamophobia or witch hunt to purge Muslims from the military. ACES does not offer salve or solutions. This tragic incident may be the most inflammatory situation since 9/11. ACES should call for the US military to examine its long standing policy of reassigning poorly performing individuals to combat zones. The military bureaucracy bears blame.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 7, 2009 2:30 AM |
| QUOTE | The Augusta Chronicle editorial staff claims United States is "the most religiously tolerant country on Earth." The overwhelming majority of Reader Comments to this editorial belie that claim. Today a AP headline reads "After [Hispanic] immigrant killed in NY, others tell of abuse". The economic downturn brought mass xenophobic wrath down on anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant. That will be dismissed as ethnic intolerance by self-righteous reactionaries, but violence within America does not stop there. After 9/11 there were attacks on people who "looked Arabic". An Indian Sheik was killed because ignorant, intolerant, violent American reactionaries thought he looked like a terrorist. Arab Americans have been persecuted in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. United States is not "the most religiously tolerant country on Earth." Christianity teaches that a true believer should worry about the beam in their own eye before they worry about the speck in another's eye. Where are the moderate Christian leaders calling for tolerance & for Americans not to rush to judgment about what happened at Ft. Hood? The religious right & ACES use this incident for political leverage, hate & war.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 7, 2009 9:33 AM |
| QUOTE | howcanweknow, the perpetrator of the horrible mass murder at Ft. Hood has been apprehended. Faithful Christians and intelligent Americans of good will should not generalize about the killing or call for the persecution of members of the Muslim faith. To do so and to become filled with hatred and desire for revenge contradict the tenets of Christianity. It also is not a smart reaction to what happened at Ft. Hood. America overreacted in the wake of 9/11. It led to unnecessary wars, to the illegal & ineffective use of torture, and eventually to the loss of the world's sympathy and support. We weaken our democracy and our faith when he become like the terrorists, like the criminals, like the religious fanatics and/or like the criminally insane.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 7, 2009 9:51 AM |
| QUOTE | Enjoy your hate fest, CHSDARKHORSE. Too bad it will get you nowhere in America's best interest. Hatred, overreaction, and targeting of Muslims is counterproductive. The attacks on 9/11/01 and the 8 year aftermath of mistakes should have taught you the benefit of mounting rational, effective responses to terrorist attacks.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 7, 2009 10:00 AM |
| QUOTE | Major Hasan's killing 13 unarmed soldiers and wounding 30 others was a senseless & unjustified act of violence. The U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are also senseless and unjustified acts of violence. One does not justify the other(s). Neither God nor humankind is served by senseless acts of violence. It is incumbent on United States as the most powerful military, political, and economic force in the world to seek peace instead of waging senseless wars. The bottom line is that if United States continues to wage war in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan it will not end well for United States no matter what course of action the United States military is ordered to take. The U.S. wars in Iraq and in Afghanistan will not succeed from a moral perspective or from a pragmatic (military) standpoint. The further United States proceeds down the road of war, the more intractable the situation becomes, and the worse the ultimate consequences (end results) of these immoral, senseless wars become. I am profoundly saddened by the loss of human life and immensely troubled by the implications of the killings (murders) at Ft. Hood, but I am not surprised. Violence begets violence. Wage peace not war.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 7, 2009 10:55 AM |
| QUOTE | What happened at Ft. Hood is a case of the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan coming home. Dahr Jamail writes in the Inter Press Service: "Fort Hood soldiers have accounted for more suicides than any other Army post since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. In this year alone, the base is averaging over 10 suicides each month - at least 75 have been recorded through July of this year alone. In a strikingly similar incident on May 11, 2009, a U.S. soldier gunned down five fellow soldiers at a stress-counseling center at a U.S. base in Baghdad."
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 7, 2009 11:09 AM |
| QUOTE | Before former President Bush ordered the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003 millions of people around the world & hundreds of thousands here in America marched & begged Bush not to invade Iraq. "I get to decide that... you don't" sneered Bush. I wrote a letter to the editor immediately before the US invaded Iraq stating that the job was not finished in Afghanistan. In 2002 Donald Rumsfeld called the U.S. war in Afghanistan "an amazing success". In July 2003 shortly after the US invaded Iraq I began a thread on The Augusta Chronicle bulletin board titled "Get Ready for Traumatized War Veterans". I remembered the returning traumatized Vietnam War veterans. So I am no Johnny-come-lately in expressing my concern for the victims of war. Where is YOUR concern KSL for the 10 service personnel from Ft. Hood who commit suicide every month? Here is the bottom line: It does not matter what the Commander in Chief orders the US military to do in Afghanistan & Iraq. These wars will be lost. Barack Obama, John Kerry, John McCain, Lindsey Graham & every other member of the American Establishment who advocates pursuing the US war in Afghanistan in any form whatsoever are on the wrong side of history
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 7, 2009 11:52 AM |
| QUOTE | "The Fort Carson Murder Spree" by L. CHRISTOPHER SMITH [Rolling Stone] Posted Nov 06, 2009 9:58 AM - Soldiers returning from Iraq have been charged in at least 11 murders at America's third-largest Army base. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story..._murder_spree/2
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 7, 2009 5:19 PM |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | |
| synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| If anyone's ill, it's apologists [Augusta Chronicle editorial] Thu 11 Nov 2009 | QUOTE | This distorted, hate-filled editorial is another effort by The Augusta Chronicle editorial staff (ACES) to stir up hatred & war fever. The editorial criticizes the Army for doing nothing about Maj. Nidal Hasan's descent into psychosis. The Army was aware as early as 2007 that this individual was increasingly unstable but did nothing. ACES blames the US Army for doing nothing while castigating anyone who criticizes the US military for their conduct of the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan. It takes a mental contortionist to believe that the US military which got it wrong in Afghanistan for 8 years now has it right. That is simply unbelievable. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, says after 8 years of failed war in Afghanistan "we are now at the beginning" of a long counterinsurgency war. Anybody who believes that sending another 30,000 American troops into this hell hole will fix the problem in Afghanistan, including the unreliable, corrupt government of Hamid Karzai, is not in touch with reality. Today the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan, retired Gen. Karl Eikenberry, warns against a troop surge in Afghanistan. ACES foments lies, religious hatred, xenophobia & war.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Nov 12, 2009 5:16 AM |
| QUOTE | U.S. drone attacks in Pakistan is terrorism. They destabilize Pakistan and all of South Asia. United States attacked Iraq without just provocation and under known false pretense. United States has no right whatsoever to occupy Afghanistan and wage war their for 8 years. Do U.S. Special Forces kill unarmed Taliban in Afghanistan when they catch them by surprise? Violence begets violence. The American Crusade in the Middle East and South Asia will not end well for United States. We are only at the beginning of a long war of our own making. Demography, geography, resources, and historical imperatives are not on United States' side.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Nov 12, 2009 4:39 PM |
| QUOTE | augusta citizen, United States has the right & responsibility to defend itself. No superpower has the right to wage wars for hegemony in any part of the world. United States military involvement in the Middle East did not begin after 9/11. It goes back at last to the 1930s in the search for cheap oil in places like Saudi Arabia. United States support for the corrupt royal family in Saudi Arabia is one of the major grievances that Osama bin Laden has against America. The CIA as well as British MI 5 were involved in the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Iran in 1953 when the Iranian President Mohammad Mosaddeq was overthrown because he was about to nationalize Iranian oil. We installed the Shah of Iran. That led to the Iranian revolution of 1979 that Americans well remember. Two brothers, Jon & Chris Boggiano, who are West Point graduates and fought in The Battle of Fallujah in 2004, came to understand that the U.S. war in Iraq is about oil. Access to & control over energy supplies is also behind the U.S. war in Afghanistan where western interests want a pipeline to traverse that country. U.S. hegemony won't happen because self-determination is a fundamental right.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 13, 2009 5:31 AM |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| | QUOTE | | QUOTE ("webmasterd") |
What a cool site, Climate Change for Dummies. I ask again how will paying a carbon tax to the U.N. change global warming?
|
JohnRandolphHardisonCain replies:
webmasterd, you are in the same category of scientifically ignorant posters like Lee Benedict and Flipa who are unwilling to learn or admit facts. You are interested in the political consequences of global warming not the scientific evidence. I don't have to answer your question because it is politically charged and not relevant whether or not man-made global climate change is real - which it is - but I will answer your question although Spiderz_web already has.
Since man-made climate change is real, humans must do everything we can to mitigate the effects - many of which are already irreversible. The measures that humans must take are: conservation, develop carbon neutral energy sources, and adapt to the irreversible effects.
United States should lead in the effort to cap carbon emissions because we are the world's number one carbon emitter -soon to be number two after China with 1.3 billion people if we are not already. United States still leads the world in per capita carbon emissions. That means we are inefficient and wasteful in our use of fossil fuels.
China is beginning to eat our lunch in alternative (carbon neutral) energy production including wind and solar. They are or are about to be the world's leaders in both these areas.
It is in America's economic interest to be innovators and adapters of zero emissions technologies. Otherwise we get left behind by economic giants China, Europe, and even India. Our mass transit system, including rail, lags far behind Europe. Money spent on energy efficient infrastructure helps us conserve energy by becoming more efficient and it helps us compete economically. United States is currently set to spend upwards of $300 billion fighting a decade long counterinsurgency / counterterrorism war in Afghanistan. That money would be put to better use upgrading our infrastructure, and it would create jobs as well.
We need more energy efficient appliances, cars, and buildings (homes and businesses). "Go green" means making money as well as mitigating the worst effect of man-made global climate change. This is an opportunity that United States cannot afford to miss.
That is your answer, webmasterd. United States cannot afford to be left behind by China and Europe unless you desire this country to continue its decline into third world status. Remember that the Soviet Union was a military giant and an economic basket case. We shouldn't let the same fate happen to United States.
|
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| | QUOTE | The war on terror not only brings political instability to Pakistan, it also brings economic hardship. United States can't throw entire regions of the world into war and chaos ("fighting them over there") without economic and political collapse coming home to roost here at home.
Foreign Direct Investment in Pakistan Fell 53.2% in Four Months| QUOTE | By Farhan Sharif
Nov. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Overseas direct investment into Pakistan dropped 53.2 percent in the first four months of the fiscal year that started July 1, the central bank said.
Investment in July-October period fell to $621.8 million from $1.33 billion a year ago, according to an e-mailed statement from the Karachi-based State Bank of Pakistan. Global funds bought $288.4 million more Pakistani stocks than they sold in the four months, compared with net sales of $173.9 million a year earlier, the central bank said.
Pakistan needs overseas investment to bolster an economy that expanded two percent in the year ended June 30, compared with 5.8 percent in the previous 12 months. The government forecasts gross domestic product will grow 3.3 percent this fiscal year.
Foreign direct investment fell to $3.72 billion last fiscal year, from $5.4 billion in the previous 12 months.
To contact the reporter on this story: Farhan Sharif in Karachi at fsharif2@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: November 18, 2009 03:34 EST |
|
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| Iraq was central front in the War OF Terror by United States and Britain.
Bush knew. Cheney knew. Rumsfeld knew. Tony Blair knew. Jack Straw knew.
| QUOTE | Iraqi prisoners held by British troops in Basra in 2003. Inmates at the high-security Shaibah base say they suffered unlawful physical and mental abuse
British ‘used Guantánamo interrogation methods’
Former prisoners held at base near Basra say captors used sensory deprivation techniques which are banned |
| QUOTE | From The Times of London
November 18, 2009
David Brown
Dozens of prisoners held at a secret British army interrogation centre in Iraq claim they suffered unlawful physical and mental abuse similar to that carried out by the US on detainees at Guantánamo Bay.
Inmates at the high-security compound within the Shaibah base say they were held in solitary confinement and forced to wear dark goggles and earmuffs when taken from their cells for questioning.
The Ministry of Defence came under pressure yesterday to order an inquiry into allegations that soldiers used the banned “five techniques” of interrogation on civilian detainees.
It is investigating allegations from more than 30 former prisoners that they were also prevented from sleeping during days of intense questioning; were forced to adopt painful stress positions; and were refused food and water. Hundreds of prisoners were held at the Divisional Temporary Detention Facility compound run by the Joint Forward Interrogation Team at the Shaibah base, 13 miles from Basra in southern Iraq. After being interrogated while in solitary confinement, many were moved to the “general population” where they were often held for many months.
Lawyers acting for former detainees, who were all released without charge, say that similarities in their accounts show that the mistreatment must have been authorised by senior officers.
Abbas Mowannis Abdul Ali, 34, was arrested in January 2006 when 50 British soldiers forced their way into his house. He says he was forced to wear goggles and earmuffs and was repeatedly forced to adopt stress positions and run in zig-zags to disorientate him until he collapsed.
During eight days in solitary confinement in a tiny cell, he claims guards prevented him from sleeping by kicking his door and loudly playing pornographic films. He also says he received little water or food.
Sami Hatem Jassim was arrested in May 2007 and held in solitary confinement at Shaibah for 38 days. He claims that each time he was seen sleeping or trying to sleep he would be handcuffed, made to wear dark goggles and forcibly walked around for a mile.
Ramzi Sagar Hasssan, 34, a car mechanic, was arrested during a raid on a friend’s house in April 2007. He was held in solitary confinement for 21 days in a cell in which a light bulb was always on.
He said during the first ten days he was interrogated five times a day, and was forced to stay awake during this time. “During the intervals between the interrogation, the soldiers would not let me sleep,” he said in a witness statement. “The moment that I fell asleep they would send me for interrogation. The light in my isolation cell was always on. The soldiers stopped me from covering my face. If I did not uncover my face, the soldier would open the door and take me for punishment.”
Hussain Hasim Khinyab, 35, a carpenter, was arrested in April 2006 and said he was kept in solitary confinement at Shaibah for ten days. He claims he was interrogated on many occasions, each time he was earmuffed, blindfolded and handcuffed before being dragged in a zig-zag fashion by three soldiers.
Sam Jacobs, of Public Interest Lawyers, which is representing the former prisoners, said the similarity of their accounts of detention at Shaibah was compelling evidence suggesting systematic mistreatment. He said the detainees only felt safe coming forward now after the withdrawal of British Forces from Iraq.
“We know [the British Forces] were under pressure from the United States to obtain more information from detainees. The techniques seen at Shaibah are similar to those used by the US in Guantánamo Bay,” he said.
“These techniques must have been approved at the highest level, because they were used so widely over a lengthy period. The only way get to the bottom of what happened — to prevent it happening again — is for an open inquiry.”
Bill Rammell, the Armed Forces Minister, said that all claims would be investigated but that allegations did not mean fact. He said the claims did not warrant a new public inquiry and there was no credible evidence that endemic abuse was a coherent part of the way the military operated.
A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman said: “The ‘five techniques’ are banned as an aid to interrogation and this is now clearly explained to all our personnel during training and before deployment on operations.
“If individuals are found to have abused or mistreated Iraqi civilians they will face severe consequences.” |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| | QUOTE ("Barry Paschal") | Wow. I'm not sure this forum is large enough to contain the hubris it takes to list your own words as the "quote of the day."
:shock: |
JohnRandolphHardisonCain replies:
Why don't you confirm or refute the quote instead of making your little suckie, snide remarks, Barry? Here's another truth for you to ponder, and yes, the quote is mine and mine along. Now you have two quotes de jour.Iraq was the central front in the War Of Terror waged by United States and Britain.Bush knew. Cheney knew. Rumsfeld knew. Tony Blair knew. Jack Straw knew.Iraqis say British Army used Guantánamo interrogation methods | QUOTE | From The Times of London
November 18, 2009
David Brown
Dozens of prisoners held at a secret British army interrogation centre in Iraq claim they suffered unlawful physical and mental abuse similar to that carried out by the US on detainees at Guantánamo Bay.
Inmates at the high-security compound within the Shaibah base say they were held in solitary confinement and forced to wear dark goggles and earmuffs when taken from their cells for questioning.
The Ministry of Defence came under pressure yesterday to order an inquiry into allegations that soldiers used the banned “five techniques” of interrogation on civilian detainees.
It is investigating allegations from more than 30 former prisoners that they were also prevented from sleeping during days of intense questioning; were forced to adopt painful stress positions; and were refused food and water. Hundreds of prisoners were held at the Divisional Temporary Detention Facility compound run by the Joint Forward Interrogation Team at the Shaibah base, 13 miles from Basra in southern Iraq. After being interrogated while in solitary confinement, many were moved to the “general population” where they were often held for many months.
Lawyers acting for former detainees, who were all released without charge, say that similarities in their accounts show that the mistreatment must have been authorised by senior officers.
~~~cont'd~~~ |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| | QUOTE ("Barry Paschal") | Wow. I'm not sure this forum is large enough to contain the hubris it takes to list your own words as the "quote of the day."
:shock: |
JohnRandolphHardisonCain replies:
Why don't you confirm or refute the quote instead of making your little suckie, snide remarks, Barry? Here's another truth for you to ponder, and yes, the quote is mine and mine along. Now you have two quotes de jour.
| QUOTE | Iraq was the central front in the War Of Terror waged by United States and Britain.
Bush knew torture was used. Cheney knew. Rumsfeld knew. Tony Blair knew. Jack Straw knew. |
| QUOTE | From The Times of London
November 18, 2009
David Brown
Dozens of prisoners held at a secret British army interrogation centre in Iraq claim they suffered unlawful physical and mental abuse similar to that carried out by the US on detainees at Guantánamo Bay.
Inmates at the high-security compound within the Shaibah base say they were held in solitary confinement and forced to wear dark goggles and earmuffs when taken from their cells for questioning.
The Ministry of Defence came under pressure yesterday to order an inquiry into allegations that soldiers used the banned “five techniques” of interrogation on civilian detainees.
It is investigating allegations from more than 30 former prisoners that they were also prevented from sleeping during days of intense questioning; were forced to adopt painful stress positions; and were refused food and water. Hundreds of prisoners were held at the Divisional Temporary Detention Facility compound run by the Joint Forward Interrogation Team at the Shaibah base, 13 miles from Basra in southern Iraq. After being interrogated while in solitary confinement, many were moved to the “general population” where they were often held for many months.
Lawyers acting for former detainees, who were all released without charge, say that similarities in their accounts show that the mistreatment must have been authorised by senior officers.
~~~cont'd~~~ |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| Bush knew about these crimes of torture. Cheney knew. Rumsfeld knew. Don't expect United States to flourish when its government participates in crimes of torture and does not hold those responsible accountable.EXCLUSIVE: CIA Secret 'Torture' Prison Found at Fancy Horseback Riding Academy | QUOTE | ABC News
ABC News Finds the Location of a "Black Site" for Alleged Terrorists in Lithuania
By BRIAN ROSS and MATTHEW COLE
Nov. 18, 2009 —
The CIA built one of its secret European prisons inside an exclusive riding academy outside Vilnius, Lithuania, a current Lithuanian government official and a former U.S. intelligence official told ABC News this week.
Where affluent Lithuanians once rode show horses and sipped coffee at a café, the CIA installed a concrete structure where it could use harsh tactics to interrogate up to eight suspected al-Qaeda terrorists at a time. A full report on the can be seen on ABC's World News with Charles Gibson tonight.
"The activities in that prison were illegal," said human rights researcher John Sifton. "They included various forms of torture, including sleep deprivation, forced standing, painful stress positions."
Lithuanian officials provided ABC News with the documents of what they called a CIA front company, Elite, LLC, which purchased the property and built the "black site" in 2004.
Lithuania agreed to allow the CIA prison after President George W. Bush visited the country in 2002 and pledged support for Lithuania's efforts to join NATO.
"The new members of NATO were so grateful for the U.S. role in getting them into that organization that they would do anything the U.S. asked for during that period," said former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, now an ABC News consultant. "They were eager to please and eager to be cooperative on security and on intelligence matters."
Lithuanian president Dalia Grybauskaite declined ABC's request for an interview.
ABC News first reported that Lithuania was one of three eastern European countries, along with Poland and Romania, where the CIA secretly interrogated suspected high-value al-Qaeda terrorists, but until now the precise site had not been confirmed. Read that report here.
Until March 2004, the site was a riding academy and café owned by a local family. The facility is in the town of Antivilai, in the forest 20 kilometers northeast of the city center of Vilnius, near an exclusive suburb where many government officials live.
A "Building Within A Building"
In March 2004, the family sold the property to Elite, LLC, a now-defunct company registered in Delaware and Panama and Washington, D.C. That same month, Lithuania marked its formal admission to NATO.
The CIA constructed the prison over the next several months, apparently flying in prefabricated elements from outside Lithuania. The prison opened in Sept. 2004.
According to sources that saw the facility, the riding academy originally consisted of an indoor riding area with a red metallic roof, a stable and a cafe. The CIA built a thick concrete wall inside the riding area. Behind the wall, it built what one Lithuanian source called a "building within a building."
On a series of thick concrete pads, it installed what a source called "prefabricated pods" to house prisoners, each separated from the other by five or six feet. Each pod included a shower, a bed and a toilet. Separate cells were constructed for interrogations. The CIA converted much of the rest of the building into garage space.
Intelligence officers working at the prison were housed next door in the converted stable, raising the roof to add space. Electrical power for both structures was provided by a 2003 Caterpillar autonomous generator. All the electrical outlets in the renovated structure were 110 volts, meaning they were designed for American appliances. European outlets and appliances typically use 220 volts.
The prison pods inside the barn were not visible to locals. They describe seeing large amounts of earth being excavated during the summer of 2004. Locals who saw the activity at the prison and approached to ask for work were turned away by English-speaking guards. The guards were replaced by new guards every 90 days.
Former CIA officials directly involved or briefed on the highly classified secret prison program tell ABC News that as many as eight suspects were held for more than a year in the Vilnius prison. Flight logs viewed by ABC News confirm that CIA planes made repeated flights into Lithuania during that period. In November 2005, after public disclosures about the program, the prison was closed, as was another "black site" in Romania.
Lithuanian Prison One of Many Around Europe, Officials Said
The CIA moved the so-called High Value Detainees (HVD) out of Europe to "war zone" facilities, according to one of the former CIA officials, meaning they were moved to the Middle East. Within nine months, President Bush announced the existence of the program and ordered the transfer of 14 of the detainees, including Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, Ramzi bin al Shihb and Abu Zubaydah, to Guantanamo.
In August 2009, after ABC News reported the existence of the secret prison outside Vilnius, Lithuanian president Grybauskaite called for an investigation. "If this is true," Grybauskaite said, "Lithuania has to clean up, accept responsibility, apologize, and promise it will never happen again."
At the time, a Lithuanian government official denied that his country had hosted a secret CIA facility. The CIA told ABC News that reporting the existence of the Lithuanian prison was "irresponsible" and declined to discuss the location of the prison.
On Tuesday, the CIA again declined to talk about the prison. "The CIA's terrorist interrogation program is over," said CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano. "This agency does not discuss publicly where detention facilities may or may not have been."
Former CIA officials told ABC News that the prison in Lithuania was one of eight facilities the CIA set-up after 9/11 to detain and interrogate top al-Qaeda operatives captured around the world. Thailand, Romania, Poland, Morocco, and Afghanistan have also been identified as countries that housed secret prisons for the CIA. President Barack Obama ordered all the sites closed shortly after taking office in January.
The Lithuanian prison was the last "black" site opened in Europe, after the CIA's secret prison in Poland was closed down in late 2003 or early 2004.
"It obviously took a lot of effort to keep [the prison] secret," said John Sifton, whose firm One World Research investigates human rights abuses. "There's a reason this stuff gets kept secret."
"It's an embarrassment, and a crime." |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| QUOTE OF THE DAY FOR THURSDAY 19 NOVEMBER 2009:Organized war is the culmination of state, ethnic, or religious sponsored mass hatred. Nations must evolve ways to solve international and internal disputes without resorting to war if civilization and humanity are to survive on this planet.Why do we hate? Academics seek answer in new field | QUOTE | By NICHOLAS K. GERANIOS, Associated Press Writer
Wed Nov 18, 7:57 pm ET
SPOKANE, Wash. – Why did the Nazis hate the Jews? Why did the Hutus hate the Tutsis?
Hate is everywhere, but the fundamental question of why one person can hate another has never been adequately studied, contends Jim Mohr of Gonzaga University, who is developing a new academic field of hate studies.
The goal is to explain a condition that has plagued humanity since one caveman looked askance at another.
"What makes hate tick?" Mohr, director of Gonzaga's Institute for Action Against Hate, wondered. "How can we stop it?"
Gonzaga founded the institute a decade ago after some black law students received threatening letters. It has since started a Journal of Hate Studies, hosted a conference and offered its first class on hatred last spring.
The hope is that other universities will follow suit, said Ken Stern of the American Jewish Committee in New York, who has been involved in the effort. "We wanted to approach hate more intelligently," he said.
Stern, who has spent 20 years battling anti-Semitism, said the need for hate studies became obvious when people started fighting groups like the Aryan Nations, which once flourished in this area. Opponents galvanized against the Aryans, but didn't really know how best to fight them, Stern said.
"We were flying by the seat of our pants," he said. "There was no testable theory."
There is not even a good definition of hate, Stern contends.
Philosophers have offered numerous definitions: Rene Descartes said hate was the urge to withdraw from something that is thought bad. Aristotle saw hate as the incurable desire to annihilate an object.
In psychology, Sigmund Freud defined hate as an ego state that wishes to destroy the source of its unhappiness.
Gonzaga, a Jesuit university best known for its basketball team, offered a class on the subject taught by five professors from different disciplines.
Student Kayla De Los Reyes was in that class, and said the information both horrified her and gave her hope.
"Hate is something that is part of the human emotional makeup," she said. "Everyone feels it at one point or another. You have to learn to control it."
The goal is to create an academic home where a variety of disciplines, including history, psychology, religious studies, anthropology and political science, can be brought together to focus on hate. It's the same sort of effort that led to the creation of disciplines like black studies or women's studies, Mohr said.
Such academic efforts are not without controversy. Some skeptics fear they are little more than attacks on the dominant power structure.
"This stuff tends to be one dimensional and presumes the guilt of an archetypal white male," said Glenn Ricketts, spokesman for the National Association of Scholars.
Indeed, De Los Reyes said one of the more interesting topics in the class involved white privilege. The most recent Journal of Hate Studies contained articles about oppression of gays, Nazi experiments on Jews, the local battle against Aryan Nations, and Muslim support for suicide bombings.
Heather Veeder, a graduate assistant for the institute, said the organization has an important mission.
"Hate thrives in areas not illuminated by education," she said.
But Stern said it is too easy to blame ignorance for hate. People can have plenty of knowledge about something and still hate it, he said. The problem is when one person or group can separate another person or group from their humanity, thinking of them as an "other," Stern said.
"We dehumanize them and justify violence against them," Stern said.
There is no simple answer to why people hate, Mohr said. Hate can be sparked by greed, or fear, or a tribe bonding together in opposition to another. People looking to belong will hate others to fit into a group, he said.
With all the political conflict in the United States, it can seem that hate is on the rise. Some people seem to hate President Obama. Some hate Muslims. Some hate homosexuals.
But Mohr said he wouldn't pursue a field of hate studies if he didn't think something positive could be achieved.
"We can change," Mohr said. "There has to be hope."
|
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| Where's dissent from peaceful Muslims? [Letter to the editor The Augusta Chronicle] Saturday 21 November 2009 | QUOTE | Where is "Christian" America's apology for waging an unnecessary war of choice in Iraq? That abomination has gone on for 6 years and 8 months. The U.S. war of aggression in Iraq was waged under known false pretenses. Where are the calls to bring those responsible for lying this country into war in Iraq to justice? Where are the denunciations from the pulpits of mainstream Christian churches? Billy Graham has blessed every war that United States launched under Presidents Bush Sr. and Bush Jr.. Where is the denunciation of unjust, immoral, illegal wars from the pulpit of First Baptist Church of Augusta? "Christian" crusaders have plenty of blood on their hands. That is what they will have to answer to God for. I suggest that retired U.S. Army Major Dewey Galeas get the beam out of his own eye.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 5:04 AM |
| QUOTE | There was NOT a consensus among the intelligence community that Saddam possessed WMD. There were those in the CIA who doubted that conclusion. Former Vice President Dick Cheney paid no less than 4 visits to Langley, VA (the home of the CIA) to pressure the agency to issue an unqualified conclusion that Saddam possessed WMD. The Downing Street Memos from July 2002 noted that the Bush admin was "fixing" intelligence around the conclusion that Saddam possessed WMD. In Oct 2002 CIA Director George W. Tenet informed former President George W. Bush that the intelligence which said that Saddam sought yellowcake uranium in Niger was unreliable. Nevertheless that false claim made it back into the State of the Union address in Jan 2003. Bush & Cheney LIED & BULLIED this country into war in Iraq. UN inspectors were on the ground in Iraq doing their job in competent fashion when then President Bush ordered them out of the country so he could comment "shock & awe" bombing of Iraq. The right-wing media vilified the UN inspectors. Shock jock Neal Boortz claimed that Hans Blix (the UN chemical weapons inspector) "couldn't find his a$$ with both hands". Bush went to war in Iraq BECAUSE HE COULD!
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 5:49 AM |
| QUOTE | I sense that many Americans who are afraid of terrorism are scapegoating Muslims the same way that the Nazis blamed all of Germany's problems on the Jews. Persecution occurs when xenophobic societies are stressed. Violence escalates & perpetuates itself when the inevitable backlash against those persecutions follows. The cycle of fear and revenge has to be broken. FallingLeaves made some wonderful posts above only to be disparaged by the fear mongers who perpetuate ignorance, disinformation, and hatred. Sen. Carl Levin has a wonderful idea that I think will hep end the U.S. war in Afghanistan in short order if it becomes law: tax the super rich to pay for the cost of sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan! Watch how fast the right-wing, pro-big business media changes its tune if that happens. The ditto-head sheeple will follow the leader when the media quits singing their siren songs of war. When United States leaves Afghanistan and Iraq, Americans will be pleasantly surprised when the backlash against U.S. military intervention dies down and a semblance of peace and normality return. The cycle of hatred and violence will have been broken. The antonym of appeasement is synthesis.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:52 AM |
| QUOTE | Here's the bottom line. If United States does not withdraw its troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and stop launching drone attacks in Pakistan the violence will continue, and it will not turn out well for American occupation forces or for United States - militarily, politically, or economically. There will be no U.S. military "victory" in these neocolonial wars. I have enunciated the reasons for this many times. They are: demographics, geography, resources, and historical imperatives. Others have reached the same conclusion including Andrew Bacevich and Matthew Hoh, both men with military experience. William R. Poke also reaches the same conclusion. 40,000 more U.S. troops in Afghanistan is only a down payment on the numbers needed to win a long counterinsurgency war. The economic cost of a long war in Afghanistan could easily top $6 trillion. It would take between 600,000 and 1.3 million U.S. troops many years to pacify Afghanistan and affected border regions. That is just not going to happen, so you can fuggedabout a U.S./NATO military "victory" over (as you see it) Muslim militants. http://www.juancole.com/2009/11/polk-let-a...and-depart.html
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:07 AM |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| General was far too politically correct [Letter to the editor The Augusta Chronicle] Saturday 21 November 2009 | QUOTE | Most right-wingnuts who rant on about "political correctness" are the very same people who object when others voice their freedom of speech in dissident fashion. Who cares about your personal WWII heroes, Carl Langley? Neither of those men are above reproach. I remind you that Generals don't run this country nor are they Commander in Chief. It is very good that the US Army is diversified. Former President George W. Bush launched a clash of civilizations (a war on Islam) when he embarked this country on a "long war" for hegemony in the Middle East & South Asia. Don't try to stop me or any other American dissident from voicing our "politically incorrect" opinions. It is the militaristic mentality of American aggressors that demands "political correctness". This narrow minded thinking demands that every politician wear an American flag lapel pin & declare "America is the greatest nation in the world." When Americans live up to our core values we are indeed the greatest nation on Earth, but when we torture terror suspects & wage wars for hegemony (the US war in Iraq is largely about access to oil & has nothing whatsoever to do with stopping terrorism) - we are NOT "the greatest nation"
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 5:32 AM |
| QUOTE | God bless our Muslim soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 5:33 AM |
| QUOTE | United States has waged an unjust, immoral, illegal war in Iraq for 6 years 8 months. United States has waged a war of conquest & occupation in Afghanistan for 8 years 1 month. We are only at the beginning of a "long war". The original crusades lasted about 150 years. They started out with a noble purpose (to gain Christian access to Jerusalem). That objective was reached within 5 years. After that the crusades disintegrated into wars of greed & lust. There were acts of barbarism & heroism on both sides. The long supply lies proved the west's undoing. Everything reverted back to the status quo ante after 150 years. The Children's Crusade near the end was horrible beyond description. These modern day crusades will end similarly. United States will lose the long war because of demographics, geography, resources & historical imperatives. The bottom line is that there would be few if any long term consequences from a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq & Afghanistan. False pride & fear of humiliation are driving United States deeper into a quagmire. Notice how my dissent against the U.S. wars of aggression in Iraq & Afghanistan are labeled "America hating tunnel vision."
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 6:15 AM |
| QUOTE | I don't hate America. I hate where right-wing warmongers and their supportive American Establishment have taken America.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 6:17 AM |
| QUOTE | Unjust crusades always end badly for the aggressor, johnston.cliff. You can't handle the truth with your profoundly simplistic and utterly wrong reasoning.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 6:27 AM |
| QUOTE | United States has no legitimate interests in Afghanistan beyond making sure that Al Qaeda training camps are not reestablished there. That can be done from afar without U.S. occupation troops. The bottom line is that terrorism does not pose an existential threat to United States. It is a major nuisance at worst that is best dealt with trough police action and international cooperation not by occupying Afghanistan for decades with the U.S. Army at a cost of at least $500,000 per U.S. solider per year and perhaps as much as $1 million per U.S. soldier per year. President Obama will make a big mistake if he escalates U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan. The Taliban, despite their harsh rule, are less corrupt than the U.S.-backed gov't of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. That is why the Taliban has managed to become resurgent after 8 years of U.S. military occupation. The operative word is counterproductive - look it up! The U.S. War on Terror has become the U.S. War Of Terror. We are creating many more enemies than we are killing. As I have repeatedly noted, United States will lose its long war of aggression because of demographics, geography, resources, and historical imperatives.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 6:35 AM |
| QUOTE | The era of neocolonialism has passed.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 6:37 AM |
| QUOTE | I see tons of political correctness and attempts to repress free speech coming from the radical right war hawks in these Reader Comments. The meme "You're either with us or you're against us" is readily apparent.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:29 AM |
| QUOTE | United States is at war in Iraq NOT because of "terrorist Muslim beliefs" but because The Bush-Cheney war regime committed aggression against Iraq. They lied us into war. Their purpose (stated by George W. Bush himself) was to remold the entire Middle East. Bush took his eye off Afghanistan without finishing the job (Bush disparaged "nation building") & trained his sights on his father's anathema, Saddam Hussein. Iraq was to be the first domino in the remaking of the entire Middle East under the US security umbrella. The misguided War on Terror has led to backlash in Iraq, Afghanistan & Pakistan. Americans can keep on blaming "terrorist Muslim beliefs" but our wars of aggression are feeding their resentment & hatred. Afghans have never tolerated a foreign occupier. The war on terror has destabilized Pakistan. United States cannot fight 1 billion Muslims by itself. Canada is pulling out of the coalition in Afghanistan. Britain is demanding an exit strategy from Afghanistan. United States has the right & responsible to pursue those DIRECTLY responsible for 9/11, but it does not have the right to wage war in Afghanistan for more than 8 years & still not catch bin Laden. Blowback!
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:46 AM |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| | QUOTE ("JohnBoy53") | | QUOTE ("JohnRandolphHardisonCain") | It does not matter if President Obama orders another 36,000 U.S. troops, another 60,000 U.S. troops, or any number of addition U.S. troops to Afghanistan, the U.S./NATO mission is doomed. Canada and Britain are weary of this war. Canadians are ready to get out and leave the fighting to the Americans. The British public is sick of this war. Europe has no interest, and Australia can't pick up the slack.
President Obama is condemning this country to many more years of costly, indecisive war, and he is dooming his own presidency. United States will make no progress whatsoever on the domestic front, including our economy, as long as this country militarily occupies Iraq and Afghanistan. President Obama is making a major blunder. He is caving in to the war-addicted American business and power Establishment. |
And there ain't nuttin' you can do about it!! Must be a-pullin' your hair out and be about down to the pubes by now!!! ROFL!!!!!!!
|
JohnRandolphHardisonCain replies:
Enjoy your ersatz victory, and dance a jig like you did when U.S. invasion forces overthrew the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001 and rolled to victory in Baghdad in 2003. The fighting will die down over the winter in Afghanistan, but come next Spring even with increased numbers of U.S. troops deployed, the number of Americans killed and maimed in Afghanistan will grow as will the U.S. budget deficit and national debt, and there will still be no U.S. military victory in Afghanistan next year, or the year after that, or the year after that, and President Obama will neither win the war nor engineer a U.S. exit from Afghanistan before he leaves office either in Jan 2013 or Jan 2017. Even your enthusiasm for war will be ground down long before any kind of American victory in Afghanistan occurs which will be never. Go ahead and yuck it up, JohnBoy.Obama to Increase Troops in Afghanistan
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| Understand the strategic choices for Afghanistan and Pakistan By Perry Smith| Guest Columnist [The Augusta Chronicle] Friday, November 27, 2009 | QUOTE | | (The writer, a retired U.S. Air Force major general, is secretary of the Congressional Medal of Honor Foundation. His books include Rules and Tools for Leaders, Assignment Pentagon and A Hero Among Heroes . He lives in Augusta.) |
| QUOTE | The vast majority of Afghans, including women, do not support the corrupt U.S.-backed gov't of Afghan President Hamid Karzai & his warlord cronies. Their 8 years of misrule along with the unwelcome U.S. military occupation of Afghanistan is exactly why the Taliban is resurgent. American "experts" tout their current fetish of counterinsurgency warfare, but the fact remains that only a handful of counterinsurgency campaigns have ever succeeded & those took on average 11 or 12 years to win. According to the Chairman of the JCS, Adm. Mike Mullen, we are only "at the beginning" of this long war after 8 years with no clear U.S. policy in Afghanistan & poor military strategy. Gen. David Petraeus does not walk on water. Whether or not his surge succeeded in Iraq is still an open question. The town of Tal Afar was the model village for Gen. Petraeus' counterinsurgency strategy. It was billed as a success but has since fallen back into chaos. Anbar province in western Iraq where Gen. Petraeus' strategy was centered is regressing as U.S. troops withdraw. The U.S. war in Afghanistan is counterproductive to our national security & destabilizes Pakistan. Obama's decision to escalate is a mistake
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:39 AM |
| QUOTE | Gen. Perry Smith's column comes rather late in the game as President Obama has already made his decision to escalate the U.S. war in Afghanistan. Gen. Smith is providing Americans reading material so they can get up to speed on a subject about which deliberation has already occurred. Instead of making their informed opinions heard before this fateful decision was made, Americans are left to read about what the decision makers have decided & follow along in their dust. What is missing from the pathetic American "debate" on Afghanistan is what do Afghans themselves think & want? The majority of Afghan want the foreign occupation forces to leave. They did not like the Taliban's harsh rule, but the Taliban did bring a certain amount of harsh justice & order to Afghanistan. Poppy production was down under the Taliban. It is up under Hamid Karzai & the U.S. occupation. Afghans did not like the Taliban, but they detest the U.S.-backed current regime even more. Oppression of women did not stop with the overthrow of the Taliban. Read or listen what one Afghan woman, Malalai Joya, says about the U.S. war & occupation: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...oryId=114207995
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:10 AM |
| QUOTE | What astounds me more than American supremacists' militarist interventionist mentality & their continuing support for an 8 year old lost cause in Afghanistan is the fear of Islam, the ignorance about Islam, the disinformation about Islam, the vilification of Islam & the outright hatred of Islam epitomized by southernguy08's post at 6:28 am. This is the reason so many Afghans, Pakistanis & Muslims throughout the Islamic world are convinced that United States is waging not only war of hegemony in Iraq & Afghanistan but also war against Islam. BTW, southernguy08, the repressive family of Saudi Arabia is an erstwhile ally of United States. Remember when former President George W. Bush held the Saudi Prince's hand? U.S. support for the corrupt royal family in Saudi Arabia was Osama bin Laden's first beef with United States' interventionism in the Middle East. 30,000 or more U.S. troops in Afghanistan will only be a down payment. The U.S. Army's counterinsurgency manual calls for 1 occupation troop per 20 population. United States would need between 600,000 & 1.3 million troops to win a counterinsurgency war in Afghanistan. False pride & fear of humiliation are driving us into a quagmire
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:24 AM |
| QUOTE | southernguy08, I attended (and graduated from) college on a student deferment from 1966- 1970. I drew a high number in the first draft lottery in 1970. I you are going to make "service" in the military a litmus test for the ability to analyze foreign policy and voice an informed opinion, then you will have to discount the opinions of Dick Cheney, Dick Army, Newt Gingrich, Saxby Chambliss, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Sean Hannity, Paul Wolfowitz, Neal Boortz, Ann Coulter, Frank Gaffney, Frederick Kagan, Joe Lieberman, Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, Ken Adelman, Fred Barnes, William Bennett, John Bolton, Matt Drudge, Rudy Giuliani, David Horowitz, Bill Kristol, Michael Ledeen, Bill O'Reilley, Ted Nugent, Condoleezza Rice, Fred Thompson, and lots more Congressmen, Senators, Movers and Shakers, Neoconservatives, "Think Tank" academics, and Opinion Makers who did not "serve" in the U.S. military.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:56 AM |
| QUOTE | Notice that southernguy08 demands I be grateful to U.S. military personnel "serving" in Iraq & Afghanistan because they are protecting my freedom of speech. But when I voice my opinion freely, Tigger_The_Tiger calls me a traitor & repeatedly "reminds" me that the penalty for treason is death. I just don't see logic or cogent arguments put up by right-wing posters in this edition of Reader Comments. They don't say they have read any of the books that Gen. Smith recommends. All they say is "I've been there & seen for myself". Because I disagree with the U.S. wars in Iraq & Afghanistan & give reasons why, I am labeled as "full of it", a "draft dodger", "hate America", "treasonous", etc.. President Obama is committing United States to at least 3 more years of war if he serves only 1 term & 7 more years of war if he serves 2 terms. President Obama has promised to "finish the job" during his term in office. This is NOT going to happen. If the economy crashes again Obama will not be reelected & the U.S. will not be out of Afghanistan in 3 years. The job won't be finished in 7 years. Those "off ramps" Obama has put in his policy will never be used. It is easy to go in & HARD to get out!
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 8:20 AM |
| QUOTE | Tigger_The_Tiger, how is expressing my opposition to the U.S. wars in Iraq & Afghanistan, a freedom guaranteed to me by the U.S. Constitution, "providing aid and comfort" to the enemy? By urging this country to press ahead in an 8 years old failed war in Afghanistan, it is YOU who is condemning this country to failure. The first book that Gen. Perry Smith recommended is titled "In the Graveyard of Empires." The reasons United States will lost wars in Afghanistan (just as the Soviet and the British before them lose war there) is because of the following reasons: demography (the Taliban can raise an endless supply of fierce warriors), geography (Afghanistan is a mountainous country more than 8,000 miles from United States. It costs $400 to deliver one gallon of fuel to Afghanistan); resources (United States and Britain are broke. The U.S. borrows money from China to fight these wars while the Taliban raises more money from the Persian Gulf States than it gets from opium sales); and because of historical imperatives (the age of neocolonialism is over). Cheer-leading for the United States military is not particularly patriotic when the U.S. foreign policy is wrong & war unwinnable.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 8:37 AM |
| QUOTE | Every member of the Taliban in Afghanistan is not a "terrorist". The U.S. military is talking with some of them. It is true that Mullah Omar has rejected any negotiations that leave Hamid Karzai's gov't in power. I don't "blame America for all the world's problems". I blame America when it wages protracted, costly, unwinnable, anachronistic, neocolonial wars whose intent is to dominate the Middle East & South Asia & place those regions under a U.S. security umbrella. Gen. Ray Odierno has said that he envisions United States involved in Iraq "for many years to come." What is driving the resistance in Iraq & now in Afghanistan is the perception among Afghans that United States is not there as liberators but as conquerors & occupiers. When United States kills innocent civilians in Iraq & Afghanistan WE ARE THE AGGRESSORS. Indiscriminate U.S. bombing in Afghanistan helped turned Afghan sentiment against the U.S. occupation. Each U.S. troop on the ground in Afghanistan costs at least $500,000 & likely as much as $1 million each per year. 30,000 more troops in 2010 means another $30 billion for the U.S. war in Afghanistan. We are now committed to $75 billion every year for another decade
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 8:58 AM |
| QUOTE | carcraft, United States cannot change the cultures of the entire Muslim world by fighting wars in Iraq & Afghanistan & by launching missile into Pakistan. If we wish to further women's rights in this area of the world, we can't do that by waging wars of occupation. Turning this into a crusade against Islam only cements an American defeat. The best way to work for women's rights is through peaceful means. We work around the edges using non-governmental organizations & let the women of Afghanistan (or whatever Muslim nation you wish to influence) take the lead in telling the NGOs what it is they want. I posted a link at 6:10 am to what one Afghan woman, a former member of parliament, thinks about the situation for women in Afghanistan under the Taliban & under U.S. occupation. It isn't just Muslims who are culturally conservative in this area of the world. The ancient Yazidi sect in north Iraq recently stoned a young woman to death in a so-called "honor killing". United States cannot change the cultural mores of The Middle East, South Asia, Central Asia & the Arabian peninsula through U.S. wars & military occupation in Iraq & Afghanistan or with missiles strikes into Pakistan.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:27 AM |
| QUOTE | U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan, Retired Lt. General Karl Eikenberry, recommended that the President NOT commit more U.S. troops to Afghanistan because United States does not have a credible or reliable partner in the corrupt government of Hamid Karzai & his bevy of warlords. Remember that newly minted 4 star Gen. Stanley McChrystal comes from the same counterinsurgency theory-of-war school as does Gen. Jesus Petraeus. Their is no evidence that 30,000 more U.S. troops will come anywhere near tipping the balance in Afghanistan anytime in proximate future, but already the decision to escalate the U.S. war in Afghanistan is leading to an incremental destabilization of Pakistan. More war is what the pro-war American supremacist militarist business-of-war establishment wants. Wait until the American economy crashes again (the banking sector has not been fixed & banks continue to issue unregulated credit default swaps out the wazoo) & suddenly China is not willing to lend us more money for our foreign military adventures. Remember we still have ~ 117,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. Gen. Ray Odierno wants a long term U.S. presence there. Obama will be begging for mo money for mo war soon enough.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:45 AM |
| QUOTE | We can debate right here. What's the point of being face to face in a coffee shop? A retired sergeant major claimed I was afraid to speak at Ft. Gordon. If he arranged the meeting I would be glad to speak. I was on Austin Rhodes' program for 3 hours in October 2005. Austin gleans personal information from The Augusta Chronicle forums and uses irrelevant ad hominem attacks to discredit people with whom he disagrees. I'll heed gaspringwater's advice, but I won't rule out a meeting. You're comments between 1:30 pm and 1:52 pm and continuing after that, show me you are already predisposed against me, wizzardx1. What's the point in meeting you? It would take longer than 1 meeting to begin to educate you on my POV. The one thing that you and I might agree about is that the little guy gets screwed. I am on the side of the little guy. I became politicized starting in 1968 at age 20 and became more so by 1972. There is a lot of history between then and now. I don't have an ax to grind against Vietnam War veterans, but I do support the conclusion reached by a consensus of historians that the Vietnam War was unnecessary.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 2:02 PM |
| QUOTE | I was never invited back on Austin's show. I came out publicly against the U.S. war in Afghanistan on that show in Oct 2005 even though the program was mainly about the U.S. war in Iraq & what "liberals" believe. Austin has mined The Augusta Chronicle bulletin board (The Forum) for irrelevant personal information. He accused me of being a millionaire & when I disabused him of his misconception he uses my poverty against me. None of the personal attacks have anything to do with whether the surge succeeded in Iraq (it didn't) or whether escalating the U.S. war in Afghanistan is a good idea (it isn't). I could have a medical history a mile long & be psychotic. That would not make any difference on my well informed opinion that the only thing guaranteed to succeed by an escalation of the U.S. war in Afghanistan is the incremental destabilization of Pakistan. The government of Pakistan has asked to be included or at least informed of the decision making process. Obama has sided up to India which has interests in Afghanistan that deeply worry Pakistan. The misguided U.S. war on terror has destabilized Pakistan & raised tensions between India & Pakistan. Obama's war will be a failure
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:11 PM |
| QUOTE | No one can be a draft dodger who never received a draft notice unless he repeatedly uses deferments as reasons to avoid service. I used a college deferment & then drew a high number (277) in the first draft lottery in 1970. The next year my birthday was drawn Number One! The war whoopers here should label Dick Cheney & other chickenhawks draft dodgers. At 18 years old few young men have firmly set political ideas. Mine began to gel at age 20 & became firmly set as far as the U.S. war in Vietnam was concerned in 1972 when I was 22. I voted for George McGovern. I could not vote in 1968 because the voting age was 21. As I look back, I could have applied for conscientious objector status. This country has a long history of military interventions before & after Vietnam. In 1980 Ronald Reagan made it clear that he would support proxy wars in Central America, in Angola & in Mozambique. Reagan invaded Grenada. After the Berlin Wall came down & the Cold War ended Bush 41 invaded Panama to get one man. Bush 41 waged his war in Panama one Christmas & the first Gulf war the next Christmas. Bush 43 launched wars in Afghanistan & then in Iraq. I am a conscientious objector to the business of war
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:33 PM |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | |
| |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| Afghan push: Is it in time? Augusta Chronicle editorial - Monday, November 30, 2009 | QUOTE | wizzardx1, all the military advisors do NOT agree with the counterinsurgency theory of war. Retired 3 star General Karl Eikenberry, who is now U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan & was formerly head of U.S. forces in that country, advised against sending more U.S. troops because the corrupt gov't of Hamid Karzai with its warlords is not reliable a partner. The Augusta Chronicle editorial staff (ACES) has no credibility whatsoever. There simply is no way that the Bush 43 admin & the U.S. military got it wrong for 8 years, then Gen. Stanley McChrystal comes up with a plan that might succeed over a ten year period, but because President Obama has "dithered" since August, suddenly it may be too late to win the U.S. war in Afghanistan. Don't forget that President Obama already sent an additional 16,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan back in April. That did not tip the balance & neither will another 30,000 U.S. troops tip the balance. The U.S. Army's own counterinsurgency manual calls for 1 occupation troop per 20 population. It would take 600,000 occupation troops at least 10 years to win a counterinsurgency war at a cost of roughly $1 million soldier every year. U.S. GET OUT OF AFGHANISTAN NOW!
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 5:23 AM |
| QUOTE | The claim that the U.S. has waged war in Afghanistan & occupies that country for more than 8 years with "the goal of destroying the terrorist platform from which to launch attacks on America" is bogus. United States had & still has the right & the responsibility to bring those responsible for 9/11 to justice. Those people are not in Afghanistan. United States was justified in invading Afghanistan in Oct 2001 in order to destroy Al Qaeda training camps & capture or kill Al Qaeda leaders. The former was accomplished. Afghanistan does not serve as a "platform from which to launch attacks on America." Obama & Biden still use that bogus rationale for this failed war. The leaders of Al Qaeda escaped to Pakistan. The "platforms" from which the 9/11 attacks were planned & launched include The Philippines (KSM lived there when he planned the airline hijackings), Hamburg, Germany where Al Qaeda cells operated, and even the U.S. itself where the 9/11 terrorists received flight training. Al Qaeda does not operate from Afghanistan. The Taliban is a local phenomenon not an international jihaddist movement. Many Al Qaeda leaders have left Pakistan for Yemen & Somalia. Afghanistan is irrelevant.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 5:48 AM |
| QUOTE | False pride and fear of humiliation are two major factors driving United States further into this quagmire of Afghanistan.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:12 AM |
| QUOTE | Afghanistan is now Obama's war. If President Obama doesn't have the prescience to end the illegal occupation of Afghanistan, not only his presidency is doomed, United States will be diminished politically, economically & militarily over the course of a long, intractable war in Afghanistan which has already spread to Pakistan & now portends India's involvement. The U.S. war on terror in South & Central Asia can flare beyond the ability of any superpower to contain. Russia & China are egging United States on. China is financing this war through massive U.S. debt. Why is United States exhausting itself fighting in an impoverished country ten thousand miles from home while regional superpower Russia & China sit on the sidelines? A regional conflagration which could become a world war is in no one's best interest. Obama will find it politically impossible to use so-called exit ramps when the military situation does not improve in the next year or two. It is easy to get into a quagmire & hard to get out. An immediate about face is the only tenable military option United States has. Afghanistan will be the American empire's graveyard. United States is one fiscal crisis away from collapse.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:43 AM |
| QUOTE | robaroo, many experts say it takes $1 million to place a U.S. soldier on the ground in Afghanistan for 1 year. The U.S. military claims that figure is closer to $500,000. If the military is correct it will cost an extra $15 billion every year to send an additonal 30,000 American troops to Afghanistan. If the higher figure is correct it will cost an extra $30 billion for those additional 30,000 troops. The total cost of the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan could easily top $75 billion a year. President Obama will soon appeal to Congress for additional funds (all borrowed from places like China) for the expanded U.S. war effort in Afghanistan. If it takes ten years to win a counterinsurgency war, then the costs could easily top $750 billion.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 7:13 AM |
| QUOTE | Horse manure, JerryAtrick. It cost up to $400 a gallon to deliver fuel to Afghanistan. The costs of deploying an army to Afghanistan vs keeping the troops at home are magnitudes of times greater. It is the war profiteers and the pro-business-of-war-American-economy which are pushing for an expanded and more profitable (for them) U.S. war effort in Afghanistan.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 7:34 AM |
| QUOTE | The U.S. war in Afghanistan is not winnable. It is not winnable because of demography, geography, resources, and historical imperatives. AWyld1, I'm sorry you along with The Augusta Chronicle editorial staff (ACES) are stupid, reality denying, brainwashed fools. One of the most destructive mistakes that chest thumping, self-professed American patriots and war advocates make is repeatedly proclaiming this country "the greatest nation in the world." No doubt arrogant and ignorant Romans, Brits, the Soviets, & many other empires proclaimed the same. The U.S. won the cold war, but now economic weakness is endangering its global power. United States has reached the limits of its empire.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:48 AM |
| QUOTE | In 70 Predator strikes so far in Pakistan, 600-odd people have been killed, including 17 in the al-Qaeda high command. Al Qaeda has not been decapitated. Al Qaeda's command structure has been compared to a hydra. Everyone is replaceable. United States killed Al Qaeda in Iraq's leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi along with 2 women & 1 child in a targeted airstrike in 2006. That did not stop AQI. Al-Zarqawi was replaced. United States has killed hundreds of civilians in its missile strikes in Pakistan. It is impossible to overstate the anti-American sentiment that is now widespread in Pakistan. Read what Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid writes about this. A surge of U.S. troops into Afghanistan and continuation of missile strikes in Pakistan fired from U.S. drones guarantees only one thing - the incremental destabilization of Pakistan - a nuclear armed country with 177 million inhabitants. United States' technology is not going to deliver a U.S. military victory in this asymmetric war. The costs will break us. When we kill someone's relative we make enemies. The U.S. kills and kills in Afghanistan & Pakistan. We cannot kill all the terrorists because our policies keep creating more enemies
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 9:20 AM
|
| QUOTE | Riverman1, you were never known for your intelligence, but you comment at 9:11 am (which you have used before) shows the arrogance of American idiots who proclaim United States "the greatest country in the world." Did you know that drone pilots suffer from PTSD? A 19 year old video-game whiz can indeed be recruited to be a drone pilot. He can indeed kill lots of Taliban (who do not threaten this country). But what the 19 year old drone jockey can't do is win this war for America. Remember when cruise missiles were the stealth weapons? They didn't eliminate the terror threat. Neither will drone strikes. And the fiscal costs mount up. You do make an important argument for not escalating the number of U.S. ground troops in Afghanistan. Since neither Afghanistan nor the Taliban threaten United States in any way, the only legitimate U.S. interest in Afghanistan is to ensure that no Al Qaeda training camps are reestablished there. This can be done with stand off weapons like missile launched from drone aircraft. There is no pending national security need for United States to send additional ground troops into the inhospitable, unforgiving terrain of Afghanistan.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 9:29 AM |
| QUOTE | Riverman1, who will United States sign an armistice with when it wins the "war on terror"? How will we know when he have won? Unlike WWII this is a political war like the Vietnam war or France's war in Algeria. There are never military victors in political wars. All political wars are ended through negotiations. There is no such things as a monolithic Taliban. There are a whole host of Taliban allied insurgent groups in Afghanistan. They are united in their common goal to expel foreign occupation forces. If this country was occupied for 8 years by a foreign power, and if this country was ruled by a corrupt, inefficient gov't allied with warlords, Americans from every walk of life would rise up against the occupiers and against anyone who collaborated with them. Throats would be cut. Bombs would be planted. Hit and run tactics would be adopted. Afghans are no different. They want the foreign occupiers (which is US) to leave THEIR country, and they won't stop fighting until we do. Just look at Afghan history going back 2,500 years.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 9:38 AM |
| QUOTE | I don't hate America. I do hate that my country has a history of waging unnecessary neocolonial wars. I was in college from 1966-1970 during the Vietnam War. That war finally ended in 1975. In 1980 presidential candidate Ronald Reagan made it clear he would fight proxy wars in Central America. Reagan ordered the invasion of Grenada in 1983. After Soviet Union peacefully surrendered ending the Cold War in 1989, Bush 41 immediately invaded Panama in order to capture one man, Gen. Manuel Noriega. United States was back in the business of war as usual. The next Christmas Bush 41 fought the 1st Gulf War after U.S. Ambassador Glaspie gave Saddam Hussein the green light to invade Kuwait. Bush 43 invaded Afghanistan in 2001 & Iraq in 2003. I listened to highly paid establishment media maven Ted Koppel today talk about how the real unspoken reason that President Obama is escalating our long term presence in Afghanistan is because Pakistan has nukes. What Koppel didn't admit is that the 8 year long U.S. occupation of Afghanistan has incrementally destabilized Pakistan helping to fulfilling Koppel's self-fulfilling fear-mongering prophesy about the dangers posed by Pakistan's nuclear weapons.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:47 PM |
| QUOTE | The U.S./NATO war in Afghanistan is a political war. It will be ended through negotiations not through a military victory. It is better to start those negotiations immediately with the Taliban who now operate in all parts of Afghanistan not just in the Pashtun tribal areas of southern Afghanistan. The only thing that is guaranteed by an additional influx of 30,000 American occupation troops is the continued incremental destabilization of Pakistan when a destabilized nuclear armed Pakistan is the west's biggest fear. Why are we following a policy that is guaranteed to result in a self-fulfilling nightmare?
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Mon Nov 30, 2009 7:37 PM |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | |
| synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| | QUOTE | From WBUR and NPR "On Point" with Tom Ashbrook
Wednesday, December 2, 2009 at 10:00 AM EST
Obama’s Speech on Afghanistan
President Barack Obama speaks about the war in Afghanistan at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., Tuesday, Dec. 1, 2009. (AP)
Post your comments below
And so, the Afghanistan plan is announced. We’re going in. And we’re getting out.
Going in, with 30,000 more American troops to fight and train and claw back momentum from the Taliban. Going out, or headed in that direction, by July, 2011 – just eighteen months from now.
There was something for everyone last night in the President’s speech at West Point. Building up. Coming home.
But there was no straight up withdrawal. No word on how to pay for the surge. And no guarantees.
This Hour, On Point: eight years in and doubling down in Afghanistan. We’ll look at the plan, and the battle ahead.
You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.
-Tom Ashbrook
Guests:
John Mearsheimer, professor of political science and co-director at the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago. He’s been critical of sending further troops to Afghanistan and advocates withdrawing.
Robert Kaplan, senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and a longtime correspondent for The Atlantic. His latest book is “Hog Pilots, Blue Water Grunts: The American Military in the Air, at Sea, and on the Ground.” He has advocated sending more troops to Afghanistan. |
| QUOTE | It really doesn’t matter what the American people think about the U.S. war in Afghanistan because it is the American elite national security Establishment that is making decisions for us. Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry are all part of the elite American Establishment. It makes no difference if members of this club are Republicans or Democrats. They represent the interests of American supremacist militarists and the business-of-war lobby. Perhaps the invasion of U.S. Afghanistan in Oct 2001 was necessary to apprehend those responsible for 9/11 and to destroy Al Qaeda trainings camps (if that could not be done through police actions) but United States has no right whatsoever to remain in Afghanistan for 8 years waging a war for American hegemony. The only guaranteed “success” of a U.S. surge in Afghanistan will be the destabilization of Pakistan. The long war in Afghanistan is counterproductive and a self-fulfilling nightmare.
Posted by John Randolph Hardison Cain, on December 2nd, 2009 at 9:28 am EST |
--------------------
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then, will you realize that money cannot be
eaten!!!
(Cree Indian Prophecy) | | IP: ---------- | | | synergy | |
Advanced Member
Group: Admin
Posts: 36,920
Member No.: 3
Joined: 20-November 07
Warn: (0%)
| | QUOTE | Augusta Chronicle editorial staff (ACES): I know God. God is a friend of mine. God does not grant His "speed" or His blessings to United States in waging its war in Afghanistan. And tell the truth, ACES. You do not not truly wish President Obama "Godspeed". You do wish for United States military to kill & kill & kill some more in Afghanistan. I removed the Obama sticker from my vehicle yesterday. President Obama is not doing God's work or furthering the legitimate national security interests of our country by escalating the U.S. war in Afghanistan. Jim Hightower writes "Obama has been taken over by the military industrial hawks & national security theorists who play war games with other people's lives & money." Cornel West says President Obama has been "mesmerized" by the "brilliant" influential advisers surrounding him. Ted Koppel says the real elephant in the room is Pakistan & its nuclear arms. Koppel says the bottom line is that United States military will remain in Iraq far beyond 2011 or 2012 as stipulated in the Status of Forces Agreement, and United States military occupation forces will be in Afghanistan 20 or 30 more years! Forget about Obama's assurances to the contrary.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Dec 3, 2009 5:25 AM
|
| QUOTE | Already (ACES) The Augusta Chronicle editorial staff's thesis of a U.S. military pullout from Afghanistan in July 2011 has been shredded. Yesterday (Wed 02 Dec 2009) the day after President Obama's speech, Anne Gearan, National Security Writer for the Associated Press wrote "Obama's three chief war managers promptly put the countdown on hold. The exit strategy isn't absolute, they said, disappointing Democrats for whom the July 2011 date was meant as an olive branch from a Democratic president bearing bad news." Sec of Defense Robert Gates, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, and Sec of State Hillary Clinton all nixed the fixed withdrawal date. Sec of Defense Gates went on to state that United States military would not leave Iraq until Afghan security forces are ready to pick up the job (which will be NEVER). That is another reason why United States military occupation of Afghanistan will last DECADES not 18 months or 3 - 5 more years. ACES is about their usual business of raising false alarms. American should be alarmed that we are headed into a decades long war we cannot win & cannot afford. It is easier of ACES to trash Obama than to criticize Robt Gates.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Dec 3, 2009 5:56 AM |
| QUOTE | | The beaches of Normandy were fortified with German installations. There are no such Taliban installations in Afghanistan. U.S. troops will be airlifted into Kabul (Bagram Air Base). The Taliban does not have an Air Force. The Germans had the Luftwaffe. It is true that supply routes into Afghanistan from Pakistan are often attacked by Taliban insurgents, but no U.S. troops will be entering Afghanistan over land routes AFAIK. wizzardxi's analogy to WWII does not hold water. |
| QUOTE | WWII was a declared war. The U.S. war in Afghanistan, despite claims it is an existential war, is in fact a neocolonial political war. What is "victory"? How do we know we have "won"? For how many more years can United States afford to spend upwards of $75 billion each year in upfront costs (all of it borrowed from foreign sources like China)? When long term costs are considered, including the price of providing care for wounded soldiers including the tens of thousands who suffer for PTSD, the costs rapidly escalate into trillions of dollars. Meanwhile the U.S. currency is losing value & economic hardships endure here at home. I have written before that United States' war in Afghanistan is doomed because of geography, demography, resources & because of historical imperatives. This war will bankrupt United States & it won't defeat Al Qaeda. They already have a much better safe havens in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia & the Maghreb in North Africa. The U.S. war in Iraq was counterproductive because it was Al Qaeda's biggest recruiting tool. The same with Afghanistan. Central Asia as well as Pakistan is being destabilized. Russian railroads are being bombed by resurgent Islamic militants.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Dec 3, 2009 6:54 AM |
| QUOTE | robbie, When the U.S. surged troops into Iraq, Islamic militants who had received training the Iraq under U.S. occupation (a bigger training ground and proving ground for weapons than Afghanistan was under Al Qaeda) many moved to Afghanistan and took their expertise (esp IEDs) to Afghanistan. What makes you think that as United States surges into Afghanistan the militants will not return to Iraq? United States still has 115,000 occupation troops in Iraq. When we draw down what happens? The Iraqis cannot reconcile among themselves. The January elections may or may not happen in late February 2010 a month after the constitutional deadline and it is by no mean certain to happen then. Iraq can still slide into civil war. Today a bomb killed 1 and injured 6 in northern Baghdad. The mole always win an a game of what a mole. United States does not have enough troops to fight counterinsurgency wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, North Africa, and elsewhere. We will exhaust ourselves which is bin Laden's game plan.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Dec 3, 2009 7:32 AM
|
| QUOTE | robbie wrote at 7:40 am: "What THEY do with THEIR country when we are gone is THEIR decision. Not AQ's who did hold quite a bit of power here until we surged." robbie admits that Al Qaeda did not exist in Iraq until United States invaded that country in an unnecessary war of choice in 2003. I recall Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri saying the Iraqi resistance will attack at the time and place of their choosing. Why wouldn't Iraq's Sunni resistance wait until the majority of U.S. troops leave Iraq for Afghanistan? Enjoy your ersatz "victory" in Iraq, robbie. It ain't over yet, brother. Remember Sec of Defense Donald Rumsfeld declaring Afghanistan "an amazing success" in 2002?
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Dec 3, 2009 8:31 AM |
| QUOTE | I would not be surprised if Al Qaeda played a role in helping Chechen militants plant bombs in Russia. United States cannot militarily occupy every enclave that harbors Al Qaeda's leaders or to which Al Qaeda sends its emissaries. Using the U.S. military to fight the war on terror is like using a shotgun to kill a fly. Is the U.S. able to keep drones over Pakistan, over Somalia, over the Indian Ocean, and elsewhere indefinitely? The Sudan can harbor Al Qaeda. Or Malaysia. Or Indonesia. Or The Philippines. United States' occupation of Afghanistan because that is where the 9/11 attacks are said to have originated is ridiculous. KSL planned airline hijackings while he was in The Philippines, Al Qaeda cells planned 9/11 in Hamburg, Germany & terrorists received flying lessons in United States. Occupying countries is counterproductive because it creates more enemies for the United States. That is what Al Qaeda wants. The only effective way to fight terrorism is thorough international cooperation & targeted police actions. Destroying Chechnya did not solve Russia's problems with its Muslim dominated republics. United States cannot fight its way to victory Iraq, Afghanistan, or Pakistan.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Dec 3, 2009 8:52 AM |
| QUOTE | robbie, you need to distinguish between Al Qaeda in Iraq (formerly Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia) & Al Qaeda central headed by OBL & Ayman al-Zawahiri. They are not the same thing although there was a loose affiliation. AQI was largely destroyed. Al Qaeda central remains in tact & has spread since 9/11/01 & the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in Oct 2001. Why did the Bush 43 admin & the U.S. military high command allow the Taliban & Al Qaeda to escape to Pakistan & for OBL to escape the noose when he was surrounded in Tora Bora mountains in Dec 2001? The real reason that United States occupies Afghanistan is not because of any threat posed from there by either Al Qaeda or the Taliban. United States wants to impose its security umbrella over the entire region. Bush wanted to reshape the entire Middle East. That is still the agenda of the American supramacist militarist Establishment agenda. Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry & Richard Holbrooke are all members of the American elite Establishment. There really is not difference in their objectives & the objective of the Bush 43 administration. The war in Iraq was about oil. There are plans for a gas pipeline in Afghanistan.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Dec 3, 2009 9:04 AM |
| QUOTE | I already have my passport, NO DIXIE CHICK PLEASE. Thanks for your intelligent comment. If I hated America as you claim, I would recommend that United States stay on the failed course it has pursued since 9/11/01. United States had & still has the right & responsibility to bring those DIRECTLY responsible for 9/11 to justice. United States was justified in invading Afghanistan to destroy Al Qaeda training camps & overthrow the Taliban while in hot pursuit of the former. United States was never justified in invading Iraq. United States is not justified in occupying Afghanistan for 8 years & waging a war of occupation there. That is why Afghans resent us. Pakistanis also resent U.S. meddling in their country. I already explained that Osama bin Laden's game plan is to bankrupt United States. He is succeeding. If we keep playing his game we will continue to lose the war on terror & our standard of living will continue to decline. President Obama did not mention how much it is going to cost to put 30,000 more American troops on the ground in Afghanistgan. Figure $1 million per soldier per year. That is an additional $30 billion. The Afghanistan war will cost $75 billion or more per year
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Dec 3, 2009 9:18 AM |
| QUOTE | It's Obama's war now. It may not have been the politically expedient thing for the President to do to inform the American people that the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan in wrong and the U.S. war in Afghanistan unwinnable, but it would have been the morally right thing to do and the best thing to do for this country in the long run, even if it means that Obama may not be reelected. Now Wartime President Barack Obama will preside over an interminable war in Afghanistan and the continued deteriorate of the U.S. economy as well as the reduced clout of United States in economic, political, and military terms. As it is, Obama has not only condemn his own Presidency, he has ordered the military and committed this country into a quagmire in Afghanistan. We won't win in 18 months and we won't get out of Afghanistan for decades or until we are forced out by political, economic, or military necessity.
Posted by JohnRandolphHardisonCain on Thu Dec 3, 2009 10:11 AM |
|
|
