The Afghan people are winning - part 8
[From previous thread:]
So... whaddya think of the kidnapped American soldier? Did the Taliban lure him into a windowless van while he played with his toy soldiers in the front yard?
I'm pretty sure he's a good guy. Get a load of this:
[SEE THE VIDEO HERE]
Peters said, “I wanna stress first of all that we must wait until all of the facts are in to make a final judgment, but nobody in the military that I’ve heard is defending this guy. He is an apparent deserter. Reports are indeed that he abandoned his buddies, abandoned his post and walked off…Now there’s another problem Julie. On that video he is collaborating with the enemy, under duress or not, that’s really not relevant…He’s lying about how he was captured saying that he lagged behind a patrol….So we know this private is a liar we aren’t sure if he is a deserter, but the media needs to hit the pause button and not portray this guy as a hero.”
Peters said that if he is a deserter, the Taliban should kill him, “I want to be clear. If, when the facts are in, we find out that through some convoluted chain of events, he really was captured by the Taliban, I’m with him. But, if he walked away from his post and his buddies in wartime, I don’t care how hard it sounds, as far as I’m concerned, the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and legal bills.”
I love it when they talk straight.
Comments
Had Bush and Blair provided the Afghan Taliban government information that reasonably established that Osama Bin Laden was the mastermind behind the attack, then the Taliban would have handed him over to the World Court.
But they didn't, because they didn't have any such information.
That's just it, Fidel, the point you refuse to entertain: that someone is not NATO. It is not Taliban Jack. It is none of our business. Our only obligation, our only moral duty, is to get on the next plane, bus, boat, canoe, donkey, or bicycle and get the fuck out. I really cannot fathom in what sort of fantasy world you inhabit wherein someone like Jack Layton can negotiate or bargain with the powerfully connected mafioso in Afghanistan to create a Utopia.
I couldnt agree more that it is none of our business. In a perfect world, democracy would reign supreme, and 40 some odd countries would not be occupying Afghanistan militarily. Unfortunately that is not the current reality and never has been. And I'm sure Jack Layton understands this as well.
Actual world scenario:
Whether you believe it or not, Iggy and Harper will do whatever Uncle Sam tells them to. It's what they do. It's their designated colonial administrative duty, and these kinds of menial tasks assigned to the them by Washington are their unwritten obligations. With the Tory and Liberal agenda reigning supreme in Ottawa, Canadians can expect more of their sons and daughters returned home to them in plastic bags from Afghanistan. Murder is the ultimate expression of insanity. Achieving peace is more difficult than most people know.
It doesnt matter what I think. Realistically speaking I have zero ability to stop the epic tragedy still unfolding in Afghanistan 31 years after the CIA bgan meddling in Afghanistan. Afghanistan: A Forgotten Chapter Warning: Not a pro-USSA point of view
We could pullout of Afghanistan, as the NDP has proposed since protesting Paul Martin's vicious toadying for switching Canada's role from that of peacekeepers to one of US-style combatants by 2006. Yanquis imperialists would still be there along with about 38 other countries' militaries. I'm not so naive as to think that peace or prosperity will visit Afghanistan soon. Ordinary people in Afghanistan are not winning after 31 years of US meddling in that country and counting.
Yes, cover the kids eyes and ears. This thread is X rated for relentless supporters of Canada's two old line parties and vicious toadies of the empire.
Had Bush and Blair provided the Afghan Taliban government information that reasonably established that Osama Bin Laden was the mastermind behind the attack, then the Taliban would have handed him over to the World Court.
But they didn't, because they didn't have any such information.
And they still have no such information. Apparently as far as international law goes, it's too late now to press that point with Washington and NATO. Theyve since received a nod from UN to be there.
But if we are trying to convince ordinary people and voters alike as to what's gone wrong in Afghanistan and why they shouldnt support Ottawa's Liberal-Tory war coalition, then I think the soft underbelly for Ottawa's vicious toadying is probably to ask self-annointed experts and the undecideds Why is Canada's military in Afghanistan? Youll likely receive a wide range of answers and wild guesses. Because if they can't explain why, and their fearless political leaders can't tell them either, then the snakes should start turning on one another at some point.
Hello, men rape women get punished for being raped.
You apparently have no idea what she is talking about.
That's not what she said. She said:
So, now it's Canada's responsibility punish rapists. I see. How does she propose to do this? "Canada can do much better", she says, but doesn't bother saying what that better would be. Is she leaving it up to our US-trained Generals to figure it out? Maybe the women-friendly Harper government can get Jason Kenney working on a plan.
She sounds like Fidel: occupation if necessary, but not necessarily occupation.
She doen't like all the nasty killing and stuff, but still sees a role for Canada. Should we send in the RCMP? They can taser Dostrum. Or they can drive the Taliban to the outskirts of Kabul and make them walk back. Or they can provide explosives and agent provocateurs to goad some young guys into plotting an attack......wait a minute...
Attack Antonia eh?
Not going down that patriarchial road with you.
Whatever the NDP says is wrong according to our non-partisan partisans.
Canada should get the hell out of their country immediately if not sooner. We've done quite enough there already thank you very much. These 'solutions' imposed by outsiders have brought nothing but harm. Canada's role in Afghanistan is to invade, occupy and destroy and aside from a few disgusting social work photo ops, what they bring for the Afghan people - women, children and men, is bombs and bullets. If you wish to help the women and people of Afghanistan, make your part of their war go back where it came from.
Several thousand Taliban are on the verge of victory over the 40 nation military alliance, and NATO's surrender is imminent. No diplomacy needed just more blood and gore and solid as jello combative comments. Pass the body bags, and let's skewer Jack Layton some more, that peacemongering commie leading the effective opposition to the Harper lap poodles and those other warmongering plutocrats propping them up.
I don't quite follow how the first sentence which I quite like connects to the rest. By the time I reached Layton and "effective opposition" I was quite lost I must confess.
I'm trying to understand it myself. Just remember, this is all Jack Layton's fault. It's easier that way.
The NDP hasn't proposed anything of the sort. Except for Dawn Black's earlier musings about moving the road show on to Darfur, which doesn't make it party policy btw, what we've actually been witnessing is a shell game where the object is to uncover the word 'mission' after it's been spun around in front of our eyes. Chances are we wouldn't find the word under the shell called Khandahar, but certainly under another. Yes indeed, the current mission would have ended under an NDP government, to be replaced by another more 'constructive' mission somewhere else in Afghanistan. No official statement that I'm aware of calls for the complete withdrawal from that country. Not lost on anyone adept at how shell games operate is the realization that any mission in that country collaborates with a foreign occupying force. Collaboration under another guise remains the essence of NDP policy regarding Afghanistan.
Fidel, you are trolling.
Stay out of this thread.
Attack Antonia eh?
Not going down that patriarchial road with you.
I don't think he was being patriarchal or attacking Antonia. He was taking issue with some of her statements - which imply that she wants Canada (and others) intervening in Afghanistan, telling them what laws to have, how to train their police, etc, etc, etc. What Canada needs to do is get out, not change our mission to some other type of control over the Afghans.
And btw, I really don't think we are the country that can speak with any authority on how to adequately handle rapists.
When did we start putting women in jail because they were raped Ghislaine?
When did we start putting women in jail because they were raped Ghislaine?
We don't. But read an Amnesty report about how many countries on this planet do that - or worse such as stoning them to death for it. That is for those countries to figure out. We cannot go intervene in every single country that treats women like garbage and impose our values on them. I wholeheartedly agree that we are lucky to be women in Canada. However, I do not support continued intervention in Afghanistan as a rich Western country telling them how to run their country.
What do you not get about Canada is supporting the government in Afghanistan doing this, plus implimenting other anti-women bills. And it is shameful. So yes we need to get the hell out, but we also owe Afghans much. How to do all of this is still the question, attcking someone who is at least trying to speak about is not the answer.
Y
I'm a member of the Zerbiasis fan page on Facebook. She has been courageous and outspoken on many important issues. She's not afraid of the MSM establishment. I admire her for that. This particular column of hers properly condemns the occupation. It exposes some of the lies about the alleged improvement of women's condition under the heavy hand of the invaders and their warlord puppets. If she had just left out her last couple paras where she says what Afghans "need", it would not have been a bad piece - and I agree with Jingles and Ghislaine from that perspective.
It's a reminder that even very progressive people, indeed all of us, have to be careful about telling other nations how they should be running their affairs. We should be especially careful when our own troops are occupying and murdering them. But it doesn't put Zerbisias on the other side of the fence. Her article is light years ahead of the trash coming out of a certain political party in recent months. She is just the kind of ally we need in the MSM, speaking out against the occupation - we need more like her.
What do you not get about Canada is supporting the government in Afghanistan doing this, plus implimenting other anti-women bills. And it is shameful. So yes we need to get the hell out, but we also owe Afghans much. How to do all of this is still the question, attcking someone who is at least trying to speak about is not the answer.
Y
remind, I absoluely get that Canada is supporting the government there and that is why I am saying we have to get out immediately - not in 2011. That is what we owe Afghanistan.
I was not attacking you, just stating my opinion that I don't support meddling in the Afghanis country any more or trying to tell them how to run out. We need to leave right away and not try and linger by imposing Western values on them. It is their country to run.
ok, well i did not see jingles or myself attacking her. I saw some people taking issue with a couple of her statements, while agreeing with her about ending the occupation. As unionist pointed out, most of her post is excellent.
And they still have no such information. Apparently as far as international law goes, it's too late now to press that point with Washington and NATO. Theyve since received a nod from UN to be there.
When the U.N. gave the green light for the U.S.A.'s and NATO's war in Afghanistan, which was handed to the U.N. as a post de facto fait accompli, the U.N. contravened its own Charter concerning the declaration and prosecution of an (illegal) aggressive war by other (subordinate) parties.
But then the U.S.A. always gets what it wants anyway by simply ignoring the U.N. and international laws and treaties it is party to. Something about being a Superpower and not being subject to international organizations, laws and treaties like everyone else.
She doen't like all the nasty killing and stuff, but still sees a role for Canada. Should we send in the RCMP? They can taser Dostrum. Or they can drive the Taliban to the outskirts of Kabul and make them walk back. Or they can provide explosives and agent provocateurs to goad some young guys into plotting an attack......wait a minute...
after their most recent visit to Kandahar, this is the same bullshit both Stephen Harper and Peter MacKay used when they talked about our (fuzzy word) "mission". Our "mission" is going to morph where our soldiers (presumably) are going transform from muderers into little humanitarian angels.
Fidel, you are trolling.
Stay out of this thread.
C'mon Maysie, our friend Fidel is not trolling. He is honing his skills in the fine art of sarcasm. No need to kick him out of this public swimming pool of ideas and debate.
Afghan Presidential Candidate: The US Occupation Must End
http://www.alternet.org/world/141504/afghan-presidential-candidate%3A_th...
"the past 8 years have done more harm than good to women's rights in Afghanistan -- the US is waging a war not winning a peace.."
Fidel, you are trolling.
Stay out of this thread.
Please tell Jingles to stop trolling in kind, thank you very much.
This is not my position nor is it remind's on the US-led NATO military occupation of Afghanistan involving approximately 40 countries and Canada. If he persists with this antagonism and straightforward lie, then I think I should be able to defend myself with similar bullying tactics in kind at the very least if scales and balance are absent. And he knows full well which parties' MP's voted against extending Canada's military occupation of Afghanistan and which two old line parties voted in unison for it. That's not trolling - it's stating the truth, which I am under the impression is generally encouraged on this progressive forum.
What Jack sez:
A "surge" (escalation, for those of us in the real world) in troop levels is always accompanied by massive increases in atrocity. Does Layton thin Fallujah was a success in that sense? He must, since the same bloodthirsty storm troopers of white supremecy, the US Marines, whom laid waste to everything living in the city of Mosques, are now part of the escalation.
Oh boy. Iran will be invited. How nice of Ms. Clinton to invite the people who live there to a conference on what kind of damage NATO will do to their countries. What a fucking asshole.
It would maximize engagement with moderate elements of the insurgency, including those who are fighting with the Taliban not for ideological reasons, but for food and money to support their families. Targeted engagement is critical to isolating the small percentage of extreme ideologues among the insurgents.
Spoken like a true Clintonista.
Now, this is the quote that I want Fidel to read. Nowhere does Layton seem to understand that even if it were true that Canadian troops will leave in 2011 (they won't), there would still be thousands of American einzatzgruppens all over the country, carrying out their Phoenix programs without interruption. So, Layton's dreamy role of a "eminent person" to show the savages the ways of the Lord demonstrates that either he's a Obomber wannabe con man, or completely off his bloody nut. Nowhere does he seem to recognize that we have no business being their, either in uniform or in Wilsonian top hat and tails, dining with the "moderate" insurgents to get them to play along. He seems completely oblivious to the naked colonial attitude reflected in his and the NDP's position. Jack better get his head out his ass.
I know what you'll say. You'll accuse me of being an apologist for the "two old line parties". Whatever. It isn't about them. We already know Ignasty and Harper are fascists. We can't change that. But the NDP are supposed to be the alternative to the Capitalists. Layton demonstrates time and again that he has very little quarrel with those two when it comes to the important stuff.
I have a suggestion for a campaign slogan for any one of the three. "It's not personal, you understand. It's just business"
Afghanistan Tells Journos: No Election Criticism
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/07/afghanistan-tells-journos-no-cri...
"In advance of my trip here, I recieved a copy of the Afghan election commission's 'code of conduct', to be signed by journalists who want to be accredited to cover the upcoming vote. It's a pretty interesting read. Among other things, journalists are to 'avoid printing, broadcasting and publishing of scandalous advertisements and disgrace reports about [a] candidate's personality or behaviour which could effect the election results."
I'm beginning to think you arent so much an anti-war advocate as you are just plain old anti-NDP. Jack and the NDP and Blocquistas voted against the two old line parties and against extending Canada's military occupation of Afghanistan. The NDP and Bloc's anti-war stance was defeated, and the troops are there until at least 2011. You are blaming Jack Layton for that, and so I think you are not serious.
Why arent you attaempting to place equal dubious blame on the Bloc for having been unable to stop Canada's military extension in Afghanistan? Because by the same logic, you must think of them as traitors for voting against extending the mission and for not giving the Harper-Liberal coalition their pro-war votes of confidence.
A UN mediated peace process is clearly what's needed in Afghanistan. Warlords in political opposition to Karzai have stated this is what's needed. UN officials have said so, And surrounding countries affected by an increase violence due to weapons and drugs smuggling from Afghanistan are saying peace talks are needed to end the war and related violence. And Jack Layton and the NDP are now appealing to everyone involved for peace talks to happen.
But people like you and General McChrystal, otoh, arent talking peace negotiations at all by what I can tell. US Mil. General McChrystal wants Obama to send even more US troops to Afghanistan and even more money for training and arming Afghan security forces. Tens of thousands more US troops. Are we to assume that this is Jingles' position, too?
Of course, like McChrystal and warhawks and some other people we're familiar with, the handful few Taliban ideologues will not desire peace talks or involving other countries' leaders in such diplomacy. The main principals calling the shots in this war will not want their own power to wage war taken from them with offers of compromise and power sharing made to other Taliban warlords in the region. Iran will be courted by US warhawks to provide a land and air route for supplying NATO's counterinsurgency. The US military will lose its main supply routes through Pakistan if the Pakistani army is unable to stop the Taliban in Swat Valley. The US is becoming more powerless with having to cede some control for supplying this war to Russia and Stani nations, Iran etc. Eventually, security for the region should be handed over to SCO countries anyway - it's their backyard not ours and especially not "North Atlantic" Treaty Org's responsibility. Iran is one of those nations sharing a border with Afghanistan and therefore desires to quell the export of militant Islam to their country as do China, Russia, India etc.
On the other side of the equation is Pakistan. Their military leaders are saying they can't afford to allocate any more of their half million man army to Swat valley and border region for a long list of flimsy reasons. The real reasons are unclear, except that the Pakistani ISI probably still controls the Taliban and still desires "strategic depth" in Afghanistan for purposes of geostrategic advantage over India and their border conflict in Kashmir. My guess is that Pakistan's ISI and the US CIA are still collaborating behind the scenes to keep the war going for their ulterior motives and to maintain US military presence in Central Asia under the false pretense of waging a war on terror. In fact, it's a war of terror and colder war manouvering. The main principals in this phony war necessarily need giving the bum's rush to the exit door with drums for peace negotiations beating louder and louder by the day.
"For the military, aid is part of its counterinsurgency operations. "It's a useful counterinsurgency tool," is how Liutenant-Colonel Tom Doucette, commander of Canada's provincial reconstruction team, described CIDA's work. Development assistance, for instance, was sometimes given to communities in exchange for information on combatants. Reconstruction aid was an important part of what the Canadian army called "three block war". "Our military could be engaged in combat against well-armed militia in one city block, stabilization operations in the next block and humanitarian relief and reconstruction two blocks over," explained the Paul Martin government's 2005 International Policy Statement." Yves Engler Black Book of Canadian Foreign Policy, Page 153 Afghanistan
and from the sublime to the...not so sublime..
http://www.ndp.ca/press/canadas-next-steps-in-afghanistan
"our skills and reputation as a peace maker"....really? Mendacious muck and gobbledygook this
So it appears NDPP doesnt support diplomacy or peace negotiations.
not if these are simply alternative attempts by which the Predator seeks objectives unattainable by military means or as Ward Churchill characterized negotiations with western 'Crusaders', like being "locked in a room with the sociocultural equivalent of Hannibal Lector."
Fidel. A moderator told you to stay out of the thread. You clearly read that and understood, but chose to blow it off. I'm suspending your account for a time to be determined after consultation.
Not on my behalf I hope oldgoat. On what basis is someone ejected like this? Seems counterproductive especially to one of your more enthusiastic contributor/participants. Why not try some diplomacy or peace negotiations first?
It was on neither of your behalf, and has been involving countless threads in a process which predates both of you. If you're told to stay out of a thread you stay out of the thread.
Something to remember when we hear nice liberal humanitarian neofeminist interventionists talk of "negotiations" or "diplomacy" with the "moderate insurgents": they aren't in any way serious.
When they say "negotiations", what they mean is "unconditional surrender". When the say "diplomacy", the mean "accept the presence of foreign troops on your soil, and foreign corporations plundering your resources". If they were honest, all the nice liberals would admit that what their diplomatic solution model for Afghanistan is identical to the diplomatic solution to the "Indian Problem" in the Americas: surrender and move to reservations.
Can anyone seriously imagine a scenario where NATO, or the UN, or the special envoys and esteemed white persons will agree to remove all foreign troops from Afghanistan? Not a chance. Since the only leverage they have is overwhelming, indiscriminate force, removing that threat means removing any reason to be there.
Thanks for that link, NDPP.
This is a very interesting interview, and everyone should read it.
The title, however, is inaccurate: Candidate Bashardost does not say "the US occupation must end."
He had a chance to say so here, but he didn't:
Bashardost: I am absolutely sure that the war in Afghanistan today is not a war for human rights, for democracy, because for the past seven years the international community has openly supported war criminals and financed them in Afghanistan. It is incredible to me that American tax payers are paying the salaries of the bodyguards of war criminals. It is incredible to me that the international community's tax payers pay for a very luxurious life for the four wives of a war criminal in power in Afghanistan. Today in the Afghan government and the cabinet we have war criminals, in our provinces we have corrupt governors or war criminals. It is time to deeply change the American strategy in Afghanistan.
He had another chance to say it here, but didn't:
Bashardost: Our problem is not a problem of American troops in Afghanistan. Our problem is that the analysis of the American state about the Afghan situation is wrong....
He had a third chance to say it here, but instead talked about how the US has a role to play in deciding Afghanistan's future:
Bashardost: Thank you very much. I would like to say to the American people: your young soldiers give their blood in Afghanistan. Your tax money pays for Afghan reconstruction. Because we have the same interests for a long time. But now your tax money and the blood of your soldiers is used in Afghanistan by a minority in power who are war criminals, they are part of the narco-state. They don't believe in human rights values, in women's rights. So it is time that you support a real, good governance in Afghanistan, and human rights values in Afghanistan, and give a chance to a new generation in Afghanistan to have higher education and good experiences, and that believe in good governance and human rights. I am absolutely sure that the way of the American government is the wrong way in Afghanistan. It is time to change for American people's interests and also for Afghan people's interests. We have the same interests. We can decide together.
Thanks for the deconstruction, M. Spector. It shows how impressions get created without being founded in reality - and the danger in reading headlines.
The logic of murderers is compelling:
125 extra UK troops set for Afghanistan
The humorously-named Labour Secretary of "Defence", Bob Ainsworth, explained:
... so we're sending more sacrifices.
Wow his thread is embarassing. I don't think we should be in Afghanistan and I pray for the day we westerners will smarten up and leave them alone but this thread seems more about a couple of people trying to piss each other off with rude and sarcastic comments than worrying about the people in Afghanistan.
You say the Afghan people are still winning? Try telling that to the parents of that young girl who was just shot by a Canadian soldier.
And this is part #8? I hope there isn't a part 9.
Welcome to babble, SparkyOne. It's always nice to be lectured to by someone on their very first day on the board. Is it part of a series? Where can I sign up?
Hi Unionist, thank you!
You have to admit this thread doesn't seem about us destroying Afghanistan as much as it seems to be about you and Fidel, no offense!
I haven't considered making a serious but I could blog about it, you would join right? 
I'm just tired of hearing about Afghans dying and Canadians dying and people trying to justify it somehow. I don't like my tax dollars buying bullets that shoot little girls.
Insurgent attacks increasing all over Afghanistan
Western military casualties have hit record levels in Afghanistan as foreign governments scramble extra troops to the war-torn nation, hoping to ease a worsening Taliban insurgency ahead of elections on August 20. [...]
Violence is also surging elsewhere in the country, with 12 insurgents reported killed in the north and the southeast Ghazni province. [...]
In northern Balkh province, four Taliban were killed in a clash with foreign forces, said Abdul Rauf Daj, a provincial intelligence chief. [...]
The fatalities Friday bring the foreign military death toll in July to 65, the deadliest month for international forces since the 2001 invasion.
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
A soldier accused of shooting and killing a colleague in a tent in Afghanistan over two years ago says he felt his life was threatened by someone when he whirled and fired his weapon.
Cpl. Matthew Wilcox took the stand in his own defence Friday in his manslaughter trial in Sydney, N.S., and told the four military jurors that he heard someone cocking a pistol.
He told a hushed military courtroom that “he just reacted,” and turned quickly, drawing his gun from his holster before shooting.
Cpl. Wilcox says he only realized seconds later that he had shot one of his best friends, Cpl. Kevin Megeney.
And then this gem:
What would the maximum force have been - a tactical nuclear device?
Didn't he shoot his friend inside the base? Where the only people who have guns are the soldiers?
It sounds like he fired his weapon by accident and is trying to cover up.
PTSD does not afford rational thought time, it is immediate response which is at work.
Now we know what the people of Afghanistan have had to deal with...
I think the CF have been told to start preparing public opinion for extending the "mission" past 2011. Here's why:
Break no longer needed after Afghan mission: general
The chief of the Canadian army says he now sees no need for the military to take a yearlong operational pause after the scheduled end to Canada's combat mission in Afghanistan in 2011.
Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie, chief of land staff, called the federal government's $5-billion pledge this month for new armoured vehicles a "game-changer."
In March, Leslie told a Parliamentary committee the Canadian Forces had been pushed to the limit and would need no less than a year to recover from the mission, but now says that is no longer the case.
At the time, he said the army's vehicles were old and broken, and its battalions and regiments weren't doing much better.
Leslie told the committee the army had a backlog of 6,000 untrained troops waiting for qualified soldiers to come home and train them.
But just three months later, Leslie says his army has been rejuvenated.
"With this $5 billion, we don't need an operational pause, in my opinion," he said.
What liars this officer corps are - spouting whatever script Harper writes and pretending it's their own "military" opinion.
This is 100% bullshit for a number of reasons:
1. The Afghans can build IEDs that can defeat our Leoppard tanks. Canada deploys 'em, the insurgents destroy 'em.
2. $5 million and cool army toys for our officer class to play with aren't going to magically reduce the rates of PTSD and suicide in the Canadian military.
As for that Gutfeld moron, my suggestion is: Take a look at how soldiers are forced to do 3 or more tours consecutively and then take a look the rate of PTSD, domestic and criminal violence and suicide within the U.S. military and military families, and then flap your gums in public on this subject.
I think we can all agree that Canada, the U.S., all NATO and ISAF countries should leave Afghanistan now. What bothers me though, about walking away physically is that we are also walking away morally - from Afghanistan. American, Canadian and Western European society collectively bear moral resposibility for what is happening in Afghanistan starting with the Soviet Afghan war in 1979 and the war and violence that has continued to the present. At the very least, we should stop the war immediately. Withdraw all troops. Apologize to the Afghan people. Then promise to rebuild what we have destroyed and try to heal as many physical and emotional wounds we have caused the Afghan people. Rather than our telling, we need to seek Afghans telling us how we can reverse the harm we have done.
http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2009/07/16/the-afghanistan-industry.html
Operation in Afghanistan Rooted in Israel: http://informationclearinghouse.info/article23128.htm
"The real reason why the U.S. continues its presence in Afghanistan is Iran, the country which is an annoyance for Israel, said Karen Kwiatkowski, a writer and former US Air Force officer."
Whatever that means.
I'm not impressed by reading one article by one Afghan intellectual in the Guardian, Frmrsldr. We should leave. Of course we should pay reparations. But that's not what you appear to be suggesting. We have no business shooting and bombing the Afghan people into submission to our way of life. Neither are we allowed to do so with "reconstruction" dollars.
I defy anyone to understand this story:
Arrest after Polish Afghan death
Keep reading.
Unionist that article of frmsldr's was from RAWA, not the Guardian!
We have no business shooting and bombing the Afghan people into submission to our way of life. Neither are we allowed to do so with "reconstruction" dollars.
You and I are in agreement on this. I am not making the argument that we should impose reconstruction and redevelopment and then use it to justify continuing our troop presence in Afghanistan - upon the Afghan people.
The way we are acting is like children: We "play" with whatever "toys" attract our attention for the moment. When we abuse and destroy these toys, we discard them without further thought (remorse) and turn our attention to other toys (such as Colombia, Venezuela, Sudan, Somalia, Niger or Iran or...?).
I will accept the concept of "reparations" provided it is moral based rather than legal based and it is directed by the Afghan people rather than us.
We are opposed to this:
Increasing security for us and increasing (what we see as) "humanitarian aid" means increasing insecurity and increasing death for Afghans.
We are descending like black angels of death upon Afghanistan.
Maybe the title of the next thread on this topic does need to be modified somewhat, as no one is winning anything here, except maybe the defense contractors.
Seven bombers killed as Taliban switch tactics with attack in east
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/26/taliban-afghanistan-khost-attack
Unionist that article of frmsldr's was from RAWA, not the Guardian!
The article was posted on the RAWA website, but it originally appeared in The Guardian, as noted at the top of the page.
Velvet Revolution or Lesser Shades of Black?
http://arabwomanblues.blogspot.com/2009/07/velvet-revolution-or-lesser-s...
"Some speak of a 'velvet revolution' in Iran, while I see nothing but Red Blood. Velvet, Silk, or Satin, or maybe just Black Polyester, it doesn't really matter what you call it - the fact remains that thousands of Iranians have had it with the rule of the Ayatollahs.."
Unionist, this page is for you,
http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2009/07/25/afghan-woman-mp-lists-enemies...
This, the report concluded, was not an accurate account.
"This was not the case in the Waigal Valley, where the paratroopers occupied only two combat outposts, and had almost no interaction with the population," the report stated.
A statement from one machine gunner in the unit summed up the general attitude to locals: "We didn't interact with them...they didn't come near us and we didn't go near them," Another soldier added: "These people, they disgust me...everything about those people up there is disgusting. They're worthless."
Report: US commanders 'incompetent' over nine soldiers killed in Afghan battle of Wanat
Maybe it is. But I took a look through one of the lists of the detained and those killed, and I noticed that by and large they were of the "professional" class, and or students... that said, you should get some sleep, this is a thread about Afghanistan, not Iran... 
Never underestimate the resourcefulness of the Afghans
http://nytimes.com/2009/07/26/world/asia/26marines.html?pagewanted=1&_r=...
Germany Is Dragged Into the War in Afghanistan Against the Will of the People
http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_56413.shtml
"We are fighting a national, anti-Western insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is of geostrategic importance because it is a place from which one can monitor Russia, India, Pakistan and China. The country is also phenomenally well situated in terms of the politics of natural resources. In fact, the Americans want to build a natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan...
But the international organizations are far more corrupt. Western companies are raking in profits of 400, 600 and sometimes 1,000 percent there. Only a fraction of the money passes through the Afghan government, while the rest ends up in private hands. In Kabul a Western company submitted a bill for $10 million for a 1.5 kilometer metal fence around the Zarnegar Park. Karzai had the matter investigated and it turned out that this fence was worth no more than $70,000. This doesn't exactly strengthen the Afghan's trust in Western development aid..
Were it not for the spiraling unemployment they have created, they wouldn't have the soldiers to fight their wars. They will not stop until they are stopped - and only the people, organized can stop them.."
It's sad that Canadian soldiers actually want to go to Afghanistan. I'm afraid of who they will turn around and try to fight once Canadian soldiers get pulled out!
It's sad that Canadian soldiers actually want to go to Afghanistan. I'm afraid of who they will turn around and try to fight once Canadian soldiers get pulled out!
That's the result of social conditioning from early childhood. The impression that (the majority) of Canadian soldiers want to go to Afghanistan itself is "spin". That's the story the government and the military want to tell and want you to believe. The corporate owned media lap this stuff up right out of their hands. In Canada, the military dissuades, threatens and intimidates any soldier or their family that is publicly critical of the war. The fact that PTSD, alcoholism, licit and illicit drug abuse, domestic and criminal violence and suicide have skyrocketed in the military and within military families since 2002, tells another story.
The only soldiers who can be said to willingly go to Afghanistan are Army Reservists because they can choose: That is, if you discount the pro war indoctrination and pressure they are subjected to.
For the Reg(ular) Forces, when you sign your induction papers - you are signing a legal document that literally puts the power of making decisions over your physical and emotional health and over your life and death to anyone who is your "superior" (which, when you first get in is everyone) in your chain of command.
No one knows for certain how they are going to react to war - until they get there. Consequently, not many people know how popular or unpopular Afghanistan is among Canadian soldiers. Canadian soldiers, like our American counterparts, need the Courage to Resist.
"I don't feel like satan, but I am to them".
The German Offensive in Afghanistan
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jul2009/pers-j27.shtml
"The German Army has dramatically intensified its intervention in Afghanistan in the past few days. For the first time since Hitler's troops laid waste to large parts of Europe, the German army is again conducting major military operations against "rebellious elements." According to press reports, the 21-cm Morser 18 was one of the main weapons used by Hitler's Wermacht on all of the fronts of the Second World War. Now the same weapon in its modern form is being used once again to rain destruction upon the enemy. The decision for the latest deployment was not made by the German parliament, but rather by the Army High Command itself.."
Afghanistan: Training Ground for War on Russia
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14538
"Nato trains Finland, Sweden for conflict with Russia.."
Afghanistan: Training Ground for War on Russia
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14538
"Nato trains Finland, Sweden for conflict with Russia.."
Oh, that's great. Just like Germany did (wrt) Finland in World War II.
Peters said that if he is a deserter, the Taliban should kill him, “I want to be clear. If, when the facts are in, we find out that through some convoluted chain of events, he really was captured by the Taliban, I’m with him. But, if he walked away from his post and his buddies in wartime, I don’t care how hard it sounds, as far as I’m concerned, the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and legal bills.”
I love it when they talk straight.
Nice people. If there is any truth to the desertion story, then this attitude explains a lot. I'd wanna desert too.
Why does Unionist repeat this terrible lie with every thread beginning on this same subject? Is he a closet pro-warhawk? He is obssessed with the blood and gore of this phony war and yet refuses to tell the truth - that no one is winning in this phony war, and especially not ordinary Afghans taking a beating from both of the phony combatants. Deal's off, Unionist. I'll be changing your thread title to something that reflects the truth in Afghanistan, first chance I get.
Moderators advised. Why don't you just go soil some other threads, please.
It's a pact Unionist. Stop responding. If you have a complaint send it by email of PM.
sorry...
Moderators advised. Why don't you just go soil some other threads, please.
That's two unprovoked personal attacks against me in one week, Unionist. Stop obssessing over me, please. It's very creepy. Posts flagged and moderators alerted.
And I'll be posting relevant RAWA commentaries on what's happening in their own country whether you approve or not. In your ear, white man.
Afghan cities attacked by Taliban
Ah, the BBC, with their keen taste for irony:
[emphasis added]
That makes 18 British soldiers in July alone. Time to go home, I think.
Afghanistan: 'The truth cannot be killed' Malalai Joya July 4
"In the Cold War, they wasted lots of money on them as puppets, but they became like mice when the Taliban came to power. They just crept into their holes.
"But after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the US again made them wolves -in the skin of lambs to deceive the world.
"The democratic parties are not able to publish magazines, they are underground. . .
"They occupied Iraq because of oil, while they occupied Afghanistan for its geopolitical location. When they have military bases in Afghanistan it makes it easier to assert control against Iran, China, Russia, etc.
"That's why they keep the situation dangerous, to have a reason to have troops stay longer in Afghanistan. It is just a drama, the War on Terror drama."
“No democratic party was behind them, people themselves went out.”
Joya called for solidarity from ordinary people in the occupying countries. “No country can donate liberation to another country. It is our responsibility to bring values like democracy, human rights and women’s rights.
“But with this catastrophic situation we need the helping hand of democratic men and women throughout the world. We don’t want occupation.
"Our people hate warlords, don't support Karzai and his puppet government of war criminals and drug lords who now want to negotiate with the Taliban. Our people hate the Taliban. . .
"This support gives me responsibility, but also strength and hope. These 30 years in Afghanistan, we almost lost everything but we gained one thing which means a lot. Political knowledge and consciousness. . .
"That's why they keep the situation dangerous, to have a reason to have troops stay longer in Afghanistan. It is just a drama, the War on Terror drama."
"Political knowledge and consciousness" is all theyve managed to salvage from this 30 year-long tragedy. That means more than just counting bodies and blaming the Soviets from a bygone era specifically from your rabid anticommunist point of view littering these threads. It's a phony war and "just a drama, the War on Terror drama"
Can anyone point to any people's democracy insurgent groups in Afghanistan? Sadly, I have neither heard nor read of any. As Malalai Joya has also stated, "The Afghan people are caught between the frying pan and the fire." The Afghan people are caught between the U.S. supported Taliban, Northern Alliance warlords (60% of MPs in the National Government come from this group), the Karzai government, and uninvited and unwanted U.S./NATO/ISAF soldiers waging a genocidal war in their country. The Karzai government, along with the U.S. and U.K. governments - is currently seeking negotiations with key Taliban figures to form the next government after the so - called Afghan "elections".
Judging from our actions, Afghanistan is all about greed and power. The plight of the Afghan people, women and children (especially girls needing access to education) aside from their propaganda value, ultimately don't factor into the equasion.
Can anyone point to any people's democracy insurgent groups in Afghanistan?
Not really my business. What is my business is what is done in my name and with my money, in the country which I am presumably responsible for. Presumably, even if there were "pro-democracy" (whatever that means) groups in Afghanistan I highly doubt we would hear from them, since anyone and anything moving and fighting NATO in Afghanistan is automatically grouped as "Taliban" (whatever that is). What I do know is that the Canadian army in Afghanistan is NOT a "pro-democracy" group, and even if it were, I also know that war is not democracy, nor does it create it. War is tyrrany.
So, faced with what appear to be two anti-democracy forces in Afghanistan the alleged "Taliban" and the CAF, I have very limited moral ground on which to base a judgement, except this one: We don't live in Afghanistan; We are not Afghan; Afghanistan is not our country. Therefore, upon this basis, I assert that those who resist the occupation, whatever their specific political beliefs, trump those of non Afghans.
It was a Liberal Government that put Canadian troops in Afghanistan, and the Harpers have picked up that ball and are carrying it.
And Canada isnt the only country with troops there. Afghanistan is occupied by troops from over 40 countries. Someone has to initiate peace talks and develop a plan for withdrawal of foreign troops at some point. We cant go on counting bodies and pretend that troop withdrawal is going to happen without some kind of diplomacy. Certain special interests involved in Afghanistan, the USA and-or their former proxies from 1996-2001, the Taliban, may not desire peace talks leading to troop withdrawal and cessation of war for whatever reasons, but perhaps they can be convinced if enough countries involved support an initiative leading to a negotitated peace and mediated by the UN as Karzai's political opposition in Kabul have already agreed is necessary.
Negotiations and bargaining in good faith is done all the time in civilized countries when competent people do their jobs. And our vicious toadies in government from start of the decade through today havent been doing their jobs. Theyve deferred any and all executive decisions on the occupation to their bosses in Warshington. Jack Layton and the NDP are true leaders while the other two Washington lap dogs await further instruction from either Uncle Sam or banks execs here in Canada who apparently instruct them as to when a federal election should happen or not. It must be difficult for Iggy and Harper with so many non-government people telling them what to do and when to do it.
Had to wade into the dusty NDP archives to find this:
Statement by NDP Leader Jack Layton on Canada's mission in Afghanistan
"New Democrats have a clear, comprehensive vision that moves Canada in the right direction - where our role in Afghanistan is through humanitarian aid, reconstruction, and a comprehensive peace process - not a George Bush-style counter-insurgency war."
Besides Dawn Black's earlier musings about taking it all on the road to Darfur, the NDP's position involves partaking in Hegemony Lite, as opposed to the nastier business of direct counter-insurgency. The building and protection of potemkin villages in support the US installed puppet regime is apparently a more appropriate task for armed soldiers in Jack Layton's view.
Unionist and Fidel, knock it off.
Learn to ignore each other. This is not a suggestion.
I'm not sure if this is hilarious or tragic:
UK soldier dies in Afghanistan
His death brings to 188 the total UK deaths in Afghanistan since 2001 and is the 19th this month.
The soldier has not been named, and next of kin have been informed.
Lieutenant Colonel Nick Richardson, spokesman for Task Force Helmand, said: "We share in the pain that is felt by his family, friends and colleagues at the loss of this courageous soldier; our thoughts and prayers are with them."
The cynical commanders who send these young people to their death churn out their meaningless phrases and praise - even before they release the name! "Courageous" - we'll tell you who it was later!
That's just it, Fidel, the point you refuse to entertain: that someone is not NATO. It is not Taliban Jack. It is none of our business. Our only obligation, our only moral duty, is to get on the next plane, bus, boat, canoe, donkey, or bicycle and get the fuck out. I really cannot fathom in what sort of fantasy world you inhabit wherein someone like Jack Layton can negotiate or bargain with the powerfully connected mafioso in Afghanistan to create a Utopia.
I can only conclude that you think the people of Afghanistan are incapable of figuring things out for themselves, and need a foreign someone to make everything great for them. I can also only conclude, from you repetative and irrelevant ranting, that the only someone you feel capable of sorting things out is Leonid Breshnev.
Canadian soldiers murder one Afghan girl; in separate incident, they shoot and wound three Afghan police
Just read the story. It is too sickening to quote how these trigger-happy murderers behave. Notwithstanding their guns, the Afghan people will surely win.
Strange how "warning" shots become fatal, isn't it?
The usual ploy of "blame the Afghans" was employed, of course.
Yes, there has been lots of good news about girls going to school and women in Parliament – although the latter are mostly pro-warlord and keep silent.
But really, these things mean nothing if they are immolating themselves rather than being married off to old men, if they are attacked with acid on their way to class, if they are imprisoned for being raped only to be raped by their jailers, if they are killed for being outspoken.
All these things are happening now, aggravated by relentless war that displaces and impoverishes people. There's no clean water, no sanitation. Children are diseased and hungry.
Widows, with no marketable skills and less literacy, are forced into prostitution. (And how many NATO soldiers are their customers?) A woman is lucky to make it to 40.
Or not so lucky.
A UN report released this month shows that women face more violence than ever.
And yet there's still legislation in the works that will force the minority Shia women to have sex with their husbands or else starve, a bill that the ever-smiling Karzai approved in order to win the coming election.
The occupation has only managed to make Afghanistan more fundamentalist.
In the new documentary Rethinking Afghanistan, human rights activist Ann Jones, author of Kabul in Winter, recalls Faisal Ahmad Shinwari, the chief justice from 2001 to 2006, declaring that women have two rights.
"One, every woman has the right to obey her husband," she quotes him as saying. "Two, every woman has the right to pray, though not in the mosque. That is reserved for men."
This is what we have supported?
Estimates are, we will be spending $3 billion over this year and next. That's assuming, if experience is any indication, that costs don't spiral.
What a waste.
The only way to bring security is protect the women and children, not with bombs and bullets, armour and airplanes, but with secure schools, clean wells, steady supplies of food and legislation that punishes men, not women.
That's how you change a country.
Canada can do much better.
*bolding mine
When Antonias discovers a food that only women eat, she can let us know. Does she really have any idea what she's talking about? How, exactly, does one "punish men, not women"? Scramble the NASCAR channel? Ban urinals? WTF?
Sounds like a good liberal.
Hello, men rape women get punished for being raped.
You apparently have no idea what she is talking about.
Here's the problem, (continued after quote)
The only way to bring security is protect the women and children, not with bombs and bullets, armour and airplanes, but with secure schools, clean wells, steady supplies of food and legislation that punishes men, not women.
That's how you change a country.
Canada can do much better.
*bolding mine
after their most recent visit to Kandahar, this is the same bullshit both Stephen Harper and Peter MacKay used when they talked about our (fuzzy word) "mission". Our "mission" is going to morph where our soldiers (presumably) are going transform from muderers into little humanitarian angels.
History seldom gives us a second chance. In the case of Afghanistan it did. the first opportunity we had was immediately after 9/11. Had Bush and Blair provided the Afghan Taliban government information that reasonably established that Osama Bin Laden was the mastermind behind the attack, then the Taliban would have handed him over to the World Court. The reconstruction, redevelopment and humanitarian work could have been done. Afghanistan would be an equal and fully contributing member of the world community today and everyone would be happy.
The second opportunity was in late November, early December 2001, after the battle of Tora Bora - the end of "Phase I" of the Afghan war. Tony Blair visited Kabul and said, "For too long we have ignored Afghanistan. Afghanistan must not become a breeding ground for terrorists." At this second point in time, if we had engaged in humanitarian aid and nothing but humanitarian aid, then we would not have the problems the Afghan people are suffering from today.
We had two opportunities and in both cases, we blew it. Bush and Blair's idea of preventing Afghanistan from being radicalized and from hating us was to invite NATO (not the U.N.) and to continue the war in Afghanistan.
After nearly eight years of murdering and maiming Afghans and destroying their homes and country, are they going to love and trust us if we suddenly engage in more humanitarian aid and become ever so slightly more war "lite"?