Afghanistan: Russia Steps in to Help NATO
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/exclusive-afghanistan-r...
"Russia has agreed to return to teh war in Afghanistan at the request of the Western states which helped the Mujahedin to drive its forces out of the country 21 years ago..."
all the gangsters are now in the game
This must be proof then that the NATO axis is leading Russia around the world by their nose-hairs like so many lap dogs in Ottawa are bought and paid-for? Not necessarily so says [url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21273]Eric Walberg[/url]
Yes I think the old North Atlantic gang is surrounding Russia and China militarily. More great game nonsense.
I think this is apropos:
Heh.
And so the story continues:
Yes, I think you are right, Fidel.
Here's more evidence:
We've been here before. Remember the U.S. Status Of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the Iraq government? Look how well that's working out.
And, from Jason Ditz again, [url=http://news.antiwar.com/2010/10/27/nato-chief-slams-gorbachevs-negative-... Chief Slams Gorbachev’s ‘Negative’ View of Afghan War[/url] British FM Insists Current Afghan Occupation Way Different From Soviet One
It sounds like they're squabbling over degrees of failure.
There is the exit strategy. The west went in -- frigged it up -- now wants to hand it off to a more local set of powers.
I seem to be missing something here since Russia no longer even borders Afghanistan. Would this deal lead to Russian troops in the other 'istan countries that abut Afghanistan? Just looking for the Russian advantage in such a deal.
like I said, all the gangsters are now in the game...if you can't beat'em join'em. Some preliminary horse-trading...
Russia Raises Its Price to Rescue NATO from Afghan Quagmire
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/russia-raises-its-price...
"Russia is setting out tougher terms for NATO, in return for its assistance in Afghanistan, with demands that the Alliance restricts the number of troops it bases in member countries which were former members of the Warsaw Pact..
Meanwhile back at the ranch...WHAT 'Afghan Quagmire'?
"Although the situation in Afghanistan remains complex and challenging and fluid, I believe we are beginning to see success taking form,' MacKay said.."
Afghan Situation Improving: MacKay
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/10/27/15857116.html
This raises two possibilities:
1. Is MacKay & Co. saying this as a face saving means to cover Canada's military disengagement from Afghanistan (Stephen Harper "Canada does not cut and run.")?
2. Is MacKay saying this to psychologically prepare Canadians for a further military escalation in Afghanistan beyond 2011? Remember, there are 90 troops, half stationed in Kabul and half in Kandahar (City?), who will remain in country beyond 2011. Are the Cons prep'ing the Canadian public for more?
Actually, there are mixed messages coming from officialdom:
Remember, after the last War Resolution passed in the House that escalated Canada's military engagement in Afghanistan, how the Liberals 'wrested' an agreement from the Cons that they would have quarterly Afghan "progress" (or more realistically regress) reports?
After about two dismal reports by Stockwell Day, the Cons stopped the reports because Canada's top general Walt Natynczyk declared that Canada would militarily disengage from Afghanistan in 2011.
Was this meant to sweeten the U.S., NATO and Russia deal?
Was it also meant as a dress rehearsal for U.S., NATO and Russian cooperation and for Russian military (re)engagement(?) in Afghanistan?
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\10\30\story_30-10-2010_pg20_4
Actually, I think it's more like NATO, and its prospective auxillary member's attempt to contain China, itself. Great Game redux indeed-- but not without geopolitical sense (Russia needs to move it's natural gas South, and can't, in the long run, trust China's ally, and gas supplier: Iran).
Also, its interesting that the Independent article failed to mention Russia's experience with Islamic resistance movements in Chechnya, (and their ties to the Taliban) as another possible, Russian motive vis-a-vis that protracted conflict, and all that that has entailed to date.
Two things:
thing #1. There is no such thing as al-Qaeda
thing# 2. The Russians and Chinese know it
Fidel:
If, by chance (because I'm not so arrogant as to assume anything), you're referring to my previous comments: I never mentioned al-Qaeda.
Okay, and just so long as we understand who has supported, funded and aided the anti-Russian, anti-Serb, and anti-Chinese jihads all along for the last 30 years and continuing today. The Muslim countries are supposed to be turning a blind eye to Chechnya because of Russian support of the Palestinians, Syria, Turkey, Iran etc. And on the other side, Pakistani elites controlling that country's ISI as well as the invisible army of unmentionables, that base of expendable anti-communist jihadi assets sometimes referred to as "al-Qaeda", are supposed to be on the outs with their cold war friends in the American CIA. Everything is just as it seems however and probably not all of the truth.
Pentagon Forges NATO Proxy Armies in Eastern Europe - by Rick Rozoff
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21694
"On November 19 and 20, the leaders of 28 North American and European nations, all the major Western military powers and their vassals will gather in the capital of Portugal for this yearly summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. This year's summit will endorse the Alliance's first Strategic Concept for the 21st century, a draft of which was crafted by a so-called group of experts led by former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.."
Wow. I bet the Afghans are going to love that.
Maybe the coalition forces are just trying to improve their image by reminding them of the good old days, though I doubt it will work.
Hamid Karzai feels Afghanistan's sovereignty was violated:
sounds like things are going from bad to worse or bad to better depending on your POV...the Russians won't help this
Killing Reconciliation, Military Raids, Backing of Corrupt Government Undoing Stated US Goals in Afghanistan
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/10/29/killing_reconciliation_military_r...
"Just back from Afghanistan, unembedded investigative journalists Jeremy Scahill and Rick Rowley...
IEA: Afghan Resistance Statement - The Untold Story of the Kandahar Operation
http://shahamat.info/english/
"For recent information on the situation in the [Kandahar] district, Alemarah interviewed the Military Commander for this district...
NATO in Afghanistan: World War In One Country
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2010/05/14/nato-in-afghanistan-world-war...
"Afghanistan has, whether by convenience, design or some combination of the two, been transformed into a vast training ground for the consolidation of a 50 nation military structure that has already been extended into Central Asia, the Caucasus, Eastern Europe, the Horn of Africa, the Indian Ocean and the Middle East.."
I almost fell off my chair - what a howler..
the reason Hamid K is so pissed is that the joint Russian US operation targeted some of the lucrative opium-heroin trade, of which the Karzai family is allegedly deeply involved and from which serious money is made..
Anders Fogh Rasmussen gives details of Russian involvement in Afghanistan before NATO summit later this month in Lisbon, Portugal:
[url=http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/article371809.ece]21% of world heroin supply is being dumped on Russia[/url] Russians say NATO responsible
Russia-led Bloc to NATO: Stop Pushing Afghan Militants North - by Jason Dix
http://news.antiwar.com/2010/11/04/russia-led-bloc-to-nato-stop-pushing-...
"Central Asian members of Bloc (CSTO) fear growing instability - Taliban has added to its northern sphere of influence..."
It's never mentioned, but Russia has economic deals with these countries that allow, for example, Russian built pipelines to transmit oil and natural gas to and from these countries and eventually to Europe and the West. Russia also "rents" air and other military bases in these countries.
Keeping this in mind will provide background information to the following article:
Um, as you can see it's a slippery slope proposition. Armored vehicles aren't weapons unless they're armed. Would Russia accept transporting unarmed armored vehicles if they were later armed after they arrived in Afghanistan?
Would you?
I kind of think Russia helping out the USA here is akin to giving the USA enough rope so they can hang themselves.