Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
THE USA IS GETTING IS ASS KICKED IN AFGHANISTAN!
Contrary to what is being reported in the Capitalist press, the USA has not pacified Afghanistan nor it is being welcomed as (cough, cough) liberators.
December 22, 2002
Details of U.S. victory are a little premature
By ERIC MARGOLIS -- Contributing Foreign Editor
On the frigid night of Dec. 24, 1979, Soviet airborne forces seized Kabul airport. Elite Alpha Group commandos sped to the presidential palace, burst into the bedroom of Afghan President Hafizullah Amin and gunned him down. Columns of Soviet armour crossed the border and raced south toward Kabul.
It took Soviet forces only a few days to occupy Afghanistan. They installed a puppet ruler, Babrak Karmal. Moscow proclaimed it had invaded Afghanistan to "liberate" it from "feudalism and Islamic extremism" and "nests of terrorists and bandits."
Soviet propaganda churned out films of Red Army soldiers playing with children, building schools, dispensing medical care. Afghan women were to be liberated from the veil and other backward Islamic customs. The Soviet Union and its local communist allies would bring Afghanistan into the 20th century.
Two years later, Afghans had risen against their Soviet "liberators" and were waging a low-intensity guerrilla war. Unable to control the countryside, Moscow poured more troops into Afghanistan. The Soviet-run Afghan Army had poor morale and less fighting zeal. The KGB-run Afghan secret police, KhAD, jailed and savagely tortured tens of thousands of "Islamic terrorists," then called "freedom fighters" in the West.
Fast forward to December, 2002, and a disturbing sense of deja vu. A new foreign army has easily occupied Afghanistan, overthrown the "feudal" Taliban government and installed a puppet regime in Kabul. Western media churn out the same rosy, agitprop stories the Soviets did about liberating Afghanistan, freeing women, educating children. The only real difference is that kids in today's TV clips are waving American instead of Soviet flags. The invaders have changed; the propaganda remains the same.
America's invasion of Afghanistan in October, 2001, was billed as an epic military victory and the model of future imperial expeditions to pacify Third World malefactors. Since then, news about this war-ravaged land has grown scarce. America's limited attention has turned elsewhere.
Afghanistan in chaos
In fact, America's Afghan adventure has gotten off to as poor a start as that of the Soviet Union. The U.S.-installed ruler of Kabul, veteran CIA asset Hamid Karzai, must be protected from his own people by up to 200 U.S. bodyguards. Much of Afghanistan is in chaos, fought over by feuding warlords and drug barons.
There are almost daily attacks on U.S. occupation forces. My old mujahedin sources say U.S. casualties and equipment losses in Afghanistan are far higher than Washington is reporting - and are rising.
American troops are operating from the old Soviet bases at Bagram and Shindand, retaliating, like the Soviets, against mujahedin attacks on U.S. forces by heavily bombing nearby villages. The CIA is trying to assassinate Afghan nationalist leaders opposed to the Karzai regime in Kabul, in particular my old acquaintance Gulbadin Hekmatyar.
North of the Hindu Kush mountains, America's Afghan ally, the Tajik-Uzbek Northern Alliance, has long been a proxy of the Russians. The chief of the Russian general staff and head of intelligence directed the Alliance in its final attack on the Taliban last fall. Russia then supplied Alliance forces with $100 million in arms, and is providing $85 million worth of helicopters, tanks, artillery and spare parts, as well as military advisors and technicians. Russia now dominates much of northern Afghanistan.
The Taliban, according to the United Nations drug agency, had almost shut down opium-morphine-heroin production. America's ally, the Northern Alliance, has revived the illicit trade. Since the U.S. overthrew the Taliban, opium cultivation has soared from 185 tons a year to 2,700. The Northern Alliance, which dominates the Kabul regime, finances its arms-buying and field operations with drug money. President George Bush's war on drugs collided with his war on terrorism - and lost. The U.S. is now, in effect, colluding in the heroin trade.
Anti-American Afghan forces - the Taliban, al-Qaida, and others - have regrouped and are mounting ever larger attacks on U.S. troops and, reports the UN, even reopening training camps. Taliban mujahedin are using the same sophisticated early alert system they developed to monitor Soviet forces in the 1980s to warn of American search-and-destroy missions before they leave base. As a result, U.S. troops keep chasing shadows. Canadians fared no better.
In the sole major battle since the Taliban's overthrow, Operation Anaconda, U.S. forces were bested by veteran Afghan mujahedin, losing two helicopters.
The ongoing cost of Afghan operations is a closely guarded secret. Earlier this year, the cost of stationing 8,000 American troops, backed by warplanes and naval units, was estimated at $5 billion US monthly!
The CIA spends millions every month to bribe Pushtun warlords.
Costs will rise as the U.S. expands bases in Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgystan and Uzbekistan - all placed along the planned U.S.-owned pipeline that will bring Central Asian oil south through Afghanistan.
The UN reports the Taliban and al-Qaida on the offensive, Afghan women remain veiled and the country is in a dangerous mess. Declaring victory in Afghanistan may have been premature.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric can be reached by e-mail at margolis [at] foreigncorrespondent.com.
Letters to the editor should be sent to editor [at] sunpub.com or visit his home page.
Details of U.S. victory are a little premature
By ERIC MARGOLIS -- Contributing Foreign Editor
On the frigid night of Dec. 24, 1979, Soviet airborne forces seized Kabul airport. Elite Alpha Group commandos sped to the presidential palace, burst into the bedroom of Afghan President Hafizullah Amin and gunned him down. Columns of Soviet armour crossed the border and raced south toward Kabul.
It took Soviet forces only a few days to occupy Afghanistan. They installed a puppet ruler, Babrak Karmal. Moscow proclaimed it had invaded Afghanistan to "liberate" it from "feudalism and Islamic extremism" and "nests of terrorists and bandits."
Soviet propaganda churned out films of Red Army soldiers playing with children, building schools, dispensing medical care. Afghan women were to be liberated from the veil and other backward Islamic customs. The Soviet Union and its local communist allies would bring Afghanistan into the 20th century.
Two years later, Afghans had risen against their Soviet "liberators" and were waging a low-intensity guerrilla war. Unable to control the countryside, Moscow poured more troops into Afghanistan. The Soviet-run Afghan Army had poor morale and less fighting zeal. The KGB-run Afghan secret police, KhAD, jailed and savagely tortured tens of thousands of "Islamic terrorists," then called "freedom fighters" in the West.
Fast forward to December, 2002, and a disturbing sense of deja vu. A new foreign army has easily occupied Afghanistan, overthrown the "feudal" Taliban government and installed a puppet regime in Kabul. Western media churn out the same rosy, agitprop stories the Soviets did about liberating Afghanistan, freeing women, educating children. The only real difference is that kids in today's TV clips are waving American instead of Soviet flags. The invaders have changed; the propaganda remains the same.
America's invasion of Afghanistan in October, 2001, was billed as an epic military victory and the model of future imperial expeditions to pacify Third World malefactors. Since then, news about this war-ravaged land has grown scarce. America's limited attention has turned elsewhere.
Afghanistan in chaos
In fact, America's Afghan adventure has gotten off to as poor a start as that of the Soviet Union. The U.S.-installed ruler of Kabul, veteran CIA asset Hamid Karzai, must be protected from his own people by up to 200 U.S. bodyguards. Much of Afghanistan is in chaos, fought over by feuding warlords and drug barons.
There are almost daily attacks on U.S. occupation forces. My old mujahedin sources say U.S. casualties and equipment losses in Afghanistan are far higher than Washington is reporting - and are rising.
American troops are operating from the old Soviet bases at Bagram and Shindand, retaliating, like the Soviets, against mujahedin attacks on U.S. forces by heavily bombing nearby villages. The CIA is trying to assassinate Afghan nationalist leaders opposed to the Karzai regime in Kabul, in particular my old acquaintance Gulbadin Hekmatyar.
North of the Hindu Kush mountains, America's Afghan ally, the Tajik-Uzbek Northern Alliance, has long been a proxy of the Russians. The chief of the Russian general staff and head of intelligence directed the Alliance in its final attack on the Taliban last fall. Russia then supplied Alliance forces with $100 million in arms, and is providing $85 million worth of helicopters, tanks, artillery and spare parts, as well as military advisors and technicians. Russia now dominates much of northern Afghanistan.
The Taliban, according to the United Nations drug agency, had almost shut down opium-morphine-heroin production. America's ally, the Northern Alliance, has revived the illicit trade. Since the U.S. overthrew the Taliban, opium cultivation has soared from 185 tons a year to 2,700. The Northern Alliance, which dominates the Kabul regime, finances its arms-buying and field operations with drug money. President George Bush's war on drugs collided with his war on terrorism - and lost. The U.S. is now, in effect, colluding in the heroin trade.
Anti-American Afghan forces - the Taliban, al-Qaida, and others - have regrouped and are mounting ever larger attacks on U.S. troops and, reports the UN, even reopening training camps. Taliban mujahedin are using the same sophisticated early alert system they developed to monitor Soviet forces in the 1980s to warn of American search-and-destroy missions before they leave base. As a result, U.S. troops keep chasing shadows. Canadians fared no better.
In the sole major battle since the Taliban's overthrow, Operation Anaconda, U.S. forces were bested by veteran Afghan mujahedin, losing two helicopters.
The ongoing cost of Afghan operations is a closely guarded secret. Earlier this year, the cost of stationing 8,000 American troops, backed by warplanes and naval units, was estimated at $5 billion US monthly!
The CIA spends millions every month to bribe Pushtun warlords.
Costs will rise as the U.S. expands bases in Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgystan and Uzbekistan - all placed along the planned U.S.-owned pipeline that will bring Central Asian oil south through Afghanistan.
The UN reports the Taliban and al-Qaida on the offensive, Afghan women remain veiled and the country is in a dangerous mess. Declaring victory in Afghanistan may have been premature.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric can be reached by e-mail at margolis [at] foreigncorrespondent.com.
Letters to the editor should be sent to editor [at] sunpub.com or visit his home page.
For more information:
http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/margolis_de...
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$210.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
the easy bit is sending in the bombers and the troops and blowing shit up.
what's the incredibly hard, tricky and difficult part?
re-building afghanistan into a westernized, modernized, non-tribal version of itself. a version it may very well not want to become, despite the best intentions of america.
the upper echelons of the american government and military should really be given a hand on how well they pull off the easy part. if you want to blow shit up, call the u.s. government. but unfortunately, the u.s. gov. always seem to forget that it's real easy going in, but real hard coming out. once america goes in, it's responsible for what comes after.
the same applies for america's folly in iraq...
only a true idiot thinks the whole story there is simply the battle and saddam hussein. the battle and the war part of the story is worth nothing. zero. nada. what comes after our big new war in iraq is what everything else rest on. that's the whole story and nothing but the story. that's what changes the world, the middle east, and america. that seems like an important topic, yes?
but it sure is off the radar screens in america. of course, with the u.s. gov. orchestrating our complaisant, lazy media, all discussions are always only on one subject: the pretexts, the war and what weapons the troops will use. that's the extent of it. that's called the blind, unwise, short term thinking of a pack of idiots.
Denton
Your message smells of COINTELPRO. Most real activists don't hate America. They just criticize it.
Even if you're not FBI or some other kissing cousin, your message is retarded.
X
Whatever........ "God" in the messages above isn't real, and JC Denton, if you are indeed a different person, should easily see that. Go easy on the Gardenploting and Cablesplicing, OK ;-)
You far-left people are a bunch of paranoied sensacionalist idiots...
on Afghanistan's plains,
and the women come out
to cut up what remains,
jes' roll to your rifle and
blow out your brains
and go to your Gawd like a soldier
Rudyard Kipling
from the book 'Kim'
Denton, I'm guessing the days of anti-semitism and anti-Americanism are just beginning.
Up Sheople!!
This is a very good article it is only too bad that most of the information regarding American involvement in this part of the world is skewed by the mainstream press. The American people have been mislead about the war in afghanistan and the one to take place in Iraq. These conflicts are about strategic positioning and imperialism. I only wonder if the Russians, Chinese, and Europeans are stupid enough to allow the Americans to corner the oil market and dominate central Asia with its grip on the supply.
This is a very good article it is only too bad that most of the information regarding American involvement in this part of the world is skewed by the mainstream press. The American people have been mislead about the war in afghanistan and the one to take place in Iraq. These conflicts are about strategic positioning and imperialism. I only wonder if the Russians, Chinese, and Europeans are stupid enough to allow the Americans to corner the oil market and dominate central Asia with its grip on the supply.
Up Sheople!!
This is a very good article it is only too bad that most of the information regarding American involvement in this part of the world is skewed by the mainstream press. The American people have been mislead about the war in afghanistan and the one to take place in Iraq. These conflicts are about strategic positioning and imperialism. I only wonder if the Russians, Chinese, and Europeans are stupid enough to allow the Americans to corner the oil market and dominate central Asia with its grip on the supply.
This is a very good article it is only too bad that most of the information regarding American involvement in this part of the world is skewed by the mainstream press. The American people have been mislead about the war in afghanistan and the one to take place in Iraq. These conflicts are about strategic positioning and imperialism. I only wonder if the Russians, Chinese, and Europeans are stupid enough to allow the Americans to corner the oil market and dominate central Asia with its grip on the supply.
This is a very good article it is only too bad that most of the information regarding American involvement in this part of the world is skewed by the mainstream press. The American people have been mislead about the war in afghanistan and the one to take place in Iraq. These conflicts are about strategic positioning and imperialism. I only wonder if the Russians, Chinese, and Europeans are stupid enough to allow the Americans to corner the oil market and dominate central Asia with its grip on the supply.
Up Sheople!!
Ordinarily it's bad form to point out an opponent's typographical errors in an internet debate, but it's important to point out Joe's error, with "sencationalist," because it's not a typo. It's a quite stupid misspelling, indicative of the ignorance of the author and the arrogant stupidity to sound it out, rather than look it up to make sure.
Stupidity is un-American, always has been, and always will be with what's left of it after this ilk of "Republicans" get through with it. I blame Republicans, even though I'm not even a leftist. Nor am I a sensationalist, nor a paranoid. I kin spell purty good tho', don' I, Joe?
It takes a great deal of stupidity to fall for sensationalism and paranoia. You other readers will notice that those non-American halfwits who occupy this country by birth are the most most easily convinced, without evidence, that "Saddam is a threat to world peace with his weapons of mass destruction," and "Islam is a threat to world peace with its violent sayings in its holy book," and "we are going to rid the world of evil once and for all," and "we're making the world safe for democracy through military action," and "the founding fathers meant America to be a Christian country," and other such grotesque and murder-oriented fairy tales.
Only authentically stupid individuals could fall for such fairy tales. We note that the Scranton Institute recently pegged George "Dubya" Bush's IQ at 91, which is one point higher than the classic medical-book designation of "moron." (Next lowest, Joe, is "idiot," with an IQ below 70)
This doesn't mean "Dubya" himself has fallen for the same sensationalistic, paranoid sewage his trainers are spraying into the eager open mouths of morons like Joe, with their bubble-headed-bleached-blonde TV "news." It means only that the Presidential Moron has faith that the greedy interests who are hiding behind him (including his father, now a weapons salesman who commands $100,000 minimum per sales pitch), writing his speeches for him and ordering him to behave like a dictator, know what they're doing and won't hurt him.
Obviously, they don't know what they're doing. But "Dubya" follows them, in his confused stupidity. In the same way, Joe knows that there is a "paranoid, sencationalist" element to the current equation somewhere, but is too fucking stupid to see where it is. Are you a Limbaugh fan, Joe? Is that where you picked up such a big word like "sensationalism" without knowing how to spell it?
You far-left dudes need to get a life...losers
Bye
Joe "White Trash Hero" Texan
this isn't a war against terrorism... its all about oil!!!!!! I didn't think people would stoop this low for oil, but by god they have! They staged the 9/11 attack which is so obvious to the Americans that they want a public enquiry! what about terorrism in ISRAEL!!!!! DOES THAT SHUT YOUR GOB, beffore you call me an anti semite i tell you to fcuk off...
go to http://www.whatreallyhappened.com
Catch a clue. Have you ever asked yourself, "what is a war on terrorism?". We all should figure this out , our government has stated to the world that you are either with us or against us. So people of the world must figure out what is the war on terrorism? Palestinians will show you where to see terrorism, Isreallis will show you where to see terrorism, Afganistan villiagers can show you, Burmese villagers can show you, chinese toy manufacturers will show you. So why don't you figure it out terrorism is not something you war against, it is something you war with. Our forefather's who fought so hard to give us the freedoms we cherish would mostlikely be considered a terrorist or at the very least an enemy combatant by our current administration, who seem to be trying so hard to take away our freedoms.
Just catch a clue
As for an ass kickin pull your head out of your ass.
As an Israeli-American (holding dual citizenship), all I can say is that I hear you Americans whining all the time about so many things. You complain about the influence of the Israeli and Zionist lobby with your Congress, the growing power of our Jewish entity the ADL - aka the 'Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith' (yes it really is ours, and we are extremely proud of its Zionist power), the great influential power of Zionist leadership at the top of your major media conglomerate companies, the billions of your tax dollars sent to our state of Israel every year, how we consider you Americans to be our money-slaves and refer to your country as the 'United States of Israel', etc...
In this post-911 environment, I am no longer worried or concerned about openly stating my Zionism. SO WHAT if all the things above that you forever whine about are true. Regardless, you simply must see that we Zionist Jews have risen to this high degree of power and authority in your country by using your own rules and laws, that's all. All you other goyim races also so far tried playing by these same rules, but we are clearly the superior ones who have finally won the game of power and authority in America - fair and square! Deal with it!
You must certainly also fully realize why this has happened. There was never anything that you could do about it. We Israelis are well known to be the superior chosen people of G_d, and that is why we will always, ALWAYS, eventually rise to such a level of command over all you inferior goyim races. It doesn't matter whether we are existing in America, or in any other country. We simply are G_d's own chosen race - thus all the other races can never, EVER, be anything else but compliant subjects and servants to us in our eventual glorious kingdom of Zion in Israel. This is our very Zionist belief system and lifeblood. It is our unstoppable fate and destiny to ultimately rule over all of you goyim masses of this world. For the time being, it is safe to say that America is the best and rapid vehicle we have historically ever found to get us there - primarily because it is so extremely easy for us to beat you goyim when playing by your own American rules and laws.
So please, PLEASE, stop all your never-ending American whining about everything. There is simply nothing you can do about it, that time is long past. Our Zionist power and influence is now already well established in your government, your media, our client religions of Christianity. Soon your very own fighting American military will cause our Zionism to be triumphantly dominant over Islam as well. And Islam held out a great, great deal longer against our Zionism power then even you Americans did!
It is now unquestionably true that we have fully succeeded in making Zionism an unspoken, but fully powerful and governing, presence in every single existing aspect of your American society - from your military ventures, to your movie themes, to your federal laws, to your business practices. You Americans could never have reached this current level of success without our help - by temporarily lending to you our leadership skills and higher intellect to get you here.
In your subconscious minds, you already know that we - the Jewish Zionist people of Israel - have already attained a level of superiority and influence in your American society that can never be reversed. It is time that you stopped all your incessant whining about it, and instead, just resign yourself to "play ball" the way that we instruct you to do so. For only those actually in positions of power and control can ever make the kinds of changes that you constantly whine about... and those positions are all taken. You MUST now clearly see that there is a reason that we in Zionist leadership already fills all those positions. We have won the game, period. We are better and more organized and more qualified. Live with it!
So my final message to all you Americans is this: Shut-up, get with our program, and we will then all live in peace.
oh and i do remember one thing rabbi did say was that we jewish people should never practice any of the christmas rituals even putting up a tree or listening to or singing christmas carols especially with christian people. remember we believe that christ was an enemy and the talmud calls him a bastard and a deceiver and says his mother was a whore so you should never celebrate any the christian things with christian people especially christmas and new year and never even put up or look at their christian decorations. i have to go now though bye.
Die you Zionist shill. I hope you choke on your matzah.
Die you Zionist shill. I hope you choke on your matzah.
Those brave American GIs doing their best (cough, cough) "to fight terrorism." Yes, and there really is a Santa Claus. The Tooth Fairy is real. And the Easter Bunny is coming to your house.
LOL. You Patriotic fucks will believe everything you are told by your Propaganda Press, won't you? Your occupation troops in Afghanistan can't even protect their own cowardly asses, let alone "fight terrorism."
Hell, your GI bitches are having a hard time protecting the American Puppet Dictator of Hamid Karzai let alone engaging in fire fights with the local Warlords.
"Die you Zionist shill. I hope you choke on your matzah."
Go tell that to Ari Fleischer.
White House Press Briefing with Ari Fleischer
Tuesday, December 17, 2002, 12:15 p.m.
by Russell Mokhiber
Mokhiber: Ari, last week I asked -- why is the President appointing convicted criminals like Elliott Abrams to policy positions at the White House? You said that you disputed the premise of the question. What part of the question do you dispute?
Ari Fleischer: Did you call him a war criminal?
Mokhiber: No, I didn't. I called him a convicted criminal.
Fleischer: That's right, you called Henry Kissinger, the Nobel Prize winner, a war criminal. You didn't call him (Abrams) a war criminal?
Mokhiber: I did not. I said, why is the President appointing convicted criminals like Elliott Abrams to policy positions at the White House?
Fleischer: Russell, we can go round and round. I know if you were President, you would not have appointed Mr. Abrams. The President believes that Elliott Abrams is a superb choice for this position. He has tremendous faith and confidence in Elliott Abrams. And the President, I think, is going to be proven correct as Elliott Abrams has worked to improve democracies. Helen, I know you and Russell are on the same ticket against the President.
Mokhiber: I have a second question. The LA Times today --
Fleischer: Is it softer than your first?
Mokhiber: You have to judge that.
The LA Times today published a poll that found that 72 percent of Americans, including 60 percent of Republicans, said the President has not provided enough evidence to justify starting a war with Iraq. Is the President losing the public relations battle here in the United States?
Fleischer: Well, one, I think that I'll just state what is well known. The President will not make any decision about war and peace and the possibility of putting some of our nation's best men and women in harm's way on the basis of a poll. He will do it on the basis of his judgment as Commander-in-Chief and what it will take to save and protect American lives in the event that he reaches the conclusion Saddam Hussein will indeed engage in war against the United States or provide terrorists with weapons to engage in war against the United States, just like on September 11th with the attack. And if he reaches that judgment, he will do so because the information he has and the judgment he makes suggest that, not because of a poll.
I think it's also fair to say that when you take a look at a variety of ways to measure public opinion, you will see different things out there in the public. The Pew Research Institution has done work on this topic and has come to very different conclusions. So the President will not make judgments based on polls, he'll make judgments based on what he believes is right.
These racists are thick as lice lately. We sure could use some help fighting them off. Help us out, people. When we miss a post like this, please let us know. Send us the URL by email and we'll deal with it as soon as we can.
Our address is: imc-sf-editorial [at] lists.indymedia.org
Dec. 18 2002
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/att...hp?postid=16372
Northen Allince Dec
Taken: 21 2002
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/att...hp?postid=16451
From Sweden: An Actual representation of the cages where the POWs are kept in Guantanamo Bay
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/att...hp?postid=16841
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1766037.stm
Date Unknown
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/att...hp?postid=16120
Attack on German.
Taken: Dec. 19 2002
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/att...hp?postid=16094
Evacuation of German Forces in Afghanistan
Taken: Dec. 21 2002
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/att...hp?postid=16449
Two Americans Killed (Kabul)
Taken: Dec. 17 2002
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/att...hp?postid=15838
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/attachment.php?postid=16372
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/attachment.php?postid=16451
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/attachment.php?postid=16841
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1766037.stm
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/attachment.php?postid=16120
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/attachment.php?postid=16094
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/attachment.php?postid=16449
http://www.al-mojahedoon.net/vb/attachment.php?postid=15838
EXCERPT:
------------------
Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan Sign $3.2 Billion Pipeline Deal
By Bagila Bukharbayeva, Associated Press Writer
Published: Dec 27, 2002
ASHGABAT, Turkmenistan (AP) - Pakistan and Turkmenistan signed an ambitious agreement with the Afghan president Friday to build a gas pipeline through war-ravaged Afghanistan.
------------------
More at following link:
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAFRCP38AD.html
5k dead wasn't enough to qualify for something more than constrained. That's right folks, when 3k patriots die it's a catastrophe, but when 5k afgans die . . . now that's what I call restraint! Patriots love murder, just like in cave-dwelling times. They think that by being in the miitary that murder is fine and dandy, but later on, they'll wise up. By then, of course, it's too late, and the nightmares set in.
They can argue that they only do it because its for the good of the country, but as we can see with Bushmoron - they even follow a MORON into battle, then use it as an excuse to sufforcate the enemy in metal boxes, then paint crude messages on bombs and giggle.
"Until you have served, you never understand the sacrifice and terror of war"
That's right, the sacrifice for Walmart! They're out there making the world right for Texaco! And if they have to murder every civlian in the world to protect the American Corporate Persons, they'll gladly do so!
That's right folks, you live in a dream world and only people in the military - serving the MORON - understand what real life is all about.
You sound like you almost WANT another 9-11 to happen. This is the same line that Right Wing militarists like Frank Gaffney and the Project for a New American Century repeat over and over. What's that Zgig. Brzezkinski said--"another Pearl Harbor is needed in order to convinve the public to support Imperial wars abroad."
"Until you have served, you never understand the sacrifice and terror of war."
You should tell this to those people who are on the receiving end of your bombs and Hi-Tech Terror. Better yet, tell this to the Chickenhawks currently in the American government.
EXCERPT:
---------------------
A reluctant supporter of the Pentagon's plans is Frank Gaffney, a former assistant defence secretary.
He says that it would only take one more terrorist attack and public support is assured.
"At that point there will not only be a willingness to submit to those sorts of infringement but a demand that they be infringed upon in the hope of trying to protect us.
------
More at link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/2563249.stm
Funny the Russians seem to have the same islamist problem we do. If you think the us was sloppy wait for a russian response. They figure 5 dumb bombs are cheaper than one smart one, fuck the civillians...They didn't do the gitmo thing, they shot each half awake theatre hostage taker once in the head.
And they have nothing to show for it. Like Israel, they fight fire with firepower, and are left with a terrified population--their own Russian citizens, I mean, who live in deadly and mortal fear of suicide bombings, kidnapings, and probably worse to follow.
They are not slaves, like the southern sundaes Christians, that’s what happens if you don't or can not fight back to Islamic extremists. Thank goodness Russia doesn't fall into that category and will follow the eye for any eye principle Muslims claim to value yet scream bloody murder when they get their asses kick after starting the bloodshed.
It takes very little to carry out a terrorist attack, preventing all of them is near if not impossible, so the best way to stop them is to destroy the support for the cause. As was the case in Syria in the 70's, when "freedom fighters" used “terrorist tactics" to try to disable the government. Syria then killed over 20,000 innocent Arab civilians, and then uprising quickly ended. Funny how we never hear anything from the Palestine supporters on this board about the "genocide" committed by the Syrians. (even though I was told anything with a death toll over a thousand was a genocide.
yes, absolutely i agree. but "the cause" is in fact supported any time "the west", or america, or russia, attacks muslims and muslim countries, whether terrorists are involved or not, whether the military action is justified or not. invading and bombing just feeds, escalates and exacerbates their hatred of the west.
personally, i feel it is the dilemma between israel and palestine just boosted to a much, much larger scale.
or, it's the dilemma of "the drug war" boosted to a much, much larger scale. you can't win the war on drugs simply by destroying cocaine cartels. because there will always be a market. it's an intractable problem, one where there will never be a "perfect", absolute conquering of the problem. or a clear, decisive win.
i wonder if the solution we are presently undertaking against terrorism will just make things worse. it's a dilemma, more than it is a successful, decisive, results orientented solution. i think Our Dear Leaders know this, and so they give themselves an out by saying "well, we don't when this will end. it could be months, or years, or decades..."
So you support genocide to destroy "the support for the cause," whatever cause, you don't like. No wonder your crowd is so sanguine about civilian casualties that the U.S. may inflict in Iraq. All's fair in war and Republican party politics!
by John Pilger
The Mirror
December 20, 2002
THE American and British attack on Iraq has already begun. While the Blair government continues to claim in Parliament that "no
final decision has been taken", Royal Air Force and US fighter bombers have secretly changed tactics and escalated their "patrols" over Iraq to an all-out assault on both military and civilian targets.
American and British bombing of Iraq has increased by 300 per cent. Between March and November, according to Ministry of Defence replies to MPs, the RAF dropped more than 124 tonnes of bombs.
From August to December, there were 62 attacks by American F-16 aircraft and RAF Tornadoes - an average of one bombing raid every two days. These are said to have been aimed at Iraqi "air defences", but many have fallen on mostly populated areas, where civilian deaths are unavoidable.
Under the United Nations Charter and the conventions of war and international law, the attacks amount to acts of piracy: no different, in principle, from the German Luftwaffe's bombing in Spain in the 1930s as precursor to its invasion of Europe.
The bombing is a "secret war" that has seldom been news. Since 1991, and especially in the last four years, it has been unrelenting and is now deemed the longest Anglo-American campaign of aerial bombardment since World War Two.
The US and British governments justify it by claiming they have a UN mandate to police so-called "no-fly zones" which they declared
following the Gulf War. They say these "zones", which give them control of most of Iraq's airspace, are legal and supported by UN Security Council Resolution 688.
This is false. There are no references to no fly zones in any Security Council resolution. To be sure about this, I asked Dr Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who was Secretary General of the United Nations in 1992 when Resolution 688 was passed. "The issue of no fly zones was not raised and therefore not debated: not a word," he said. "They offer no legitimacy to countries sending their aircraft to attack Iraq."
In 1999, Tony Blair claimed the no fly zones allowed the US and Britain to perform "a vital humanitarian task" in protecting the
Kurds in the north of Iraq and the ethnic Marsh Arabs in the south. In fact, British and American aircraft have actually provided cover for neighbouring Turkey's repeated invasions of northern, Kurdish Iraq.
TURKEY is critical to the American "world order". Overseeing the oilfields of the Middle East and Central Asia, it is a member of
Nato and the recipient of billions of dollars' worth of American weapons and military equipment. It is also where British and American
bombers are based.
A long-running insurrection by Turkey's Kurdish population is regarded by Washington as a threat to the "stability" of Turkey's
"democracy" that is a front for its military which is among the world's worst violators of human rights. Hundreds of thousands of Turkish Kurds have been displaced and an estimated 30,000 killed. Turkey, unlike Iraq, is "our friend".
In 1995 and 1997, as many as 50,000 Turkish troops, backed by tanks and fighter aircraft, occupied what the West called "Kurdish safe havens".
They terrorised Kurdish villages and murdered civilians. In December 2000, they were back, committing the atrocities that the
Turkish military commits with immunity against its own Kurdish population.
For joining the US "coalition" against Iraq, the Turkish regime is to be rewarded with a bribe worth $6billion. Turkey's invasions are rarely reported in Britain. So great is the collusion of the Blair government that, virtually unknown to Parliament and the British
public, the RAF and the Americans have, from time to time, deliberately suspended their "humanitarian" patrols to allow the Turks to get on with killing Kurds in Iraq.
In March last year, RAF pilots patrolling the "no fly zone" in Kurdish Iraq publicly protested for the first time about their enforced complicity in the Turkish campaign. The pilots complained that they were frequently ordered to return to their base in Turkey to allow the Turkish air force to bomb the very people they were meant to be "protecting".
Speaking on a non-attributable basis to Dr Eric Herring, a senior lecturer in politics at Bristol University and a specialist on
Iraqi sanctions, the pilots said whenever the Turks wanted to attack the Kurds in Iraq, RAF patrols were recalled to base and ground crews were told to switch off their radar - so that the Turks' targets would not be visible. One British pilot reported seeing the devastation in Kurdish villages caused by the attacks once he had resumed his patrol.
AMERICAN pilots who fly in tandem with the British, are also ordered to turn their planes around and turn back to Turkey to allow
the Turks to devastate the Kurdish "safe havens".
You'd see Turkish F-14s and F-16s inbound, loaded to the gills with munitions," one pilot told the Washington Post. "Then
they'd come out half an hour later with their munitions expended." When the Americans returned to Iraqi air space, he said, they would see "burning villages, lots of smoke and fire."
The Turks do no more than American and British aircraft in their humanitarian guise. The sheer scale of the Anglo-American bombing is astonishing, with Britain a very junior partner. During the 18 months to January 1999 (the last time I was able to confirm
official US figures) American aircraft flew 36,000 sorties over Iraq, including 24,000 combat missions.
The term "combat" is highly deceptive. Iraq has virtually no air force and no modern air defences. Thus, "combat" means dropping
bombs or firing missiles at infrastructure that has been laid to waste by a 12-year-old embargo.
The Wall Street Journal, the authentic voice of the American establishment, described this eloquently when it reported that the US
faced "a genuine dilemma" in Iraq. After eight years of enforcing a no fly zone in northern (and southern) Iraq, few targets remain. "We're down to the last outhouse," one US official protested.
I have seen the result of these attacks. When I drove from the northern city of Mosul three years ago, I saw the remains of an
agricultural water tanker and truck, riddled with bullet holes, shrapnel from a missile, a shoe and the wool and skeletons of about 150 sheep.
A family of six, a shepherd, his father and his wife and four children, were blown to pieces here. It was treeless, open country: a
moonscape. The shepherd, his family and his sheep would have been clearly visible from the air.
The shepherd's brother, Hussain Jarsis, agreed to meet me at the cemetery where the family is buried. He arrived in an old
Toyota van with the widow, who was hunched with grief, her face covered. She held the hand of her one remaining child, and they sat beside the mounds of earth that are the four children's graves. "I want to see the pilot who killed my children," she shouted across to us.
The shepherd's brother told me, "I heard explosions, and when I arrived to look for my brother and family, the planes were circling overhead. I hadn't reached the causeway when the fourth bombardment took place. The last two rockets hit them.
"At the time I couldn't grasp what was going on. The truck was burning. It was a big truck, but it was ripped to pieces. Nothing
remained except the tyres and the numberplate.
"We saw three corpses, but the rest were just body parts. With the last rocket, I could see the sheep blasted into the air."
It was not known if American or British aircraft had done this. When details of the attack were put to the Ministry of Defence in
London, an official said, "We reserve the right to take robust action when threatened." This attack was significant, because it was investigated and verified by the senior United Nations official in Iraq at the time, Hans Von Sponeck, who drove there specially from Baghdad.
He confirmed that nothing nearby resembled a military installation.
Von Sponeck recorded his finding in a confidential internal document entitled, "Air Strikes in Iraq", prepared by the UN Security Section (UNOHCI).
HE also confirmed dozens of similar attacks and these are documented - attacks on villages, a fishermen's wharf, nearby a UN
food warehouse. So regular were the attacks that Von Sponeck ordered UN relief convoys suspended every afternoon.
FOR this, Von Sponeck, a senior United Nations civil servant with a distinguished career all over the world, made powerful
enemies in Washington and London.
The Americans demanded that Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary General, sack him and were surprised when Annan stood by his chief
representative in Iraq.
However, within a few months, Von Sponeck felt he could no longer run a humanitarian programme in Iraq that was threatened
both by the illegal bombing and by a deliberate American policy of blocking humanitarian supplies.
He resigned in protest, just as his predecessor, Denis Halliday, a Deputy Under Secretary of the UN, had done. Halliday called
the US and British-driven embargo "genocidal".
It is now clear from official documents that the United States is preparing for a possible slaughter in Iraq. The Pentagon's
"Doctrine for Joint Urban Operations" says that unless Baghdad falls quickly it has to be the target of "overwhelming firepower". The resistance of Stalingrad in World War Two is given as a "lesson".
Cluster bombs, deep penetration "bunker" bombs and depleted uranium will almost certainly be used. Depleted uranium is a weapon
of mass destruction. Coated on missiles, and tank shells, its explosive force spreads radiation over a wide area, especially in the desert dust.
Professor Doug Rokke, the US army physicist in charge of cleaning up depleted uranium in Kuwait told me, "I am like most
-people in southern Iraq. I have 5,000 times the recommended level of radiation in my body. What we're seeing now, respiratory problems, kidney problems, cancers are the direct result.
"The controversy over whether or not it's the cause of these problems is a manufactured one. My own ill-health is a testament to
that."
THE most devastating weapon of mass destruction was briefly in the news last week when Unicef, the United Nations children's Fund, released its annual State of the World's Children report.
The human cost of the American-driven embargo of Iraq is spelt out in statistics that require no comment.
"Iraq's child mortality rate has nearly tripled since 1990 to levels found in some of the world's least-developed countries, " said the report.
"The country's regression over the past decade is by far the most severe of the 193 countries surveyed. Unicef said that a quarter
of Iraqi babies were now underweight and that more than a fifth were stunted from malnutrition."
Under the rules of the embargo, Iraqis are allowed less than 100 per person with which to sustain life for an entire year.
To date, the cost of the current, "secret" and illegal British bombing of Iraq is a billion pounds.
Source: http://www.ccmep.org/2002_articles/Iraq/122002_secret_war.htm
You completely missed the point of the post; it was not in support of genocide, but rather an example of how leftists have held America and Israel to a high standard while ignoring all crimes of Arabs against Arabs. This greatly disturbs me when they “claim” to care about the well being of these people. Instead they are used as pawns to support anti-American agenda of the new Stalinist type leadership that has taken over these groups in recent times. This is what upsets me greatly.
"Iraq's child mortality rate has nearly tripled since 1990 to levels found in some of the world's least-developed countries"
How long are you anti-war activists, going to continue to use outdated information to support your cause rather than getting to the "root cause" they always claim to understand and care about. The 1994 Unicef study had a sample size of some 43 Iraqi households, no margin of error there right? Anyway if you look at the increase in Iraqi child mortality rate, (under 5) in any great detail, you will notice, about half occurred before the oil for food deal, as before that Saddam had rejected this humanitarian package, because he felt there was room for political gain. The remaining cases of child mortality haven't increase equally across the whole country. For example, in the northern now semi-autonomous Kurdish region has only seen an increase of 9 per 1000 births, (81 per 1000 to 90.) while the southern region, has more than doubled from 56 per 1000 to 131. Yes the same region that encompassing Iraq's majority, but oppressed Sunni Muslims, you know the ones who tried to overthrow Saddam in 1991 after the gulf war. You know, the greatest threat to his power, the ones the leftists hope will over though him but don't have a chance without international intervention. I know Saddam would never harm children to keep himself in power, it’s not like he locks up the children of out spoken Iraqi critics of his government. (The sight of one of his "children’s jail, would bring a tear to anyone eye, however it has yet to be mention by any of the so called supporters of the oppressed people in the world.) After all, it’s not like Saddam is vengeful, or that he would put his own person interest over that of his subjects. It's not like Saddam has already killed over a million Iraqi's to hold on to his power. (Mainly Sunni’s)
Why does everyone assume I am a right wing nut, I agree the US isn’t perfect, who is? But to criticize the United States government while ignoring the crimes of the Iraqi regime is both hypocritical and unjust.
Aww, the cycle of hatred, which will continue to escalate as long both sides continue to attack. While this is as valid an argument for not going to war, as they come. However, I truly believe that hatred is taught, not learned or even observed. I believe even with an end to the violence there will still be a cult following of who will continue to change their demands to ensure their own agenda more and continued violence. I good example of which would be a picture I saw, in the Toronto Sun, of a Palestinians baby, no more than a few months old, dressed up in suicide bomber outfit, any dummy explosives. I looked at this picture and asked myself many of the same questions you have today. Was this baby seriously oppressed, did the IDF unjustly take away his milk bottle, had this baby exhausted all other non violent solutions and had no recourse but to give his life for the cause. Or had this baby simply been born at the wrong place at the wrong time, and was going to be "trained" to become another suicide bomber (pawn) in this war. Thus my feeling is the only way to a permanent solution is a change of leadership staring at the top down. Is this an imperialist view, maybe but I feel that only by giving power to the people of Arab nations can there be hope for a long standing solution. The cocaine market will always exist because there is a strong demand for cocaine, regardless of what happens to supply. However, the demand to blow yourself up is very limited and can easily be greatly reduced if not totally eliminated by giving the people of this region one important thing: Hope, and the chance for a better life. However, that can only come with a change in leadership.
"i wonder if the solution we are presently undertaking against terrorism will just make things worse"
Funny, I thought the same thing about the negotiated solution undertaken in the 90's. I have always believed that you never negotiate with terrorists, because all that it will achieve is recognition from the terrorist parties that their methods our acceptable and achieving results. This will only lead to more terrorist attacks and new greater demands once to have met the original ones. Something like what has happened in the years since Oslo. Apparently the Palestinians no longer can live without East Jerusalem a demand they seemed to have forgotten about years ago when their efforts did not appear to be achieving any results. The same demand or sticking point (in reality an excuse) they now that they used for not finding a peaceful solution. Which is why appeasement does not work, it only increases the appetite. 1948, Munich Pact #14, "Ok Hitler you can have Europe, Africa, Asia and South America" but this time you can't cross your fingers when you promise not to attack us anymore".
This is a dilemma which can be debated for years, (good choice of a topic) and perhaps only time will tell. Hard to end, hard to find a solution unless you are me, egg, everyone knows the egg came before the chicken.
yes, but why do WE have to be the ones to do it for them? you see, the problem that creates is "their" new leader has american finger prints all over him or her. the new leader will be seen to be imposed on them from above. and so their trust in "their" leader slowly disappears. and so, to stay in power, this leader has to get more and more repressive. and eventually the leader becomes a target for overthrow. and then we are back to square one.
i think meddling in the affairs of other countries creates way more problems than it solves. even IF we replace the leaders, that's not going to stop terrorism coming from that particular country, or from the middle east. that as soon as the new leader is in place, suddenly there's no more terrorism. i'm sorry, but i don't think that claim can be made. no way, that's just wishful, simplistic thinking. there's more to terrorism than simply bad leadership.
so how can we effectively defend ourselves from terrorism without having to meddle in the affairs of 5 or more countries in middle east at the same time, and without exacerbating the situation, and without fueling further terrorism? it's a very, very difficult question, and i don't think the bush admin. has paid enough attention to it. they don't want to even try to answer it. they just want the easy, tactical, short term answer. but they don't seem to get that the very difficult, strategic, long term answer is the one that will get the best results. what that answer is...
Yes. My impression from most of them is that they're generally adolescent or very scared older boys driving the biggest SUVs they can find with large girlfriends and flags and bumperstickers about reloading. And if they're police or military, they're using lots of things as excuses and props for their own rage against everything, symptomatic of depression and abuse.
I saw a great movie the other night (rental, can't remember but it had Barbara Hershey and appeared to be set in Australia, she plays a therapist who dissapears) and it was all about how we don't trust anyone, even in our closest relationships, maybe especially in those. It was an amazing story, because the filmmaker also tricks the audience into thinking things automatically without having proof of it, making assumptions about people being bad. And this is socially, an almost hard-wired thing about people, to automatically assume others are bad because they're bad people, not that they're good people that have gotten into bad situations. Across the board, humans automatically assume the worst about other humans. So we have a lot of work to do to get past these most basic problems. I was glad to find, though, that some do, although it takes thinking, even just the slightest bit, being aware of who and what you are.
The funny thing about Canada - when they talk about support for the war and against the war, they just come out and say that the 'intellectuals' don't support it, 'of course.' Down here we're like the crazies. Someone on KPFA was pointing out how mainstream media is trying to start to make fun of people who want peace, and that they're taunting the hollywood stars that are coming out.
Yes. My impression from most of them is that they're generally adolescent or very scared older boys driving the biggest SUVs they can find with large girlfriends and flags and bumperstickers about reloading. And if they're police or military, they're using lots of things as excuses and props for their own rage against everything, symptomatic of depression and abuse.
I saw a great movie the other night (rental, can't remember but it had Barbara Hershey and appeared to be set in Australia, she plays a therapist who dissapears) and it was all about how we don't trust anyone, even in our closest relationships, maybe especially in those. It was an amazing story, because the filmmaker also tricks the audience into thinking things automatically without having proof of it, making assumptions about people being bad. And this is socially, an almost hard-wired thing about people, to automatically assume others are bad because they're bad people, not that they're good people that have gotten into bad situations. Across the board, humans automatically assume the worst about other humans. So we have a lot of work to do to get past these most basic problems. I was glad to find, though, that some do, although it takes thinking, even just the slightest bit, being aware of who and what you are.
The funny thing about Canada - when they talk about support for the war and against the war, they just come out and say that the 'intellectuals' don't support it, 'of course.' Down here we're like the crazies. Someone on KPFA was pointing out how mainstream media is trying to start to make fun of people who want peace, and that they're taunting the hollywood stars that are coming out.
I must say I was surprised to see them, but never having read an indymedia page before, I wasn't sure how quickly the editor's would respond, or even if they'd allow them to remain or wipe them.
In the confusion of a recent spam attack, one of his comments was accidently unhidden. In the confussion of a spam attack, sometimes this happens. Sometimes posts are hidden accidentally. Sometimes there isn't time for accurate, aimed fire. Sometimes we just gotta spray and pray. Sorry about that. We're doing our best to keep the Nazis off this site. Please bear with us. Better still, deal with them yourslf, in the best way there is:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/12/1553620_comment.php#1554869
In the meantime, if you happen see a Tsun post we missed, please write and tell us:
imc-sf-editorial [at] lists.indymedia.org
We'll deal with it as soon as we can.
I don't think that's how it works.
I do believe, however, that life will be better for Iraq, once they have a regime change, but that's my right wing fanaticism. By the way, good luck fixing the CA economy with more socialism.
And as for liberation, todays societys dont liberate for nothing, there is no such thing as a free lunch.
the rest of the world would be glad to go home. Also,
before your leaders go to Washington to ask for our help tell them then you don't need it. We don't want to
help you but, if you thnk you can invade our land and not pay the price you are mistaken. We are not like you we have courage and a back bone, we are not cowards. Remember don't tell us to go home after we get their, tell us not to come before you get your ass kicked.