Afghanistan: Invasion, Destruction, Occupation, Exploitation, Opium
http://www.jar2.com/Topics/US_International_Crimes.html
http://www.jar2.com/1/Archive/2006/April2006.htm
http://www.jar2.com/topics/War_and_Drugs.html
Title- “Literal Colonialism”- Blackwater Founder Calls For “American Viceroy” To Rule Afghanistan Afghan police destroy poppy field in Nangarhar
July 10, 2019 - For several days now I have been attempting to research several matters but have run into a complete wall of censorship and resources that are no longer there. As an example I attempted to find an actual death count on the civilians and Afghans killed by the US and NATO and the best resource I found was my own site in articles from 2012. Western search engines were useless and now Yandex, which is owned by shadowy individuals in the Netherlands is also useless. The Taliban Have Won? While monitoring the some of my news sources this headline came up The Taliban Have Won In Afghanistan prompting another casualty search. With the racist imperial internet completely wiped of any data on the genocide of the Afghan people, thus the genocide in Afghanistan rolls on ignored by the world and obfuscated as over a million people have been killed from Afghan herion (the only reliable number I have found from a report by Ivanov http://www.jar2.com/Topics/Afghanistan.html ) with US estimates (only vague estimates) at approximately 250 000 a year every year since 2001 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Afghanistan ). That makes over 4 million 500 thousand. Since there are no accurte body counts and in fact the internet is filled with data showing a doubling of the Afghan population nearing the 37-40 million figure since 2001 which I am certain is a complete lie I used the CIA controlled WikiPedia page and counted their suspiciosly even number of yearly deaths (about 250 0000) as war casualties.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Afghanistan The Afghan pipeline meanwhile continues to be ignored as does the missing Pentagon 21 trillion.
http://www.jar2.com/Topics/USAID.html https://www.usip.org/publications/2017/12/usaid-afghanistan-challenges-and-successes
http://www.jar2.com/Interviews/Anita_Dancs.html
http://www.jar2.com/Interviews/Kathy_Kelly.html
https://www.jar2.com/Interviews/Zalmay_Gulzad.html
Download audio file 23 June, 04:44 The situation in Afghanistan after more than 12 years of U.S. occupation is getting worse by the day. The United States continues to support and make deals with the Taliban in order to guarantee that their designs for the country are fulfilled, most importantly keeping 9 military bases in the country after the official withdrawal of troops in 2014. President Karzai and the Afghan people are tired of the U.S. double-dealing and have decided to stop all negotiations.
Hello! This is John Robles, I’m talking with Dr. Zalmay Gulzad. He is a Professor at Harold Washington College in Chicago in the Political Science Department.
Robles: Hello Sir! How are you this evening?
Gulzad: Very good, thank you very much.
Robles: First question: can you give our listeners a little bit of an update? And we’d really like to hear what you think about this situation currently in Afghanistan, especially with this kind switch of events that are happening right now, as far as Russia supporting Karzai etc?
Gulzad: The situation is that the area is totally in chaos. Afghanistan, Iran, Syria and Turkey and all these areas are in trouble.
What Afghanistan really wanted to have is: the Afghans must lead the peace talk, that was the goal. What happened was that the United States as usual, we have seen the history, the United States has this very strong alliance with the Pakistani military, and also with the Pakistani secret police, the ISI. Everybody in the world knows that Talibans are supported by the Pakistani military and by the ISI secret police of Pakistan.
So, Americans made a deal with them like: “Okay, we want to have nine bases in Afghanistan. This negotiation is going on and while it is going on, we want you to create a situation for us, to tell the Taliban to come to Qatar and sit down with us and talk, we could create something that they would not attack the American bases in Afghanistan and also would not attack the United States from Afghanistan.”
So, if that is happening, America and Taliban are going to talk, the Pakistani military and the ISI, because they are good allies and the United States is giving $2 billion a year to the Pakistani military, they said “Fine!”, they created this.
Robles: Karzai, wasn’t he agreeing to the same thing, to allow bases to remain in Afghanistan? So what happened there?
Gulzad: Karzai has agreed mostly that nine bases should be given to Afghanistan. One condition isd there that most Afghans are asking the United States, that the United States should push the Pakistani military not to support any more, while the Americans and the NATO are leaving, they should not support the Taliban, so that Afghanistan has peace. But the United States is largely saying to Afghans that we cannot do that. So, the objective is this: America wants to make a secret deal, to sell Afghanistan to Pakistan and to the Taliban and the Afghans are not going to accept it.
The other thing is the building which was dedicated to the Afghan Taliban, they’ve put the name on it: Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, and they were flying the Taliban flag. Immediately the Afghan Government and the Afghan officials, they objected to that, that is why Karzai got mad.
Okay, this is supposed to be: you are recognizing Taliban as an entity. And Taliban also used that office to send their delegation to Iran. They were trying to use it. So, that’s why today’s situation got very bad.
Karzai says that we are not going to talk to you anymore about the American troops staying in Afghanistan until things change. So then Kerry, called Karzai in Kabul and he said that the Taliban will not fly the American, I mean the Taliban flag over the building and also they will not call it the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.
So, the problem is this: the mistrust between the Afghan Government, the Afghan people and the United States, is because the United States always supported the Taliban, (Al Qaeda is supported by the Taliban), and the United States is having this secret alliance with the Pakistani military, even though there was some sort of election in Pakistan after which the Muslim League, which is a very religious party, won the election. But still, the military is in control.
Nawaz Sharif will become the Prime Minister, he was overthrown by Gen Musharraf in 1991. He was in jail, he was in exile in London and Saudi Arabia but he’s back now, he is the Prime Minister, but he is afraid of the military. The military is calling all the shots in Pakistan.
Robles: What are the chances right now of things being worked out, I mean where do you see the Taliban going? What is the future looking like right now?
Gulzad: The future looks like this: United States wanted to make a deal with Pakistan and with Taliban in order to get their bases, because the United States always looks for their own interests, short term.
As I said before, the nine bases are very important because they are in the north of Afghanistan, west Afghanistan, central Afghanistan, out of Afghanistan and east Afghanistan.
East Afghanistan, northeast Afghanistan is for China, north Afghanistan is for Russia, the west of Afghanistan is for Iran and the south Afghanistan is for the Persian Gulf, because it is 150 miles and they could keep an eye on the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz and all this.
The other thing is that if you look throughout the history at what the United States has done, they made quick deals with the Taliban. If you look at the Clinton Administration, when the Taliban was in power I had the pleasure to go to the White House and talk with Clinton and his wife and I told them: “What you are doing in Afghanistan, with Taliban is killing these people?”
Because the Unocal Company, which is a California-based company, contributed money to his election. Clinton made a deal with them, they said: “Okay, as long as Taliban could bring stability in Afghanistan, then there will be this pipeline which is coming from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to the Indian Ocean.
So, Clinton didn’t give a damn about what Taliban was doing to the Afghan people and Afghan women, and all this. All he was concerned about was how this pipeline should go. He didn’t care about Democracy, he didn’t care about anything. The only thing he cared about was that this pipeline could go so that he could pay back the Unocal who gave him a lot of money in his election.
Right now, this Obama regime is doing exactly the same thing. They want to make a deal with the Devil and they are selling the Afghan people. And then…
Naturally I don’t blame Russia, I don’t blame China, I don’t blame India and all these big powers, they are very nervous because if they leave a lot of these countries such as Pakistan, everybody will arm their own ally, there will be a war. And this war is going to spread, it has already spread to Pakistan and it’s going to spread to the former Soviet Republics, Islamic Republics of Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan, and that will have a major impact on the future of Russia.
Robles: And what role do you see for Russia right now, in the short term and in the long term?
Gulzad: Russia has a major role. I don’t care what people say that Russia is finished and all this kind of stuff. The people in Afghanistan and in the area are looking forward to see Russia play a major role in the politics of that area. The people of Afghanistan always had good relations with Russia. You were listening to an interview with Dr. Zalmay Gulzad.
Dr Zalmay
Gulzad spoke to the Voice of Russia's John Robles about the history of
Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and about how the USSR assisted the
Afghan people and built almost everything there is in the country. Dr.
Gulzad details how the US turned their own "freedom fighters" into the very
"terrorists" that they are now fighting and he says the US wants to stay in
Afghanistan for a very long time due to its strategic geopolitical location.
Hello! This is John Robles, I’m talking with Dr.
Zalmay Gulzad. He is a professor at Harold
Washington College in Chicago, in the Political Science Department.
Robles: Hello
Sir! How are you this evening? Gulzad: Very good, thank you very much.
Robles: First
question I’d like to ask you. Now: you were born in Afghanistan and live in
the US, you work in the US. How do you feel about the invasion of
Afghanistan by the United States of America?
Gulzad: Let
me start with this: I was a young member of PDPA (People Democratic Party of
Afghanistan). I supported the Afghan revolution. Unfortunately at that time
I was in the United States, but I did support the revolution in Afghanistan
and I supported the Soviet Union’s support for the Afghan revolution.
There was
one Soviet Union journalist Vladimir Pozner, at the Soviet time. Him and I
did a review “Question and Answer for American people”. I was a student, I
was getting my Phd and he came to Madison Wisconsin. I know Vladimir Pozner
very well and we met.
So, my
point is that it is an aggression. These are the people who the United
States supported, they are the criminals, they’re bandits, the so-called
“freedom fighters” because they were fighting the Soviets and the communism
and all this.
And today
the same people are attacking the United States and they call them
terrorists. Why didn’t they call them terrorists in 1980s?
Robles: I’ve
been trying to get that point across to a lot of people and people are
missing that for some reason.
Gulzad: 15,000
Soviet troops were killed to fight these bandits, but the United States
always went with the short victories, went with the criminals. The criminals
that they trained: Bin Laden and the Arab terrorists, and the Pakistanis,
and all these Taliban and Mujahidin, and “they” turned against them (U.S.).
Unfortunately, this land of democracy that I live in is a joke because
nobody is asking their leader: “Why did you make that mistake.?” I used to
call them freedom fighters, today they are terrorists. How come it changed
in one day?
Robles: Do
you have any details yourself about how the Taliban got their start, how Al
Qaeda got their start, how Osama Bin Laden got his start fighting the Soviet
Army in Afghanistan?
Gulzad: 1978
Afghan revolution, the Soviet Union recognized us and most progressive
countries in the world recognized that revolution.
Jimmy
Carter was the President of the United States. He started it: with Zbigniew
Brzezinski, they started it to arm, to find the people to oppose the Afghan
state because they considered, they thought: that this is the soft belly of
the Soviet Union.
They
thought that from Afghanistan they are going to infiltrate in the Muslim
Soviet republics of Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan.
So what
they did… Now, they couldn’t find too many Afghans, very few Afghans opposed
it, because the Communist Government gave them land and everything else, so
they couldn’t find too many Afghans.
So, what
they did is they went to Anwar Sadat and to the Arab reactionary regimes,
they found unemployed Arabs, unemployed Pakistanis (the Pakistani regime was
a dictatorship, not only military, but it was a religious Zia-ul-Haq regime
in Pakistan).
What they
did, they brought all these criminals to Pakistan which is bordering with
Afghanistan for almost 1000 miles. So what they did, the CIA started
training them and sending them to kill the Afghans, destroy the Afghan
revolution.
So, then
naturally, “naturally”, it is a very natural thing, the Soviet Union had to…
because there was a friendship treaty with Afghanistan.
The Soviet
Union and Afghanistan signed the friendship treaty in September 1978.
So
according to that treaty the Afghan Government was able to ask the Soviet
Union, in case they were in trouble, to ask for the Soviet Union to help and
the Soviet Union provided that help.
So, the
point is that the United States taught these criminals, dropped them there
to fight not only the Afghan Communists, but then they thought they will
make it the Soviet Union but now… And that is how all that process started
through Pakistan. Pakistan was a reactionary regime of military.
So, Afghanistan became a sandwich between
two: Shia and Sunni Muslim fundamentalists.
Reminder
Robles: Can
you give us a few more details? Can you compare what the United States is
doing now and what the Soviet Union was doing when they were in there, in
Afghanistan? Because now some people are trying to say: “Oh, well!! The
Soviet Union “INVADED” Afghanistan… The Soviet Union…
Gulzad: I
fight it every day. I fought it even at that time when Ronald Reagan was in
power. Vladimir Ponzner will be the witness on that.
We had a
Progressive Afghan Student Organization and I was the head of it.
My point
is that you cannot compare the Soviet Union because Afghanistan People’s
Democratic Party had the same ideology as the Communist Party of the Soviet
Union.
So, the
idea was that Afghanistan PDPA was giving land, Afghanistan was a very poor
country, an almost feudal society, so we were giving land to the poor. What
person is going to rise against you if you give them a piece of land? If you
teach their daughter and son?
They (The
U.S.S.R.) built schools, they built everything that is in Afghanistan today,
I am telling you as an Afghan! Every road, highway, dam, factory, airport
that you can see, the infrastructure of Afghanistan is made in the USSR.
Robles: Few
people know that.
Gulzad: Including
Bagram that today the American Imperialists are sitting there. It is the
Soviet Union that built everything.
Thousands
of Afghan students, including my brother, became educated in the Soviet
Union. I mean “what the hell?” people are going to… It was Not the people!
Do you
know that there was a recent interview on BBC and CNN. They went to Kandahar
and to Ghazni, two cities in Afghanistan. They were asking people… An Afghan
farmer he spit on the American journalist!
He said:
“The Soviet Union brought a lot of things to this country, peace, but you
brought war.”
Certainly!
And they showed it on TV, I saw it on BBC and Aljazeera.
Robles: So,
what is the real situation in Afghanistan right now, after almost 13 years
of US occupation?
Gulzad: My
point is this: that if you want to stop this war, you should go to Pakistan.
Pakistan is a very poor country. Pakistan is controlling the Taliban, the Al
Qaeda, everybody.
If United
States wants to stop this war, then United States could squeeze Pakistan
economically and in many ways! Pakistan is a joke!
So, my
point is that the United States wants to prolong this war because they want
to stay in Afghanistan.
The United
States has total control economically and militarily over Pakistan. End of part 1
The former Soviet Union built everything in Afghanistan including the bases which the US is now occupying, the United States is supporting Radical Islamic groups, including Chechen terrorists, to destabilize countries they are targetting. Syria is the most secular progressive country in the Muslim World yet i being attacked by the West and all of the US actions are back-firing on them, they believe that quick victory is the proper route. They are worng. All of theses issues were discussed in an interview with Dr. Zalmay Gulzad, an Afghan native who teaches Political Science at Harold Washington College in Chicago.
Gulzad: The
point is that what the United States is doing and NATO is doing: they want
to prolong this war with the collaboration of the Pakistani army. The very
government in Pakistan is a joke, is silly, is nothing. The decisions are
made by the military, the military is with the United States.
Robles: What
are the reasons, I mean, why does the US want to be in Afghanistan and in
your opinion, resources or what?
Gulzad: It
is very important geopolitically and I will tell you why. Afghanistan is now
very poor and I salute the Soviet people because the Soviet Union (the
former Soviet Union) because Afghanistan has so many resources and now they
have revealed how many resources they have. The Soviet Union did not take
any of it. They did not take advantage of it, because we have petroleum, we
have copper, we have so many things now.
They gave
the biggest copper mine to Chinese now, and in the Central Afghanistan they
have the steel and all that kind of stuff.
So anyway,
the reason that United States wants to prolong this war and stay there is
because; first of all we have a 150 mile border with China. Then we are very
close to Russia, if you pass Tadzhikistan, it’s Russia, and then we have
Iran, then we have Persian Gulf, so Afghanistan is a very important.
Now I’ll
tell you that these bases that United States is using today which were made
by the Soviet Union. One in the north of Afghanistan is American base now,
and Shindand, the Soviet Union built it, it is bordering with Iran and
Pakistan, then Kandahar, then you have Bagram, which is north of Kabul, now
they are building a base almost everywhere including Badakhshan. Badakhshan
is not too far from Tadzhikistan and the Chinese borders.
And also
the United States is supporting the Uyghur Muslim group and Tadjiks in
Xinjiang Province, which is bordering Afghanistan. They are making trouble
for the Chinese Muslims. And also United States is supporting the Chechen
group in Russia.
Robles: Which
group did you say in Russia?
Gulzad: In
Russia, the Chechen group.
Robles: Sure.
Gulzad: And
also in China they are supporting Uyghur and Tadjiks.
Robles: I
think they would support any group that will destabilize or weaken any
country that they want to attack, I think.
Gulzad: Absolutely.
My point is that when they are saying that the Cold War is over, they were
anti-communists. What the hell? I mean today Russia is not a Communist
country.
Robles: No,
we are not.
Gulzad: But
the point is that United States have a phobia and they want to be the
imperialist power. What they are doing with the world today: my God!!
I always
discuss with my colleagues here that… Okay, how many countries did the
Soviet Union invade? How many countries has the United States invaded in our
lifetime? How many wars? Just recently: Panama, Nicaragua, Afghanistan,
Iraq, for no reason, for no reason.
Robles: Iraq,
Iran, the list goes on and on.
Gulzad: In
Syria, they want to know, why doesn’t the United States want to… (if they
are such champions of human rights and democracy) …why don’t they say
anything about Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, all these kingdoms?
Robles: Sure.
Gulzad: Why
Syria? Syria is more secular, more progressive country.
Robles: I
don’t understand… Okay Syria; they were just attacked, about 50 people, this
was yesterday, 53 people are said to have been dead by an Al-Qaeda group.
Israel is
bombing Syria, and the United States, so we have Israel, Al-Qaeda and the
United States working together (Working together right?) to destroy Syria.
Doesn’t that seem strange?
Gulzad: Absolutely.
And how it’s backfiring!! Let me tell you something. Just a few months ago I
did an interview on American television here, on the so-called Arab Spring.
So what’s happened? I told them, the United States is not supporting the
progressive group; intellectuals. They don’t have to be left group but just
regular progressive secular groups.
What they
did: they supported the most radical Islamist group, the problem was
Mubarak, because they were sick and tired of Mubarak. They wanted to find a
new puppet. What happened is it backfired! Guess what? Who won? The Islamic
fundamentalists.
In Libya
they did the same thing because they are too stupid here because they think
that quick victory will bring them happiness and glory. So, what they did in
Libya. they did the same thing. Guess who took over? Islamic
fundamentalists.
This is
what happened in Tunisia: Islamic fundamentalists.
Right now,
yesterday, the Congress of the United States decided to give millions of
dollars to the radicals of Syria. They are not giving it to intellectuals,
to secular groups, they claim that they are fighting for democracy and
secular regimes. But they are giving it to them because they want to get
over, through this in a blink.
A lot of
this is backfiring, 3-4 countries backfired on them. And then after Syria,
mark my words for it, it is Iran. It’s not that I love Iran, Iran regime is
a fascist regime, but my point is that the United States will go there
because if you look from Morocco to Iran, to Afghanistan, to India and
everything, guess what? All of them are pro-American except Iran and Syria.
These two places are not puppets.
And the
expansion of NATO against who? Now the Warsaw pact is not there! Against
who? Why do you expand this? You took Saakashvili from Chicago. Do you know
Saakashvili is from Chicago, he was the lawyer here, they picked him up and
made him the president of Georgia, and now they find another puppet. Do you
know that Karzai’s brother had a restaurant in Chicago? They picked him up
from Chicago and gave him the same thing.
Robles: Bashar
Assad was a dentist in London. I couldn’t understand why they went against
him.
Gulzad: It
is amazing, isn’t it? If you look at Lithuania, so many places, look at
Ukraine, the guy who was the former president of Ukraine, his wife was from
the United States, from Chicago.
Robles: I’ve
talked to many people and it seems like most of the world is being
controlled by some part of Chicago for some reason.
Gulzad: Chicago
is the mafia city. It is just amazing.
Robles: Now
listen, here is a hypothetical that I don’t think anyone has ever talked
about, but… You say the plan is backfiring. We see, everybody sees: ok, they
are funding these terrorists, they are promoting terrorism actually. They
are creating more terrorists. They are financing
radical-Islamic-violent-people, right?
Gulzad: Absolutely.
Robles: Is
it possible that that is, what they want?
Gulzad: Well,
they want to destabilize their enemy, the only way you can weaken a country
and society is with a civil war, and how you do it? Like for example in
China, you promote Tibet, you promote the idea of Islamist Uyghur and
Tadjiks, it’s one problem.
You go to
Russia, make Russia very busy with the terrorists through Georgia, which
Sakashvili was helping. From Georgia you head then to Dagestan, and, you
know, Chechen area and you could create problems for Russia. That is the
only way, see?
And then
you make excuses that I am staying in Afghanistan because the Taliban are
still in power and al-Qaeda is still alive.
Robles: That
is what I am talking about. And then they can continue the endless War on
Terror because they keep creating more and more terrorists themselves.
Gulzad: You
know there is key reason, the weak countries in the world, what they do;
they are diverting attention from the inside misery of the people, from
internal forces because inside it is empty and miserable and worse economy,
so what they do they tell the people that outside is going to…
That’s the
history of United States, think about it. Castro is going to attack Florida.
The Soviet Union is going to come and get us! The Russians are coming!!
Okay? Then Saddam Hussein is going to come and invade the United States.
Then they created this man, this stupid man with a beard called Osama, Bin
Laden, okay?
So, what
they did, they made Americans wave the flag! “We are Americans!” And the
became very patriotic and all this. So, they continue finding these external
unbelievable forces.
And their
motive is this: as I said before and just recently I gave another interview,
that what they want to do is they want to stay in Afghanistan. They want to
stay in Iraq. Permanently, they will stay in Afghanistan because of Russia,
because of China, because of the BRICs, China, India, and Russia, in this
part of the world.
Plus they
don’t like Iran, so they want to destabilize Iran through Afghanistan. These
are all excuses.
Where are
these terrorists? If you want to finish this thing, tomorrow you tell
Pakistan that: “You will not get a penny”, Pakistan is a very poor country,
and it is all over, give me these terrorist groups, one by one”.
Robles: Listen
Doctor Gulzad, we have to finish. I really loved speaking with you. Can I
call you again?
Gulzad: Call
me any time.
Robles: Thank
you very much sir!
Gulzad: You’re
welcome, alright!
You were
listening to an interview with Dr. Zalmay Gulzad, a Professor at Harold
Washington College in Chicago. Thanks for listening, and as always I wish
you the best.
Almost the entirety of the facts regarding the US invasion and “involvement” in Afghanistan raise serious questions as to the real intentions that the US had in invading the country in the first place and what they have done there since. The questions are many, some that are impossible to answer, some that have been answered and brushed under the carpet and still others that are not be answered or even asked, with anyone attempting to do so facing a violent reaction or concerted backlash. Among these questions is why has opium production increased after 12 years of US/NATO occupation? The fact that the US does not want the world to know what they have really been doing in Afghanistan, the embedded reporters who only report what they are supposed to report and their attempts to silence anyone who has exposed crimes (Bradley Manning for example), along with the level of duplicity that exists within the Karzai “puppet” government, the Taliban and their intertwined relationship with the US has made it extremely difficult if not impossible to ascertain the real situation in the country. However if one is to look at the results of their invasion and occupation and what has transpired there in the now over 12 years of occupation things become clearer. Like any crime, the crimes that have occurred in Afghanistan and against the Afghan people by the US/NATO coalition in collusion with the Taliban, other non-state actors and foreign powers, have been carried out to benefit particular actors or a particular geopolitical or other plan. From the concerted destruction of almost all Soviet built infrastructure to the decimation of all institutions that supported civil society the end result of over 12 years of US/NATO occupation has been the complete destruction and splintering of the country and the predicted return of the Taliban to power. This benefits US/NATO strategy of destroying countries to keep them weak and prevent the formation of anti US blocs, such as one that may have formed between Russia, China, Pakistan and Afghanistan and it has also followed US strategy with regard to exploitation and resource extraction, that it is better and more profitabler to deal with warlords and illegal fiefdoms when obtaining resources than with legitimate state actors who demand contracts, quotas, controls and taxes. Following the line of thought that with any crime someone benefits, we then have to ask what has benefitted the most from the US occupation. The answer to that is the opium production and trade and the Taliban. This is not a theory or an accusation but the facts as laid out by the United Nations. So while the US has been taking money from US taxpayers to “fight” the illicit narcotics business in Afghanistan, to the tune of $70 billion, Afghan opium cultivation is up 36% and production is up 49%. According to a report released by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC): “Opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan rose 36 per cent in 2013, a record high, according to the 2013 Afghanistan Opium Survey released today in Kabul by the Ministry of Counter Narcotics and UNODC. Meanwhile, opium production amounted to 5,500 tons, up by almost a half since 2012.” Mr. Yury Fedotov, the Executive Director of UNODC, called the news "sobering" and stressed that this situation poses a threat to health, stability and development in Afghanistan and beyond: "What is needed is an integrated, comprehensive response to the drug problem. Counter-narcotics efforts must be an integral part of the security, development and institution-building agenda". The problem with this and the elephant in the room that everyone is ignoring is the fact the United States and their CIA are colluding with the producers of heroin and in fact protecting the opium fields in Afghanistan while running duplicitous policies with the Taliban and the Karzai government. The reality is that US/NATO and their “coalition of the willing” are involved in actively protecting the opium fields in Afghanistan according to a recent exposé consisting of almost exclusively photographs by the Global Research group(LINK2). Global Research apparently made the editorial decision that a picture is worth a thousand words and in this case the pictures, are a visual and unarguable condemnation of the US “mission” in Afghanistan. Global research quotes Jean-Luc Lemahieu, the outgoing leader of the Afghanistan office of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, which produced the above report as saying: “This has never been witnessed before in the history of Afghanistan,”. Global Research wrote: “The U.S. military has allowed poppy cultivation to continue in order to appease farmers and government officials involved with the drug trade who might otherwise turn against the Afghan Karzai government in Kabul. Fueling both sides, in fact, the opium and heroin industry is both a product of the war and an essential source for continued conflict.” They also say: “It is well-documented that the U.S. government has – at least at some times in some parts of the world – protected drug operations. (Big American banks also launder money for drug cartels. Indeed, drug dealers kept the banking system afloat during the depths of the 2008 financial crisis. And the U.S. drug money laundering is continuing to this day.) Scores of other reports say the CIA, which has funded operations from drug money received in Columbia and in other locations, has a long history of such collusion and Afghanistan, which now produces approximately 75% of the world’s opium, is a literal gold mine for illicit narcotics revenues and shifts the balance of the illegal heroin trade from the Golden Triangle and other organizations. In a book by Alfred W. McCoy, called the The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade : Afghanistan, Southeast Asia, Central America, Colombia, he writes: “American diplomats and secret agents have been involved in the narcotics traffic at three levels: (1) coincidental complicity by allying with groups actively engaged in the drug traffic; (2) abetting the traffic by covering up for known heroin traffickers and condoning their involvement; (3) and active engagement in the transport of opium and heroin. It is ironic, to say the least, that America's heroin plague is of its own making.” UNODC chief Yury Fedotov believes the UN report is a warning: "As we approach 2014 and the withdrawal of international forces from the country, the results of the Afghanistan Opium Survey 2013 should be taken for what they are - a warning, and an urgent call to action. If the drug problem is not taken more seriously by aid, development and security actors, the virus of opium will further reduce the resistance of its host, already suffering from dangerously low immune levels due to fragmentation, conflict, patronage, corruption and impunity". After 12 years and perhaps a million dead the only mission that has been accomplished in Afghanistan is the increase of heroin production, could it be that this was the goal all along? Food for thought and serious investigation
30 April,
2013 09:18
The violence
and instability in the Middle East is getting worse as summer approaches, it
is being fueled by Shiite - Sunni strife, regional animosity, civil war,
shattered economies, rising Islamic fundamentalism, the ongoing conflict in
Syria, Israeli moves against it neighbors, the instability in post invasion
Libya and Iraq, and US military expansion. It is no coincidence that right
in the middle of almost every single Middle Eastern conflict is the CIA,
with suitcases of money for Karzai, money for Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria,
money for NGOs in Egypt and support for insurgents and terrorists in almost
every single recent conflict. A pretext is needed by US “nation builders”
for an all out invasion of Syria and Iran, will the CIA give them one or can
be peace be brought about in the Middle East despite US efforts? The Prime
Minister of Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki, recently made a very astute, topical and
insightful statement
to the world’s press regarding
the situation in Syria. As a man in the leadership of a country targeted,
destroyed and haphazardly reconfigured by the nefarious Western geopolitical
empire builders, sitting in their comfortable offices in Washington while
safely wreaking death, destruction and havoc on poor weak countries across
the globe, he is a man who surely must know what he is talking about when he
talks about forces that could tear the Middle East completely apart. The prime
minister warned that if the Syrian insurgents, a grouping made up almost in
its entirety of U.S and Western backed terrorists, mercenaries, criminals
and killers, succeeds in ousting the elected President of Syria Bashar
al-Assad, it will lead to more violence and instability not only in Syria,
but it will spillover into the rest of the region. He said if the
U.S. backed insurgents, a motley mix of Al-Qaeda, Chechen, and every other
color of terrorist wins, Syria will become a haven for extremists, a
sectarian war will be sparked in Iraq, a civil war will start in Lebanon and
divisions will be created in Jordan. This is
something that the nefarious Washington planners must also be aware of and
perhaps are counting on. Washington itself has become even more bellicose
than usual as of late, attempting to fabricate a Syrian chemical weapons
story and trying to connect it to an invasion of Iran. The U.S. planners are
clearly behind schedule on Syria and Iran and surely the pretexts for yet
more aggressive invasions disguised as “interventions” will be coming one
after the other in haste as summer begins. Washington’s Iranian uranium
pretext has not panned out so well and President Bashar al-Assad has clearly
shown more resiliency than Washington expected. The statement
by the prime minister is particularly topical with the recent news that the
President of Afghanistan has been receiving millions upon millions of CIA
dollars for the last decade, which explains a lot actually. Namely and most
importantly for me this explains, President Karzai’s complacency when it
comes to the constant, seemingly never ending stream of civilian casualties
and the death and destruction wreaked on the innocent Afghan civilian
population by the “Bush coalition of the willing”. It also explains why
Karzai has allied himself with what are nothing more than aggressive
invaders of his country. These were always question I pondered but the
answer is now simple and clear, it appears, that he was simply bought-off by
the CIA. The New York
Times reported that; “… money was delivered monthly by the CIA in suitcases,
backpacks and plastic shopping bags and the sums were in the tens of
millions of dollars”. Were such a revelation made of almost any other leader
in the world, the outrage in the president’s country would be unbelievable.
In almost any country the president receiving money from a foreign power’s
spy agency, the CIA in this case, would be an outrageous act of treason. Hamid
Karzai has admitted that the accusations,
which were revealed by members of his own administration, are true and has
tried to say that the money was used for innocent and benign “humanitarian”
issues and paying unspecified “rents”. No corruption or treason here, move
along, nothing to see. Never mind the CIA was doing the money delivery.
Normal. Move along. The Iraqi PM
stated that the violence of those wishing to replace President Bashar
al-Assad will lead to more violence, this is completely logical and
pragmatic reasoning and could be expanded on to reach the conclusion that a
country rebuilt by corrupt officials will also spread more corruption. This
black budget, or the new politer term “Ghost Money”, was paid to Karzai in
secret by the CIA, not because it was for “humanitarian assistance” or
“rent”, but because it was illegal and what in fact they were doing was
buying favor. How will
American politicians, diplomats, State Department officials and the
sanctimonious idiots at the CIA who allowed this to become known, now
dictate to the world on corruption? Even more importantly for their own
political necks, how will they be able to explain to poor over-taxed, over
controlled American taxpayers and voters, why they are pouring millions upon
millions into the pockets of a foreign leader in a country where they have
already failed miserably and have burdened the next dozen or so generations
of American taxpayer with a bill of over half a trillion dollars? As of today,
according to cost of war dot com , the
war in Afghanistan has cost American taxpayers $624,885,950,261.00. This
burden on Americans continues to grow as the government continues to close
schools, cut social spending, continues to behave as if the basic human
rights of housing, education and medical care are for the elites and
continues to raise taxes. Now tell Americans the CIA was delivering millions
of their tax dollars to the president of a country they invaded. Doubtful
they will support that. Expanding on
the theme; the US always knows exactly how much the opium trade is making in
Afghanistan, how many tons are produced etc, just as they claim to have
information on and be able to determine who is corrupt. Now we know they are
engaged in the very corruption they preach to the world about, clearly
giving them a true position as experts on the matter. Perhaps they are also
involved in the opium trade? After all that “business” has skyrocketed since
they invaded Afghanistan, maybe I am reaching but it does raise questions.
Of course this would be through the CIA, an “agency” which engages in some
of the worst evils being carried out by humankind, and these are questions
American tax payers and voters should be asking. Why the CIA and
the US need to control and pay off Karzai is clear, but what about the
statements by the Iraqi PM? Why would the US want to bring about what could
be the complete destruction of the entire Middle East, by continuing to fund
insurgents in Syria, and the deaths of millions if all out war breaks out?
The answer to US meddling and destabilization efforts in the Middle East is
quiet simple and boils down to three main things: oil, Israel and money. I have said
this in the past many times: a country founded by genocidal killers and the
worst elements of European society and based on that genocide and built by
slaves, will never be able to truly carry out anything worthy of mankind,
other than more death and destruction. The Iraqi PM’s statement, in all its
honesty, if applied historically and with a 200-year-retrospect, could apply
to the US as well. Back to Karzai:
the New York Times quotes Karzai as having said the money was "very useful,
and we are grateful for it." Sure you are all those billions must have
helped a lot in securing yourself a nice little life while the Afghan people
are some of the poorest in the world. They also quote Khalil Roman, the
deputy chief of staff for Karzai from 2002 until 2005, as saying the huge
sums were "ghost money" that "came in secret, and it left in secret." The
publication also quotes anonymous US officials as saying: "… the cash has
fueled corruption and empowered warlords, undermining Washington's exit
strategy from Afghanistan." As I have said
many times, the US needs conflict, it needs and feeds war, all over the
world. This justifies its own global military expansion, and it has never
ever, not for a minute, been truly concerned about human rights, democracy,
rule of law, corruption, justice or peace. So should a country spreading so
much war, death, suffering and corruption continue to be allowed to do? I
think the answer to that is clear. The US has
shown itself to be the single largest threat to peace and regional stability
on the entire planet Earth. It has started and been involved in more wars,
aggressive invasions and has violated more international laws and
conventions than any other country on the planet. Maybe it is time the world
said no to the CIA and Washington’s geopolitical global architects, or
perhaps they CIA might start delivering suitcases of dollars to poor and
hungry kids around the world so they can build schools, pay for medical
care, buy food and perhaps get a new toy? Doubt that will ever happen, no
profit in helping humans!
27 February, 11:48 The
self serving spin is almost mind numbing in its complete twisting of the
facts as the western press reports that in a telephone conversation on
Tuesday US President Barrack Hussein Obama "warned his Afghan counterpart
Hamid Karzai that the US may pull all of its troops out of his country by
the year's end." First of all the statement flies in the face of the fact
that the US/NATO are supposed to (not may) leave Afghanistan this year.
Secondly the use of the word "warn" implies that somehow President Karzai
wants the invaders to continue to occupy his country, something unlikely as
he has refused to sign a "security agreement" with the occupiers who want to
stay in his country until the end of time to guarantee their military plans
and takeover of the entire region.
The Afghanistan
narrative by
the western media and
the US Government is almost the same as the one they were trying to spin as
they were chased out of Iraq in 2011. Of course the US Government and US
President Obama have to paint as positive a portrait as they can on the
Afghanistan fiasco, this is understandable, but given the facts it is
pathetic to watch. As in the illegal invasion of Iraq, the invasion of
Afghanistan, was portrayed as somehow connected to the events of September
11, 2001 but all connections were quickly proven to be nothing but lies and
spin making the US guilty of not one but two (and more) acts of aggressive
war (crimes against peace and humanity) based on false pre-fabricated
evidence.
Those crimes against humanity have been ignored by the so-called
"international community" as they continue to ignore the illegal
extra-territorial torture dungeon at Guantanamo Bay Cuba, the ongoing
extra-judicial drone assassination operations by the CIA and Obama, the
illegal massive spying by the NSA and the persecution of whistleblowers like
Julian Assange who remains trapped in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London even
though he has asylum in Ecuador and has not been charged with a single
crime. The ignoring of these crimes continues to fly in the face of
international law and is an abomination which continues to undermine the
very foundations and belief in the rule of law for all citizens of the
world. Yet
the western media continues to spin away everything as if nothing has
happened and paint its leaders and military industrial complex as somehow
being noble and even more unbelievable, wanted. That is part of the
delusional architecture at work here, just as they are ignoring that it is
public knowledge that the US/CIA orchestrated the overthrowing of yet
another democratically elected government in Ukraine, they continue to
ignore and are in denial of the fact that they were never wanted in
Afghanistan. The
US invasion and over 12 year occupation of Afghanistan has done nothing
positive whatsoever for the Afghan people or the Afghan Government. By some
estimates the fighting has killed up to a million Afghanis, opium production
has now risen 40 fold making Afghanistan the world’s number one opium
producer and the Taliban, who the western media continue to say were somehow
defeated are now stronger than ever. As for the 10 or so al-Qaeda fighters
that were operating in Afghanistan and who the US supposedly brought in
several hundred thousand troops to fight, well they are probably still
hanging around somewhere. We
can tell all of the poor Afghan families who have lost children, brothers,
husbands and entire families to wanton drone attacks and night raids that it
is okay. The US commanders and those in charge of the carnage have learned
"lessons." A repeated claim by Generals and politicians. Yes, your country
was decimated and destroyed so US/NATO/ISAF could "learn" how to improve
their interoperability, fly their little killer drones and use all of their
cool night vision murder equipment during their night raids. They also
learned how to torture and hone their “enhanced interrogation” skills on
your people. As for the opium, well, they learned how to protect the opium
fields and in front of the eyes of the world increase production 40 fold
while pretending to be fighting against the illegal narcotics trade. The
US is battling a thousand in Afghanistan and is unfortunately also having a
problem getting President Karzai to agree to give US personnel legal
immunity for its soldiers and contractors. President Karzai may be slightly
upset by the thousands of innocent civilians that the US has slaughtered in
their wanton drone attacks, but just like in Iraq the "exceptional"
Americans believe they should be immune from any law whatsoever when it
applies to anywhere other than their own country. This belief that they are
above the law everywhere is a psychosis for which there will be no cure
until prosecutions begin to be handed down. Something not likely to happen
soon as the US even has an act called the "Hague Invasion Act" in case
anyone has the nerve to prosecute any American for war crimes. So
back to the pull out. The US wants to keep, what is for them a "small"
number of troops (just 10 thousand or so) in Afghanistan until the end of
time or has threatened to go for what they are calling a "zero option"
(withdrawing all troops), as it did in Iraq, leaving the Afghan forces to
battle the bogeymen terrorists by themselves, namely the 5 or so al-Qaeda
fighters that may be somewhere in Afghanistan.
The problem is that
President Karzai will not sign the security agreement the US wants him to
sign to guarantee they can stay. After the phone call between Obama and
Karzai White House spokesperson
Jay Carney said
:"We
have made clear that our commitment to Afghanistan – separate from the troop
presence – is in our national security interests." He also said: "It is
preposterous to suggest [that Karzai’s refusal to sign the BSA] is because
we have not made clear that it is to be signed." Yes
that was a correct quote. The US made it clear to Karzai that "… it is to be
signed," meaning that Karzai has not followed orders. Let us recall for a
moment, Hamid Karzai is not a US Government employee or a member of the
White House’s lower level staff, he is the President of Afghanistan. The
statement underlines the complete arrogance of the White House and the fact
that they really do believe that they own Karzai. The
US White House released a statement which said: "… we will leave open the
possibility of concluding a BSA (bilateral security agreement) later this
year. However, the longer we go without a BSA, the more challenging it will
be to plan and execute any US mission and the more likely it will be that
any post-2014 US mission will be smaller in scale and ambition." If
this is true, that the US will actually leave Afghanistan without their BSA,
a fact I doubt, then this will surely have the Afghan people dancing in the
streets and finally allow the government and the people to concentrate or
rebuilding their country, something they will have to do as the US has
destroyed all of the infrastructure and annihilated what little the people
did have before their invasion. As for the hundreds of thousands if not a
million dead civilians, well the US has gotten away with murder so far….
According to
Al-Jazeera Chuck
Hagel, the US Secretary of Defense (War), said planning for the "zero
option" was a prudent step given that Karzai had made clear he is unlikely
to sign the security deal. However Hagel is recalcitrant, the US wants to
stay, whether they are wanted or not. Hagel added: "The United States will
consult closely with NATO allies and ISAF partners in the months ahead, and
I look forward to discussing our planning with defence ministers in Brussels
this week."
16
January, 23:20 Due
to clerical errors in filing the proper documents, something which exists in
all governments at one time or the other, some police in Afghanistan have
not received their salaries since November. The Afghan authorities have
reported that the issue is being taken care of and that Afghanistan’s law
enforcement personnel will be receiving their full salaries and back pay
soon. Those are the facts but of course the US/NATO occupiers have to twist
them to meet their own ends. The
narrative again is as old and tired as the hills as US/NATO continue to use
the same arguments and propaganda to attempt to stay relevant and put
forward an acceptable and believable argument to continue their occupation
of Afghanistan, a country they invaded, decimated, occupied and were never
wanted in, in the first place. Again the western media is full of statements
and reports that the Afghan people are inept, corrupt, incompetent, ignorant
and apparently cannot even pay out meager salaries to police despite the
“generosity” of the occupiers. One
of the favorite tactics for justifying military occupations, interventions
and the subversion of foreign governments by the US has long been one of
demonizing and portraying populations and governments as being somehow
unable to govern themselves properly to guarantee their own security either
because they are too backward and ignorant or too weak to defend themselves.
This is a particularly effective tactic with countries possessing non-white
populations, particular Middle Eastern and Latin American nations whose
“brown” people are portrayed as somehow ignorant and incapable of self-rule. The
tactic plays well to “Americans”, blinded by the country’s institutionalized
endemic racism and from birth fed with propaganda that somehow the white
“American” race group is the one chosen by God to rule the world and is
somehow inherently more intelligent, worthy and exceptional than any other.
Non-white Americans are of course forced to live with such a system and are
of course figuratively “welcomed along for the ride” as long as they are
supportive and live with the pretext that they are inferior and that the
land of the “Red” man is the land of the white man. Of
course no one in the debate do those demonizing Afghanistan for the clerical
error mention their own government’s complete and total failure economically
but that is another issue. US/NATO need to justify their continued presence.
With the issue of pay for the police, if one is to listen to many Afghans,
the fault lies with the West, who many say is attempting to further weaken
the country and who must be evicted as soon as possible. That is the Afghan
perspective. The self-serving western perspective is that for the same
reason they must stay, which is just in keeping with their long-term
strategy in the region.
While blame is being traded by Afghan officials and others are blaming the
West the issue appears to truly clerical in nature and does not reflect a
need for the US/NATO to continue their occupation. Quite the opposite in
fact it shows that law enforcement continues to function even with the
absence of pay. Something Americans could never really understand in the
first place.
While many western media outlets are jumping
on the bandwagon and screaming “See they are ignorant, they must be
occupied!” the New York Times appears to be one of the most balanced outlets
reporting on the issue. The NY Times reports that: “Basil Massey, who runs
the United Nations trust fund through which the police salaries are
transferred to the Afghan government from donor nations said the money is in
Afghanistan’s treasury and the trust fund was only now becoming aware of the
problem because it was reconciling its books from the past quarter, which
ended in December.”
According to the NYT “Afghanistan Finance
Minister Omar Zakhilwal said the Interior Ministry’s paperwork arrived three
days before the end of the Afghan fiscal year on Dec. 20. By then, the
ministry’s processing system was already closed so the accounting books
could be reconciled. The Interior Ministry “might as well have complained
about us because we didn’t process their late requests, but we at the
Ministry of Finance follow standard budgetary procedures — and that we stick
to. Now that the ministry is again dispersing money, the police will soon
receive their back pay, he said.”
NYT: Interior Ministry
spokesperson Sediq Sediqqi, said the ministry had missed the deadline
because of a shift in the dates for the fiscal year, and that the late
paychecks affected only a few areas. Interior Minister Umar Daudzai, said he
had already fired a number of officials and that the issue would not happen
again.
Sounds reasonable, things happen, especially in a war torn occupied country.
Sounds reasonable if one is objective, unless of course you want to use such
an error for your own propaganda purposes and to justify a further
occupation as it appears many western media outlets do.
The Christian Science Monitor is just one
such publication reporting that the Afghan Government is “inept”, “does not
even notice that their own police did not receive their salaries” and that
the error is a “stunning display of incompetence”. In the same article they
demonize Karzai for not caving in to conditions to guaranteeing the further
occupation of his country and attempt to portray the occupation and the
foreign invaders as somehow necessary as a force for good: “… allowing
foreign troops to stay is crucial for the continued flow of aid to
Afghanistan and for the country's stability.” The
article is a perfect example of American hypocrisy and their messianic
approach to their own role in the world and by failing to mention the
opposing side of the equation is a disservice to any of the poor readers who
happen to come across the piece. Nowhere is there a mention that Afghanistan
existed for thousands of years without US occupation, that the US/NATO
occupying forces are guilty of thousands of war crimes and crimes against
humanity in Afghanistan or that the only visible result of going on 13 years
of occupation is a 40 fold increase in opium production.
The CSM finishes with: “If after 10 years
and a war that has cost the US at least $1 trillion the government can't
remember to pay its police, how many more years and how much money must be
spent before it learns how?” The
idiocy of this statement is so glaring that I can only call it what it is,
namely idiotic. First off since when is US/NATO an educational body and has
the responsibility to ensure that countries pay their police on time? Second
if after the US has spent at least $1 trillion dollars in Afghanistan
engaged in a mission that has brought the people of the US nor of
Afghanistan any benefit, this while the American people are hurting and the
US’ own economy is bankrupt and the country is falling apart, when are the
people going to learn to stand up and say “enough is enough”. Mentioning the
US Government “learning” anything is a hopeless cause and one which has been
abandoned by many long ago.
Afghanistan is a geopolitical prize from which US/NATO will never leave
because it allows for placing US/NATO military assets near Russia and within
range of central Asia, and it is now, thanks to US/NATO the world largest
producer of opium and the biggest provider of CIA black funds on the planet.
How many years and how much more money will be spent before the American
people wake up and realize they have been duped? Afghanistan needs to heal, to rebuild its infrastructure and its society and it does not need obtuse war profiteers and war criminals occupying it any longer to do so. Sadly even the Taliban seems a better option than continued US/NATO occupation, and this is according to US analysts and even the same reporter for the CSM. So go figure.
12
February, 2014 21:07 The
US has failed miserably in Afghanistan, the way they failed in Iraq, in
Vietnam, and in dozens of other places and even though they are finally
leaving with their tail between their legs, military "commanders" continue
to make bold statements and try to put a positive spin on the fiasco that
seem to be disconnected from reality and might cause the average person to
question their competence. It
may be difficult for the average American and for citizens of the world to
understand those who have launched all of the US wars, in the same way that
it is difficult for the sane person to understand the mind and the
motivations of a homicidal serial killer, yet if we look closely maybe we
can. Or not? These are people who have caused the deaths of millions and for
you and I it might be difficult to comprehend why despite the failures in
Afghanistan and the price the world is having to pay for their "lessons"
they want to continue with their adventure. For
Americans it should be vital to understand why their country is at war, but
they are bogged down trying to survive without healthcare, with homes being
foreclosed, education becoming privatized and everything growing
astronomically expensive. Every day those who still have jobs work and
attempt to pay for a gallon of gas at the pump so they can stay employed,
the same gallon that was $0.69 in 1980 and is already predicted and forecast
to be at over $10.00 by the year 2030, yet few question.
Americans should be concerned, if not for the over 1 million lives that have
been brutally extinguished since the "War on Terror" began, including the
initial 2,999 of their fellow countrymen and innocent civilians who perished
on 9-11, then for the simple economic reason that every household in
America, whether they support the unfounded and illegal wars and invasions
of Afghanistan and Iraq or not, are going to foot the bill for generations
to come as the military adventures started by their leaders will cost every
household approximately $75,000.00 so far. Yes
American taxpayer, like it or not, justified or not, you will pay as much as
$6 trillion for your government’s illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq,
that breaks down to the equivalent of $75,000 for every household according
to the Harvard University Kennedy School of Government.
Costs of wars
In
an article for Global Research
Sabir Shah detailed the costs of the US wars which Bush and the wars’
proponents said would pay for themselves through oil revenues. So then why
isn’t gas at the pump now $0.30 a gallon but has instead skyrocketed? Ask
them.
Overall the illegal wars have cost the US $6 trillion dollars, $2 trillion
which they have already borrowed and already paid $260 billion just on the
interest of those loans. But the war profiteers don’t care, at the same time
they are also giving themselves tax cuts of historic proportions.
Those are just the preliminary financial costs there are also long term
costs and the cost in destroyed lives and human suffering that the US tries
to ignore. Of
course no one in the US has seriously done any study on how many Afghan
lives they have extinguished or destroyed either, but there have been many
studies done on the lives of US soldiers that have been affected. According
to Global Research approximately 1.56 million US Afghanistan and Iraq
veterans are receiving treatment at Veterans Administration Hospitals and
will be receiving benefits for the rest of their lives with %50 of all
veterans having already applied for permanent disability benefits.
Citing the Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government report Global
Research says the US government has already spent $134 billion on medical
care and disability benefits and that they will pay out $836 billion more in
the coming decades. But that is not the worst thing, according to the
Harvard report, even if the warmongers ended their wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan it would not help in easing the growing and widespread poverty,
unemployment and declining living standards for working people in the US.
Quite the opposite, no matter what happens Americans will be paying for the
American adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq for many, many decades to come.
Detached from Reality:
No Accoutability
Perhaps through no fault of their own but rather because their government
has been taken over by war profiteers, the military industrial complex and
the security structures that only serve those promoting war for the sake of
war, American have lost the backbone to question and the ability to call for
accountability.
Putting aside, as Americans love to do, that the invasions of Afghanistan
and Iraq were crimes against humanity and unprovoked aggressive wars
launched on countries that never posed a threat to the US, one of the real
insanities of the wars is that the commanders and the wars’ proponents have
the audacity to openly discuss the "lessons that are to be learned" over
their failed military adventures. As if they were on a training run and
their decades of war, the millions of civilians killed, the hundreds of
thousands of American soldiers crippled and the decimated US economy were
not even worth mentioning.
Lessons Learned ?!?!
In an unapologetic
article the site UT San Diego matter-of-factly
reports that
retired Marine General John Allen and retired Navy Admiral James Stavridis
two key former commanders in Afghanistan spoke at a conference dedicated to
the "lessons to be learned" from their devastating wars. Of
course the conference itself, the "commanders" and the publication ignore
the fact that the US was the cause of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and
that these invasions were based on lie after lie, but the remorselessly
discuss the "lessons to be learned" as if they are discussing some training
exercise and not decades of war that caused millions of deaths.
Perhaps I am mistaken but if someone has the authority to send soldiers off
to die and order the invasions of countries they damn well better have
already learned their "lessons" and actually know what they are doing.
So what lessons did these commanders learn?
Well one is that: "… long-term
engagement leveraging multinational alliances is key to global stability, in
that country and others from Iraq to the Balkans and China."
In other words use your allies in your illegal wars.
The publication calls the aggressive wars
which killed millions the "US experience" and says the two commanders
"… cautioned against the isolationist streak in American sentiment emerging
in the post-Afghanistan, post-Iraq war era." Sure
people are beginning to wake up and see the war criminals for what they are
and most normal countries do not want to be involved in crimes against
humanity and endless resource wars.
Mr. Allen’s Lessons Mr.
Allen was very nice in telling the audience about the lessons he had learned
in Afghanistan. Very expensive lessons paid coming at a cost of trillions of
dollars and millions of lives, but since they were so expensive no doubt the
things he learned need repeating. Among his comments he said: "… without
security almost nothing is possible in the future in Afghanistan." Sure but
I think any idiot will tell you that you cannot build a future when your
country has been invaded and is occupied.
Regardless, that was not Mr. Allen’s main
lesson learned. According to him his top lesson learned was that the invaded
people might actually fight back and kill his "advisers". "That
development, together with innovations in the method and prevalence of
roadside bombs, or improvised explosive devices (IEDs), is among Allen’s top
lessons learned from the war."reports
UT San Diego.
Mr. Allen also said: "It took us awhile to recognize the
strategic implications, killing our advisers, created a huge political
crisis ... that began to create a dissolution of the coalition. This was the
biggest political challenge I faced."
Mr. Stavridis’ Lessons
Neither of the "commanders" took responsibility for bringing Al-Qaeda to
Iraq, a country where they did not exist before, and did not mention the
fall of Fallujah a city for which hundreds of Americans had died, so I guess
it was not that important.
Mr. Stavridis did acknowledge "enormous
fatigue" in the US with Middle Eastern problems, from the Palestinian crisis
to Iraq and Afghanistan in what is perceived as "this enormous, disastrous
crescent of crisis." but did not take any responsibility. Even worse he said
they should continue their adventure: "The worst thing we could do in my view is
walk away from this turbulent part of the world or come home to our shores." Mr.
Stavridis was regretful on one point however when he said: "… the US failed
to leave behind a residual force of troops. Options for nurturing stability
in volatile areas include ‘strategic communication’ about American values
such as democracy, NATO military advisers, private-sector weapons sales, and
cultural exchanges to build ‘secondary linkages.’" Yes, the families of
those one million Iraqis the US killed need to be taught about "American
values, democracy and weapons sales.
Mr. Stravidis was candid however when he
stated the real reason for destroying Iraq: "All is not lost. If we use the tools we
have, we’ve got a reasonable chance of keeping Iraq where it needs to be, a
friend of the United States, engaged in the region."
No mention of Al-Qaeda or 9-11 or WMDs there. Strange?
Best Lesson The award for the best lesson learned goes to Mr. Stravidis and he gets the award for saying: "In the end, we won’t deliver security strictly from the barrel of a gun. We are going to do it through building teams."
Apparently they love
learning because they want more
The American Forces
Press Service
reports
that apparently the lessons continue. This time the student is Defense
Secretary Chuck Hagel who said that despite the fact that Afghan President
Hamid Karzai will not sign an agreement that would allow for a continued
US/NATO presence he: "… continues to
plan for a post-2014 training and assistance mission in Afghanistan." The
publication says that Mr. Hagel recently met US President Obama and
discussed the retreat and the pulling out of forces and equipment from
Afghanistan. The US position has not changed, Mr. Hagel said, adding that
"Karzai has so far refused to sign the pact…", but that, "We continue to
hope and believe that it will be signed, and we will continue to plan and
work with our NATO and International Security Assistance Force commanders
for a post-2014 mission." People keep dying as apparently the hardest lesson which the US refuses to learn is that they are simply "not wanted". Time to finally go home.
3 April,
22:43
The utter
and dismal failure of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was
further underlined on March 11 at a session of the UN Commission on
Narcotics Drugs. Opium production which was almost completely stopped in
2001 now accounts for 90% of the world’s heroin, a fact that might lead to
speculation as to the real motivations behind the invasion and occupation by
the West of Afghanistan.
On March
11, at the 56th session of the Commission on Narcotics Drugs held by the
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Victor Ivanov, the head of the
Russian Federal Drug Control Service, revealed that since the U.S. invasion
of Afghanistan heroin production has increased 40 fold, more than 1 million
people have died due to Afghan heroin and now 90% of the world’s heroin
supply comes from Afghanistan.
These are
damning statistics which the western media and the U.S. Government will try
to evade and further underline the complete failure of U.S. named “Operation
Enduring Freedom,” an aggressive invasion, which has done nothing but
decimate the country’s people, destroy almost all of the infrastructure and
has further allowed America’s war profiteers to become fabulously rich.
Ivanov
told the conference that: “Afghan heroin has killed more than 1 million
people worldwide since the ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’ began and over a
trillion dollars has been invested into transnational organized crime from
drug sales… Any impartial observer must admit the sad fact that the
international community has failed to curb heroin production in Afghanistan
since the start of NATO’s operation.”
With the
Middle East, the Arctic, Venezuela and the slew of other countries that have
been the subject of U.S. targeting both military and otherwise it is clear
what the real objectives are, and were, first and foremost oil and energy
resources. With Afghanistan the real reason will never be admitted as it is
much more illicit.
Although
officials will not state this openly, both in Russia and elsewhere, judging
from the U.S.’ past history of invading countries where there are large
financial dividends to be had as well as ones of strategic importance, it
would appear that the trillion dollar Afghan heroin industry is what the
U.S. was after. This would explain why the U.S. has done nothing to
eradicate the cultivation of opium in the country and has done nothing to
stop the flow of heroin out of Afghanistan.
Unlike the
decades before 9-11 there is sadly little chance that anyone will ever come
forward and expose the entire lie that has been the U.S. invasion and
occupation of Afghanistan. With the U.S. hyper-security state and its
aggressive persecution of whistleblowers there will be no Iran-Contra like
revelations pointing to U.S. narcotics profiteering or collusion with the
drug trade. What we have are the statistics to look at and the aftermath of
the U.S. invasion.
According to data presented by Ivanov at the session
opium production has increased to 154,000 hectares and according to reports
from Afghanistan will be at 157,000 hectares this year. This is in sharp
contrast to the situation before the U.S. invasion in October 2001 when the
Taliban had banned the growing of all poppies. What is telling is that after
the U.S. invasion all production resumed.
In a graph
used by Ivanov during his presentation opium production in Afghanistan in
2001 was at a paltry 185 tons a year compared to 8,200 in 2007 and 6,900 in
2009. This accounts for a huge amount of dirty money that Ivanonv says is
nearly on par with the world’s oil and gas trade.
Moscow
believes that eradicating the Afghan poppy fields is the simplest solution
to the problem, one that the U.S. for some reason has eschewed. Ivanov
said:"Metaphorically speaking, instead of destroying the machine-gun nest,
they suggest catching bullets flying from the machine-gun. We suggest
eradicating the narcotic plants altogether. As long as there are opium poppy
fields, there will be trafficking."
11 March,
2013
15:22
The
President of Afghanistan has made several statements of late and has taken a
stance against the American occupiers of his country that have many in
Washington bristling, with the latest being his statements that the US is in
collusion with the Taliban to further destabilize the country in order to
justify a continuing US presence and the prolongation of their “Security
Assistance Invasion” and occupation of the strategically important country.
There have
been hundreds, if not thousands, of reports and articles written detailing
US involvement and ties with the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden but
to finally hear President Hamid Karzai, the acting head of state of
Afghanistan, the country where all of the above got their start with the
support of the US in their “secret” Afghan war against the Soviet Union, is
another matter entirely.
In
statements made during a speech celebrating the once Soviet holiday of
Women’s Day on Sunday and after the unannounced “secret” visit by the new US
War Secretary Chuck Hagel, President Karzai leveled harsh accusations at his
American benefactors in an obvious attempt to try to maintain support among
the Afghan people, save face and show that he is in control despite the
fact, and moreover, especially after the US refused to hand-over control of
the Bagram prison, despite Karzai’s claims before Parliament and the nation
this was soon to occur. The hand-over was promoted and seen as a sign that
Afghanistan was reasserting its sovereignty.
Karzai’s harshest statement accused the United States
of America of being in collusion with the Taliban and in fact working
together with them to continue destabilizing the country, a fact that is not
surprising, given the proven US track record of destabilizing countries to
facilitate control over them, the US geopolitical goals in the region, the
strategic importance of Afghanistan for the Americans and the US desire to
stay in the country indefinitely further underlined by Rick Rozoff in an
interview with Press
TV.
Karzai did not mince words when he said the Taliban
and the US were in bed together in Afghanistan after the US bombed Kabul in
the lead up to the visit by Hagel to Afghanistan. According to Reuters Karzai
said: "Those bombs that went off in Kabul and Khost were not a show of force
to America. They were in service of America. It was in the service of the
2014 slogan to warn us if they (Americans) are not here then Taliban will
come. In fact those bombs, set off yesterday in the name of the Taliban,
were in the service of Americans to keep foreigners longer in Afghanistan."
In an interview I conducted with three time Nobel Peace Prize nominee Kathy
Kelly who has been on almost a dozen extended stays in Afghanistan for the
Voice of Russia she
took it one step further and stated that the US had even built Al-Qaeda and
Osama Bin Laden’s encampments in the country.
One has to
wonder as to the sincerity of Hamid Karzai however as he has proven in the
past, and continues to prove, that he is almost completely impotent in
dealing with the Americans who have invaded his country and continue to
occupy it for the13th year running. He has repeatedly made statements
condemning the slaughter of civilian women and children by US and ISAF
forces, the non-stop night raids that are designed to terrorize the Afghan
civilian population and the continuing US control of Afghan prisons where
the US conducts torture and arbitrary incarceration. Yet until now he has
taken almost no real concrete measures to end any of these abuses by the US
invaders.
To the
chagrin of what many call his US paymasters and “allies” Karzai has
surprisingly taken steps recently, if not to protect Afghan Sovereignty,
then at least to show he is capable of standing up to the American invaders
and prohibited US commandos from conducting “Special Operations” in the
Wardak Province. He also came out in, as the New York Times reports,
“bristling” terms against the US insistence on maintaining control over how
Afghans, who are for the most part simply defending their homeland, are
detained, interrogated and released.
Karzai’s
new-found independence caused the US to cancel plans to hand over Bagram
Prison and Hagel to cancel a joint photo opportunity and press conference
that had been planned to show Americans just how wonderful the US failure is
going in Afghanistan.
The American occupiers are of course bristling
themselves at Karzai’s independent and anti-US rhetoric, withBloomberg quoting
a retired U.S. Army colonel David Maxwell as saying; “On the surface and to
this outside observer, it appears that Karzai has gone way off the
reservation, perhaps more so than he has in the past,” and “I cannot see how
we could work with such an apparently delusional leader much longer, but
unfortunately I do not know if we have any other good options.”
Such
arrogant rhetoric as well as statements by Hagel himself and Western
military commanders, point to counted days for Karzai as president, yet have
to be taken in the context of the political theater that Karzai himself has
been a leading actor in during almost 13 years of US occupation after their
aggressive invasion of the country on false grounds.
Using the
American idiom derived from the term used for Indians who left their
prison-like reservations and were murdered and calling Karzai delusional for
saying anything against the imperialist US occupiers further underlines the
unbelievable arrogance, all encompassing ignorance and unwavering
self-righteous hypocrisy that US has when dealing with foreign countries and
anyone they want to control.
President Karzai is in a difficult position, on the
one hand the Americans support him and guarantee his safety as long as he is
pliable and on the other he has to somehow respond the Afghan people’s anger
at the US occupiers who have brought nothing but war and misery to the
Afghan people, unlike the Soviets who came in and built almost all of the
infrastructure in the country and brought peace, much of which has been
destroyed by the Americans. A fact recently underlined in an interview
with Afghan native and expert Dr. Zalmay Gulzad aired by the Voice of Russia .
Knowing
the US Geopolitical goals in the region and Afghanistan’s strategic location
bordering China, Iran and former Soviet Republics, and against the backdrop
of those goals which require the Americans to maintain a huge military
presence in Afghanistan, makes everything the US does or says with regard to
the nobility of their invasion; hypocritical, laughable and an insult to
every intelligent independent thinking individual on the planet
On Sunday
in attacks killing at least 19 people underlining the blood and carnage the
Americans have brought to Afghanistan, as Hagel was leaving a U.S. military
compound in Kabul, a Taliban suicide bomber blew himself up outside the
Ministry of Defense and another suicide bomber detonated his explosives in
Khost province, prompting Karzai to say: “There are ongoing daily talks
between Taliban, American and foreigners in Europe and in the Gulf states.”
He also said the attacks show that; “The Taliban want a longer presence of
foreigners, not their departure from Afghanistan."
If we look
at the US support of Al-Qaeda in Syria and their close relationship with the
Taliban in the past and we know the US and Israel want to invade Iran and
destabilize Iran and China and through former Soviet Republics, Russia,
where else will their mercenaries and terrorists need to be based? In
Afghanistan of course, and perhaps at the US built fortifications at
Tora-Bora.
Further
complicating Karzai’s and the Afghan people’s predicament are Afghan
resources. Sure they are many and will be exploited by the US but the main
reason for the US presence will be to guarantee the security and the
exploitation of pipelines delivering oil and gas to the US’ main financial
backer, China. For US planners once Iran and Syria are “taken care of” this
will open up the possibility of oil to flow all the way from/to China to the
Mediterranean and on to the ravenous US market.
19 September 2012, 00:25
The number of green-on-blue attacks in Afghanistan is increasing amid
widespread rioting over the American film “The Innocence of Muslims” as the
US attempts to make a saving face drawdown of troops from the country.
Cooperation between “coalition” troops and the Afghans is being cut back as
the attacks continue, yet the US is still trying to paint a different
picture of their failure in Afghanistan.
The
western media reports that this year alone there have been 37 attacks on the
US, and its NATO and want-to-be-NATO allies, all part of George Bush’s
coalition of the willing engaged in their endless world war on terror.
Just like
at the beginning of the invasion when the US and the Western media reacted
with horror and indignation anytime the Afghans fought back, branding them
enemy combatants then terrorists and hauling them off to their illegal
torture prison, outside of the jurisdiction of international law, in
Guantanamo Bay Cuba, the media in the West still don’t seem to get it. They
continue to react with shock and indignation whenever the Afghan “allies,”
yes that is the term they use now for the countrymen of the country they
invaded, attack the "coalition" forces.
Let’s
stop for a minute here and put things into the proper perspective. Unlike
the Soviet Union, whose intervention was officially requested by the Afghan
Government, the United States and NATO were never asked to enter the
country, that’s one, two: the invasion of Afghanistan, and that is what it
was no matter how the West hates to admit it, was never sanctioned
internationally or even within the US, and Afghanistan never threatened the
US, never committed an act of aggression against the US warranting invasion,
and last and most importantly was never involved in the questionable events
of 9-11.
The
Western media says that the attacks by Afghan “allies” have killed 51
“international service members” this year with 12 attacks in August leaving
15 dead. Yet nowhere can you find an accurate body count of the innocent
Iraqi people, including women and children who have died at the hands of the
coalition. This is simple to explain and is part of the US propaganda war,
the people back in Kansas don’t want to hear about it, the Afghan people are
an abstraction, less than human, their lives do not count as much as those
of the “coalition” forces. If the American people were to find out what the
US is really doing in Afghanistan, they might become upset and call for an
end to the military adventure.
The US’
vested interest in hiding the truth, including about Afghanistan, is obvious
by the US reaction to Wikileaks, Bradley Manning, yours truly, and anyone
else who gets too close to the truth. The war should be over soon, you may
think, at least that is what they want you to believe, not hardly, despite
the fact that the US is to announce that 33,000 troops who were part of the
“surge” three years ago, have left the country this actually means nothing.
The number of troops will remain at close to invasion level with 68,000 US
troops still in-country. That is the great pull-out?
The
western media doesn’t mention this very real and provable fact, they
continue to complain about Afghan "attacks," either they just doesn’t get it
or they actually believe what they are writing when it comes to Afghanistan.
This is
completely understandable, no one in the US wants to hear that they
illegally invaded and decimated a country for no real reason, or at least
not for the reasons they were lied to about and led to believe. No one wants
to hear that their presence is not wanted and that they are aggressors and
invaders: invaders who attacked one of the poorest and most defenseless
countries in the world illegally and on false pretext and then stayed there
for more than a decade killing the population without being able to claim
any kind of a victory.
The media
in the West complains that the spike in “insider” attacks is somehow souring
relations between the US and its Afghan allies who
are fighting side by side. Against whom? Against other Afghan people. The
once-CIA-backed Taliban? The reality is that the US invaded their country,
and is killing their people, so how is it that an Afghan could, in their
right mind, fight alongside the invaders? Well apparently many are now
taking the first chance they have to fight back. Not against their Afghan
brothers and sisters but against the invaders.
This is
something the US just doesn’t seem to understand. Even if there weren’t
thousands of cases of innocent civilians being killed and the constant
“scandals” that go unpunished, incidents of urinating on corpses, collecting
body parts as trophies and the like, the US would never be welcomed in the
country. They are invaders.
The
latest in a spate of what are now called “green-on-blue” attacks an Afghan
soldier in Helmand province opened fire on a vehicle he believed was driven
by NATO soldiers slightly wounding a foreign staff member. Also on Sunday,
an Afghan police officer shot and killed four American troops in Zabul and
on Saturday a member of a government-backed militia killed two British
troops, also in Helmand.
Of course
the escalation in violence and attacks against the Americans is being
painted in a different light by officials and the press and Instead of
admitting that they are completely losing control of the country and the
situation for them is growing worse by the day, people like U.S. Defense
Secretary Leon Panetta, are attempting to paint the increase in attacks as a
sign of the decrease in power by the attackers. Panetta said while visiting
Japan that the “… insider attacks are the last gasp of a Taliban insurgency
that has not been able to regain lost ground.” So the fact that they are
attacking more means that they are in fact weaker? Ahem. Okay, but sorry, if
you call a black kettle white it is still black.
Further
underlining the US military adventure’s failure in Afghanistan and in their
meddling in the Muslim world in general, on Tuesday September 18th a woman
wearing a suicide vest blew herself up on a minibus in Kabul killing 12
people including 7 foreigners. According to reports the dead were mostly
Russian and South African nationals. Apparently the attack was in protest of
the infamous film “The Innocence of Muslims”.
In Kabul
thousands of protestors clashed with police over the same film, in violence
that was even worse that the outbreak that occurred at the beginning of the
year over the burning of Korans by US troops.
On Monday
NATO reported that it has cut the number of joint operations with Afghan
soldiers and policemen in order to lessen the chance of insider attacks.
This is the second such order given recently which further flies in the face
of the claim that they are fighting "shoulder to shoulder" with the Afghans.
The
Pentagon, for its part, has "suspended most joint field operations with
Afghan forces because so many Americans are being killed by the men they are
training" according to CBS News reports. This comes on the heels of a
decision to end all joint patrols and operations without first obtaining
approval from the command structure.
If they
call that winning, I would hate to see what they call losing.
28
August 2012, 22:55
Another case of US Forces desecrating remains ends with a slap on the wrist
for some of the perpetrators while others received no disciplinary action
and on the same day the burning of Korans was also brushed off with those
guilty also escaping serious punishment. Against the backdrop of increased
Afghan on NATO violence and the beheading of 17 partygoers by Islamists, the
question as to who really are the "savages" in Afghanistan begs to be asked. Once
again, as with almost every case involving egregious misconduct by US troops
who have committed what can only be characterized as war crimes, those
involved have received nothing more than the proverbial slap on the wrist,
and the cases are in the hundreds if not thousands. We do not know the
accurate figures because most such events are hidden and not reported. This
time the events in question could be called benign by US standards. For some
reason, probably to minimize the backlash, both judgments came at the same
time, namely rulings on cases of soldiers urinating on Taliban corpses and
the burning of Korans.
In the
case of the urinating Marines
some of them received unspecified administrative “discipline,” it was
reported on Monday, despite the US claiming that it was a “huge”
embarrassment and caused a Naval Criminal Investigative Service
investigation, as well as condemnation and an apology from Secretary of
Defense Leon Panetta and even US Secretary of State Clinton, who vowed that
the culprits would be found and punished. The
other judgment also released on Monday, involved the burning of Korans by US
troops, an event which caused widespread riots, multiple deaths and calls
from the Taliban and Islamists to kill foreign troops in Afghanistan and
Americans in order to defend Islam’s Holy book.
Despite the outrage and deaths caused by their actions nothing “criminal”
really occurred, according to the US.
Like I said these were benign events by US standards, after Abu Ghraib and
similar events in Iraq, the mass murders of almost 20 civilians while they
slept in their homes earlier this year by a “deranged” sergeant, cases of
cutting off body parts as trophies (including the cutting off of fingers,
noses, ears and even the peeling off of faces), families being set on fire,
denial of medical care to mass numbers of civilians leading to their deaths,
snipers posing with Nazi symbols, multiple cases of rape, sodomy and
massacre after massacre after massacre,
sure Marines simply urinating on corpses seems almost comic. The
Taliban are almost no better, however they trail far behind compared to the
overall creativity and level of atrocity of NATO’s finest. Their savagery is
just as brutal as that committed by some of the NATO forces but less
widespread and frequent. The latest event attributed to the Taliban but
denied by them and quite possibly carried out by “insurgents,” was the
beheading of 15 men and 2 women for having a party with dancing and music,
something they view as immoral and un-Islamic. The
Afghan authorities has launched an investigation with President Hamid Karzai
saying,”…the attack shows that there are irresponsible members among the
Taliban." The
beheading of the partygoers occurred in an area of Musa Qala district which
is almost totally under Taliban control. Governor of Musa Qala, Nematullah
Khan said, "They were having a music party and the Taliban came and killed
them and cut off their heads." On
the same day to the south 10 Afghan soldiers were killed at a checkpoint and
2 NATO soldiers were killed by an Afghan soldier while they were on joint
patrol bringing the number of victims of Afghan soldier on NATO soldier
violence to 42 this year alone. Now called “green-on-blue-killings” a
further sign of the utter failure of almost 12 years of “coalition”
occupation.
These are facts the west would rather we did not know because in Afghanistan
as in Iraq every move against the citizenry and every bomb dropped has been
done illegally. Both of these countries were attacked in illegal acts of
military aggression for involvement in events they had nothing to do with,
namely the events of 9-11, both of the countries never threatened or even
posed a threat to the US, yet they have paid the price and have been
illegally occupied so it is not surprising that the people are fighting
back.
Going back to the subject of slaps on the wrists for those committing
atrocities, for me, the reason they never pay the price for their illegal
behavior has been clear for a long time. How on earth could the US judicial
system or the US military deem anything their own killing machines do to be
illegal if the whole war and occupation of Afghanistan is in and of itself
illegal to begin with? The
truth is an extremely dangerous thing especially when it is something that
might end plans for world domination, and that is what it is all about, but
it looks like they may be failing. In
Afghanistan, a country decimated by close to 12 years of war the truths are
hidden on a daily basis and as sites such as Wikileaks have found out (the
hard way), reporting on the facts is something the US Empire will not allow. The
destruction and atrocities that the US has unleashed on the Afghan people
continue on a daily basis and have been something the US has attempted time
and time again to hide. As they continue so will the response from the
Afghan side. In
Afghanistan the US obfuscates, hides and doctors the facts at every turn so
that even finding an accurate count of the number of civilian deaths in the
country is almost an impossibility with numbers ranging from the 10s of
thousands to the millions. Yet one thing is crystal clear the US has failed
in Afghanistan and there is little likelihood that there is a way out. One question that I feel truly begs to be answered is quite a simple one: who in fact are the real “savages” in Afghanistan?
10 July 2012, 12:01
It was supposed to be the big saving face I suppose, but sadly as if to
underline the failure of the Western adventure in Afghanistan, a conference
by donor countries was recently held not in some free and peaceful city of
Afghanistan, liberated by the peace-bringing-humanitarian-intervening NATO,
but at a safe distance, in Tokyo Japan.
President Hamid Karzai looked worried and none too pleased. Perhaps he knows
that when NATO leaves his chances of staying in power decrease
exponentially. Perhaps he is tired of having to pose for photo ops with the
same occupiers who have countless times ignored his calls for an end to
civilian casualties and who have apologized countless times for the same
casualties and the countless horrific acts against his people; acts of mass
murder, urinating on corpses, collecting body parts as trophies, torture and
much more, a sickening list too long to go into here.
It’s an election year in the U.S. and a pull-out is politically expedient
and soon NATO will be abandoning Karzai and the country it has devastated
for over a decade, so a saving face plan had to be carried out. On the
surface it looks as if the kind and benevolent West is out to help
Afghanistan, granting it a special non-NATO ally/special ally status and $16
billion in economic aid. I guess this is supposed to please the Afghan
people. Of course the $16 billion will be able to assist the Afghan people
in paying all of the Western reconstruction contractors and the special
status will only serve to give the U.S. a legal framework for its long term
geo-strategic plans in the region. A fact underlined by a statement made by
Clinton at the donor summit: “We had no intention to leave Afghanistan. On
the contrary, we are building partnerships with Afghanistan, which will
continue far into the future."
Far into the future? Is the same in store for Pakistan which also recently
received the “special ally” status from the U.S.?
As for the money it is supposed to in some way guarantee that the country
does not spiral into complete anarchy once the NATO forces leave, that is
their public reason. The real reason for the money may be the buying of
continued influence in the country. One reason why the West was so opposed
to Iran’s offer to build infrastructure and roads in Afghanistan.
Meanwhile the Taliban have continued to show the world that the U.S. has
gotten nowhere in Afghanistan. Shortly after the donor meeting in Tokyo the
Taliban launched a huge, albeit not entirely effective, attack on multiple
targets in the country; a massive attack according to reports, resulting in
23 dead, 17 of them being Taliban. They were launched in response to the
donor meeting which the Taliban saw as an agreement to continue a foreign
occupation of their country.
Perhaps they are right, but who is really the worst in this conflict? The
NATO/US forces who have killed up to tens of thousands either directly or
indirectly, in their “righteous” war, or the Taliban, who have sadly, proven
time and time again that they can be just as savage, if not more so, than
the occupiers of their country.
Sadly for Afghanistan the future looks bleak. Another recent event in a
village called Qol-i-Heer in central Afghanistan, further serves to
underline the West's utter and dismal failure in Afghanistan, namely the
cold-blooded execution of a poor Afghan girl named Najiba who was in her
early 20s. She was publicly executed by the brutal and primitive Taliban for
alleged “illegal sex” after she was passed back and forth between two top
Taliban leaders. A brutal and cowardly act against all women and civilized
people.
Sure the Taliban are brutal, backwards and primitive savages making a
mockery of their very name “Taliban”, which means roughly "Students of the
Holy Koran", but, who in fact are the worst savages? Those who kill hundreds
because of their primitive, brutal and backward beliefs, or those who kill
thousands and have press teams, slick-looking uniforms and smooth-talking
spokespeople and kill for the primitive motives of domination, or revenge
for an attack they may have planned themselves?
Sadly for the Afghan people the answer to this question is not one that can
be easily answered, nor if answered, would it help them in any way.
29 May 2012, 13:29 In
Eastern Afghanistan on Saturday night NATO was involved in another
“incident”, as NATO calls them, involving the deaths of large numbers of
civilians. This time NATO forces killed a family of eight people, including
six children, in the Paktia province. In
Eastern Afghanistan on Saturday night NATO was involved in another
“incident”, as NATO calls them, involving the deaths of large numbers of
civilians. This time NATO forces killed a family of eight people, including
six children, in the Paktia province.
Many experts say the “incident” threatens to further strain the already
tense relationship between President Hamid Karzai and his Western backers.
Some analysts claimed Karzai’s recent trip to the NATO Summit in Washington
served to slightly smooth the already tense relationship but this latest
incident may cause another wave of violence in the country and force Karzai
to have to take stronger steps against the “occupiers”.
According to a local government spokesperson in an interview with the AFP
the eight people were killed in a NATO air strike and included a husband and
wife and their six children. The
official, one Rohulla Samouni, stated that none of the members of the family
had ties with the Taliban or other terrorist group. He said NATO aircraft
bombed a house. A man named Mohammad Sahfi his wife and their six innocent
children were brutally murdered. —
There have been many similar such cases in 2012 in Afghanistan. For example
on February 17, 2012, six civilians, including a woman and a child were
killed in a NATO night raid in Dewa Gul Valley, in the Chawki district of
Kunar province.
—Then on February 8, seven children and a young adult were killed in a NATO
airstrike in the village of Geyaba in the eastern Afghan province of Kapisa.
—March 11, 2012 saw at least 16 civilians, including women and children
killed after a 'rogue' US serviceman entered their homes murdered them. The
War in Afghanistan has already lasted for more than 10 years (2001–present)
and killed tens of thousands of Afghan civilians directly as well as the
deaths of tens of thousands more indirectly as a consequence of
displacement, starvation, disease, exposure, lack of medical treatment,
crime and lawlessness resulting from the war.
President Hamid Karzai has summoned foreign military commanders and made
public statements to warn of the consequences of further Afghan civilian
deaths many times.
—"We are not happy. We don't want any more Afghan civilian casualties."
"This must not occur again." President Hamid Karzai, July 2002 —"I
don’t think there is a big need for military activity in Afghanistan
anymore." "Similarly, going into the Afghan homes – searching Afghan homes
without the authorization of the Afghan government – is something that
should stop now." President Hamid Karzai, September 2005 —In
May 2006, Afghan President Hamid Karzai summoned the commander of U.S.
forces in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry, to demand an explanation
for the deaths of at least 16 Afghan civilians during air strikes. —In
December 2006, a tearful President Hamid Karzai gave a heartfelt speech that
brought audience members to tears, Karzai said the cruelty imposed on his
people "is too much" and that Afghanistan cannot stop "the coalition from
killing our children."
—"Five years on, it is very difficult for us to continue accepting civilian
casualties. It is becoming heavy for us; it is not understandable anymore."
"We are very sorry when the international coalition force and NATO soldiers
lose their lives or are injured. It pains us. But Afghans are human beings,
too." President Hamid Karzai, May 2, 2007 —In
June 2007, after the deaths of more than 90 civilians in 10 days, President
Hamid Karzai accused ISAF and the US-led military coalition in his country
of "extreme" and "disproportionate" use of force.
—"Afghan life is not cheap and it should not be treated as such." "Several
times in the last year, the Afghan government tried to prevent civilian
casualties, but our innocent people are becoming victims of careless
operations of NATO and international forces." President Hamid Karzai, June
23, 2007 —On
October 28, 2007, in an interview on 60 Minutes, Hamid Karzai stated that he
had explicitly asked U.S. President George W. Bush to roll back the use of
air strikes, which had killed more than 270 civilians in 17 air strikes to
date in 2007 alone. —
In August 2008, President Hamid Karzai ordered a review of foreign troops in
Afghanistan after 96 civilians were killed in an air strike in Herat.
—"The continuation of civilian casualties can seriously undermine the
legitimacy of fighting terrorism and the credibility of the Afghan people's
partnership with the international community." President Hamid Karzai,
September 24, 2008 —
On November 5, 2008, Afghan President Hamid Karzai asked U.S.
President-elect Barack Obama to put an end to civilian casualties in
Afghanistan after an air strike on a wedding party, killing 37 people,
including 23 children and 10 women. —
In April 2009, American-led military forces killed 5 civilians, including
two children and a nine-month-old baby, in a U.S. night raid in Khost
province —In
March 2011, Karzai rejected American President Obama's and Gen. David
Petraeus' apologies for the killing of 9 Afghan boys ages 7–13 who were
collecting firewood. "The apology is not enough," Karzai said —
In May 2011, Karzai issued a "final warning" as more civilians were killed
in NATO airstrikes. He said the Afghan people can no longer tolerate the
attacks, and that the U.S.-led coalition risks being seen as an "occupying
force". The killings go on.
|