Comments on: Breaking the Silence on Afghanistan http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/ Firedoglake weblog Tue, 14 Feb 2012 16:16:04 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: macaquerman http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874520 macaquerman Mon, 06 Apr 2009 19:06:06 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874520 <p>Permit me to follow your JA quote and muddle the picture by pointing out that there IS a country dying next door in Pakistan.<br /> Maybe we should be concerned (didn’t want to say “occupied”) with that situation short-term and then pull out.</p> Permit me to follow your JA quote and muddle the picture by pointing out that there IS a country dying next door in Pakistan.
Maybe we should be concerned (didn’t want to say “occupied”) with that situation short-term and then pull out.

]]> By: tjbs http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874508 tjbs Mon, 06 Apr 2009 18:52:48 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874508 <p>Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.<br /> How many heard that message in the last years?<br /> Have we learned it yet ?</p> Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
How many heard that message in the last years?
Have we learned it yet ?

]]> By: eCAHNomics http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874482 eCAHNomics Mon, 06 Apr 2009 18:07:52 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874482 <p>As I understand the Malay insurgency, it was primarily carried out by ethnic Chinese who constituted about 10% of the population. I don’t mean to imply that all ethnic Chinese living in Malaysia were insurgents; only used that stat to indidicate that the insurgency was centered within a population that was a substantial minority. The rest of the Malaysians were biased against the ethnic Chinese. So the Brits had a much easier time siding with the vast majority against the insurgents, and keeping the vast majority relatively safe, however they did it.</p> As I understand the Malay insurgency, it was primarily carried out by ethnic Chinese who constituted about 10% of the population. I don’t mean to imply that all ethnic Chinese living in Malaysia were insurgents; only used that stat to indidicate that the insurgency was centered within a population that was a substantial minority. The rest of the Malaysians were biased against the ethnic Chinese. So the Brits had a much easier time siding with the vast majority against the insurgents, and keeping the vast majority relatively safe, however they did it.

]]> By: Teddy Partridge http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874480 Teddy Partridge Mon, 06 Apr 2009 18:05:32 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874480 <p><strong>Troops<br /> Home<br /> Now</strong></p> Troops
Home
Now

]]> By: SouthernDragon http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874458 SouthernDragon Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:36:41 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874458 <blockquote><p>Peace, while nice to talk about, has never worked. It is <strong>only the countries with strong militaries that have not been attacked</strong>.</p></blockquote> <p>Why is it Pearl Harbor comes to mind? </p> <p>Rome became an empire because of its military might.</p> <p>Britain became an empire because of its military might.</p> <p>Japan became an empire because of its military might.</p> <p>The US has become an empire because of its military might.</p> <p>All of this military might was used to create and maintain wealth for a select few. </p> <p>There will be no peace as long as some country wants to become an empire.</p> <p>As Jefferson Airplane said 40 years ago, “War is good business. Give your son.”</p>

Peace, while nice to talk about, has never worked. It is only the countries with strong militaries that have not been attacked.

Why is it Pearl Harbor comes to mind?

Rome became an empire because of its military might.

Britain became an empire because of its military might.

Japan became an empire because of its military might.

The US has become an empire because of its military might.

All of this military might was used to create and maintain wealth for a select few.

There will be no peace as long as some country wants to become an empire.

As Jefferson Airplane said 40 years ago, “War is good business. Give your son.”

]]> By: timr http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874447 timr Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:20:56 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874447 <p>The strategic hamlet program was used sucessfully by the Brits in their insurgent war in Malaya in the 50s. The US figured that if it worked their. it should work in Vietnam. It did not. As a Vietnam Vet over the last 35 years I have read every book I could find on the region. We simply went in on the heels of the French and attampted to do what they could not. We were going to fail in that war from the gitgo due to a total failue to understand the people and the reasons for the actual fight-civil war-going on there. I have been against the Iraq war from the start. I am much more ambivalent about Afghanistan. We had a good reason to invade, however we went about it wrong. We started by going in cheap and compounding the error when we had almost all of the alQaeda leadership trapped in Tora Bora. Micro management by Rumsfeld resulted in the escape of alQaeda. Since then the problem has moved into Pakistan-nuclear weapons anyone? Why should we bother about Pakistan? Because their govt is corrupt, their ISI intel agency funded the Taliban, which has spread itself into Pakistan and could take over the govt. I don’t know what needs to be done, but this I can say with knowledge and certainty. If we do nothing, then we will be attacked by alQaeda once more, possibly with a nuclear weapon from Pakistan. Peace, while nice to talk about, has never worked. It is only the countries with strong militaries that have not been attacked. I can go on for hours with examples of this fact. OTOH I do not believe in the current militarism of the US. What we should do is protect our own country. Bring home the troops from Germany and Japan. It has been over 60 years, I do not think that they will go to war again against us.</p> The strategic hamlet program was used sucessfully by the Brits in their insurgent war in Malaya in the 50s. The US figured that if it worked their. it should work in Vietnam. It did not. As a Vietnam Vet over the last 35 years I have read every book I could find on the region. We simply went in on the heels of the French and attampted to do what they could not. We were going to fail in that war from the gitgo due to a total failue to understand the people and the reasons for the actual fight-civil war-going on there. I have been against the Iraq war from the start. I am much more ambivalent about Afghanistan. We had a good reason to invade, however we went about it wrong. We started by going in cheap and compounding the error when we had almost all of the alQaeda leadership trapped in Tora Bora. Micro management by Rumsfeld resulted in the escape of alQaeda. Since then the problem has moved into Pakistan-nuclear weapons anyone? Why should we bother about Pakistan? Because their govt is corrupt, their ISI intel agency funded the Taliban, which has spread itself into Pakistan and could take over the govt. I don’t know what needs to be done, but this I can say with knowledge and certainty. If we do nothing, then we will be attacked by alQaeda once more, possibly with a nuclear weapon from Pakistan. Peace, while nice to talk about, has never worked. It is only the countries with strong militaries that have not been attacked. I can go on for hours with examples of this fact. OTOH I do not believe in the current militarism of the US. What we should do is protect our own country. Bring home the troops from Germany and Japan. It has been over 60 years, I do not think that they will go to war again against us.

]]> By: TomThumb http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874443 TomThumb Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:17:09 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874443 <p>Gee Mack, Israel is not a very stable country and they have nukes, should we occupy them?/s</p> Gee Mack, Israel is not a very stable country and they have nukes, should we occupy them?/s

]]> By: Kassandra http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874440 Kassandra Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:11:47 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874440 <p>What I don’t understand is that this whole thing started off with al Quaida as the enemy; now, it’s the Taliban.Why are THEY “insurgents” now, they friggin’ LIVE there. It’s their society, bad as it may be.<br /> We’ll always be able to find someone, somewhere who doesn’t agree with US.<br /> Obama is really beginning to scare the living daylights outta me.</p> What I don’t understand is that this whole thing started off with al Quaida as the enemy; now, it’s the Taliban.Why are THEY “insurgents” now, they friggin’ LIVE there. It’s their society, bad as it may be.
We’ll always be able to find someone, somewhere who doesn’t agree with US.
Obama is really beginning to scare the living daylights outta me.

]]> By: SouthernDragon http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874436 SouthernDragon Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:05:59 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874436 <p>Ever been in a country occupied by foreign troops? Ever been an occupier? Ever see the look in a person’s eyes that says, “If I could I would kill you?” </p> <p>Do you really think US troops will provide security for Afghanis? Buying off Sunnis and promising them jobs in the Iraki security forces resulted in a decrease in both Iraki and American casualties, temporarily it turns out. Now that al-Maliki has imprisoned one of the Sunni Awakening leaders, the promise of jobs goes unfulfilled and we’ve halted payments to the Sunnis we now have multiple bombings in Shi’ite areas of Baghdad. How’s that for security? Are we going to buy off the Taliban in order to prop up an American puppet who’s playing both sides of the fence? </p> <p>“I will believe that violence will overcome violence when you can convince me that darkness will overcome darkness.” M K Gandhi</p> Ever been in a country occupied by foreign troops? Ever been an occupier? Ever see the look in a person’s eyes that says, “If I could I would kill you?”

Do you really think US troops will provide security for Afghanis? Buying off Sunnis and promising them jobs in the Iraki security forces resulted in a decrease in both Iraki and American casualties, temporarily it turns out. Now that al-Maliki has imprisoned one of the Sunni Awakening leaders, the promise of jobs goes unfulfilled and we’ve halted payments to the Sunnis we now have multiple bombings in Shi’ite areas of Baghdad. How’s that for security? Are we going to buy off the Taliban in order to prop up an American puppet who’s playing both sides of the fence?

“I will believe that violence will overcome violence when you can convince me that darkness will overcome darkness.” M K Gandhi

]]> By: mack http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874423 mack Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:44:20 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/04/06/breaking-the-silence-on-afghanistan/#comment-1874423 <p>The problem is that while Iraqi and Iranian nuclear threats are largley neocon wet nightmares, the Pakisani potential is fully realized.<br /> My impression is that the US Afganistan policy is more driven by this factor than the liklihood of new AQ training camps.<br /> I am not a believer in a military solution in the area, but at this point I do not think the “declare victory and leave” approach is really in the US’s best interests.</p> The problem is that while Iraqi and Iranian nuclear threats are largley neocon wet nightmares, the Pakisani potential is fully realized.
My impression is that the US Afganistan policy is more driven by this factor than the liklihood of new AQ training camps.
I am not a believer in a military solution in the area, but at this point I do not think the “declare victory and leave” approach is really in the US’s best interests.

]]>