Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiNot Your Own People
While the Taliban have claimed responsiblity for the shooting of five British soldiers in Afghanistan, knowledgeable observers have branded as "wishful thinking" the official U.K. line that the attack was the work of one "rogue" policeman. In a war of ever-shifting frontlines, complex tribal loyalties, and trainees who are often high, illiterate, angry or working as infiltrators, a video report from the Guardian says, yesterday's attack was a foreseeable disaster just waiting to happen.
"What is significant is that the bullets did not come across the fields from a distant ditch or building but from inside, from the barrel of an ally's gun. It comes in a year marked by several such instances, raising serious questions about the loyalty of Afghanistan's security forces."
10 Comments so far
Show AllThe Taliban, if they really claimed responsibility for this, are almost surely lying and seeking to show their bravado. Let's get damn real. This was some person or persons with the constabulary in that country which the US Government has on its payroll.
AD
I think the chickenhawks who committed us to senseless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq learned a good deal from Vietnam.
They learned to counter the threat of honest reporting from the battlefield by embedding selected journalists with the troops, while running a coordinated psy-ops campaign for mass media consumption back on the home front touting continuous mission success.
They learned to marginalize domestic critics of the wars, taking the option of withdrawal "off the table" for serious public discussion, framing the issue instead as whether to escalate or simply stay the course.
They learned to confine antiwar street protests to ineffectual free speech zones with scant major media coverage, so that fair and balanced news coverage of such events could focus equally upon pro-war counter-demonstrators.
They learned not to allow any coverage of the returning flagged draped caskets of soldiers killed in action, and how to hector and impugn the patriotism of news outlets that did not provide only a sanitized version of the carnage and the civilian casualties that were taking place.
They learned to field an all volunteer army of occupation with heavy reliance upon mercenary corporate contractors, and no draft to disrupt the tender sensibilities of the rich and the American middle class.
They learned to wage "low intensity" warfare with comparatively minimal US casualties, by using hi tech killing devices such as Predator drones and shadowy, CIA-linked paramilitary units that could always assert plausible deniability when atrocities occurred.
Above all, they learned to lie and never look back, relying upon the complicity of the mainstream US media to sell the wars as something honorable, something necessary to keep America safe from evildoers forever lurking in the woods.
Bill from Saginaw
OK Bill...you got me. They did indeed learn something......exactly what you outlined.
"evildoers" There's a blast from the past!
I'd still love to have put an M-16 in the hands of those Chickenhawks you were referring to and said...right on up that trail boys, go right on into that Vil and tell me who's there. We'll wait right here for you.
Or, lets send them up to one of those lovely isolated outposts in Afganistan where they are hanging our Marines out to dry. THAT would work for me too.
As long as the West continues to ignore the racial and tribal realities of Afghanistan and foolishly think of all of them as "Afghans," then not only will this sort of thing repeat itself many times, but the West will be chased out wondering what exactly happened. What is worse than a defeat is a defeat where no lessons are learned.
Fair point about the differences in the Afghans. We won't be wondering what happened, we will know exacactly what happened. Same as before.
The chickenhawks that committed us to these wars didn't learn anything from Vietnam because they weren't there and refused to serve. This was lost when we went in.
By the way....ck your comment to me on the other string.....oops!
I doubt if the five soldiers killed give a damn who gets "credit" for killing them.
As long as we have troops there, casaulties will happen.....no troops, no casualties.
With no leadership more troops will die.
Ann Jones wrote on Tom Dispatch a month ago that most of the "trainees" are either taking the money, the food and the weapon, and going home, or they're Taliban (or other resisters) taking the money, food, weapon AND training, and going back to the resistance. The only good thing is that a strategy this stupid must hasten the total collapse of the empire.
Ann Jones wrote on Tom Dispatch a month ago that most of the "trainees" are either taking the money, the food and the weapon, and going home, or they're Taliban (or other resisters) taking the money, food, weapon AND training, and going back to the resistance. The only good thing is that a strategy this stupid must hasten the total collapse of the empire.
I did not know the British and other occupiers of Afghanistan producing chaos and mayhem in that country were allies of the Afghan people.
It may be time for the occupiers to adjust their perception of their role in that land. They may want to try this thought experiment, difficult as it may be for such West centered minds: they should try to put themselves in an Afghan person's shoes for one entire day. After doing that, they may just decide it's indeed time to get the heck out of there, go home, and shut the heck up.
Newsflash..you are not their "ally"...you are their "occupier"
There is a long proud Afgan history of capping Imperial Brits.
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats