Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
US Eyes Vietnam for Afghanistan Tips
BRUSSELS — Top U.S. officials have reached out to a leading Vietnam war scholar to discuss the similarities of that conflict 40 years ago with American involvement in Afghanistan, where the U.S. is seeking ways to isolate an elusive guerrilla force and win over a skeptical local population.
This July 8, 2009 photo shows journalist Stanley Karnow, seated, in Washington paying respect to the first American causalities killed in Vietnam in 1959. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, NATO's top commander in Afghanistan, and Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. special envoy to the country, telephoned renowned Vietnam War historian Stanley Karnow on July 27 to discuss the two conflicts. (AP Photo/The Washington Times, Chase Martinez, File) The overture to Pulitzer Prize-winning
historian Stanley Karnow, who opposes the Afghan war, comes as the U.S.
is evaluating its strategy there.
President Barack Obama has doubled the size of the U.S. force to curb a burgeoning Taliban insurgency and bolster the Afghan government. He has tasked Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander, to conduct a strategic review of the fight against Taliban guerrillas and draft a detailed proposal for victory.
McChrystal and Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. special envoy to the country, telephoned Karnow on July 27 in an apparent effort to apply the lessons of Vietnam to the Afghan war, which started in 2001 when U.S.-led forces ousted the Taliban regime in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.
Among the concerns voiced by historians is the credibility of President Hamid Karzai's government, which is widely perceived as being plagued by graft and corruption. They draw a parallel between Afghanistan's presidential election on Aug. 20 and the failed effort in Vietnam to legitimize a military regime lacking broad popular support through an imposed presidential election in 1967.
"Holbrooke rang me from Kabul and passed the phone to the general," said Karnow, who authored the seminal 1983 book, "Vietnam: A History."
Holbrooke confirmed to The Associated Press that the three men discussed similarities between the two wars. "We discussed the two situations and what to do," he said during a visit last week to NATO headquarters in Brussels.
In an interview Thursday with the AP, Karnow said it was the first time he had ever been consulted by U.S. commanders to discuss the war. He did not elaborate on the specifics of the conversation.
When asked what could be drawn from the Vietnam experience, Karnow replied: "What did we learn from Vietnam? We learned that we shouldn't have been there in the first place. Obama and everybody else seem to want to be in Afghanistan, but not I."
"It now seems unthinkable that the U.S. could lose (in Afghanistan), but that's what experts ... thought in Vietnam in 1967," he said at his Maryland home. "It could be that there will be no real conclusion and that it will go on for a long time until the American public grows tired of it."
An administration official said academics and outside experts have been consulted frequently during the Obama presidency, especially around high-profile events or decisions. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to speak more freely about the administration's behind-the-scenes thinking.
Holbrooke and Karnow have known each other since they were both in Vietnam in the early 1960s. At the time, Holbrooke was a junior U.S. diplomat and Karnow a Time-Life correspondent.
Holbrooke briefly commented on contrasts between the two conflicts, noting that the military regime in Saigon was corrupt and unpopular, while the international community seeks to build a democracy in Afghanistan.
The Vietnam war also was a much bigger conflict. Nearly 550,000 U.S. troops were deployed at the height of the war, whereas 102,000 international troops are currently in Afghanistan — of which 63,000 are American.
James McAllister, a professor of political science at Williams College in Massachusetts who has written extensively about Vietnam, said the administration could learn a lot from Vietnam.
"American policy makers clearly see parallels between the two wars," he said. "They know that the mistakes we made in Vietnam must be avoided in Afghanistan."
McAllister cited analogies between the two wars:
_ In both wars, security forces had an overwhelming advantage in firepower over lightly armed but highly mobile guerrillas.
_ Insurgents in both cases were able to use safe havens in neighboring countries to regroup and re-equip.
_He pointed to McChrystal's order to limit airstrikes and prevent civilian casualties, linking it to the overuse of air power in Vietnam which resulted in massive civilian deaths.
McAllister drew a parallel to another failed political strategy from Vietnam — the presidential election.
"That ('67 ballot) helped ensure that U.S. efforts would continue to be compromised by its support for a corrupt, unpopular regime in Saigon," McAllister said.
Rufus Phillips, Holbrooke's boss in Vietnam and author of the book "Why Vietnam Matters," echoed that warning.
"The rigged election in South Vietnam proved (to be) the most destructive and destabilizing factor of all," said Phillips, now in Kabul helping to monitor the upcoming election.
David Kilcullen, a counterinsurgency specialist who will soon assume a role as a senior adviser to McChrystal, compared Karzai to South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem.
"He has a reasonably clean personal reputation but he's seen as ineffective; his family are corrupt; he's alienated a very substantial portion of the population," Kilcullen said Thursday at the U.S. Institute of Peace.
"He seems paranoid and delusional and out of touch with reality," he said. "That's all the sort of things that were said about President Diem in 1963."
AP correspondents Anne Gearan and Jennifer Loven in Washington contributed to this report.
- Posted in
73 Comments so far
Show AllKarnow sez: ""It could be that there will be no real conclusion and that it will go on for a long time until the American public grows tired of it."
***
I don't think we're in 1967 anymore, Toto.
The public IS tired - apparently too tired to get worked up over difficulties on the empire's frontier. The occupation will go on as long as there's a dollar to be wrung from it. Or until the locals kick out the West's collective butts, whichever comes first.
The U.S. is determined NOT to repeat its Vietnam experience. Rather than suffer the humiliation of another helicopter withdrawal, it will fight on to the last drop of blood -- at least its NATO allies' blood and possibly its own cannon fodder as well although the latter is less likely.
Unfortunately, many of the NATO allies seem to be awakening to the plot and may be less inclined to participate than they were when sympathy for the U.S. and its people where at a peak following the "9/11" incident.
President Barracks Obimbo has tasked Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander, to conduct a strategic review of the fight against Taliban guerrillas and draft a detailed proposal for victory.
This report has been indefinitely postponed. No one will be hearing about it because the report's glaringly obvious conclusion, that no "victory" is possible, will never be uttered by anyone in the American government. If you want to see what's going to happen to Obimbo, watch John Frankenheimer's last film, "Path to War", the story of Lyndon Johnson's self-destruction over Vietnam. Enjoy especially the scene wherein Johnson, the man with a very bad heart, realizing he has been had, both by himself and the jerks around him, yet cannot muster the courage and common sense to withdraw, grabs a pack of cigarettes he has been hiding and starts smoking again, despite Lady Bird yelling at him to stop. A quick but wonderful rendering of our national suicide.
American who love freedom and independence must applaud all Afghans who kill Americans. Resisting brutal foreign occupation is so, ah, American, eh?
Maybe a complete economic melt down in the US will lead to removing the troops to save money.
We have money for killing or money for curing (medicare).
We're tired now.....
The AfPaks are not only tired as well, but they are deservedly furious!
Kazai may be running a corrupt government but he is not in control of anything in Afghanistan. Blaming Kazia is a futile attempt by the US to pretend that it is not part of the problem. As mentioned above, that is exactly what happened in Vietnam with Diem. The problem with occupations is that it is not only the insurgents that you are fighting occupation but locals saboteurs in the puppet government. Corruption and sabotage can be very effective means to fight occupation from within because some of the money and other resources that are stolen find their way into the hands of insurgents.
Obama's actions are of a man speeding us into the apocolypse, not a man concerned with winning a second term.
He's on a mission so damn the torpedos!
The Obama administration is already on its way to become the fourth recent government that comes apart on account of a war. The others were Johnson, Nixon, and Bush II.
According to recent polls, a slim majority (about 52 percent) of American voters now oppose the AfPac war. The real kicker is that Republican voters support the war by more than 60 percent. The implication is that much more than 52 percent of 2008 Obama voters now oppose the AfPak war. Could 2010 become 2006 redux? That is certainly possible. Could Obama lose in 2012 if he continues the AfPak war on its current course? Yes, that is very possible too. Since Obama hates to lose; as a commander-in-chief of the armed forces he must do something very drastic soon. AfPak surge II? The commanders there are already asking for it.
During the primary campaign Obama cornered Hillary Clinton as a supporter of the Iraq war (that this was hypocritical is well known). Today the AfPak corner for Obama gets smaller and smaller. It is now his war. If he does not extricate himself in August or September of this year AfPak will become his political graveyard.
If President Obama believes that his war opponents will change their minds because "the chief of the Taliban was killed" he will be sadly mistaken as the experience of Bush II has demonstrated.
Cyndy Sheehan, where are you hiding?
As for Hillary, she has completely destroyed any chance of becoming the Democratic nominee in 23012 or 2016 because she is now a supporter of two imperialistic wars.
I think that the biggest difference between 1967 and 2009 is the media.
While the 1967 media would still slant stories to their liking, they would not outright manipulate the stories like they do today. During Vietnam, war protests were covered by the media with the estimates of the number of participants usually lowered, but at least the stories were covered. Today on Faux news, any protest is invisible, unless it is done by a tea-bagger.
Of course the draft was also a great motivator for many. Today we have the economic draft so the poor rural families lose their children while the rich and powerful can stay home and watch American Idol.
And anybody remember the story about the billion dollars of lost 100 dollar bills in Iraq? Oh that's right, that was the same week as Anna Nicole Smith's death so guess which story dominated the news?
The mantra of Change was merely a nefarious tool. We're all now being played for bloody fools.
More death and destruction, while this reticent and complicit corporate media fills the sheople's minds with inane programing, intended solely to distract their minds from this horrid Middle East hegemony.
If the credulous had only supported Nader?
The phrase "a burgeoning Taliban insurgency" implies that the initial invasion resulted in a war that was won. It never was.
The Taliban never surrendered, and have been fighting the invaders since day one. We can stay in Afghanistan as long as we want (or at least as long as we need the gas pipeline), but the Afghans will never stop fighting until foreign troops are gone.
This war will end the same way Vietnam did.
I'm already sick of ALL foreign adventures. This country is on the road to ruin unless it returns to the old virtues of its Founders. Case in point -- Thomas Jefferson:
"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none."
"He seems paranoid and delusional and out of touch with reality," he said. "That's all the sort of things that were said about President Diem in 1963."
Who is saying this? The same people who were saying it in 1963? Sort of amazing that they are still around.
I was at ground zero on 9/11. I supported going into Afghanistan then because that country, not Iraq was behind the attack. Then Dubya grew tired of the whole thing and lied us into Iraq. The time past and who knows where bin Laden is. Time to get out. Also time to abandon our role as world cop and get our own country in order.
Even the Afghan role "behind the attack" is questionable at best, but their insistence on some extradition proceedings for the alleged culprit was deemed unacceptable. It seems quite obvious that OBL was never the real target in any case.
everyone needs to watch a film - concerning afghanistan:
it is centred around a personal story between two little afghan boys - one a pashtun (traditionally the "upper" class) and his friend a Hazari - what they would call their "nigger"..
the rich boy's father employs the poor boy's father - living in their household compound as servants - but that is their traditional culture...and treated as family members.
the poor boy is more courageous and always comes to the rescue of the rich boy when he is bullied around by street boys..they fly kites - a tradition in afghanistan .
then the russians come in - because - of growing ethnic strife in afghanistan that threatens to spill over into russia...and the USA escalates it - that was the beginning - to accelerate the USSR's "own vietnam" (brzezinski)...
the RESULT is what we see today.
the taliban were armed by the USA as "proxy" against the communist-soviet supported government ..and had nothing to do with the welfare of ordinary afghanis...who - mind you, were doing quite much better under EVEN their communist government that at least had to make the facade of having elections .
and then the taliban take over - and we know the rest.
it is called "THE KITE RUNNER"
if people want to understand a LITTLE of the realities and the "past" of what afghanistan had been BEFORE the USA interefered with its affairs...go and watch that.
ordinary people living their ways- tolerating foregn supported politics - but largely living as they always had and dealing with their affairs as they always had.........
until it was WORSENED by the MEDDLING of the USA.
So many posters here cannot get their facts straight.
First of all the ethnic group is Hazara. The other boy's ethnic group was Pushtun in the Kite Runner. The Hazara are the descendants of Ghenghis Khan's army. I am against the persecution of the Hazara people as they are a good people. However, Ghenghis Khan really wrecked Afghanistan and much of the world at the time and people from these places do not remember him fondley. This is where the prejudice against this ethnic group arises from. Although Americans cannot seem to remember last week's news these days most people around the world remember 500 year old past history as if it were yesterday.
Second Afghanistan nor the Afghan people attacked us on 911. Al Qaeda, a stateless terrorist organization and Osama Bin Laden a terrorist leader attacked us. Al Qaeda happened to be operating on Afghan soil at the invitation of the Taliban. The Taliban were not representative of the Afghan people they are backed by the ISI and Pakistan The Taliban were not voted into office they took over by military brute force. They ruled with an iron fist and violated every human rights law in the book.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB227/index.htm
But DC you can't get your facts straight either. it is certainly true that Afghanistan did not attack the wtc, but it does not follow that Osama or al-Qaeda did. the only known perpetrators died in the act.
The Taliban were created by ziggy and the cia, in addition to isi and m16 and saudi arabia. the u.s. was supporting- and funding- the Taliban in 2001.
"the only known perpetrators died in the act."
proof?
all we have is the word of that shitferbrains (in gut we trust) bush jr.
The war will continue until the U.S. Dollar has no more value. Currently $1.44 will buy one Euro. It was only $1.25 on March 4. It used to be closer to $.80 a few years ago.
At some point, the grief that citizens feel because the country has no more good credit, and junky plastic Chinese trinkets cost ten times as much but our salaries didn't rise much, and the fact that the jobs are gone (Argentina had 70% unemployment right after its national bankruptcy), and basic services like water are sold off to Chinese interests and the price of tap water is then permanently jacked up by a power of ten, will outweigh our perpetually lustful desire to kill starving Afghan heroin farmers with Hellfire brand missiles, not because they're farming heroin but because we think they're on the wrong side. Our TV newscasters will then package all of our old video footage of missiles zeroing in on buildings and farmers dying in big explosions and sell them in 5 CD boxed sets to old farts, instead of showing them on the nightly news.
The lesson of Vietnam is simple: we should never have gone there and we should get out now. Osama bin Laden and his allies have morphed and changed in the years since 9/11/01. All we are doing now is creating more enemies.
We will be in Afghanistan until every Afghan is wiped out. We'll teach 'em for invading America, just like we taught those Iraqis for invading America.
Yesterday it was Iraq and it's been a huge disaster for both Iraqi's and Americans. Today it is Afghanistan with US deaths mounting (5 US troops were KIA yesterday) and it too, will be a disaster. Tomorrow we will invade and occupy Africa, notably those poor nations bordering the Persian Gulf that separates eastern Africa with Iran. And in America, more funding for homeland security, more security fences being built and the potential for predator unmanned drones to track US protesters. The US corporate-military is now the enemy of everyone, even here at home and it must be defeated everywhere.
Don't forget Latin America and South America. After all we have to complete our Manifest Destiny and rule the world or destroy it.
Top US officials are looking for advice about Afghanistan from a Vietnam war scholar?
I know a guy who never finished high school. After his stint as a Marine in Vietnam he spent a few years in prison for assault. Eventually he made a living hanging drywall. He's an expert on the realities of Vietnam and on the stupidity of "top US officials." I doubt they will be asking him for advice.
Let's quote it again from this excellent article: WE SHOULD NEVER HAVE INVADED IN THE FIRST PLACE. With my own ears to the BBC back in late 2001 I HEARD the Taliban spokesmen saying that 9/11 was a crime, and that if there was any evidence of Bin Laden's responsibility, they would hand him over to a world court. Problems: There was and never has been a single piece of solid evidence; and Cowboy Bush wanted "justice" his Texass way. Question: instead of spending multi-billions and killing thousands, why not just BUY the entire Afghani crop of poppies---which is the heart of their economy---thus keeping its proceeds out of the hands of drug-lords and actual would-be terrorists? Because WAR and not "victory" is the object of the U.S. game no matter who is in office....And if you haven't seen the Italian-produced documentary "ZERO" at YouTube, watch it, and find out what "Al Qaeda" really means---"The Base," which in Arabic is short for "Data Base": meaning the one compiled during the USSR-Afghan war by the U.S. CIA listing multinational mercenaries who could be and were later used to fight U.S. battles as proxies (Kosovo, Balkans etc.). I've had the stink of a rotten fish in my nose since 9/11/01 (that day it became unbearable, that is)....and I grieve that as with JFK there will be no truth or justice about them in my lifetime....
Anyone who knows even a little bit about world history will be able to tell you two things: 1) NO country has ever successfully held onto another country's property without paying an incredibly high price for it, and ultimately NOT failed at holding it and 2) NO country has EVER successfully invaded Afghanistan. The Brits couldn't do it,the Russians couldn't do it, no ancient power was ever able to do it either. NO ONE has ever been able to hold that region EXCEPT those very tough, single minded people who live there. Yes, you might kill a lot of them, and you might think that you control them, but in reality you don't, and never will. They will ultimately chase you out and spit on you while you leave.
These are undeniable facts, I don't care HOW big or powerful the country you run is, you will NEVER take over that area of the world. History is full of examples of people who have tried, and ALL failed. There is no reason at all to believe that we will be any different. And how many of our people will have to die before we learn that lesson? Far too many. How many more tens of trillions will we spend in the foolish attempt? Way too many. And blaming Karzai for the failure of those who put him up to being a captain of a doomed ship are just trying to insulate themselves from any responsibility in yet another foolish attempt to destroy another country.
We need to apologize and get out before even more of both our people and theirs die for this foolishness. Was it the Taliban who attacked us on 9-11? Nope. And since they didn't, it's an illegal war. It should be disbanded, and none of this foolishness about how we would be letting the troops down by making sure that more of them survive this stupidity.
It was Cheney and W who did this thing, now they are gone and we still have to keep it going? How about if we just admit that it was stupid to begin with, apologize and leave? Admit that the lowest of the low started something that was incredibly foolish and cowardly, and call it quits. That might actually do something for our children's futures, like make it possible for them to HAVE one.
there are 38 million Pashtuns - the dominant single ethnicity spread in afghanistan and pakistan...but that's ONLY pashtuns....not including hazaris and other ethnicities in THEIR millions. the USA is going to TRY to DOMINATE and control THEM? pakistan alone has at least 100 million people, of extremely complex ethnic relationships among them...add that to afghanistan's population -- the USA is going to try and Dominate and control at least 180 million people with WHAT?
its DRONES? its SATELLITES? its TANKS and BUNKER BUSTERS and its MARINES and PRIVATE MERCENARIES? and its HUGE NEW EMBASSY with 2,000 US "diplomats?"....they will be like the "mayor of kabul" - isolated and like sitting ducks in whatever little patch of land the USA manages to "buy" for its facilities...with its own soldiers gowing MAD in the isolation......
what a laugh!!!
if the USA couldn't even manage vietnam where there were only ONE people -- how is it going to "manage" tribes and ethnicities with different jealously guarded traditions and interests that THEY have among themselves for thousands of years known how to deal with each other -- but ABOVE ALL -- DO NOT WANT FOREIGNERS to control their doings?
is the USA - its pentagon planners , its intelligentsia , its congress, is corporations, its president --
GONE COMPLETELY BONKERS now?
on top of which it is starting this "occupation however long it takes towards VICTORY" -- with a BANKRUPT economy?
are they MAD?
"vietnam where there were only ONE people"
wrong.
List of ethnic groups in Vietnam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Vietnam is a multi-ethnic country with over fifty distinct groups (54 are recognized by the Vietnamese government), each with its own language, lifestyle, ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_Vietnam
if any country has a near-homogenous population it appears to be the US - seemingly full of hope-fed fools willingly supporting any military adventure until they get "tired".
go team go.
Exactly!
Alas, WJM, we are not in the lesson-learning business, nor are we in the apologizing, life-saving or leaving business. The only people whose children are supposed to have a future are those who are rich enough to buy a private bunker or island.
What "lessons?" the only Lesson the USA leaders , establishment, white house, pentagon, Congress, Intelligentsia and Industry have ever learned - all put together - is
how to create conditions for chaos and war and suffering....worsen conditions unnecessarily, and START wars and then when on the verge of defeat and humiliation by some ragtag natives against the "greatest army in the world's history forever and ever , amen" -
ESCALATE and spread it to neighobring regions SOME MORE and find MORE wars to start to distract americans from its FAILED POLICIES.
that's the only "lesson" the USA has ever learned.
apart of course from Exterminating Natives - starting with the Native Indians - and exporting that Extermination abroad -
and Doing business in the ENSLAVEMENT business -
starting from 20 million africans to modern day - fancy-worded american and foreign SLAVES
which american verbiage names with such fancy terms as "customer representative"....."assistant to the assistant"..."certified nursing assistant" (to wipe some fat american's ass who couldn';t reach back anymore paid at a pittance until THEIR backs break)....
those are the ONLY TWO LESSONS the USA ever learned:
WARMAKING and ENSLAVEMENT
"Afghan Occupation Will Go On' Until American Public Grows Tired'"
Reminds me of the cliche': The beatings will continue until morale improves.
In the past two months, all I've been hearing about a single-payer national healh system is, Where's the money going to come from?" Yet, in the whole course of these damn wars, I have not heard a peep from the same assholes about, "Where's the money going to come from to support these wars and occupations?"
I guess it's true, an asshole has only one eye and that one eye is pretty much blind.
We're there for the oil and gas routes.
we'll leave when we have to pay to high a price for all that.
Money and oil drive us--that's all there is and all you need to know
That these top officials are asking a scholar for advice on this misadventure in Afghanistan indicates they've thrown up their hands. Pity the officials themselves don't see it that way and act accordingly.
The reason they don't call off their dogs is that the leadership in the US hears above all other voices the voices of those who make the toys that endow the military with a power so awesome that failure is the only option, as it always is when destruction and death are the aims.
The US is a deeply conflicted nation. It is sad when national wealth is employed to ruin lives. We will reap what we sow.
Hmmm, why are we reading about this conversation in an Associated Press story? Is it supposed to show McChrystal (Obama's assassination guy) and Holbrooke (the questionable ambassador) in a sympathetic light over another pointless war?
Holbrooke's support for Indonesia's attack on East Timor was noted in a January Democracy Now program:
"It was Holbrooke and Zbigniew Brzezinski, both now leading lights in the Democratic Party, who played point in trying to frustrate the efforts of congressional human rights activists to try and condition or stop US military assistance to Indonesia and in fact accelerated the flow of weapons to Indonesia at the height of the genocide," said Brad Simpson, Assistant Professor of US History at the University of Maryland.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/28/
the_democrats_suharto_bill_clinton_richard
-TIA
"It was Holbrooke and Zbigniew Brzezinski . . . "
yes, but that was in the past.
surely experience has shown them the error of their ways.
it is time to "move on".
We need no Vietnam advisers to tell the world we lost in Iraq. Pallets of 100 dollar bills disappear, our puppet schemes to kill and remove our troops, our contractors smuggle in guns to sell to our enemies carrying out a religious war for themselves and a vast number of our troops return home mad and wreck havoc on family and the community. The same will happen in Afghanistan.
There are however winners. The 1% rich military contractors, like off the table Pelosi's husband, bankers and captains of industry have won and will win. They have raped the American people for billions in war funds, destroyed our economy, stolen our homes and bank accounts, spy on us, build detention camp for us, perform invasive searches everywhere you go. They are the winners and continue to reap the spoils of war.
In all the mess it is we the people who have become the fools. We let it happen even after what we learned ourselves from Vietnam. We will continue to end up as the one's with egg on our faces until we get off our asses and do something about it.
Dream on about someone else bringing you Hope and Change.
TRUE THAT!
The United States will find itself in another civil war before any of the Neo-Con's schemes come to pass.
way too much talk. Just get the hell out. Attacking Afghanistan was a war crime from the moment the first bomb was dropped. every day is another crime
We need somehow to waken the dormant minds of this administration. It's a big responsibility. There are very few intellectuals in this country compared to the
size of the place, much less people who can communicate well enough to persuade a Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton or Richard Holbrooke that they must perform a U-turn.
I name these officials as the likely marks since they had liberal arts education, which is supposed to assure an open mind. Down the hierarchic ladder from them the people immediately become very ____. Well, let me refrain from plugging any adjective into that hole at all.
Consider Admiral Mullen telling the American public that the fighting in Afghanistan is much "tougher than anyone expected." You expected less, Admiral? Didn't you read world history? Didn't you examine the recent and distant past of the country you want to occupy for all eternity? Didn't you read the articles and posts at Common Dreams, Truthout, Truthdig, even at Organizing for America? Why not, pray tell?
What would it take actually to reach Barack, Hillary and Richard-- the best bet for ending the American war in Afghanistan, in my view. Well, a writer friend recently told me to quit swearing in my posts. That is very difficult but she is right.
The posting person who said this latest news reveals that the administration is "throwing up their hands" might be on to something. Are we just talking or actually looking for an opening and fighting from behind for our point of view? If the latter, no swearing or off-putting language, please, and tone just right, impeccable in fact. Think about Barack, Hillary and Richard and what you know about them-- actually, it should be quite a lot since all three have huge public exposure.
I don't know if I can debate them and exercise the necessary restraint at the same time, but some others might be able to carry it off-- maybe former members of college debating teams with enlightened view of Afghanistan and firm anti-torture and anti-war conviction if such people exist.
"...waken the dorman minds of this administration?"....
i think , hopeful as anyone might think that could be...WAKENING these minds is already far too late.
these minds are nothing but the continuation of a VERY "EYES WIDE SHUT" "waking moments"...of US policy. they KNOW exactly what they are doing - that it is mendacious, cynical , exploitative and downright evil and warlike.
one must remember - for a nation which has the longest and broadest history among modern nations of warmaking (considering that it happens to be the MOST PROTECTED by two great oceans and relatively friendly and even submissive countries north and south - unlike most other countries with plenty of REAL concerns with their neighbors - and thus has NO justifications whatsoever for being under "threat" from anyone UNLESS it brought them upon itself through ITS foreign policies where it doesn't belong in its meddling and THREATENING OTHER countries and regions) --
the USA is led by "minds" whose only concern is IMPERIAL dominance AND the aggression that goes with it.
what's there to "wake" in them? they know exactly what they are doing...
does one really "wake" a lunatic to the fact that he IS lunatic? does one really "wake" a person who is knowingly ADDICTED to power and aggression and has already committed himself to continuing exactly what he has been committing because THAT is his very nature and even takes pleasure in it?...
the only waking people like that ever manage to have is when they destroy themselves and others along with that. until that happens -- it's all "guns blazing" - "all forward march" for craven people like that. they are simply , for all intents and purposes destructive people which one can only hope will die out on their own accord, soon enough, dire as that is in view of the destructiveness that they cause.
as if it's not enough that he has afghanistan/pakistan/central asia on his plate for more warmaking, Obama and his pentagon now want 6 military bases more in Colombia to do exactly WHAT?
"drug war?"
everyone there knows it's a Facade for installing yet another "military foothold" to "oversee" latin america just because most countries aren't exactly bowing to the USA this time around...the "change" obama is heading is for BACK to the "empire" as it "was" and more expansion.
they never , ever learn...except on how to "finesse" their cruelty and cretinous policies.
"dormant minds" they are not.
they're extremely active -- planning , scheming, cooking up more fantastical Wars , more economic ruin , more "victorious" marches, more cruelties, more craven dehumanizations, more lunacies -- straight from science-fiction bizarre hideousness.
"no swearing or off-putting language, please,"
WTF!?
we're dealing with murdering shits here and I gotta mind my tongue?
" Didn't you read history ". Yeah, the only time Afghanistan was conquered was by Alexander the Great thousands of years ago and that was for a very short time. The Russians were the last ones to be run out despite 500,000 troops and the might of the Russian army and if nothing else you would think that would be a wake up call for Admiral Mullen! " The fighting in Afghanistan is tougher than anyone expected". Admiral, you haven't seen anything yet, wait until the 40 million Pashtun Taliban decide they have had enough of Americas BS. Oh and one more thing Admiral, keep on killing innocent civilians with pilotless drones as I am sure that is not creating any anger for our troops. You and your ilk are nothing but murderers and hit men for the MIC and you could care less about our troops!
What's the Vegas line on Diem -- I mean, Karzai -- getting aced?
9/11
vdb, that's fuckin' hilarious