Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Report on Afghanistan Gives Obama Tough Choices
The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan's call for more troops - "or else the mission will be a failure" - gives President Obama a stark set of options for the next step in Afghanistan.
President Barack Obama pauses in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 17, 2009, during a ceremony where he awarded Army Sgt. 1st Class Jared C. Monti from Raynham, Mass. the Medal of Honor for his service in Afghanistan.
(AP Photo/Charles Dharapak) Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal wrote that "resources will not win this war, but under-resourcing could lose it," according to a summary of his 66-page report that was reported Sunday by the Washington Post.
Obama said disrupting al Qaeda is his "core goal" and is reviewing options, aides said.
While some backers of the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan are encouraging the president to beef up forces there, nobody is actively challenging him to go the other way - and pull U.S. troops out of Afghanistan.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, has said she didn't "think there's a great deal of support for sending more troops to Afghanistan" and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., wants to use existing U.S. troops there to train Afghan forces to hunt down al Qaeda.
But few politicians are publicly opposing the White House, whose position is evolving.
"By failing to speak out forcefully, Congress will serve as enablers on this war in Afghanistan," said Norman Solomon, a media critic, liberal activist and Obama supporter who spent five days around Kabul last month, touring refugee camps and talking with politicians and locals.
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, one of the staunchest anti-war votes in Congress and a key Obama ally, told The Chronicle Monday that she's "not so sure" that Obama's supporters on the left are willing to push back against him.
Lee said an amendment to the Defense Department's reauthorization bill would have required the White House to provide an exit strategy for the Afghanistan war, but the bill failed by a 2-1 margin.
"I'm definitely talking about this, trying to create a debate," Lee said. "Whether it was Bush or this president, I think this was not the correct strategy to pursue to protect America's national security."
Lee said she thinks the Taliban is getting stronger regardless of the number of U.S. troops.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, has been pushing for "soft power" in Afghanistan that would emphasize economic development, humanitarian aid, education and better governance. Now, 90 percent of U.S. resources in the country go toward the military, according to the Defense Department.
Capitol Hill Republicans urged Obama Monday to give the U.S. military leaders what they ask for. "Anything less would confirm al Qaeda's view that America lacks the strength and the resolve to endure a long war," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., declined to comment on McChrystal's report until she had read it. Last week, she told CNN that that she doesn't think the U.S. mission in Afghanistan is clear.
"I do not believe we can build a democratic state in Afghanistan," she said. "I believe it will remain a tribal entity.
By November, 68,000 U.S. troops will be in Afghanistan, in addition to 38,000 NATO troops.
25 Comments so far
Show Allthis is an excerpt from an article by Bob Herbert , NY Times:
beyond the "reasons for war" by the Empire..
americans just need to "look" deeply and honestly -- and ask themselves WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO and what are we DOING to our OWN children? in this GLorifying of WAR?
==============
excerpt:
A friend of mine who lives in South Carolina sent me an e-mail about a young serviceman in civilian clothes whom she and her husband noticed as he talked on a public telephone in the Atlanta airport last week. He was 19 or 20 years old and quite thin. His clothes and his shoes were worn, my friend said, but the thing she noticed most “was the sadness in his eyes and his sweet demeanor.”
The young man was speaking to his mom in a voice that was quite emotional. My friend recalled him saying, “We’re about to board for Oklahoma for the training before we move out. I didn’t want to bother Amber at work, so please tell her I called if you don’t think it will upset her too much. ... I miss you all so much and love you, and I just don’t know how I’ll get through this.”
At the end of the call, the serviceman had tears in his eyes and my friend said she did, too. She wrote in the e-mail: “I stood up and wished him good luck, and he smiled the sweetest smile that has haunted me ever since.”
===========
I too once witnessed with many other customers, in a paying center for telephone - a young american soldier , all blonde and tall , in his uniform - with a crutch...apparently having spent all day shuffling from one office to another...and arguing about his Phone Bill of thousands of dollars he couldn't afford to pay....
which he "incurred" during his stay in iraq...and he was near tears in his rage,, repeating that they weren't really even allowed such kinds of personal calls to that extent...so how come his bills were so high?....and he just wanted to clarify what was going on ..but the phone company merely kept saying he has to pay them....
and finally he screamed:
"i believed so much to serve my country this way...i went so far and fought and killed and got injured -- to defend THIS? what kind of country is this?"
and he just kept cursing his very own USA...
americans should not be wishing these sons and daughters "good luck" -- they should be embracing them TIGHTLY and TELL THEM -- "DO NOT GO"!!!
War is punishment for the victors as much as it is the vanquished. The psychologists hired to 'help' them are as psychotic as the commanders who send them into battle. Unless you are yourself a monster--a sadist who revels in the suffering of others--you cannot murder people without severe psychological consequences (monsters pay a price as well for being monsters within their interpersonal relationships and what they attract to themselves, but that is a separate matter). Psychologists hired to 'help' these individuals no doubt attempt to help them justify their murderous actions. It should be no mystery why so many servicemen are resorting to suicide, and it's not the BS MSM is feeding you about them 'being under stress.' There is something much DEEPER going on; something not so easy to escape or paint over.
It's a career to today's soldiers. There are soldiers who suffer from PTSD so bad that they can't do their job in the military.
They don't want to quit, so the military send them to programs for help, because they WANT to return to work. Maybe they are scared of civilian life? Their reasoning is that it's their career choice!
They can't focus their attention and have this glaze in their eyes as they avoid looking at you. The military want them fixed so they can go back to work!
I know someone in psychology who was offered a job in Iraq. I agree they want psychologists who are sympathetic to war.
Teddy, I hope you're not around to witness his next move--the rage gets worst--as a Vietnam vet I know. We are messing them up by allowing them to do their master's evil--we have to stop these occupation not only for these service men but also for their victims as well--GET THE FUCK OUT OF OTHER PEOPLES COUNTRIES--END THE OCCUPATIONS NOW!
Hi, I am sure that as a Vietnam vet - as someone that KNOWS what is the HELL of war far more than many , and that it is HELL beyond and above and SEPARATE from
the claims and glorifications...
you know exactly what that young man felt and so many others...
It really just breaks one's heart to see how a War Culture such as the USA promotes and DEFINES itself with - from birth to death of its own citizens for the sake of Corporations, Profit, Capitalism, etc. etc. --
how it DESTROYS people everywhere..how it betrays their idealism or their credulence or their own FAITH and LOVE for their country and fellow citizens
and because of that , also how they , by turning them into "soldiers" are actually DENIED the chance to be complete human beings who could have been better off doing grreat GOOD
not just for themselves, their families, their communities, their friends, their NATION -- but EVEN - as open-minded, curious, enthusiastic americans
even do GREAT GOOD towards OTHER people of other nations...simply by being allowed to grow to the fullness of their own individualities as human beings.
it is sickening, but more so - just really , really sad. I feel so much pity FOR these soldiers and their families...sometimes you just wish you had the ability to just embrace them - and just KEEP them from going away to
KILL and DIE for ...what?
for "causes" that soem old people, usually white men, sitting in boardrooms and backyard parties dream up ..
as some long-ago american senator (i believe) said :
"I HATE THESE OLD MEN SITTING IN THE COMFORT OF THEIR MANSIONS AND CONFERENCE ROOMS -- DREAMING UP WARS AND CAUSES TO SEND YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN TO THEIR DEATHS AND TO KILL....AGAINST OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO REAL QUARREL WITH US".
sometimes I consciously try to NOT read any reports about american soldiers in that condition - because it makes me cry everytime.
they should be HOME - with their parents, if they are poor, helping them at home, whatever way they can...BUT NOT by joining the "army" for the sake of rich people...
they should be HOME studying history, art, philosophy, music, engineering, being a nurse, a fireman, whatever...and be with their friends and communities all trying to contribute towards everyone's betterment through their quest to become as much of the INDIVIDUALS they are and yet will be....
rather than their lives DISRUPTED , their Childhood, their young manhood or womanhood destroyed and STOLEN from them by their own government at the behest of the Rich and Corporations and self-styled armchair Warriors like the COWARDLY neocons like BIll Kristol, and company.
they should be HOME with their girlfriends or boyfriends learning how to grow up together and helping in guiding their own little brothers and sisters to be good citizens and be an aid to their aging parents and grandparents...
they should be HOME dreaming of ONE DAY -- going to places LIKE afghanistan -- to MAKE FRIENDS and LEARN cultures and history and SHARE = rather than go there MEDDLING in their affairs to CONTROL them and KILL them and treat them like dogs in their own countries and the USA just EARNS
the HATRED and ENMITY and RESENTMENT as the PRICE of what these young americans are SENT TO DO! == to their UTTER self-destruction.
it is so sad...these young americans , sons and daughters, like that young thin soldier at the airport DON'T DESERVE to be ROBBED of their beautiful , sweet smiles like that!!
even now, as I am typing , i am making so many mistakes becuse i can't stop my own tears from flowing ....how much more it must be for those that KNOW the REAL HELL of war...such as yourself and what that young man WILL go through but can't extricate himself from
because he was THROWN LIKE A DOG to the ALTAR of WAR by HIS own COUNTRY?......for the sake of "PRIDE" of "EMPIRE?"
that's like a parent throwing his own son to a cage full of rabid pitbulls and ravenous lions - and "go fight 'em , sonnie...make papa proud"!!!
what can be more barbaric than THAT?
HOW DARE america do that to its own children!!???
I believe that is the cure for PTSD, to do act of GOOD!
If our military were to help instead of kill, they would be welcome in these countries.
If our government would only support legitimate governments who honestly are trying to help their people in a just way, (instead of fighting "evil") then we wouldn't become the evil we fight!
What these soldiers need is to feel good about themselves, they can do it by fighting for good things where they ARE accepted and appreciated.
teddy.....your passionate plea,
hit my heart, you do not cry alone.
the homicidal madness we call freedom
is "be all you can be," for an illusion.
two things, your post was stone cold
mistake free, sorry. and, if history and
philosophy were taught, young people would
think a la the 60's, can't have that.
rainbows do come
Onecaptjim:
what was so funny about that incident i witnessed of that soldier was :
MY own feelings were overwhelmingly that of a sense of being "responsible" ...i felt as if it was MY fault, knowing intellectually i had nothing to do with sending him there or his life or his bills , or whatever ...but simply that what HIS own country has done to him - somehow was MY responsibility...
i felt so guilty that i couldn't just make MAGIC and just make all his hurt disappear..
it felt so impotent..and just shows how mch EVIL this warfare state creates on ALL of us.
If you speak out against this, you got to realize; It's Not Our Fault!
>>If you wish to be a success in the world, promise everything, deliver nothing. (napoleon)
>>In politics stupidity is not a handicap (napoleon)
"Now, 90 percent of U.S. resources in the country go toward the military, according to the Defense Department." Yah, that'll win friends and influence people, like it always has. Lynn Woolsey gets it. Is anyone listening to her calm, strong voice? Sadly, the Afghans are probably so sick of us they wouldn't want our aid. I think the best strategy (for Iraq as well) is to get out, totally, and then offer to go back as part of a multinational rebuilding team.
First, pull out of Afghanistan, and Iraq. Do NOT become a part of multi-national peacekeeping force. Begin respecting an other's beliefs and cultural traditions. Send true aid if anything is sent; aid to agriculture, irrigation(clean water production-not private water ownership for profit), green technology, etc., to the people in care of the government. No military technology or aid, period! Perhaps that way we could become what the propagandists have so long claimed that we are a beacon of love and compassion, freedom and democracy in the world. There is a plan for withdrawal in congress; ask Dennis Kucinich.
Get out, Obama, before the Afghanistan fiasco gets you out!
I have had relatives in Iraq and now my Nephew is in Afghanistan, so do not get me wrong, I love the patriotism and bravery of our military people, but the most egregious use of these Americans, (who think they are protecting America, when they are really protecting big business) by the evil and corrupt people in Government has to be truncated. To use these soldiers for their own punic ends makes them guilty of the highest treason to our country.
Well isn't this hilarious! Trying to get victim records from Bagram, is like taking a bone from a pit-bull, but this "secret" report, whoops! How did that get circulated to the media?
Obama just sent tens of thousands of more marines to Afghanistan, oh but now, he has the tough decision to make...will he send more still?
Some things are certain though. One, US generals always get good jobs with defence contractors and McChrystal will be no exception.
Two, it makes little sense for Obama to appear to struggle with whether or not to send more troops now, as everyone can see that US troops are ALREADY heading there. Perhaps Obama wishes to appear more reasonable by saying "OK! 30 000 and not one more!" or "60 000 and not one more!" which one sounds tougher?
Lost in the raffle to guess how many more soldiers the US sends there, is the slight problem of what they do when they arrive. Now they don't wish to APPEAR to be occupiers, remember, at the same time, their most brilliant strategists advise that the troops should "hold" territory. And the difference between "holding" and "occupying" a distant country? for us mere humans?
Does anyone remember why America left Vietnam? Was it because they didn't "clear and hold" or was it because they didn't send another 30 000 troops? Perhaps if they get it right in Afghanistan they can take what they have learned and head back to Vietnam? Or did Vietnam somehow sort its self out without US "help"?
". . . the White House, whose position is evolving . . ."
-- late Cretaceous, perhaps?
Some of these responses seem downright hallucinatory:
-- Boxer imagines that the Afghans, if trained, will "hunt down" people fighting against the army that occupies their country
-- Woolsey imagines that the States can bribe its way into some kind of legitimate control of a country they have been shredding for 8 years.
-- Feinstein thinks that "democracy" is opposed to "tribal"
.
78,000 US troops, 38,000 NATO troops, 90,000 Afghan non-troops, and how many contracted mercenaries?
And I suppose we haven't counted the kids crashing weddings with video-game drones.
The diorama of this evolution should be painted by Hieronymous Bosch.
If the average person read this report the choice would not be difficult at all. " Without more troops the mission will fail ". The first thing I would ask the General: JUST EXACTLY WHAT IS OUR MISSION IN AFGHANISTAN SIR???
he , they - just don't want to say the E word:
EMPIRE.
of course that's also BECAUSE
Afghanistan is "where empires go to die".
the taliban - who consist of DIFFERENT Tribes - and said to often be even at war with each other in rivalry - have recently developed what the USA SHOULD DREAD:
they have come together for what is considered a rather historic, by their standards, development of the Tribes - taliban or not - AGREEING to set aside their DIFFERENCES - in order to kick out the "foreigners".
that means at least 20-30 MILLION people either sympathetic to their warlords' and chieftain's instructions and teachings and likely ready to become "activated" to fight for the preservation of their independence from Foreign meddling.
MCHRYSTAL thinks 40,000 more US troops can do the job? he is DREAMING.
the MORE the USA bombs, and drones, and remote-blasts, and kicks in doors, and INTRUDES into afghani affairs and lives - the MORE the Afghans will dig their feet in their OWN homeland to make life HELL for americans over there...
You can ask me and don't call me sir. 1) Protect Hallie Burton's pipeline. Hallie and I were such good friends until she cut and ran to the UAE. Uncle Dickie still keeps in touch. 2) Protect our nation's heroin supply. I thought of a great movie title when they make a flick on this quagmire. It should be called "When Harry Raped Sally" starring Billy McChrystal.
Either cut and run or start cutting names in another long black wall....
"Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal wrote that "resources will not win this war, but under-resourcing could lose it,"
Another triumph of conservative doublespeak, that is unless he means that more troops, more blood on both sides plus some fancy politickin will somehow make up for the increase in animosity. It would then be another triumph of conservative demagoguery.
McChrystal doublespeak, indeed. He just wants more money. He likes the power and the killing too.
The following brilliant deduction is from "Stillwell and the American Experience in China 1911-54" by Barbara W. Tuchman: "There is no more entangling alliance than aid to indigent friends".
He'll send 15K troops, but mostly amp drone attacks in Pakistan.
McChrystal says Pakistan is aiding the Taliban in Afghanistan-Pashtuns period. Give the man a new medal for deduction, cause he got that right.
And this Taliban assisting Allah worshipping ISI controls 200 nuclear weapons. They are our target ultimately, though trickier waters have never been approached.
Do they represent an existential threat to Israel? Of course they do!