Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama's 'Finish the Job' Talk Sets Stage for Afghan Troop Surge
President Obama plans to formally announce on December 1 his decision with regard to the request from some of his more ambitious generals for a massive troop surge in Afghanistan.
US Marines fire mortar rounds from their forward operating base in Mian Poshteh in Helmand Province. President Barack Obama, vowing to "finish the job" in Afghanistan, promised he would soon announce his decision on sending tens of thousands more US troops to battle Al-Qaeda and the Taliban (AFP/Manpreet Romana) But indications are that the president who was elected to set a new
course for the nation when it comes to foreign policy will instead
"stay the course" set by his quagmire-prone predecessor.
Obama announced Tuesday that he plans to "finish the job" in Afghanistan, and there is a growing consensus that he will agree to dispatch roughly 34,000 U.S. troops to the country.
The president says he plans to use his December 1 "finish-the-job" speech to signal "resolve to the allies while not signaling open-ended commitment to the American people."
Translation: There will be talk of an exit strategy -- with reassuring references to "benchmarks" and "off-ramps" -- but no exit strategy.
Obama indicated on Tuesday that he plans to expend a good deal of political capital to promote what is effectively becoming his war. "I feel very confident that when the American people hear a clear rationale for what we're doing there and how we intend to achieve our goals, that they will be supportive," he said.
But there is likely to be significant resistance to what many Americans -- some of whom serve in Congress -- see as a plan to steer the country deeper into a quagmire.
As Obama's intentions began to clarify Tuesday, anti-war activists stepped up their activism on behalf of congressional measures that would limit the scope of the war and begin a process of bringing the troops home.
In particular, they focused on a bill introduced by California Congresswoman Barbara Lee, HR 3699, which would prohibit the use of taxpayer funds for more combat troops to Afghanistan, and another introduced by Massachusetts Congressman Jim McGovern, HR 2404, which calls for the development of a clear exit strategy.
Tom Hayden, the former California legislator and anti-Vietnam War activist who has positioned himself as prime mover in the movement to prevent an escalation of the U.S. presence in Afghanistan, says the Lee and McGovern bills "provide space for the peace movement to organize in local communities across the country during the next six months."
That's right.
Lee's amendment has 23 cosponsors, McGovern's has 100 --including several Republicans.
And there are rumblings from top Democrats in Congress.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, described Afghan President Hamid Karzai as an "unworthy partner" for the U.S., in a statement that indicated deep discomfort with an expansion of the U.S. commitment toprop up Karzai's regime.
Perhaps even more significantly, Congressman David Obey, the Wisconsin Democrat who chairs the powerful House Appropriations Committee, bluntly declared that: "On the merits, I think it is a mistake to deepen our involvement."
Obey and Senator Carl Levin, D-Michigan, are proposing a war surtax on the wealthy to pay for additional troops. "If we have to pay for the health care bill, we should pay for the war as well," says the man who will have a significant say with regarding any move by Obama to expand the occupation. "The problem in this country with this issue is that the only people who have to sacrifice are military families and they've had to go to the well again and again and again and again, and everybody else is blithely unaffected by the war."
Obey is offering what could well be the most effective congressional challenge to Obama's plan. The appropriations committee chair argues that the expanded mission is simply unaffordable.
Surging more troops into Afghanistan will "wipe out every initiative we have to rebuild our own economy," says Obey, who explains that if Obama goes for an expanded war: "There ain't going to be no money for nothing if we pour it all into Afghanistan. If they ask for an increased troop commitment in Afghanistan, I am going to ask them to pay for it."
The Obama administration won't be happy with Obey.
But Obey knows the numbers when it comes to budgeting.
And his warning is stark and necessary one.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
108 Comments so far
Show AllHe's so much like the previous Bush that not only is he using the same rhetoric, but the truth is leaking out. What's next, putting food on our families?
"The president says he plans to use his December 1 "finish-the-job" speech to signal "resolve to the allies while not signaling open-ended commitment to the American people."
Heh,heh. No danger here of us thinking he has an open-ended commitment to us.
Quite an interesting comment by Obey:
"There ain't going to be no money for nothing if we pour it all into Afghanistan. If *they* ask for an increased troop commitment in Afghanistan, I am going to ask *them* to pay for it."
I've *highlited* they and them. Obey ought to know that the military has already made it plain they want more troops, so they cannot refer to the military. I'm thinking they is the collection of uber-rich that formiulate US Imperial policy through the CFR and its kin. So his statement should be If the rich want to escalate the war, then the rich are going to pay for it. Too bad he didn't say FIGHT and PAY.
Yet more evidence that THEY and THEM run the country through whatever tool THEY select to inhabit the Oval Office.
uhmmmm...the US CONGRESS is now considering a WAR TAX....
yup -=-- FORCE AMERICANS to pay taxes for the ONGOING WARFARE STATE.
To finish the job.....WE are there to kill anyone and all who
stand in the way of the building of that oil pipeline from the north to the south of Afghanistan. The pipeline will deliver oil to the ships waiting by India in the Indian Ocean.
Why can't can't Obama or any of our elected officials learn
the truth? Why more lies? Didn't we have enough of the Bush Lies?
Right you are, Freddie.
Obama will have difficulty in addressing the nation, from West Point, or anywhere else, with candor about the real rationale for the war in Afghanistan -- and about his switch of positions away from his anti-war campaign facade.
These inconvenient truths from Tom Eley’s article, regarding Obama’s Escalation of War in Afghanistan:
"Obama cannot utter the real motivation for the surge. The war’s initial aim was to place the US military astride the vast oil and natural gas reserves of the Caspian Basin and, just as critically, to prevent the emergence of a combination of Eurasian powers that might undermine US global preeminence.
Now added to these concerns is the cognisance in ruling circles that a “loss” in Afghanistan would irretrievably undermine the global position of US imperialism.
Obama won the Democratic nomination for the presidency, it should be recalled, by appealing to mass antiwar sentiment against his chief rival, Hillary Clinton. His victory over Republican John McCain, as well as crushing Democratic congressional victories in 2006 and 2008, was based in part on widespread opposition to war and militarism.
The unchecked growth of militarism under Obama, in escalating the war in Afghanistan, demonstrates the undemocratic character of the US two-party system and the bankruptcy of those who claim that the only way to oppose war is by electing Democrats, or by appealing to Democrats already in office. Obama’s war policies represent nothing more than the continuation and deepening of those of the Bush administration."
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/nov2009/afgh-n25.shtml
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
Freddie Kilowatt -- shame on you --you obviously know very very little history.
It was NEVER about the oil -- you are either a gullible person or a "Hasbara" plant.
Check out the Professor James Petras website and educate yourself before posting "misinformation".
The USA brought a Holocaust to Iraq over 25 years over 3 Million deaths ,over 4 Million orphans created ,a country destroyed , Cluster Bombs and Depleted Uranium everywhere and you want to say it was about Oil.
US oil Companies could have got it for 1/200 of the price --
.
maxwell, thanks for the link to Prof. James Petras.
I have only read briefly his articles on the nature of the inherent contradictions in the evolution of this Global ruling-elite corporate/financial Empire; the GINI inequalities within and among former nation-states, and about the negative externality debt bombs of financial capitalism -- because these are my key interests.
But I must say that Petras is spot-on in this area.
I will read and study his comments on the area that you reference --- the geopolitics of controlling global oil.
Thanks again,
Alan
The mideast has been about geopolitics for the last 100 years... at least.
Wars are always about resources.
You are the gullible one.
US companies were not interested purchasing the oil without the immense profits generated from developing the resource and under Saddam that was increasingly not going to happen.
IT HAS ALWYAS BEEN ABOUT THE OIL!
Well, his argument IS (from the sound bites I've heard in the last day or so) "to protect strategic interests". Isn't that admittance enough?
More piracy and murder coming from the Pinheaded Puppet himself.
Tuesday night. Be there.
WHY? The answer is blackmail and bribes!
Saddam had supported Palestinian terrorists but his regime's contacts with groups linked to al-Qaida were sporadic, Dowse said --( head of counter-proliferation at the Foreign Office at the time ) --
Notice how the "Hasbara" language is well established in UK Foreign Office "Speak".
Anyone expecting a whitewash will not be disappointed.
You saw it here ----"Great" Britain went down the "crapper" -- in our lifetime.
.
The only 'off-ramp' that Obama is interested in taking is the off-ramp that has been very popular with all presidents (Democrat and Republican) for the last half century --- the 'off-ramp' to Empireville.
Obama may very well "Finish the job" --- for the Empire.
Obama's speech and his 'supposed' decision about Afghanistan will reveal far more than the war strategy in Afghanistan. For those who watch with careful eyes it will reveal EMPIRE.
The decision will be voiced through the mouth of Obama to be sure --- but the decision was already made before he was president, in fact before he even ran, and the decision itself was made by the EMPIRE.
America, our country, is now part of an arrogant, unresponsive, un-democratic, but quite sophisticated 'Vichy' Empire ---- which only pretends to allow the people to have any influence over any choices, directly, or through their supposed representative government.
This fact of sophisticated and guileful Empire manipulation and trickery of the people was well documented in 1994 by Thomas Frank in his "What's the Matter with Kansas" --- showing how contrived social 'values' manipulation was used by the Empire-controlled 'Republican Party' to trick stereotypical anti-intellectual conservative Kansans into voting against their own interests.
But now the coin has been flipped, and we need Frank to write a new book, "What’s the Matter with Massachusetts" in which he would lay bare how the Empire-controlled 'Democratic Party' tricked stereotypical self-described liberal “wicked smart” Bostonians and supposedly highly educated intellectuals into voting for a second well educated (and now post-racial) president promising different 'values', but singing the same songs about "Don't stop thinking about tomorrow" and waving banners of 'hope' and 'change' --- which have now been ignored with the same level of contempt and impunity as the last several Empire-controlled Republican and Democratic shills --- who did exactly NOTHING they promised!.
When such obvious contradictions to a government structure of supposed democracy occur many times in a row, but with both supposedly different political parties, and with differing levels of sophistication employed to fool dull and bright voters, the issue is not 'values' but one of deep 'government structure'. And the only conclusion to be made is that we are dealing with a deep and deadly problem of ‘government structure’, which Ben Franklin would have immediately recognized as his fear of Empire supplanting a democratic Republic.
"The problem is not with our stars, Dear citizens, nor with this Obama, nor the previous Clinton nor Bush nor Reagan, nor even with ourselves, but with EMPIRE”
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
I am certain that you are correct about that, prescient, deeply perceptive and seeing right through the facade.
perfectly stated!
"Fool me once..."
Wow ! ! so many "Hasbara" posters here today trying to sell "It was all about Oil" propaganda.
It was the American Jewish neocon Richard Perle and his "Defense of the Realm" Agenda with Israel being the Realm.
Published in 1996 under the guidance of Richard Perle was A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (i.e., Israel). A member since 1987 of the U.S. Defense Policy Advisory Board, this self-professed Zionist became its chairman in 2001.
As a key adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Perle's senior Pentagon post helped lay the required foundation for removing Saddam Hussein as part of a Greater Israel strategy, a key theme of A Clean Break - released five years before 9-11.
Google Professor James Petras never seen or heard of in the USA.
--- Israel long wanted Saddam "eliminated" as he supported Palestinian freedom and gave aid to Palestinians whose homes Israel had destroyed and offering Palestinian students places in Iraqi universities or picking up the tab for them to study overseas after Israel closed and/or destroyed Palestine's universities.
Also most Americans don't know Israel wants to colonize parts of Iraq as "Greater Israel"
.
Oy.
Maxwellhammer, (Is that "Maxwell's silver hammer came down upon his head" of Beatles fame?)
I wonder how Iran factors into your scenario, squeezed as it is between the pincers of Iraq and Afghanistan. The US/Israel bluster seems to have quieted lately (perhaps ominously), but the vaunted change-agent of diplomacy has thus far shown only the familiar swagger of Bush.
THE UNITED STATES OF ISRAEL since President mossad Rahm Immanual and vice David Axelrod took office.OBOMBA ,he has tea with the garden club ladies and shows up for the boy scouts'fund raising events.Or goes to China to act as a tourist,brings out the snake oil and tries to dupe the Chinese leaders with his slithery smile,into thinking he's a good guy, while he asks for more spending(bomb)money.The Chinese get the picture.
So Obama has had 10 meetings with military leaders!
How many meetings has he had with sensible people?
Has he met with Greg Mortenson,author of THREE CUPS OF TEA
that is now requiraed reading for all Special Forces soldiers deploying to A? Greg is founder of the Central Asia Institute that has opened thus far 39 schools in A some of which are deep in Taliban territory.
The pentagon generals are expert mainly in demonizing or inventing an enemy so that they can obliterate the "enemy" with the use of all their expensive toys. They demonized Castro, Ortega, the North Vietmanese, and Chavez. Are we now supposed to believe also that the Taliban are demons, even though Mortenson is able to establish girls' schools in Taliban territory?
It is understandable that a proud Afghani would resent the presence of CIA thugs in his country. His only recourse (whether he likes it or not) would be to join the only viable resistance available, namely, the Taliban.
Education should be our enterprise in A. We have more stupid military bases in the middle east than there are institutions of higher learning.
Greg Mortenson's new book, "Stones Into Schools: Promoting Peace With Books, Not Bombs, in Afghanistan and Pakistan," will be published Dec.1 by Viking.
".....Congressman David Obey, the Wisconsin Democrat who chairs the powerful House Appropriations Committee, bluntly declared that: "On the merits, I think it is a mistake to deepen our involvement."
Then STOP funding the f-king war!
EXACTLY!
Do you think Joan Baez and the Grateful Dead regret pimping Obama?
Somebody remind me why Obama was a better pick than Hillary Clinton? I mean, John Nichols was nearly pathological in his attack of Hillary Clinton and his praise for Obama.
anyway... hope their tofurkey isn't too dry tomorrow, even if many of them should instead be eating crow.
I should hope they regret it. But why the comparison with Clinton, who couldn't even pretend to be an anti-war candidate, for all her rush to slaughter?
I mean no defense of Nichols 08 hallucination, but why not 0bama, were Clinton the alternative?
in america - there is no alternative left or allowed to live:
there is only the choice between LEFT WING and RIGHT WING
WAR!!!
Hey HILLAHUN and OBOMBA both have BROWN tongues.The big arses that they both lick are the junior warlocks Kissinger and brezcinskykof.The devil does have a hierarchy!So chuk-it don't be so eager to yearn over an equal monster Hillahun.They both get off on POWER/ SADISM/TORTURE/ WAR CRIMINALS? BOTH!ALL PART OF THE BUSH-SHITE/WAR CRIMINAL clique SAME CAMEL DIFFERENT SADDLE!
As in most actions of humankind war has more than one reason and motive, I would say all the posters are correct in their assumptions and there are even more than those mentioned.
"Finish the Job" also probably has more than one meaning.
My assumption is it primarily means to murder every Pastun able enough to resist the USA occupiers.
oh yea?
Finish THE JOB?
what JOB?
the JOB OF EMPIRE?
the JOB of BOMBING and FORCING afghanis and others in regions FAR , FAR AWAY to SUBMIT to AMERICAN DICTATES?
THAT JOB? is Obama Trying to "elevate" the Phrase "THE JOB" to some higher order of human accomplishment just because HE's the new EMPEROR? he is speaking to the American Audience , that is for sure, and to his corporate sponsors...
HIS BIG PROBLEM IS -- the afghanist, Pakistanis and others COULDN"T CARE LESS what HE thinks or americans think of
"THE JOB" that has to be "finished"!
to those people , Obama and America should FINISH OCCUPYING countries and dictating to them - PERIOD....do it - or they'll get kicked out in complete , shamed failure...but then
"failure is never an option" for the FAILED AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICIES of EMPIRE anyway ....
Obama wants to "FINISH THE JOB".........
oh yea - DUH !!!!
I think war resistance can be two pronged, attempt to defund the war, and though it may seem contradictory, but it can be done, also tax the wealthy enough for them to be anti war.
Just plain tax the rich. They will not be anti war. Their profits are huge. They like war and the privitization of the armed forces. Tax the rich and reinstitute progressive tax rates. Bring back the tax rates of the Eisenhower administration.
When Obama gives us the word on what we are doing in Afghanistan and what are our achieveable goals, will you just sit there? What will make you angry enough to stand up? More war? more torture? more loss of civil rights? more money to the Wall St. with out any regulation of the banksters who own the Congress? More loss of jobs due to Nafta and globalization? An increase in money going to the health care industry (big pharma, insurance companies and HMOs and less for health care--will that upset you enough to do anything? Every thing is collapsing around us, and we just ignore it the best we can? It is not going to go away, and it is getting worse. And what will you do?
I am eagerly awaiting Obama's speech in Oslo when he accepts the Nobel Peace Prize.
of course -- true to form -- as good as the article is on the futility of these policies ...and even more tragically -- their complete and utter IMMORALITY and EVIL nature - the article represents that largely "american -centric" discussion -- as if
WAR MATTERS are only of concern to americans - as to whether Congress , or pundits, or supporters or "the american people" will "withdraw support" ....
AS IF what matters above all or even ONLY matters is what AMERICA THINKS about obama's or any US leaders' "direction"....
when the BIGGEST ELEPHANT in the room in american politics REMAINS and ALWAYS will be - with regard to is EMPIRE and policies of domination, threats, intimidation, provocation, invasions, occupations, exploitations, manipulations, and "plain theft of other nations' resources" (John Perkins, Former CIA "economic hitman") to subjugate them --
is NOT what AMERICANS THINK or WISH ...
it is -regardless of the SHOCK AND AWE power and DESTRUCTIVENESS of american policies and their "BIG MUSCLE" (General Smedley Butler, US Marines, 1933) - the great American ARMED FORCES - it is what AFGHANIS, PAKISTANIS, and OTHER people invaded, threatened, occupied, undermined , made war upon
BY the USA.
it's NOT what America THINKS or WISHES that matters in those lands.
it's what the people in THOSE lands think and WISH. and they WISH for America to GO HOME and mind its own business - or if it wants to do business with them
do it FAIR AND SQUARE and on THEIR terms in THEIR land...as a SUPPLICANT for their resources -- NOT as an occupying DICTATING wanna-be Master.
as even the slightly-built, 5'5'' lady parliamentarian of Afghanistan - Malalai Joya said, after a long enumeration of why the USA does MORe damage to her country and people ,
"IF AMERICA will NOT leave and stop the occupation -- OUR PEOPLE are going to come together to make sure that America goes the way of ALL empires before it -- we SHALL fight to make America LEAVE".
and THAT coming from a woman who wants NOTHING more of wars ...but wants a gentle society that her people could create on their own terms.
FINISH THE JOB - obama says? the latest American Caesar?
reports say that they intend to "leave afghanistan BY 2017 "
duh ......
they ought to leave NOW.
AND ACCOMPANY it with REPARATIONS for destroying Afghani and pakistani life...
but of course that's not the american way -- taking RESPONSIBILITY for Disastrous consequences of its WAR STATE policies? duh!!! that's UNAMERICAN! (and I emphasise the UN-use of quotation marks - if you know what I mean) even if THAT's what they ought to be doing.
obama wants to "finish the job?"
ya -- he'll finish the job of LIQUIDATING AMERICAN EMPIRE - right there in the Graveyard of Empires...even if he and his generals think they're "strengthening" america.
what a JOKE of a policy!
Dear President Obama,
The majority of America elected you. We're your best chance for your re-election. We don't like the endless useless wars, propping up a stupid heroin production cartel in this case.
If you want to fund the war, you are going to have to walk on your knees to the very people who have always, always stabbed you in the back before. Now, that's you showing weakness. What do you expect the backstabbers to do to you this time?
Your country is near to economic collapse, primarily because of the wars.
Turn away from incessant wars. See how supporting a heroin cartel is not in America's best interest.
LMFAO! I guess the Obama "MESSIAH" kool aid isn't so tasty these days to the mindless sheep that voted for him. You reap what you sow.
QUESTION:
WHY is the USA FOURTH NAVAL FLEET REACTIVATED - overseeing the Caribbean and south american atlantic waters?
one answer:
because IRAN and BRAZIL (a Nuclear Power) have entered into a mutual friendship and cooperation and Brazil's LULA said:
"WE WANT for another country what we want for ourselves....Nuclear Energy".
"WHY is the USA FOURTH NAVAL FLEET REACTIVATED - overseeing the Caribbean and south american atlantic waters?"
So that another "Gulf of Tonkin Incident" can be ginned up in order to justify attacking Venezuela by sea from the Caribbean, and from land via Colombia and its seven bases that the U.S. will now be expanding and "building out" in order to counter "Venezuelan Terrorist Attacks" within Colombia.
"Top NATO Military Brass Meet Behind Closed Doors
Realities Collide at Halifax “War Conference”"
by Anthony Fenton, IPS, Nov 23 2009
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16256
I posted an excerpt of much of the article in a post for the following article.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/25-6
Meanwhile, the U.S. is militarising in Honduras; not only Colombia.
"SouthCom: Washington Develops its Operations in Soto Cano Airbase in Honduras",
by Arnold August, Nov. 23, 2009
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16252
QUOTE:
According to a November 17 press release, Harris Corporation, an international communications and information technology company, was awarded the U.S. Southern Command (SouthCom) Command, Control, Communications and Computer Systems operations and maintenance program for Joint Task Force (JTF) Bravo at Soto Cano Air Base in Honduras. This five-year task order contract has a base year plus four one-year options and is valued at $38 million -- including all options.
This critical infrastructure program supports the Commander of JTF-Bravo -- the Commander of all U.S. military operations in Central America in the execution of SouthCom's strategy to build Partner Nation Capacity. It is intended to bolster security, stability and prosperity in the Americas. This responsibility, according to the press release, encompasses:
- Advancing new visions of the U.S. Government and institutions of the region.
- Reducing sources of conflict and tension.
- Promoting partnership in times of need.
- Empowering initiatives to thwart narcotics trafficking and other transnational threats.
Harris is an international communications and information technology company serving government and commercial markets worldwide. Headquartered in Melbourne, Florida, the company has approximately $5 billion of annual revenue and more than 15,000 employees -- including nearly 7,000 engineers and scientists.
As the Honduran people are developing their struggle to boycott the fraudulent November 29 elections and in favor of a Constituent Assembly, Washington is already arrogantly stepping up its post-November 29 program. For imperialism, it is business as usual, irrespective of the positions, sacrifices and feelings of the vast majority of people in Honduras.
This latest decision under the Obama Administration provides the people an opportunity to see once again what constitute the “new visions of the U.S. Government and institutions of the region”. They are not new, but the same imperialist vision of domination and interference by the US in the entire hemisphere south of the Rio Grande. The only thing that is new is the appearance with the goal of having the peoples of the region and the world accept the old policies but disguised in new rhetoric.
As far as the above-stated goal of “reducing sources of conflict and tension”, if the US was really interested in this, President Zelaya would have been reinstated a long time ago; the repression by the US trained military in Honduras and Micheletti would not only have been stopped, but the guilty would have been tried and punished for the crimes committed against the people of Honduras.
However, after all, this is the same Washington which recently concluded the agreement with Columbia for the establishment of the seven military bases there.
END QUOTE
"November 17 press release" is linked to a foxbusiness.com article, "USSOUTHCOM C4S Selects Harris Corporation for $38 Million IT Services Program Under ITES-2S Contract", which says that the source for it is "Harris Corporation".
Quote: "It is intended to bolster security, stability and prosperity in the Americas". MY ASS! Okay, rear cheeks, if you prefer this more "politically correct" way of saying the same thing.
It's beyond words. We can only hope to shout it down. Land mines too.
as the ELDERS PLAN FOR MORE WARS and DEATH and DESTRUCTION....;
this sixth grade boy is playing his guitar on the street a few hours every week asking for donations for his cause , to raise money to help Iraqi children affected by war produced by this kid's own country, USA :
"I PLAY FOR PEACE"
http://www.iplayforpeace.net/Site/Welcome.html
shame on all of us adults in this world.
http://www.wheelchairsforiraqikids.com/
================
Meet Ben, a hero for disabled Iraqi children!
A young man named Ben watched the CNN report on this project, and decided he would personally get involved to make a difference in the lives
of the children I am trying to help. With help from Helen, his Mom, he set up to play his guitar on the streets of San Francisco and played his guitar
for two hours, raising an incredible $2269.46!
Thanks to Ben, many Iraqi children with disabilities who have never had a wheelchair will now know the freedom and mobility which a high quality
pediatric wheelchair can bring. Ben - YOU ARE THEIR HERO! And MY HERO! Ben has been a real trooper, raising donations many weekends since
March 2008 - even while he was sick. He's encountered many generous people who have encouraged him and donated money right into his guitar
case to support the WFIK project with his Mom standing by. However, he's also endured the ridicule of a few adults and classmates for standing
up for the disabled children of Iraq and doing the right thing. It's been a great maturing experience for him, and he's a better guy for it!
Ben set up his own website and blog (I Play for Peace.net). As of 05 October 2009, Ben has raised $15,848.11, and every penny counts! Because
of Ben's efforts, the lives of over Fifty Iraqi children and their families will be changed in a big way.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
I just read Mike Corbeil's post about the battle of Badam Kalay and before that a Times UK account of British battles in Helmand--and all the vainglorious U.S. or British soldierly valor in the name of cadaverously stenchy falsified patriotism that went along with them. But this story about the American kid raising money to help Iraq kids hurt by our war is the only one that moves me. This is the first time I've seen someone express this sentiment by action and not just words. This little kid represents a glimmer of hope for the future and he is some other kids' real hero. The other propaganda- and self-inflicted soldierly travails just represent unwilling pawns, willing dupes or fear-propagandized cowards manipulated by Big Oil and Big Weapons. The posts on the British piece show they have their share of retrograde "war is glorious" right-wingers who are just as impervious to facts or morality as our most dumbed-down neo-con tools.
Very well said, fuck the sissy OBOMBA and his war clique
Yep. Finish the job. Of destroying the U.S.
George C. Brown - When is the U.S. or its Congress and Administration(s)) going to cease to base all its actions according to war-based economy? We get all this blasted debate about how Health Care reforem is going to increase the National debt, how the "bank" bailout has been counter-productive, how entitlements are sending deeper and deeper into the hole, etc., but no one ever says a word about the drain thaty so-called "national defense is bleeding us dry? And the past administration didn't ever have the honesty to add the cost of its wars as part of the budget. John Perkins (in "Hoodwinked") and Russ Baker (in "Family of Secrets") have really hit the nail on the head: that we (the U.S.) are being run as a "militocracy" and "corporatocracy", and the sad fact that this present administration for all its talk of "change" is falling into he same old routine as the past administrations for the last several decades. The current crop of politicians in the Beltway are rapidly taking us on the road to oblivion!
I don't know if a copy of the following article was ever posted at CD, but in case it hasn't, I definitely recommend reading it. Check out the fierce resitance put up by a relatively small group of Taliban fighters against a relatively strong U.S. force, including Afghan army, and Apache helicopter gunships and a U.S. bomber and 2 F-15s.
"Fruitless battle against invisible insurgents of Badam Kalay",
Martin Fletcher in Badam Kalay, Afghanistan, Oct 2 2009
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6858842.ece
QUOTE:
The ferocious battle for the village of Badam Kalay began early on Wednesday afternoon when, without warning, two rounds from an AK47 whistled past Lieutenant-Colonel Kimo Gallahue of the US 10th Mountain Division and narrowly missed Peter Nicholls, The Times photographer.
For the next two days a handful of Talebs defied the might of the US military. The invisible insurgents used their knowledge of the labyrinthine village and its rugged mountain backdrop to dodge a fearsome barrage of rockets, mortars and earth-shaking bombs while continuously shooting at the coalition forces.
It was a battle with sobering lessons for President Obama as he weighs whether to expand or scale back America’s presence in Afghanistan. It showed that to secure a single village, let alone win the allegiance of its people, requires a massive investment of manpower, time and resources. To abandon somewhere like Badam Kalay to the Taleban, however, is almost unthinkable. It is barely 35 miles from Kabul and overlooks the critical Kabul-Kandahar highway.
The village, in Wardak province, consists of about 120 homes — mud-walled compounds called qalats — surrounded by vivid green trees in a bowl of barren mountains on the western side of the parched Towp Valley.
Badam Kalay looks charming but the US military suspects that the Taleban have been using it to place roadside bombs on the highway. At least three 300-pounders have been planted there this year, with command wires leading back towards the village. One killed two US special forces officers.
At about 7.30am on Wednesday a coalition force of more than 100, drawn from Colonel Gallahue’s 2-87 Infantry Battalion, the Marines, special forces and the Afghan National Army and police, set up base near the village.
A route-clearance team checked the approach road for improvised explosive devices. Then the soldiers went in — some on foot, others in heavily armoured “mine resistant ambush protected” vehicles, or MRAPs. They started at the southern end, checking each house for signs of Taleban activity, with the Afghan security forces taking the lead to reassure the villagers.
For a few hours all was peaceful. Then the two bullets shaved Colonel Gallahue’s head as he arrived to inspect the operation from an incline overlooking the village. The Americans responded with grenades. More shots rang out. Soon Badam Kalay was engulfed in a battle that lasted for hours.
The Taleban appeared to be firing from qalats in the village and the rocky slopes above. The coalition responded with machinegun fire and mortars. Late in the afternoon, two Apache attack helicopters arrived to pound the lower reaches of the mountains, the rattle of their 30mm cannon followed seconds later by puffs of flame and smoke from pulverised rocks.
The Times was locked inside an MRAP as it manoeuvred around the village’s narrow dirt tracks, its aerials tangling in low-hanging electricity lines, spent shells from its machinegun cascading into the cabin. “They’re all over the place. They knew we were coming,” said the driver. There was not a villager to be seen.
As darkness fell, red tracer bullets streaked over Badam Kalay. It was 9pm before the coalition forces withdrew to rocky wasteland outside the village. They had checked every house. In one, they found Taleban flags; in another, photographs of triumphant Taleban fighters — but that was it. Nobody had set eyes on their adversaries. Nobody knew if any had been killed. Lieutenant Chris Wallgren, C Company’s platoon leader, guessed that the insurgents had fought until dark so that high-ranking Talebs could escape over the mountains by night. “I don’t know if they’ll be here tomorrow,” he said.
The soldiers slept in their vehicles, changing guards every hour. They were awake well before dawn. The Afghan soldiers balked at entering the village first in case the Taleban had laid IEDs overnight. “We’re scared as f***,” said their interpreter — but shortly after 5am the force went in.
For a while it seemed peaceful. A villager herded goats to his qalat. The soldiers headed for a suspected Taleban hideout high above the village. They had just found it when the insurgents opened fire from the ridges overhead. The Talebs — perhaps 30 in all — appeared to have scattered across the mountain during the night and were soon raking the coalition troops below.
The soldiers took cover and returned fire as the US mortars opened up. Lieutenant Wallgren called for Apaches but the only ones not in use elsewhere were undergoing maintenance. Instead, two US F15s arrived with deafening roars. They could not drop their bombs without clearly identified targets so they repeatedly strafed the mountainside, giving the coalition troops cover to retreat pell-mell down to the village, sprinting from boulder to boulder. The enemy’s fire was very accurate, said Lieutenant Wallgren. “I found myself running as fast as I could with all my gear on. I took a couple of spills. The whole time the ground was popping up around me. I could hear [bullets] over my head.”
Finally, two Apaches arrived. For 70 minutes the deadly aircraft circled, pounding the ridges with rockets and cannon, turning the tables on the militants. The Apaches worked up the mountainside, suggesting that the Talebs were trying to escape over the top. From a distance it was like watching the finale of a spectacular fireworks show — with one final flourish. Without warning, a 500lb bomb landed on a ridge, dropped by a B1 bomber too high to spot. The explosion shook the valley and then, at last, there was silence.
END QUOTE
I'll finish quoting the article with another post.
Continuing to quote the above Times, UK, article:
QUOTE:
It seemed inconceivable that any Taleb had survived. The coalition forces withdrew. Then two rockets streaked defiantly from the mountainside, narrowly missing the coalition base on the far side of the village. The resistance continued.
Miraculously, no coalition forces were killed, but as they rested and took stock — and as Afghan policemen collected spent brass bullet casings to sell in the bazaar — they expressed grudging respect for the Talebs. “They had the balls to fire at the birds [Apaches],” said Specialist Eric Petty.
“They’re ghosts. We look and look and look, but they’re gone,” said Staff Sergeant Merlin Quiles. “Any time you have a huge [force] like this you expect them just to take off and go hide somewhere,” said Specialist John Wells, a medic. By contrast, Lieutenant Wallgren sounded lukewarm when asked about the performance of the Afghan soldiers. “They’ve a way to go,” he said.
He and other officers acknowledged their frustration at the continued resistance but claimed some success, arguing that they had flushed out the Talebs, disrupted their plans, forced them to move and gained intelligence.
The operation was hardly a resounding victory, however. Nobody knew how many insurgents had been killed or wounded. None were detained. The villagers had offered little, if any, information, and by Thursday the coalition had been planning to start the next crucial phase of the operation: winning them over with blankets, winter clothes and the promise of better governance. “We’re not worried about hearts and minds right now,” said Lieutenant Wallgren, his face grimy with dirt and sweat. “After two days of this, humanitarian assistance will wait.”
The battle of Badam Kalay highlights the dilemma facing Mr Obama amid growing domestic opposition to the US military's request for 40,000 more troops.
For two days, a few resourceful Talebs held off more than 100 coalition troops backed by terrifying firepower and all manner of surveillance and communications wizardry. Moreover, the multimillion-dollar operation was just one small part of a much bigger operation to clear the neighbouring Nerkh Valley, itself part of the vast, enduring campaign to drive the Taleban from Afghanistan and win over a sceptical population.
Counter-insurgency “is a long, drawn-out process,” said Captain Jeffrey Dupree, 2-87’s fire support officer. “It requires a lot of time, people and plenty of patience.” But abandoning villages like Badam Kalay to the Taleban is no option either. Not only would that sever the Kabul-Kandahar highway, but it would give the Taleban a base to attack the capital from a part of Wardak province dubbed Kabul’s “soft underbelly”.
“Badam Kalay is not huge in the overall scheme. It’s not important economically or anything,” said Captain Dupree. “But left to insurgent control it’s a perfect staging area . . . We can’t leave it alone.”
END QUOTE
You don't need to forgive me for saying this, but I'm impressed and will add that it was quite an interesting, say, account to read about. Excuse me for cheering. I know, the Taliban are nasty, oppressive towards women's rights, and a little too strict on some other matters, like consumption of a little liquor, f.e.; but I was still cheering (inside) while reading this article.
Thanks for posting this!
While reading the article, I was wondering who really is going "to finish the job." I don't think it is by any means clear who that will be.
This is a guerilla war, and guerilla wars are very hard and extremely costly to fight for traditional, invader armed forces. Guerilla wars' basic strategy is to exhaust the enemy physically, psychologically, and economically. They are seldom won by the invader.
The Taliban know the terrain as no one else does, they know the mores of the population and the language (in fact, they are part of the population!), and have all the time in the world -- none of which can be said of the various occupiers of their country. They also have decades of constant warfare behind them.
People on both sides and those caught in the middle are dying; there is nothing to cheer about!
I cheer too! Get a clue Earl Simmins! These genocide atrocity monsters are the wooses behind junior highish garbage/big man talk "finish the job" OBOMBA says and "Bring em on "BUSH-SHITE says. The reality is,these trigger happy wooses,OBOMBA AND BUSH-SHITE ,have never been within a thousand miles of any war,are SADIST WAR CRIMINALS!
Mike's article is a minscule sample of how this all plays out.The war profiteers that have bankrupted the USA,using propaganda distortions, to fulfil their own greedy evil urges,don't give a rat's ass WHO OUT THERE DIES.IT'S ALL A MONEY GAME.
The USan quagmire in Afghanistan is another supply-side racket, to generate economic/cultural activity in all the wrong places, to strengthen all the wrong muscles, the ones that press the elite boot against the peace movement and the people's necks.
Nichols is lost, arguing within the frames setup by the supply-siders themselves.
It's the people's responsibility to avoid feeding the wrong muscles with their economic activity. The people have to take control of the markets back from the supply-side.
The supply side is going to humbly take orders from the demand side, the people. The people's demands will serve the society's better interests, not fuel the boot muscles.
There are many supply-side rackets besides war. The far-left expects the people to squish all of them, by taking back their demand power in the markets and in public policy. No ifs ands or buts.
Cage the supply-siders by shifting all of your personal exchange/association away from them and toward your local communities. Demanding policies in the public interest requires voting third parties in the elections.
Achieve "our" goals.
"Talk" of an exit strategy.
Finish the job.
Benchmarks.
Surge.
Who is writing for Obama now?
It reads like plagurism.