Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiQuagmire, Phase 2: The Invasion of Pakistan
The United States has just invaded Cambodia. The name of Cambodia this time is Pakistan, but otherwise it's the same story as in Indochina in 1970.
An American army, deeply frustrated by its inability to defeat an anti-American insurgent movement despite years of struggle, decides that the key to victory lies in a neighboring country. In 1970, the problem was the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Cambodia. Today it is Taliban and al-Qaida bases inside Pakistan, which the United States has been attacking from the air for some time, with controversial "collateral damage."
George W. Bush has now authorized independent ground assaults on Taliban and al-Qaida targets in Pakistan's Tribal Territories, without consultation with Pakistan authorities. These already have begun.
This follows a period of tension, with some armed clashes, between American and Pakistani military units, the latter defending "Pakistan's national sovereignty." Pakistan public opinion seems largely against "America's war" being fought inside Pakistan.
Washington's decision was made known just in time for the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks that opened the first phase of the "war on terror," after which "nothing could ever be the same." We no doubt have now begun phase two.
The eventual outcome of the American intervention in Cambodia in 1970 was Communist overthrow of the American-sponsored military government in that country, followed by genocide. The future consequences in (nuclear-armed) Pakistan await.
There is every reason to think they may include civil protest and disorder in the country, political crisis, a major rise in the strength of Pakistan's own Islamic fundamentalist movement and, conceivably, a small war between the United States and the Pakistan army, which is the central institution in the country, has a mind of its own and is not a negligible military force.
In Afghanistan, American and NATO forces have been complaining for many months that victory over the Taliban was impossible so long as there were secure Taliban bases in Pakistan's largely inaccessible Tribal Territories.
Pakistan's former president, Pervez Musharraf, was told by his American allies to clean the Taliban out of the Territories or the U.S. Army and NATO would do it for him. U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama made the same threat. John McCain concurred. Musharraf had been looking for a negotiated arrangement with the tribesmen.
Pakistan's military intelligence services created the Taliban while they were collaborating with the CIA to form the mujahadeen that drove the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan. Many in the service still support the Taliban as a useful instrument against India, and to keep Afghanistan out of the hands of more dangerous enemies.
Musharraf was forced out of office. The U.S. brought in exiled former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, expected to be cooperative. She was assassinated, presumably by Islamic extremists. Her widower has been elected to take her place and declares himself an enemy of terrorism. However, the United States has already taken the matter into its own hands.
In the Vietnamese case, the American military command held that it could win the war by invading Cambodia to cut the so-called Ho Chi Minh Trail, along which supplies and arms for the Viet Cong Communist insurrection were being transported. The argument made was that cutting this route would starve the Viet Cong of supplies.
Initially, the unhappy Prince Sihanouk of Cambodia, desperately trying to keep his country out of the Vietnam War, was persuaded to turn a blind eye to U.S. bombing of the trail. A military coup followed in 1970, installing an American puppet general. B-52 saturation bombing ensued, without the desired military effect, but killing many Cambodians.
The joint U.S. and South Vietnamese "incursion" to cut the trail came in April 1970; it simply pushed the supply operations deeper into Cambodia. Richard Nixon said he acted to prove that the United States was not "a second-rate power." "If, when the chips are down, the world's most powerful nation acts like a pitiful helpless giant, the forces of totalitarianism and anarchy will threaten free nations and free institutions throughout the world."
The native Cambodian Khmer Rouge subsequently defeated the American-backed military regime in Phnom Penh. Genocide followed, the "killing fields," on which the United States turned its back, condemning the triumphant Vietnamese Communist government when it later invaded Cambodia to stop the killing.
89 Comments so far
Show AllThere is virtually no difference in the war plans of Obama/McCain those that think there is should explain it.
The Vietnamese War to help our little yellow friends was a splendid engagement.
We would have won except that the liberals and the left wing media prevented our marvelous victory.
Now we are repeating that dreadful error. At least McCain and Obama are not fooled by the mob in this country.
Javier:
Well there are several sites on the web that are better. Myself I have cut back and don't miss it at all.
One site I get a kick out of is CBC or www.cbc.ca/news you get the same stories as cd but remember this goes right across Canada not just a web site it is also a news station and regular station. Some stories have up to 1700 postings. Without the CBC Canada would have sent troops to Iraq for that illegal invasions that the US has paid a heavy price.
Thank-you....I joined and posted my first comment. So far I am very pleased by the postings.I like the recommend feature.It's fun........lizard
Thank you I will check it out
Also, I think Chretien deserves credit for staying out of Iraq. We don't do regime change he said, and instantly gained my respect..............lizard
"for that illegal invasions that the US has paid a heavy price."
Well ... 1 Trillion dollars, 4000 dead marines, 1 Million dead Iraqis, 2 Million displaced Iraqis in exchange for control over half the oil in the middle east. And an american population thats so war crazed we are getting 8 more years of the same shit. What heavy price ? Its fun and games. Join the freak show or curl up and die. Its war time baby and mama palin's packin heat... yooohoooo !
If this is a progressive site there really is no hope. Embedded in these comments are militaristic, chauvinistic and ignorant comments that show that the sickness of the American mind extends throughout the country. I am very disappointed to see the degree of immaturity evident in this thread. DISGUSTING. Even those who seem to understand don't seem to be able to help themselves from slipping into this attitude of using force to solve all problems. This is not serious thinking, this is amateurish.And this is supposed to be the best we have to offer?...........very sad............lizard
Settle down a moment.
I agree with you that some comments (sincere ones, as opposed to trollish) reveal disappointing or counterproductive assumptions. Nevertheless, it is erroneous to suppose that everyone is at the same point of political thought or to suppose that everyone will end at the same point. We're dealing with process and continuum.
Also, bear in mind that some posters may *actually* be immature. The forebrain keeps developing into the early twenties, I think. Maybe another poster with a background in neurology can jump in and help me here. In a textual environment, you can't know for sure how old a writer is; all you can do is make a best guess. I want any young people who may be reading and participating to stay and develop habits of critical inquiry. Just the fact of their presence here instead of on myspace or in front of a Nintendo is a good sign.
The best that we have to offer will ultimately be in the example that we set.
Perhaps you can spare some wisdom, oh noble one?
Yes,
Stop the belligerence. Learn to speak without threatening to hang people, or pass a law to force people to do what you want. Learn to speak without insults. Lets see an end to fuck this and that. Curb your anger. Spare me the sexual comments on Palin, they are assinine. Stop being in love with your gun, both of them...Above all, be less ignorant. Stop sharing the belief that you have to save the world and realize that it is the world that is going to save you. Stop thinking of the world as dangerous and adversarial, the Russians tried really hard to be nice and yet they are treated as dangerous. It was the US that betrayed Russia and reneged on its commitment not to expand Nato. Realize that we can't be policemen of the world because we don't stand for anything good. There is too much talk about how the US can shape the world and very little about how to join it as an equal partner. Stop bad-mouthing Pakistan and India and China and Russia and Muslims and whoever you seem to want to criticize to make yourselves feel important. We are not leaders, we are an anchor that retards world development, so why dump on countries like China that are lifting millions out of poverty, or Putin who took back what the friends of Yeltsin stole. How about a little praise for this act from a man who was with them and could have been super rich but chose his people instead? Do we have someone like that here? lizard
There are millions of Americans that feel the same way as you do. Sure there are a lot of people who are not good at expressing themselves, but just because our Government is doing wrong, does not mean every American supports them, or wants them to do what they are doing.
I agree with your comments. Thing is most folks that are on this site actually feel the same way you do. You have just jumped to conclusion that everyone who is American is ignorant, and supports what is going on.
To be honest with you, if you read many of the posts on this site you will see that folks are glad that Russia (including myselft) stepped in and interviened. It is good to not see other countries bullied around by the us. As an American Citizen, I am ashamed of what my government is doing, I am so upset that you have no idea.
But if I protest, I get arrested, charged with being a terrorist, and beaten. If I write letters to my congressman or women, I get nothing back. I like millions of Americans are not being heard in Mainstream Media. So we come here to voice our opinions.
Rather than pointing out what our goverment thinks, and assuming that all Americans are behind it, point out a way that we as Americans can put an end to this madness.
Again you are right. But that's why I said "embedded". I certainly see a lot of people who understand on CD. If I am too effusive it is because I still haven't recovered from discovering that what I learned in school was a mirage. I truly believed.
How to put an end to this madness? Perceptions must be changed. The women's movement changed our perception of women and their role in society. The civil right s movement changed perception of black people. Perhaps neither of these results have been perfect but perceptions did change. What perception must be changed? The perception that America is a force for good. A movement to make the population aware of this would be extremely difficult and dangerous given the present mentality. Marches with this message would provoke hostility. Then again, maybe that is what it takes.
At the very least, there must be an attempt to lead people to alternative news. Billboards, T-shirts. Financial support of the alternatives.
We must not be afraid to object when we hear imperialistic talk, even if that means problems in your relationships. Sometimes you may even attack the wrong people, but oppose one must, or be complicit.
Likewise, I think to vote for Obama or McCain is complicit. One has to be true to principles. It cannot be OK to vote for war criminals.
Awareness of the meaning of war crimes and how it applies to the behavior of the US congress is likewise essential, hence impeachment was essential. Too bad that's gone.
I might add that promoting secularism and opposing religiosity is needed too, but I'm probably asking for the moon.
Because the task is so enormous I think the only catalyst that can produce it is a serious decline in the standard of living of Americans. Our easy lives allow us to not care and let things be.
lizard
Excellent, simply excellent. In a phrase, Cease American Exceptionalism and cut ties with all that promotes it.
At the "issues" section of Obama's website, you can write truth about things that the Bush administration and their neocon buddies and "realists" have taught Congress to believe: RUSSIA is at fault. CHAVEZ and MORALES "hate America." ISRAEL is the victim in the Middle East. Et Cetera.
If we want Obama and Biden to overcome the lies, we need to educate them as to the truth.
And, today's topic: PAKISTAN was told of the change in methods but "stubbornly" insists that it is a sovereign nation and that the US has no right to invade its country without permission and to kill civilians in our zeal to "get" Al-Queda. Well, guess what it is a sovereign nation and we are in violation of international law when we cross its borders. The International Criminal Court will prosecute war criminals whose own countries refuse to call them to account. Sounds good to me and may be the only way Bush/Cheney et al. (many et al.) will ever receive their due.
I hate to say this, but congress knows more about what is really going on than everyone on this site combined. They don't need an education, they need a moral compass.
How do you remove things from the constition like "Impeachment"? Nancy P is famous for her "Impeachment is off the table" comment?
The reason is that our congress is just as corrupt as the current administration. It is why the wars keep getting funded, it is why our civil liberties are gone, it is why the torture bill, surviellance bill, and half a dozen other illegal bills have been passed.
These people don't need and education, they need a fricken pink slip!
The Pakistani Military cannot survive without American $$$. These two entities U.S. Govt and Pakistan Military/ISI have been aiding and helping each other for the last 60 years. Our fundamental Pakistan policy has not changed. We keep OUR dictators in line for the most part and there are occasional spats but they get ironed out.
Case in point:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080913/ap_on_re_as/pakistan
Life goes on. We get to have our way with them. The Paksitani Military in turn gets to have its way with the Pakistani people.
Might be true on a certian level, but then I would ask is this what America is really about?
Putting in our Dictators, making arms deals (funding and arming both sides), killing innocent people for money, power and greed. Is this what America is about, is this just, is this what Americans want?
Let me guess, the family that wants to immigrate to America wants to be apart of something like this? People around the world see this as ok?
I know you are just stating how things are seen from a politcal/military perspective, but in a way your comments seem to justify it? If I am wrong, then I am sorry to suggest this, but otherwise I feel offended as an American to think this is ok, or Taboo.
This article is a must read. Pakistan and the U.S. are joined at the hip.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JI13Df01.html
Shahzad, unlike his American counterparts, is an investigative journalist who has spent enough and more time with the Taliban and others in the heart of Waziristan and other border areas.
ajada September 13th, 2008 9:33 am
I realise Americans have a long held tradition of sanitising history with fairytales, but still wonder why so many from within the supposed independent media continue to perpetuate the myths of those they supposedly oppose.
An exhausted, bored, fearful, uncaring, ignorant nation driving itself to the landfill of history has only fairy tales left to comfort itself on the trip. Almost no American alive can imagine, much less admit, that we are coasting downhill toward a cliff that drops a thousand feet into an inferno. They still think the hill will level off and we will eventually be on our way up again. Hasn't it always been so? Here's a recent story from the San Francisco Chronicle: a car thief on Telegraph Hill was cornered by the police. The thief saw a wall, ran toward it and hopped over, not realizing that on the other side was a 200 foot drop. The thief, naturally, fell to his death. That's the United States.
Great posts Bill, Nate , Nullius etc. As for SnowWolf it seems the smaller your penis the bigger your mouth !! Its no wonder we got our asses kicked from vietnam to iraq. Our bark has no bite and we come back wimpering like SnowWolf and pretend we are big bad wolves on ... the internet !!!
Taliban, Al Qaeda, terrorists, Muslim fundamentalists, etc are probably of less importance to the Bush regime than nuclear bombs in Pakistan. Bush aims to create turmoil and chaos in Pakistan, and at the right time send the Special Forces in to steal the nukes.
The west in general does not want Muslims nations anywhere to have nukes because it makes it easier for the west to bully them, as Israel is doing it with the Arabs. If the CIA is unaware as to where the nukes are, which is improbable, then a couple of US friendly, Pakistani generals will oblige, and then live in the US happily ever after.
I realise Americans have a long held tradition of sanitising history with fairytales, but still wonder why so many from within the supposed independent media continue to perpetuate the myths of those they supposedly oppose.
RE: "Pakistan's military intelligence services created the Taliban while they were collaborating with the CIA to form the mujahadeen that drove the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan."
- Rubbish! The Ruskis pulled out of Afganistan in 1989. The Taliban did NOT exist untill U$ DoD funneled Unacol $ponsorship through Pakistani ISI, starting mid 1995 and ending mid 2001. During which time U$A double crossed their former Mujahadeen allies.
RE: "The native Cambodian Khmer Rouge subsequently defeated the American-backed military regime in Phnom Penh. Genocide followed, the "killing fields," on which the United States turned its back, ..."
- More rubbish! U$A along with its ideaological nemisis, China, armed and financed Saloth Sar's/Pol Pot's genocidal regime via Thailand.
Another favourite myth of the U$ propaganda machine is their boogeyman Usama bin Laden, who's name they can't even get right.
How do you expect to catch a guy who had his Wahabi burial/funeral in late 2001?
Wahabis traditionally have unmarked graves, so you're NEVER going to find the monster of your own creation. You'll just create ever increasing hoardes who desire "Death to America".
Won't be "Invasion" of Pakistan...WILL be "Incursion" (we're already doing it)
until we have neutralized every HVT we can find...till they are looking over their shoulder everytime they step out to take a piss...
and the Paki's won't lift a finger to stop us
Bill from Saginaw - great post. A couple of other errors from Mr Pfaff:
Benazir Bhutto was indeed exiled (along with her husband - they fled after charges of corruption were laid), but she wasn't "installed" by the US; Musharaf's position as both president and commander of the army (he seized power in a coup in 1999) had become untenable. Also, while Musharaf was President, Bhutto had been Prime minister (twice) - a very different position in a country that supposedly has a parliamentary democracy. Bhutto's widower, Asif Zardari, is now the new President (elected by parliament, not the public). Benazir's father was also Prime Minister in the 70s. He was assassinated. So were both her brothers. So was she. Pakistan is a very unstable country. Probably more dangerous than Iran.
Nullius,
“Pakistan is a very unstable country. Probably more dangerous than Iran.”
But certainly not as dangerous as the USA.
Who flexed his muscle and said he would intervene in Pakistan?
Here's a hint: his favorite word is "change".
For once Obama got something right
http://twocanpete.blogspot.com/
You have two choices in a situation like this, high altitude bombing or leave. It's pure stupidity to engage in a ground war under thes conditions. Unless of course your real objective is to make a big show about saving the world for democracy while the only thing you really care about is enriching the defense contractors that you happen to be in bed with.
I disagree...you can insert small Teams into his backyard and they can leave their calling cards till he realizes he's no longer safe where he thought he was
Enriching Military Contractors?...hmmm...I'm a Contractor...wheres my check?
To argue that something is acceptable on the basis that you can do it is to argue for amorality.
I am not sure why folks say things like Osama Bin Laden was involved in 911. I expect to see this in mainstream media, but not on a site like this. If you wonder what I mean by making this statement, please visit the FBI website at http://www.fbi.gov and search on Bin Laden.
More curious to me is how a government agency like the FBI can for over 6 years now post something like this on their site, and we still here how this "boogy man" is causing all this ruckus.
Lastly, I agree with the points on the article where it is not making statements based upon mainstream media lies. I think Russia is more to worry about than Pakistan however.
Russia is more of a worry than Pakistan? You silly person. The US is the one everyone worries about. If you lived anywhere but the US you would know this. Your attitude is the reason the US is so dangerous, its people see the whole world as hostile, while history shows that the US and England are the greatest aggressor of them all. Your attitude feeds the ones in power and cause misery in the world...............lizard
Sorry Lizard Dude, I did not mean out of all of the countries in the world to worry about. What I a meant is that out of the two most recent places the US has decided to start a ruckus, I am more concerned about Russia than Pakistan.
My attitude is not the reason the US is so dangerous, people like you who take everything out of context make huge leaps to conclusion are.
I agree that the US and England is totally out of whack, where did I ever justify what they are doing.
Some recommendations would be to try the decalf next time!
Concerned about what? How is Russia dangerous to you? Out of all the countries in the world? What do you mean, that there are many more countries to be worried about? Why? Mosty countries mind their own business. It seems you share the view that the US is an angel living in hell and therefore has to be on its toes. Is this a realistic assesment or a product of indoctrination? You should not be concerned about Russia or Pakistan, you should be concerned about England and the US. I didn't se you worry about that. I am not concerned about Russia, I am delighted that they have stood up to us. If you are worried about their defending themselves then how about stopping the attack? lizard
I do not share the view that the US is an angel living in hell. The US has made the world a living hell would be more of what I think. I am glad that Russia stood up to us as well, as I have posted in many other areas on this site. Am I worried that the US will attack Russia, or another country. You are simply twisting what I am saying because I am not focused on the one thing that you are.
There are many things going on in the world at this time. I am not happy, nor have I ever supported the invaison of Afghanistan, Iraq, or Pakistan. In fact I see no reason for wars at all unless it is a defensive measure. If someone invaded the US, then I think as an American I should help defend my country, and therefore would support war. Otherwise I do not support war at all.
Thing is, I say that as an American I am more worried about Russia than Pakistan. I do not say I support what we did in using Georgia to attack and kill innocent people. I am not saying that I do not support the fact that Russia stepped in and did something about it. I am not saying I approve of any Empire Building by the US anywhere. All I am saying is that Russia is NOT THE COUNTRY TO PISS OFF.
You should stop reading things into what people say. You have accused me of being the same thing as Bush and Cheny and all the Neo-Cons.
I have no more control over what my government is doing than you do. So stop blaming me for what others are doing. Stop twisting what I am saying. Stop accusing me of things I have never said, or posted, or even thought.
Instead maybe propose ideas that will help.
You are right, that is not what I thought were saying. I am sorry and pleased at the same time....I will seriously consider your advice. I think you are right there too.....................lizard
I am not sure why folks say things like Osama Bin Laden was involved in 911
Um...maybe its because they (al queda) came out and took credit for it?
Quite simply, you are mistaken. Neither Osama nor Al-Qaida have claimed responability.You are a victim of disinformation. Then, again, that is typical for you...lizard
Cute, but naive in your comments. Do you watch Fox News much? Let me guess your favorite news reporter is Mr. Fair and Balanced Bill 'O Reilly?
First off did you go to the FBI website and see what I was talking about? If you had, you would have read from the horses mouth itself that Bin Laden is not wanted for the events of 911 because the FBI has found no evidence that Bin Laden had anything to do with 911.
So maybe you and Bill 'O Reilly can make a phone call and update the FBI that they have been wrong all along....
No. after 9-11 Bin Laden denied involvement.
After the US invaded Afghanistan, while searching through the rubble in Kabul, they just happened upon a video. And the video just happened to show a man purported to be Osama, although he looked different, and "Osama" just happened to take credit for 9-11 on this video that the US just happened to find.
What a coincidence!
Could this be like the passport that drifted down on the streets of Manhattan, surviving a fiery plane crash and the explosion of a 110 story building- to be found to credit the story of Muslim terrorists?
Or the luggage that didn't make the connecting flight, with flight manuals and Atta's will?
How then, did he fly that plane, without the flight manual in his luggage? And how were people to carry out his will, if he expected to die on that plane with his luggage?
No evidence of that whatsoever. What we do have evidence of is Bush 41 meeting one of the Bin Ladens on 9/11 in a Washington hotel and both enjoying the carnage on CNN.
Top twenty reasons the US should further invade and occupy the entire “Middle East” (western Asia) –
The inhabitants of these lands are tired of their massive oil burden and would like to have it taken off their hands.
The Air Force needs fuel to drop its bombs to get its fuel.
Russian deterrence is a distant memory and tiny little China is but a mere speck on the map.
No one in their Right mind can imagine Baghdad without a US flag planted smack in the middle of it.
Or Tehran.
Or Islamabad, etc.
All sane people agree — World War III is to die for, as Big Business would make a royal killing.
This is by far the best use of the US National Guard. Helping people in times of flood, hurricane, and tornado — laudable as that may be – is but a distant tertiary concern.
Once again — Whose oil? Our oil.
As Dr. Pangloss says, “If you truly want the best of all possible worlds, you have to bomb for it.”
......
http://apragmaticpolicy.wordpress.com/2007/04/06/tropetopia-xiii-the-pangloss-score-ii-the-us-conquest...
All sane people agree — World War III is to die for,
Actually I think this is WW IV...III was the Cold War (we won that one)
The fact that Russia can invade a sovereign nation and the US can't do anything about it is proof that American didn't win the cold war, in fact it didn't win anything, except a huge debt. China today own us.
Why no mention that Obama asserted the same strategy months ago? Dweedly Dee or Tweedle dum - makes no difference. The domino's are being lined up to carry Ameri[k]a deeper into war for the next thirty of forty years on behalf of the military industrial establishment that both candidates are owned by. That assumes nuclear is not part of a response. Otherwise, the end may be nearer then we think. Assuming that is still something any one does these days.
I believe Mr. Pfaff is imprecise when he writes "Pakistan's military intelligence services created the Taliban while they were collaborating with the CIA to form the Mujahadeen that drove the Soviet forces out of Afghanistan." Close, but no cigar.
According to the painstakingly detailed chronology in Steven Coll's award winning book "Ghost Wars", the CIA began a lengthy working relationship with the Pakistani ISI to arm Islamic militants to attack Soviet forces in Afghanistan during the Carter administration. Billions of US dollars went into this not-so-secret clandestine anti-Soviet insurgency campaign during the Reagan years (the plot line of the Tom Hanks' movie, "Charlie Wilson's War"). These "Afghan freedom fighters" fought the Russians and the pro-Soviet (anticlerical) regime in Kabul alongside international jihadists that flocked there to wage religious war throughout the 1980's. Osama bin Laden was part of the foreign Arab jihadi contingent that eventually, through attrition and the advent of Stinger missle technology, forced the Soviet forces to finally withdraw.
The pro-Communist Kabul government survived awhile longer but eventually fell, and Afghanistan entered a prolonged period of civil war during the 1990's that pitted the Northern Alliance warlords against southern, Pashtun tribal warlords with the civilian population caught in the crossfire. Thousands of refugees fled south into camps in northern Pakistan. With the departure of the Soviets, the United States abruptly cut off the flow of arms and clandestine financial aid to all of the mujadaheen factions warring among themselves in Afghanistan and in the northern border provinces.
The Pakistani ISI created the Taliban out of that chaotic setting - long after the Soviet forces had been chased out.
The Taliban were popular with grassroots Afghans because their group advocated implementing Sharia religious law as a substitute for the never ending warlord factional feuds. Pakistan's agenda in supporting the rise of the Taliban was assurance that there would be a Pashtun province on Pakistan's northern border (rather than a regime aligned with the Northern Alliance tribes). The Taliban in turn would be beholden back to the Pakistani ISI for the spy agency's past and continued support.
Thus, it is accurate to say that once upon a time the CIA did run a black ops insurgency war in the Hindu Kush in league with Osama bin Laden, but the Taliban were never a CIA cooperating entity. Also, it is accurate to say that the Pakistani ISI was deeply angered by the cut off of CIA cash flow the moment the Russians departed, and the ISI later often used its leverage with the Taliban to stymie repeated Clinton administration efforts to take down Osama bin Laden and Al Quadea's base camps in Afghanistan and in the northwest border region.
Pfaff's analogy between the Cambodian incursion of 1970 and the Predator drone bombings and special ops forays in 2008 is apt, and most disturbing. Remember too that the Pakistani ISI was doing the bulk of the translating work for the CIA of the intercepted NSA "chatter" in the weeks immediately preceding the 911 attacks.
You add it up. Daniel Pearl died trying, and a lot of other folks have died since.
Bill from Saginaw
Bravo to Bill for recognizing what far too little out there acknowledge or even know about: the multi-faceted chaotic tribal nature of Afghanistan & the murky involvement of the ISI. I would add that the Taliban were popular with Pashtun Afghans only, as they were a Pashtun body whom practiced some of the more extreme examples of Pashtun chauvinism in Afghani history (like the massacre perpetrated by the Taliban immediately after their capture of Mazar-I-Sharif). The Taliban are bad news for Uzbeks, Tajiks, & Hazaras for ethnic and religious reasons. If the West wants to get serious about defeating the Taliban, they would be well advised to aid their mortal enemies as much as possible and let them do the dirty work. They actually have a better idea who the players are and have a lot more motivation to wipe them out. It will also remove the Taliban's main propaganda victory of "fighting the foreign invaders," as that is always a losing proposition in Afghanistan.
May I point out that this in no business of the US or Americans?...Should the rest of the world get organized to prevent Americans from being who they are? The American mentality isn't pretty, and affects the world adversely in a way that Pakistani mentality does not. Yet I don't think the US should be attacked to prevent the religious right wing movement from taking over. Do you?........................lizard
You are wishing continued civil war on people here, nate.
The US has a policy already of aiding dissatisfied ethnic minorities in places that it wishes to destabilize.
This is not a good thing for the people of the area.
Stop all arms shipments, military trainers and funding and let the people work it out.
Almost everyone wishes to live in peace, and most people do unless there is money in waging war.
Hear! Hear!
Far too often, what we see and debate in the US is a cartoon like simplicity that hides the real complexities.
One key point is the Pashtun nature of the Taliban. Pakistan has long favored Pashtun governments in Afghanistan because that tribal group of people spans the border into Pakistan. The opposition in Afghanistan tends to be warlords with ties to Russia and Iran, and Pakistan views these groups taking power in Afghanistan as a threat to their security.
At least, that's what I gather from reading over the years. None of that is from personal experience.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
It is interesting to me that a lot of the comments here on CD attack Obama, as though he is the more dangerous of the candidates. It may be true that he is less of a peacemonger than many of us might wish, but there is no way in hell that he is anywhere near the Loose Cannon from Arizona when it comes to warmongering. Boom Boom McCain is still fighting the Vietnam War, and he wants to win it! And like most Americans, his sense of geography is pretty screwed up. Vietnam, Pakistan, Cambodia, Iraq, whats the difference?
If Boom Boom is elected, we will be in another war within 6 months, tops.
War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength.
I love this constant assertion from the Dems that Obama is better than McCain. It never comes with any supporting facts. Its always just made as a blind assertion that we are supposed to believe on faith.
Here's why.
- Iraq. At best, Obama, McCain and Bush all propose the same plan. All say they'll rely on the advice of the generals. All say they'll withdraw the troops. In fact, the plan Bush is negotiating with Maliki will bring the troops home by 2011, while Obama promises to keep troops in Iraq through at least his first term.
- Iran. Obama, McCain and Bush all use exactly the same rhetoric about making sure that Iran doesn't acquire their fictional nuclear weapon. All ignore both the CIA and the IAEA when they say their is no evidence of a nuclear weapon program. All say 'all options are on the table', which is language that has explicitly been used to threaten nuclear strikes on Iran. While in Israel, there were reports that Obama basically promised to attack Iran in his term if Bush didn't before he left.
- Afghanistan. Here, Obama seems to be a much larger warmonger than Bush or McCain. Bush and McCain seem happy to keep this a small scale war. Obama is saying he wants to escalate it. Basically, it sounds like any troops Obama pulls our of Iraq will go to Afghanistan.
- Pakistan. Obama, McCain and Bush are all on the same page here. Obama was making warmongering statements about attacking into Pakistan as early as late last year in the Dem debates. Bush is now executing that policy, and both Obama and McCain are avoiding any criticism.
- Georgia. Obama has adopted very similiar language to what Bush and McCain have been saying. Obama seems willing to accept and spread the lie that Russia started this war. Obama and the Democrats all seem very supportive of the idea that a billion dollars of our tax money should go to Georgia to rebuild their toy army.
- Military spending. Obama is promising massive expansions here. He's promising to expand the Army and the Marines. He's promising to spend on more training and new equipment. Add this to the above list of places where Obama plans to fight and expand wars, and this is very ominous.
So, now please explain to me exactly how Obama is better than McCain? Don't just say it as if it were some gospel that came down from the heavens. Explain precisely why this is given the policies that Obama supports.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
PS ... I forgot at least one. Obama and the Democrats fully support the expansion of NATO up to the edges of the old Soviet Union and now inside those old borders by including Georgia and the Ukraine. This is a direct provocation to the Russians.
Palin might be using strong language threatening war with Russia. But Obama and the Democrats fully support all of the policies that are creating the tensions that seem to be leading towards such a war.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
Good post, Samson.
They make the same assertions about Gore. "Can anybody doubt that if Gore was President, we wouldn't be in Iraq?"
Yeah, me. And ain't I a somebody? Gore was onboard with the starving sanctions and the intermittent bombing of Iraq throughout the 90s. I read that he pushed Clinton into bombing Iraq when Saddam supposedly tried to assassinate Bush 41.
The sainted Jimmy Carter laid it out in the 70s. The Middle East is part of our sphere, and would be defended if "our" oil was threatened.
Do I think that if Gore was President and Saddam was making oil deals with China and France, and looking to trade oil in euros instead of dollars, that he would have invaded?
Yes, I do.
By "less of a peacemonger," you appear to mean "less enthusiastic of a warmonger."
A trivial detail to some, but to crazies who don't like spreading death and destruction at all, it seems to matter.
This is all political theater designed to elect John McCain and his six gun sidekick. As Obama swallows the bait and attempts to out gun McCain he appears ever more foolish and pliable. Obama just needs to begin a campaign of Fix America First. A divided internally weakened country cannot project a strong foreign policy. National Security is as much internal as it it external. The American People are suffering and the economy is in shytsville, yet John McCain and the Pit Bull Republicans want to continue down the road of American Bankruptcy by fighting more foreign wars. Obama is about Obama and not the American People or he would be pressing this argument forcefully. As of today I do not see Obama as a serious candidate.
Fix America first indeed, a slogan Green bioregionalists and paelo-con isolationists can get behind. More oppostion against he corrupt globalist "centrist" centralist corporate center is always good IMO.
I hadn't heard that term before "six-gun sidekick" (as in Calamity Jane?)to refer to Ms Palin. Apt, very apt.
Fix America First. I agree. And I do see Obama as serious candidate. That is, he has a 50% chance of being the next president. It would behoove all progressives to write to the Obama campaign and tell him in no uncertain terms what we think about his militaristic talk about Afghanistan and Pakistan. He is more pliable than McCain and he needs to be plied by the left.
That's funny, hamster. Obama is my senator. When he called for attacking Pakistan the first time, I called to complain. The local office I called told me that I had to call the campaign office!
So I did. They started blah, blah, blahing about protecting America. I told them that I was not willing for millions of other people to die so that I could be safe. She said she'd pass it on.
How'd that work out?
Phase 4: Georgia
Phase 5: South America
Phase 6: Iran
Phase 7: et al
Good thing the U.S. has a bottomless supply of soldiers and a similarly bottomless pit of riches with which to fund its adventures.
Could that be why the big money is behind Obama? Because they need a "liberal" to bring back the draft and supply endless soldiers for their dirty wars?
Well it all worked out in the end, we just had the Miss universe Contest held in South, uh l mean North, uh l mean Vietnam and Miss Venesuela won with Miss Colombia first runnerup. Now if those two can get along, why can't we all just get along?
"The United States has just invaded Cambodia. The name of Cambodia this time is Pakistan, but otherwise it's the same story as in Indochina in 1970."
With one huge difference. Pakistan has the bomb. You can bet they're busy building more.
Obama, the most liberal Senator according to Repugs, must rattle the saber to get the sheeple's votes though Repugs accuse him of being an appeaser for saying he would talk to our "enemies". But his bashers will be glad to know that thanks in part to them, McCain/Palin are ahead in the polls.
Start digging in.
McCain and Palin represent America better than Obama and Biden. That is why they are ahead, not because of opposition to Obama. Sad as it may be, they represent the spirit of the American people and it would be logical if they win............lizard
Obama rose in the polls because he creating the (false) impression that he represented change.
But, now that the American people are starting to pay attention, he's failing to deliver on that hope. Obama has laid out absolutely nothing to the American people to say exactly what sort of change he'll bring. In fact, he's basically promising another four years of the same old same old.
Thus, Obama is now falling in the polls.
And like in 2000, the evil Dems will try to blame the left for their own political incompetence.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
War hero and soccer mom trumps uppity black muslimish and retread anytime..........................lizard
First off, I love the blatant lie that Obama will do something other than what he says. The big money that runs this country has put hundreds of millions of dollars into Obama's campaign. Its a joke to even think that he won't do their bidding.
In fact, after all the phony bull the Obama camp spread about him being assasinated, the one thing that would most likely get him killed would be if he double crossed the people who've just paid hundreds of millions to get him elected. People at that level who invest that level of money are not to be triffled with.
Plus of course, you know exactly what the first thing the Dems will do after the election. Start running the next election. They'll be fundraising for the midterms and Obama will start fundraising for re-election immediately. Do you really think he's going to shaft the people who've funded this campaign by not doing what he's said he'll do at the same time he's calling them up and asking them to fund the next campaign?
And, I love the way the Dems use exactly the same tactics as the Republicans. Remember back when the nation was turning against Bush and the White House derided everyone who criticised him as Bush-basher. Now the Dems do exactly the same thing.
There's never any facts in this junk. Just a blank assertion that we have to elect the pro-war, pro-corporate Obama over the pro-war, pro-corporate McCain. Why, they never say. Because of course, it makes very little difference.
The people who poured hundreds of millions into the Bush campaigns really run the country. This time, they clearly shifted to Obama (can you even picture a Republican running on public financing?). Ain't nothing going to change.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
First off, I love the blatant lie that Obama will do something other than what he says. The big money that runs this country has put hundreds of millions of dollars into Obama's campaign. Its a joke to even think that he won't do their bidding.
In fact, after all the phony bull the Obama camp spread about him being assasinated, the one thing that would most likely get him killed would be if he double crossed the people who've just paid hundreds of millions to get him elected. People at that level who invest that level of money are not to be triffled with.
Plus of course, you know exactly what the first thing the Dems will do after the election. Start running the next election. They'll be fundraising for the midterms and Obama will start fundraising for re-election immediately. Do you really think he's going to shaft the people who've funded this campaign by not doing what he's said he'll do at the same time he's calling them up and asking them to fund the next campaign?
And, I love the way the Dems use exactly the same tactics as the Republicans. Remember back when the nation was turning against Bush and the White House derided everyone who criticised him as Bush-basher. Now the Dems do exactly the same thing.
There's never any facts in this junk. Just a blank assertion that we have to elect the pro-war, pro-corporate Obama over the pro-war, pro-corporate McCain. Why, they never say. Because of course, it makes very little difference.
The people who poured hundreds of millions into the Bush campaigns really run the country. This time, they clearly shifted to Obama (can you even picture a Republican running on public financing?). Ain't nothing going to change.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
The bomb makes all the difference. The attacks are just to ratchet up the chaos to justify going in and grabbing the muslim nukes.
"....grabbing the muslim nukes."
To clarify, you mean the US taking Pakistan's nukes? If that is what you meant, uh-uh, won't happen.
Pakistan is even more secretive (paranoid?) in its security surrounding their devices than the US. Pakistan's designs are modularized, and the modules stored in different secret locations throughout the country. The US doesn't not know the whereabouts of these modules, and if they did, at best the US could capture only a few components that would be quickly reconstructed....and then deployed.
Pakistan has long-known about US xenophobia for muslims (nearly 30 years), and have been preparing for it. They are much, much smarter and tougher than their Indian neighbors.
Obama has promised to bomb Pakistan way back early in his campaign, nothing new about that. The liberal Obama fanatics have difficulty acknowledging the fact that Obama will lead the US down an even worse quagmire than Bush. Obama wants to go to war with a country that really does have WMDs - and that is way more stupid and idiotic than going to war only under the pretense of finding WMDs.
Unfortunately, most of Obama fanatics have their eyes closed - well, they'll open up soon enough, if he does become the leader of the war.
http://almusawwir.org/resistance/
Maybe the generals will get tired of this nonsense and attack from the Beltway. Since our corrupt Congress will not impeach then perhaps a short coup is in order.
You do not get to be a General unless you support the NWO. The TLC has been appointing our Generals for 30 years. There will be no military coup.
If anything, maybe there already has been a coup, perhaps not a military one, maybe in 1963, and we just don't know it, and this is the result.
If the TRUTH about 11 Sept 2001 was ever known by the US military, there WOULD be a coup. It would probably last about 3-4 months before control was returned to the civilians. It would take that long to capture all the real criminals behind 911 here and in Israel. Then, hang them from street lights, and on the Mall in Washington DC. Problem solved.
You should be ashamed to speak in such a violent way. You are an example of the problem faced by people of good will, aggressivity and impulsivity. Get civilized..........lizard
Or a long one. Most of the military (grunts, anyway) are on the citizens' side this time. Now, what to do about he mercenaries
Take away their paychecks.
The House of Representatives controls the nation's purse strings. So, the Dem majority could do this anytime they wanted.
Don't hold your breath waiting.
And for the record, Obama has already said that we won't stop the use of mercs.
If you want this to change, the Dems are not the answer.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
agent provocateur?
Worse clueless astrologer.
This region (is it called Baluchistan?) is not ruled by Pakistan. Why then, are we calling it Pakistan? It has been demonstrated that the Pakistani Military can not exert its ways in this region.
The rampant Lawlessness inside of Pakistan is amplified manifold here. It is the way of the country. Law can not be imposed on a certain section of the populace.
The whining coming out of Pakistan is simply to demonstrate that it still wields some power over its people. It does not.
It is a nation about to implode on its own.
Love
Zero
You are missing some important facts. The region under discussion is autononomous under the Pakistani constitution which explicitly says that the Pakistani army must remain outside its boundaries. The government of Pakistan, theatened with the anihilation of the country by the US was forced to violate the constitution and enter this area. It isn't Pakistan that is at fault, it is the work of the United States..........Your ignorance is blinding you.............Also, you are not being nice.................lizard
Hi Zero--You'll want to refer to this map paying attention to the shaded/diagonal lined region known informally as Pashtunistan, and also this map that tells you where the FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Area) and NWFP (Noth West Frontier Province) are. I suggest you bookmark them for future reference when reading about events there. The hosting site for these maps has many others that are very helpful for that and other world regions.
Nice article.
But even in the modern era, this is Quaqmire Phase 3 at least.
Phase 1 ... Afghanistan. Seven years after 9-11, we are still there. If we have a clear mission, I've never heard it. There is talk about 'winning', but I never hear what that means. No talk at all about getting out or how we might get out.
Phase 2 ... Iraq
So Pakistan is at least Phase 3. Apparently by a nose since the Bush admin seems to have blocked the Israelis from attacking Iran. That's no great victory since Obama has promised to help the Israelis attack Iran and uses the same rhetoric about a fictional nuclear weapon being something we can't tolerate. So, Pakistan appears to be Phase 3 by being maybe since months ahead of Phase 4 in Iran.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
I had a friend, a bush supporter all the way. When 9/11 happened, they told me at the time of the invasion of Iraq, that it was the beginning of the second crusade. That "winning" they talk about means when the last one of them is dead.
Good. We've finally managed to get the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites to work together in Iraq (not!)so it must be time for the Pakistanis and Afghans to work together with a little help from their friend-- the US and push the majority Pushtuns (aka, the Taliban) out of Pakistan and Afghanistan. Trouble is we pushed the Pushtuns out in the first place, with our alliance with the warlords of the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan and they want back. And rather than include the Pushtuns in a board-base government coalition, we decided to fight them.
The Karzai government in Afghanistan is both too anti-Pushtun and too pro-Indian for the Pakistanis to abide by. (Remember, Hindus in India and Muslims in Pakistan have had difficult times). And all these sticky religious/nationalist conflicts come to bite the US in its behind in the "tribal areas." We think we're fighting terrorists, they think we're fighting their religion and nationality. But the Bush team pushes on, They, after all, create their own reality, so they claim. For America now, the clarion call is to forget this religious/nationalist background and just bomb the hell out them. Unfortunately, this will only create more animosity towards us and keep this region a hell-hole for many years to come. .
Dr Wu, the last of the big-time thinkers
And we can balance it all out by selling nukes to India! Great! After all, its about our only export anymore!
I don't know about Mccain but Obama has already supported bombing Pakistan. Who's controlling Obama to say yes to bombing Pakistan?