Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiObama's Triple Surge Into Afghanistan
Hi-ho, hi-ho, it's off to war we go!
As President Barack Obama begins winding down the Bush war in Iraq, he is building up his own war farther east. We're told that it will be a new, expanded, extra-special American adventure in Afghanistan, involving a vigorous surge strategy to "stabilize" this perpetually unstable land.
The initial surge will add 17,000 troops to the 36,000 already there. Then, later this year, there is to be a second troop surge of another 17,000 or so. This mass of soldiers is expected to be deployed to a series of new garrisons to be built in far-flung regions of this impoverished, rural, mostly illiterate warlord state that is ruled by hundreds of fractious, heavily armed tribal leaders. We're not told how much this escalation will cost, but it will at least double the $2 billion a month that American taxpayers are already shelling out for the Afghan war.
The extra-special part of this effort is to come from a simultaneous "civilian surge" of hundreds of U.S. economic development experts. "What we can't do," said Obama in an interview last Sunday, "is think that just a military approach in Afghanistan is going to be able to solve our problems." To win the hearts (and cooperation) of the Afghan people, this development leg of the operation will try to build infrastructure (roads, schools, etc.), create new crop alternatives to lure hardscrabble farmers out of poppy production and generally lift the country's bare-subsistence living standard.
What Obama has not mentioned is that, in addition to soldiers and civilians, there is a third surge in his plan: private military contractors. Yes, another privatized army, such as the one in Iraq. There, the Halliburtons, Blackwaters and other war profiteers ran rampant, shortchanging our troops, ripping off taxpayers, killing civilians and doing deep damage to America's good name.
Already, there are 71,000 private contractors operating in Afghanistan, and many more are preparing to deploy as Pentagon spending ramps up for Obama's war. The military is now offering new contracts to security firms to provide armed employees (aka, mercenaries) to guard U.S. bases and convoys. Despite the widespread contractor abuses in Iraq, Pentagon chief Robert Gates defends the ongoing privatization push: "The use of contractor security personnel is vital to supporting the forward-operating bases in certain parts of the country," he declared in a February letter to the Senate Armed Services Committee.
What the gentle war secretary is really saying is this: "We don't have a draft, and I don't see a lot of senators' kinfolks volunteering to put their butts on the line in Afghanistan, so I've gotta pay through the nose to find enough privateers to guard America's Army in this forbidding place."
Meanwhile, here's an interesting twist to Obama's contractor surge: the for-hire guards protecting our bases and convoys will not likely be Americans. The Associated Press has reported that of the 3,847 security contractors in Afghanistan, only nine are U.S. firms.
Actually, being an American contractor is not a plus in the eyes of the Afghan people, for they've had bitter experiences with them. They point to DynCorp, a Virginia-based contractor that got nearly a billion dollars in 2006 to train Afghan police. The bumbling "Inspector Clouseau" of comic fame could've done a better job. At least he might have amused the people.
What they got from DynCorp was a bunch of highly paid American "advisors" who were unqualified and knew nothing about the country. Some 70,000 police were to be trained, but less than half that number actually went through the ridiculous eight-week program, which included no field training.
A 2006 U.S. report on the DynCorp trainees deemed them to be "incapable of carrying out routine law enforcement work." Meanwhile, no one knows how many of the trainees ever reported for duty, or what happened to thousands of missing trucks and other pieces of police equipment that had been issued for the training.
The punch line of this joke is that DynCorp got another contract ($317 million) last August to "continue training civilian police forces in Afghanistan."
Excuse me for saying it, but Obama is about to sink us - and his presidency - into a mess.
49 Comments so far
Show AllJim Hightower would be a good "reality" therapist for Obama, or at least an advisor. He has always been a voice of reason, no matter who is in power.
Obama doesn't care if he is a one term president. At the rate he is pandering to the financial industry, they will have a job that pays tens of millions of dollars per year waiting for him on January 21, 2013, a signifiicant increase from his $400K salary as US President.
Have fun with President Palin...
That's what you want, right?
An absurd statement, Joseph. Can you not see more choices, more complexity, more nuance? Are you so enamored of the Geithner plan for those bundled derivatives approved by your hero, or for that matter, the appointment of Geithner and Summers in the first place?
Do you not understand that your one liners and unabashed schoolgirl cheerleading adds absolutely nothing to this forum , and it certainly fails utterly to demonstrate good citizenship.
Obama got about 70 million votes.
McCain got almost 60 million.
Nader and Mckinney COMBINED got less than 1 million.
Suppose over half of the people who voted for Obama voted for Nader.
Who would be President right now?
McCain/Palin.
That's the truth and you know it.
You are a coward not to admit it.
An absurd statement, Joseph. Can you not see more choices, more complexity, more nuance? Are you so enamored of the Geithner plan for those bundled derivatives approved by your hero, or for that matter, the appointment of Geithner and Summers in the first place?
Do you not understand that your one liners and unabashed schoolgirl cheerleading adds absolutely nothing to this forum , and it certainly fails utterly to demonstrate good citizenship.
One of us is certainly a coward, look in the mirror to solve that puzzle. Further you are a traitor to the principles that founded this nation. When you ignore the question I put to you (twice now) you display moral cowardice. When you fall back on the same old bullshit you display the weakness of your position.
Obama spent two years and seven hundred million dollars on his campaign, much of it from the same sources he now rewards with billions of our tax dollars. After eight years of Bush the voter was ready to be seduced by empty words, you too I guess. After a bit over sixty days it is blatantly opbvious that this nation is in deep trouble. You preach a simplistic ,pie in the sky mantra, and think yourself a credit to our country...Sorry to say that the way you duck the important questions shows plainly that you are not any such thing.
>>Suppose over half of the people who voted for Obama voted for Nader.
Gosh, Joe....suppose all of those misguieded dupes who voted for Obombem voted for Nader.
Nader would be president now, wouldn't he?
I cannot even begin to imagine a person so completely clueless and juvenile, who would waste the few precious pieces of gray matter he has left by posting such puerile remarks here.
What's next Joe? Are you going to stick out your tongue at us and say "Nyah Nyah?"
No, what he is going to do is what he always does; run from fact, deny logic, and just disappear until his next puerile comment. This clown thinks himself a patriot, yet his mindless hero worship is a very bad thing indeed.
This is Obamas greatest obvious mistake. Make him stop !
Hard to say if it is his greatest mistake. He's also steering into the iceberg dealing with the health care and financial industries.
Yes, glen ford: "WE have to make him stop! WE must continue to build a movement that will force him and those he represents to stop making war on the people of the planet.
Did it ever occur to you that the "PEOPLE" just had the opportunity to choose between McCAIN, Obama, Nader, McKinney, Paul, LaRouche, you name it.
And WE the PEOPLE chose Obama knowing full-well that he promised to do exactly what he is now doing in Afghanistan.
It seems to me, that you think you know better than the "PEOPLE", that YOUR voice should decide what is best for US. You don't care that WE support Obama. You want to force YOUR agenda down OUR throats.
glen ford, you are as disingenuous as they come.
People in glass houses and all that,Joseph.
Obama used a war chest of two hundred million dollars over a two year period to convince the electorate that he was not George W. Bush. Upon assuming the office he then made decisions as bad as any Bush made and appointed people to key positions who think exactly as did those under Bush.
Currently Obama has an approval rating of slightly over 60%, this should indict ,even to one as dumb as a post, that there are approximately 40% of the people dissatisfied. Would you care to predict what your heroes ratings will be in six months? In a year? In two?
You rage against people exercizing their right to free speech, Have you a problem with such actions? At least many who criticize the actions of this administrations do so with specifics, you on the other hand are embarrassingly silent on such detail. What is your function here? Blind and sophomoric one liners? Thanks but no thanks.
Red Rick March
Extremely well said. For people like Joehope, it apparently does not matter how many Afghans and other third world citizens will be slaughtered because of Obama's militarism, Obama will still be considered better than Bush, despite, as Kucinich has attempted to point out in the past, that a lesser of two evils will still manifest itself as an evil.
"You rage against people exercizing their right to free speech"
When? Raging against what they say is not the same as raging against their right to say it.
"approximately 40% of the people dissatisfied."
Yeah, angry Neo-cons and Republicans.
Frankly, you didn't respond to anything I'd written. Glen Ford is the epitome of the minority thinking they are smarter than the majority. I'm not fond of that kind of elitism. I support democracy. What do you support? A dictatorship of Naderites or LaRouche cultists?
As for your theory that money determines elections, I feel that is extremely insulting to Americans. I made up my own mind who to vote for, JUST LIKE YOU.
Damn Joseph, can you be this stupid? You want elitists, there is Geithner, Summers, Gates ,Villsack and Duncan, sterling characters all in your mind no doubt. How about Sibelius presiding over a health care debacle in her own State? How about the nomination of four people with serious tax problems? How professional huh?
You claim to make up your own mind yet show no evidence of grappling with any issues, instead posting an endless mantra of nonsensical catch phrases that show no in depth analysis whatsoever. Your callous disregard for a foreign policy that dooms many thousands more innocents makes your support hollow indeed.
"approximately 40% of the people dissatisfied."
Joe Dope: "Yeah, angry Neo-cons and Republicans"
Sorry Joe....I'm not an angry Neo-con, Republican or Democrat. But I am grossly dissatisfied, with both Obombem and his mindless, brain-dead supporters.
dumbass joeblow, STFU!
Actually every Joe Hope post is a ringing endorsement for the position of the dissidents.
If the moribund antiwar movement in this country ever wakes up, perhaps they can organize their people to stand outside the White House and chant:
"Hey, hey, USA
how many kids did you kill today?"
Or perhaps they may choose this one:
"Hey, hey, O-bom-a
how many kids did you bomb today?"
The safety of Afghanistan's citizenry may depend upon the people of the United States shaming Obama into calling off the war machine. That is, if one assumes that Obama, like Bush before him, actually has any shame as well as empathy for what the Afghans [and the Iraqis and the Pakistanis] have already suffered because of the belligerent actions of the United States of America.
Mr. Hightower, you knew or should have known all this when you not only voted for Obama but vigorously and repeatedly urged others to do so. Vote for imperialists and you get...doh!...imperialism. Perhaps next time, if you have any credibility and audience left, you won't be so anxious to suck up to power and will vote and urge others to vote their conscience and politics.
I guess Jim Hightower and Norman Solomon have a lot in common. Thanks for helping to elect Obama, but please keep your backstabbing rants to yourself, unless perhaps you've decided to join Sarah Palin's campaign team.
Ladies and Gentlemen...I give you Joe Hope!
Still "hoping" for more war after all these years.
Thanks to Jim Hightower for the article. Because, as is noted, most of the military contractors come from other countries, there is the attendant issue of under what conditions those contractors work. For example, many work doing cooking, laundry, cleaning and other service labor for the US military, but, unlike US soldiers, they have no health benefits with that work. If they are injured on the job, the US is not responsible for their care. It's yet another way the US extracts foreign labor for its own ends.
Cleaning up Bush's mess is not an easy task.
Yeah, madcow, it's tough pandering to the MIC to get their confidence in you so they can make you rich.
Change tactics? - Why?
This is no longer Bushs' mess, madcow, it is Obama's. The escalation into Afghanistan was never on the Bush agenda in fact. From our new President's war policies to his economic policies we are seeing a new direction that is as doomed to failure as was the old agenda.
this is not really abotu "cleaning up bush's mess" ...
rather -- it is a NEW PACKAGED CONTINUATION of the MESS that IS american policy. all the way from woodrow wilson at the latest.
War, in any form, is not healthy for children and other living things. Where does the "thou shall not kill" find a place in governmental/world thinking...and why isn't the far religious right (and any 'righteous' thinkers) advocating such? No swords, more 'plowshares'= peace (at least we can hope and dream)
While I admire Hightower a lot and I strongly agree that Obama's making a huge mistake committing to Afghanistan and Pakistan, I will don't understand why there's no outrage at the fact that other countries are sending in their contractors and NATO troops. I just find it so inconsistent here.
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
well this is because most of these countries are either IN NATO and led by the nose by the USA - or are countries the USA throws MONEY into .. such as the leadership of Czech republic, , poland. BRIBERY and THREATS from the USA is what it's about.
and as for OTHER countries like Russia and China -- their interest THERE is BUSINESS and resources and to prevent the USA from encroaching ON THEIR borders...having seen over the years the pattern of US motives and movements .
why should THEY be questioned to protect themselves from US encroachment in THEIR own neighborhoods?
the ONLY prime country that NEEDS TO GET OUT OF THERE unless it wants to do business on the TERMS of the natives of the region and NOT ITS TERMS --
is the USA.
but that is a notion that is TOO SIMPLE for americans to admit.
America and its leadership is TOO ADDICTED to the notion of being "in the driver's seat" --
EVEN IF IT MEANS dragging the rest of the world into DISASTER.
it is what really amounts to a NATIONAL VERSION of
a DISEASE.
A lot of my friends are ardent Obama supporters, and I have been having a hard time lately with their insistence on citing the Iraqi "pullout" as evidence of change. First of all, the US ISN'T pulling out of Iraq completely, as we all know - must protect the corporate empire that has settled there. Secondly, sending more of the Empire's troops to the other country is hardly changing anything either. I think, what part of the bigger picture do they simply not see here? Obama is still using hired murderers and professional assassins to spread the Empire. He is simply rearranging the structure of it, much like a business restructures itself and renames positions for a new look.
You want REAL change? Then Obama should denounce war. Obama should apologize for the aggressive imperialism and murder the white rulers of this continent have rained down on others since 1492. Obama should announce to the world that the US will truly lead the way into a new future by putting down all our weapons and inviting the rest of the world to do the same. Now THAT would be real change.
And the next day he would be assassinated . . . most likely by some "crazy, loner gunman" acting "by himself".
Good post stevenson 2:34 -------- Seems like the emptying of Iraq is just to increase Afghanistan and Send alot of troop resources to the USA SW border.
All the talk of stopping gun flow simultaneously with 700 GUN SALES CHARGES BEING DISMISSED BY A JUDGE,( near Tucson Ariz.?) in a seemingly tight case against a USA citizen store owner and cartel supplier.
Yes, it's just simply shifting the emphasis of the Empire. And I'm sure the upsurge of troops in Afghanistan has ABSOLUTELY nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that the US will be installing a puppet administrator to oversee Karzai, as was cited in an article on this site yesterday. 17,000 certificates of insurance is what that is.
Cartel says to the judge "dismiss this case or your family will die" and the judge knows its not a bluff.
Wait - hold on: we got "hundreds of U.S. economic development experts"???
Boy, if they're as expert as the ones we're keeping stateside, like Summers and Rubin and Geithner and Bernanke and Paulson, the Afghan people are gonna be soooo happy, they'll be fighting over who gets to strap the C4 to their chests...
I never met a dem/repub who didn't love war. Even Dennis Kucinich still refuses to denounce the Party. Just check the voting records of congress.
I cannot understand how anyone who has ever loved a child, or any other human being for that matter, can assign the status of "necessary collateral damage" to other people's loved ones. And then call themselves progressive, or moral, or religious, or good in any sense.
Sioux Rose
NO SURRENDER: Exactly! To be human is to have empathy for others; but it seems many in politics and/or power have lost their humanity, sold it out for the trinkets that are temporal, bowed down to Mammon or Mars and think themselves kings. There is a spiritual price paid for these choices, and ultimately they minimize the true account that's carried into future lifetimes, all for ego-flagellation in this one.
'Excuse me for saying it, but' the U.S.A. is just beginning to get back what it has earned. The big payoff is yet to come but should start arriving late in 2009. Some people call this payoff karma.
there was also a saying by Benjamin Franklin:
"THE REAL BILL OF GOING TO WAR DOES NOT IMMEDIATELY MAKE ITSELF CLEAR........IT COMES LATER....BUT MUCH, MUCH BIGGER".
but the usa apparently has lost all sense and memory and never heeds what Dwight Eisenhower warned his country against:
"WE SHALL SURELY BANKRUPT OURSELVES IN OUR QUEST FOR ABSOLUTE SECURITY".
and of course "absolute security" to the USA MEANS --CONTINUING EMPIRE and THAT means -- war.
The Saudis are pouring money into Afganistan to build their brand of fundamental schools to commit jihad. The U.S. should be building as many schools and educating as many children (boys & girls) as possible and that will head off the 50 or so enemies you make everytime you kill a family member. War is not and never has been the answer but education is to just about any question you can think of.
Except that it is STILL the NATIVES that will decide what kind of society they will have or tolerate...and these are people who have not existed in that area for eons because they are "naive" and just "backward".
no -- these are people, regardless of what the more recent developments are in their society towards more militancy and through islam -- are fundamentally among the OLDEST civilizations in the world with their own thousands of years of mores, norms, thinking and PREFERENCES..which will NOT bow to a mere 250 years old "empire" wanna be.
Obama is going to find his presidency SWALLOWED right there in the middle east and central asia like all would-be
"CAESARS" before him.
================
The New York Times
This copy is for your personal, noncommercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers here or use the "Reprints" tool that appears next to any article. Visit www.nytreprints.com for samples and additional information. Order a reprint of this article now.
Printer Friendly Format Sponsored By
March 27, 2009
Pakistani and Afghan Taliban Unify in Face of U.S. Influx
By CARLOTTA GALL
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — After agreeing to bury their differences and unite forces, Taliban leaders based in Pakistan have closed ranks with their Afghan comrades to ready a new offensive in Afghanistan as the United States prepares to send 17,000 more troops there this year.
In interviews, several Taliban fighters based in the border region said preparations for the anticipated influx of American troops were already being made. A number of new, younger commanders have been preparing to step up a campaign of roadside bombings and suicide attacks to greet the Americans, the fighters said.
The refortified alliance was forged after the reclusive Afghan Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, sent emissaries to persuade Pakistani Taliban leaders to join forces and turn their attention to Afghanistan, Pakistani officials and Taliban members said.
The overture by Mullah Omar is an indication that with the prospect of an American buildup, the Taliban feel the need to strengthen their own forces in Afghanistan and to redirect their Pakistani allies toward blunting the new American push.
The Pakistani Taliban, an offspring of the Afghan Taliban, are led by veterans of the fighting in Afghanistan who come from the border regions. They have always supported the fight against foreign forces in Afghanistan by supplying fighters, training and logistical aid.
But in recent years the Pakistani Taliban have concentrated on battling the Pakistani government, extending a domain that has not only threatened Pakistan but has also provided an essential rear base for the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan.
At the same time, American officials told The New York Times this week that Pakistan’s military intelligence agency continued to offer money, supplies and guidance to the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan as a proxy to help shape a friendly government there once American forces leave.
The new Taliban alliance has raised concern in Afghanistan, where NATO generals warn that the conflict will worsen this year. It has also generated anxiety in Pakistan, where officials fear that a united Taliban will be more dangerous, even if focused on Afghanistan, and draw more attacks inside Pakistan from United States drone aircraft.
“This may bring some respite for us from militants’ attacks, but what it may entail in terms of national security could be far more serious,” said one senior Pakistani official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not permitted to talk to news organizations. “This would mean more attacks inside our tribal areas, something we have been arguing against with the Americans.”
The Pakistani Taliban is dominated by three powerful commanders — Baitullah Mehsud, Hafiz Gul Bahadur and Maulavi Nazir — based in North and South Waziristan, the hub of insurgent activity in Pakistan’s tribal border regions, who have often clashed among themselves.
Mullah Omar dispatched a six-member team to Waziristan in late December and early January, several Taliban fighters said in interviews in Dera Ismail Khan, a town in North-West Frontier Province that is not far from South Waziristan. The Afghan Taliban delegation urged the Pakistani Taliban leaders to settle their internal differences, scale down their activities in Pakistan and help counter the planned increase of American forces in Afghanistan, the fighters said.
The three Pakistani Taliban leaders agreed. In February, they formed a united council, or shura, called the Council of United Mujahedeen. In a printed statement the leaders vowed to put aside their disputes and focus on fighting American-led forces in Afghanistan.
A spokesman for the Afghan Taliban, Zabiullah Mujahid, denied that the meetings ever took place or that any emissaries were sent by Mullah Omar. The Afghan Taliban routinely disavow any presence in Pakistan or connection to the Pakistani Taliban to emphasize that their movement is indigenous to Afghanistan. “We don’t like to be involved with them, as we have rejected all affiliation with Pakistani Taliban fighters,” Mr. Mujahid said. “We have sympathy for them as Muslims, but beside that, there is nothing else between us.”
Several Pakistani officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not permitted to talk to news organizations, confirmed the meetings. But they said that the overture might have been inspired by Sirajuddin Haqqani, an Afghan Taliban leader who swears allegiance to Mullah Omar but is largely independent in his operations.
Mr. Haqqani, and his father Jalaluddin Haqqani, the most powerful figures in Waziristan, are closely linked to Al Qaeda and to Pakistani intelligence, American officials say. From their base in North Waziristan, they have directed groups of fighters into eastern Afghanistan and increasingly in complex attacks on the Afghan capital, Kabul.
The Taliban fighters said the Afghan Taliban delegation was led by Mullah Abdullah Zakir, a commander from Helmand Province in southern Afghanistan, whose real name is reported to be Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul.
A front-line commander during the Taliban government, Mullah Zakir was captured in 2001 in northern Afghanistan and was detained at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, until his release in 2007, Afghan Taliban members contacted by telephone said.
The Pakistani fighters described Mullah Zakir as an impressive speaker and a trainer, and one said he was particularly energetic in working to unite the different Taliban groups. Beyond bolstering Taliban forces in Afghanistan, both the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban leaders had other reasons to unite, Pakistani officials said.
One motivation may have been to shift the focus of hostilities to Afghanistan in hopes of improving their own security in Waziristan, where more than 30 drone strikes in recent months have been directed at both Mr. Mehsud and Mr. Nazir. Two senior commanders of the Haqqani network have been killed.
The Pakistani Taliban leaders also rely on Mr. Haqqani and their affiliation with the Afghan mujahedeen for legitimacy, as well as the money and influence it brings.
In their written statement, decorated with crossed swords, the three Pakistani Taliban leaders reaffirmed their allegiance to Mullah Omar, as well as the leader of Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden.
The mujahedeen should unite as the “enemies” have united behind the leadership of President Obama, it said. “The mujahedeen should put aside their own differences for the sake of God, God’s happiness, for the strength of religion, and to bring dishonor on the infidels.” The Taliban fighters interviewed said that the top commanders removed a number of older commanders and appointed younger commanders who were good fighters to prepare for operations in Afghanistan in the coming weeks.
In confident spirits, the Taliban fighters predicted that 2009 was going to be a “very bloody” year.
Ismail Khan contributed reporting from Peshawar, Pakistan; Pir Zubair Shah from Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan; and Taimoor Shah from Kandahar, Afghanistan.
*
How does that story go? So Brer Rabbit say to de tar baby, eff y'all don't leggo of my lef' hand, I gwine to smack you wif' my right hand. But de tar baby, he don't say nuffin'.
Anyone who paid attention during Obama's campaign knew this Afghanistan debacle was coming (which is the main reason I voted for Nader)...but aside from that, which is incredibly foolish of Obama, his appointing Wall St. hacks to be his econ advisors is equally foolish and will eventually doom his Preznancy. Pretty sad, neh, how all you Obamaniacs were duped. Sure, he's intelligent, articulate, calm. But HE'S WRONG!
Exactly. I only hope that since he was supported by a grass-roots effort that we can eventually make our voices heard (there's got to be a din from his so-called 'change.org' and 'open' listening to the American public). He must have ear-plugs in. That's the only 'hope' he offers - that he might eventually pay attention!! I voted for Nader also, and supported Kucinich as far as he could go (until dissed by NBC/GE/insurance industry for DARING to suggest a single-payer system, now 'off the table' by Obama). No, I'm not too surprised by Pres. O. Close to what I predicted, unfortunately. (|-\ . America has little awareness of the degree to which she has been fear-mongered/brain-washed into buying the constant din of DOD bullying tactics to use their lethal toys at our, and the world's, expense. We have little concept of what a truly peace-loving country could accomplish to prevent so much of the violence we support daily. Support Kucinich's 'Department of Peace' - it should be equal in power to the DOD (in a perfect world that won't exist for some time apparently, but it must come about).
I am stunned. I've been preoccupied with Obama's financial and healthcare disasters and I wasn't paying much attention. When I first read this piece, I had to double check who had written it because I thought it couldn't be real.
Obama will double our troops in Afghanistan and double the cost from $2B a month to $4B? We have 36,000 troops there now but 71,000 private contractors! And of the 3,847 security contractors only NINE are American?
Let me just set aside everything that can be said about this war and focus where I've been focused which is on the Obombing of our economy. If we spent a trillion in Iraq and most of that went to American contractors, it was our only growth industry during the Bush reign of terror. Obama is outsourcing every square inch of the American economy that is left - it's happening in finance - JPMorgan just announced jobs moving overseas and the AIG bailout is global; it's happening in tech - IBM didn't "slash" jobs, they moved them to India; and now it is even happening in war. I'm sure many will find it offensive to put this war in terms of our economy, but that's what I've been focused on and I've noticed a real trend with Obama. We're going into debt and he's not even spending that money here.