EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Why Are We in Afghanistan?
"Now there's folks in Washington that care what's on our minds."
--Folksinger Ani DiFranco in a new verse added to the old union song "Which Side Are You On?"
"We meet today as three sovereign nations joined by a common goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat Al Qaeda."
--Barack Obama, President of the United States
"We demand an end to these operations ... an end to air strikes."
--Hamid Karzai, President of Afghanistan
Why are we in Afghanistan? That is, why are we still in Afghanistan, seven years on? There's no simple answer, but one factor could be that those who feel that the new folks in Washington care about what's on their minds are themselves not paying very close attention to what's going on there. Otherwise, how do we explain so little public outcry about a war in which the number of civilians killed may have surpassed the total membership of the principal enemy?
There are no hard figures on Al Qaeda's membership, clearly due not to want of effort on the part of western intelligence agencies but to the organization's conspiratorial nature. In an article published in Slate earlier this year, Timothy Noah wrote that "intelligence estimates suggest al-Qaida's (sic) current membership may be as low as 200 or 300," a remarkably low number, but within the range of mainstream opinion. The Council on Foreign Relations reports that "estimates range from several hundred to several thousand members."
(The organization known alternately as Al Qaeda Iraq or Al Qaeda Mesopotamia, which sprang up in Iraq following the American invasion of that country, is estimated to have anywhere from under a thousand to five thousand members. Obviously they are not the target of military activities in Afghanistan.)
The number of civilian casualties is uncertain as well, but in this case the vagueness is due to lack of effort, this being quite an uncomfortable topic for both the Afghan and American governments. But organizations like the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission and the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan have devoted considerable attention to the question and estimates based upon their work suggest total civilian casualties in the 7,000 to 10,000 range. Professor Marc W. Herold of the University of New Hampshire has also made a close study of civilian casualties resulting specifically from US military actions and concludes that somewhere from 5,000 to 7,000 Afghani civilians were killed by them alone.
The nature of these figures clearly renders definite conclusions impossible, but has there ever before been a war in which it was even a close question as to whether civilian casualties might actually exceed the total number of the enemy?
How could a war like this continue for so long? Well, as President Obama went on to say at his recent meeting with Karzai and Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, the US is fighting not just Al Qaeda, but also "its extremist allies in Pakistan and Afghanistan," foremost among them the Taliban whose fundamentalist government the US overthrew seven years ago.
The Taliban, of course, differ from Al Qaeda in many respects. Among the more significant are the fact that they clearly have more than a few hundred supporters; that, distasteful as they are, they did not organize the 2001 attacks on the US; and that the US government did not find them beyond the pale when they were deemed useful allies against the Soviet Union. And after seven years of fighting them, the US finds itself engaged in a course of continuing aerial bombardment of Afghanistan in the face of objections by that country's president while also launching drone missle attacks upon Pakistan which that country's president characterizes as "violations of our sovereignty" that he "cannot condone."
So with the US blatantly contravening the wishes of its ostensible allies, why the continued silence on the home front? Well, when Ani DiFranco sang the new verse cited above to the crowd gathered at Madison Square Garden to celebrate Pete Seeger's 90th birthday, it said a great deal about the depth of support Obama currently enjoys on the left. For DiFranco is, you see, nobody's idea of a wishy washy liberal. In the past, where another performer might explain that she opposed the war in Iraq but "supported our boys," DiFranco was known to announce to her audience "I don't support our troops in Iraq." She simply didn't think they belonged there and wasn't about to dilute that point.
For sure, there are lots of people on the left side of the political spectrum feeling a whole lot better lately. And after eight years of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, who can blame them? But with a hundred days of good feeling under our belts, it seems time to be giving those new folks in Washington a clearer idea of what's on our minds about America's "other war" - that is, if there is actually a clear idea there.
Certainly many of those who might normally object to a foreign policy that utilizes air strikes where police activity is in order are constrained by their faith in the new occupant of the White House. But might it also be the case that Americans are exercising a perverse variation on the precautionary principle? Since we can't be sure that the war in Afghanistan is not deterring terrorism, it's best not to oppose it.
A recent extreme example of that type of thinking was operative in the civil wars in the former Yugoslavia. Why did Serbs, Croats, ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, and Bosnian Muslims continue to support leaders engaging in activities the rest of the world viewed as war crimes? Simply because each of those groups saw those leaders as acting in their defense - which they were. They might have been war criminals, but they were "our" war criminals who at least did not intend to kill "us," as "their" war criminals clearly did. And as the wars and the atrocities rolled on, so did the list of justifications for this attitude.
Given the disrepute into which Serbia, in particular, fell during the course of those wars, this is a seriously unflattering comparison. But then it is always easier to see the foibles of others. If we want to be certain that the comparison is not apt, then each of us ought to have a clear answer as to why we are still in Afghanistan - especially those of us who feel that the new folks in Washington really do care about what's on our minds.
- 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...
58 Comments so far
Show Allyesterday i heard a snippet of a radio broadcast that was going over the profligate waste and excess in the military's energy use. it was pretty outrageous (and i sensed if anything, they were understating the case, since it was mainstream media) and made me wonder anew at the orwellian craziness of 'western civilization' where the military hardware, fueled by copious amts of nonrenewable resources, is employed (as are the human beings who COULD be learning how to install solar panels, teach kids about sustainable agriculture, retrofitting homes for energy efficiency, transitioning from chicago school economics to something more humane like yunus or tasch suggest, dealing with water issues,indigenous rights or any number of projects for social uplift and environmental remediation)--- in making the lives of afghanis (just one example...there are plenty others around the globe feeling the effects of corporate-sponsored violence) a living hell and reducing the ave. life expectancy to even lower than its present 44 years. what on earth are we doing? are we suicidal? rapture-crazy? blind to others' suffering? oblivious to the world we're leaving behind to today's babies? no. we are ADDICTED to the status quo. we are in afghanistan to protect our military-industrial complex's (which includes not just drones and white phosphorus, but our ability to drive two blocks on a whim to buy popcicles when it's hot) 'way of life'....remember.... the one that's 'not negotiable'? can we negotiate now?.... obama, SOMEbody, CAN we???????
thank you! I am surrounded by the insanity, beginning with my local church and school, moving through industries, jobs and careers, featuring the destruction of the world as an asterisk* under Resources, supported by propaganda\marketing media and digital surveillance\mentalities...
the obvious answers to everything are so basic: water, food and shelter, with a fair dollop of sex and musing thrown in...
first requirement of change is to limit input and reanalyze prevailing facts based on personal observation...turn off your tv, and begin to think about where we started and where we are, and how it happened...we are not living in a world that got this way naturally...this world has been very intentionally manipulated to be the way that it is, beginning with the ownership of property, and continuing through corporate 'personhood'...the individual must reclaim the rights and responsibilities that are inherent with life itself...
why are we in afghanistan? there are a couple of good, though not popular, answers to that question, like geographically critical oil pipelines and, virtually, the entire world's supply of heroin, but neither, in my opinion, would justify our presence...nothing would, short of an invitation...
of course, no one considers those motivations viable, since 'everyone knows' we're there because of some kind of mushy, American-democracy\freedom-related purpose that never held water at all, but, apparently, many people still lick their lips, gulp it down and pretend that it satisfies their thirst for purpose...
we have allowed our very essences to be separated from our daily lives...we don't even interact with our own bodies anymore...we must return to the physical basics of survival, because they are the key to spiritual reawakening, and ongoing lifepurpose...
what is your life's purpose? mine appears to be, at this point, replanting the earth that I influence, and encouraging my neighbors to do likewise...
we each have a planet, which provides us a body, and a spirit...treat the planet as a sacred garden, take only what you need from the water and food around you, allow yourself and others the rights and responsibilities inherently possessed as entities...focus your attentions on simple living, and do not complicate with industry or meddling...compassionate sharing...the absence of suffering...peace...
the problem we are facing isn't a dying economy, it's a dying planet due to our economy...
I harbor, cling to, worship the hope that we, all humans, choose to work together to bring paradise back...Global Start Date: September 22, 2012...
some of you will say there never was a Paradise, to which I respond: then surely we, with all that we've learned throughout history, can now, at the height of our intelligence and selflessness, create one...let us make this planet a shining example of the glories of nature...a big, floating refuge, a park, a sanctuary...let us treat our own world lie a vacation destination, our own lives like those of an honored guest...let us create the very best world we can, simply that we, and all other plants and animals with us, and all to come after, might enjoy the results...
Right-on, right-on!
My start date was about April 16, 1964 when as a toddler I planted my first radish seeds. Today I'm transplanting Aspens and strawberries and watching to see if my herbs have popped up yet.
Paradise is right here on earth. It's up to us.
Plant seeds, sing songs...
Nice post! Compare and contrast your vision with our alienated consumer society. Try to put a name and face on the shoes we wear which were made by child sweatshop labor in Asia? How about any of the other stuff we buy?
"Who's Your Farmer?"
(Bumper sticker)
One thing I realized recently is that there are many people in the USA who expect Congress and Obama to adhere to a higher standard of ethics vis a vis money than they themselves adhere to in their own life journey.
why are we in afghanistan?
Because we're stuck there until the inevitable catastrophe forces us to leave.
Because the politician Obama will not withdraw our forces for fear of political evisceration for 'letting the terrorists win'.
Because al-Qaeda and the Taliban are our enemies and that's where they're currently found (and next door in Pakistan).
Because Congress allowed Bush to start this illogical and asinine Stupid War with its specified military goal of 'preventing future terrorism' by our enemies (Public Law 107-40, the 'AUMF').
Because there's always more preventing of future terrorism to be done, and that's what the military will do until ordered to stop (and hopefully then).
Because there's no exit strategy on account of nobody can explain how we ever can be done 'preventing future terrorism' (that's why the drone attacks, the assassin hits - all to prevent potential terrorists from committing future terrorism).
Because many people use this imbecilic situation to cover their own wars; resources, ideology, political gain, etc.
Because Congress (except for 60 members) still refuses to accept responsibility, over seven years later, for getting us out of the mess that they allowed Bush to get us into.
Because the American voters continue to reward the despicable vermin in Congress by re-electing them instead of tossing them out.
" There are no simple answers ". Please! $$$$$$$$$$$$$!
How about $$$ + Hegemony? Don't forget about the "Cold Warriors" playing out their endgame. All of our leaders are crooks, but some are also ideologically insane.
Why are we in Afghanistan? That is, why are we still in Afghanistan, seven years on? There's no simple answer . . .
Yes, there is. Paul Revere above has given it to you, short and exceedingly sweet . . . a whole pound of God and sugar in your coffee cup . . . MONEY!
We are in Afghanistan because of its role in the ongoing energy war. Pepe Escobar outlines it all too well in his articles on Pipeliestan. This link is a good place to start, http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175071
I agree, Escobar summed it up. Tariq Ali has some interesting things to say as well. Strategic imperial considerations and the Pipeline is at he core of the attempted occupation of Afghanistan; this will end badly.
By the way, where exactly is the evidence that "Al-Quaeda" is in Afghanistan? Who are they really? According to the BBC documentary by Adam Curtis "The Power of Nightmares" (not shown in the land of the free), Al-Quaeda is a fiction, part of the new Politics of Fear. The new bogeyman under your bed to replace the Reds.
The same can be said for the "Taleban" Ironic that these rebellious Pashtun tribesmen don't take kindly to other countries bombing and killing their women and children and they fight back. The US gave these groups at least a billion dollars cash and all the Stinger missiles they could shoot back in the 80s to fight the Soviets. We called them freedom fighters (mujahadeen) now they are called Taleban. Another irony is that the former English-speaking imperialists in the region called them Taleban 100 years ago. Remember the Anglo-Afghan wars?
Thanks for clarifying that. I think it's important people get that. Good points! Too bad the MSM isn't saying that. They wouldn't though, being the propaganda arm of the puppet masters making all the profits.
Rashid's book on the Taliban is also invaluable, and was published prior to 9/11. As Escobar points out because many have forgotten, BushCo had plans to take out the Taliban well prepared prior to 9/11. Together, Escobar and Klare offer a recap of events showing the continuity of Energy War policy since Carter and point to its future direction--and the lies needed to make that direction possible.
"Why are we in Afghanistan?"
I've been wondering that myself.
Has anyone read Three Cups Of Tea by Greg Mortenson?
http://www.threecupsoftea.com/
THAT is what we need to be doing in Afghanistan. And climbing mountains.
smipypr
The terrorists "won" when they lammed out of Tora Bora. Osama and his crew are very likely on some golf course, giggling their little butts off. Further Terrorist victories were posted when the US forces were removed from Saudi Arabia, and then when the US economy fell down the stairs on Wall Street.
The place now referred to as Pipelinistan has always been regarded as strategic. Ask the British and the Russians. They worked very hard to secure that part of the world, and look how that turned out. Those who fail to learn from history aren't just doomed to repeat it - they're just doomed.
All true, no doubt.Yet the thing that I find most interesting is that neither Obama nor the policy wonks have been able to come up with a coherent propaganda line to sell these wars to the American public. During the Vietnam era, the government worked overtime cranking out rationales for why we were there: Coldwar competition, the domino theory, establishing a viable demococracy in Southeast Asia.Even if you thought all this was crap, at least the government line had a certain coherence to it, and every escalation of the war was proceeded by a major presidential adress and a propaganda campaign.They put up all the bullshit so we could see it.Eventually, all the governments arguments were reduced to one: We're there because we're there, and if we leave now, all those boys will have died in vain.I get the impression that the government is too lazy to try to sell Afganistan, and that we're all asleep at the wheel. Government propaganda, such as it is, seems more about papering over fuck-ups than anything else.Like when a bunch of women and kids "accidentally" get incinerated.
War for G.O.D...
Guns... Enrich the military contractors
Oil... Pipelines to SEAsia
Drugs... Heroin production & distribution routes
God bless America! It has been days since we last bombed and slaughtered innocent people in Afghanistan. We need to pray harder!
"Why Are We in Afghanistan?"
Basically, the same reason Tom has an AOL email address. We have for a long time and still do think giant corporations with diabolical designs are ok as long as they fit a couple of snivets of "do good" in the cracks. Similarly, we have for a long time and still do think class hierarchy, and the infrastructure of class hierarchy such as "intellectual property" are ok, as long as a wimpy "do good" argument may be draped over the ugly truth.
The implication is that we should individually choose to defeat the class war aggressors, the elites, in an abstract, general sense, in all of our engagements in the society, and bask in the many huge benefits this will create in all sectors including an end to imperial expansion. The difficulty comes via the "tar pit" of fossil gluttony that keeps us stuck in our $30,000 bathrooms and new 2010 Range Rovers. More bombs bursting in air, more luxurious brass fixtures!!!
Oh and keep feeding class war aggression by paying rent to the "hungry" in San Francisco, Tom! Support your local "do gooder" Pelosi with your votes so she can keep imperial occupation "on the table"!! Oh say can you see??????????
Better yet, why are we in wars and occupations regardless of which country it's in? America's life style and constant laughing at those of us who are frugal and peace-loving is what enable the war machines and then our jobs and services that could be used for peaceful and domestic purposes such as agriculture, education, etc ... are numbered down and instead outsourced to other countries or transferred to big banks, pharma, insurance, defense, and the likes. I've even called for an immediate abolition of the CIA but even progressives and liberals refuse to join the efforts. Mr. Gallagher fails to even discuss the role of the CIA which is also a major reason why we're stuck in Afghanistan.
p
Hey, if ya gotta go, GO!
Why are we (our military) in Iraq? Korea? Japan? Europe? Philipines? Anywhere?
What nation is stupid enough to commit suicide and attack the world's largest most deadly death machine whether it's on our domestic soil or abroad? The only ones crazy enough to do this were 19 guys working alone carrying 79 cent box cutters. But what nation would dare think to do such a stupid act? They know they'd be blown off the map if they did such a suicidal act.
So why are we garrisoned all over the globe?
Melodramatic analogy:
Like Darth Vader saying: "Because WE are the EMPIRE, it is futile to resist."
Junior actually thinks God elected him president and he needed to clean terrorist clock? This is nothing your average American alcoholic wouldn't dream up. I don't know why Obama is picking up the dropped ball on this one.
We need more breakable cheep plastic crap made in China, Lefty. That's the only way to re-grow our economy. That's why we need that pipeline through Afghanistan, and that's why we're there. I've worked it out. Oh yeah, and to fight Al Qeada. Qeida. Whatever. You know, the evil-doers.
Funny how all this evil-doer shock and awe stuff has turned into long term occupations. It warms a heart when you see heroin production surge under the nourishment of our exported democracy.
The continuation of Dick Cheney's endless war.
-
Oh geeze, just when I was typing the above sentence (2:10 PM Mountain Time), the power cut out and I lost my DSL connection. Perfect. How synchronous is that?
Maybe we know too much and they're onto us? Oooo, ya think? That reeks with juicy conspiracy theory possibility.
Or, maybe the big windstorm outside blew a tree across the power line.
Maybe it's time to get a wind generator...
If only growing hemp were legal could we make durable and biodegrable plastics of our own for a change instead of relying on cheap Chinese labor.
http://hempplastic.com/newSite/index.htm
I think I can see why they really banned hemp and it wasn't the cultural part but fear of industrial competition. I hear that hemp could be made into fuel for powering vehicles too. If so, maybe even my SUV, and yes I know the guilty part even though I use it for work to carry stuff from office to office as part of my job, won't have to go after all. I was thinking of hybrids by the way but way too expensive compared to the SUVs to justify buying them. I still wonder if plastics made from hemp are really stronger than those made from crude oil. At one point, when they compared rope made of hemp to rope made from nylon (a product derived from crude oil), the latter proved twice as strong even though nylon is generally delicate.
Well I'm a rock climber, and if I had to trust my life to a standard nylon kernmantle climbing rope or an old hemp rope like climbers used before the 1960's, I would go with the modern kernmantle climbing rope. I've towed cars with them.
I'd like to see a kernmantle climbing rope made from hemp plastic. Not sure if they would have to synthesize the hemp to have a similar molecular structure to nylon, which is synthesized petroleum.
I've heard of two ways to develop what's called renewable petroleum. One method that's being worked on in Silicon Valley is genetically modifying the bugs so that they can excrete light sweet crude oil that's carbon negative but a lot of lab costs are bound to be involved. The second method is producing the chemical equivilant of light sweet crude oil from wild algae that can be grown almost anywhere including on waste sites. If the chemical equivilant of light sweet crude oil can be produced, this could be the ticket to making biodegradable nylons and no corn will be needed. Just a guess though.
Shellac is a natural polymer made from the secretion of the lac insect in southeast Asia. I wonder if this is the insect they are interested in modifying. Besides being skeptical of generic engineering, I wonder, would it burn as clean as ethanol? Would it be carbon neutral (or negative - bugs, like humans exhale carbon dioxide)? And would biodegradable nylon loose it's usefulness after getting wet? Would it be UV sensitive? Those issues would have to be worked out.
Why Are We in Pipelinestan? It's a rhetorical question.
Rhetorical indeed. The corporate pimps promised to build and protect the pipelines and their right of way, even if it took American troops(as promised by the prostituted members of congress). Can't keep that promise if the silly, misguided, camel farmers keep digging them up lighting them off.
So off with their heads; and, up with a corporation owned congress in Washington.
another ani difranco quote, (from 'self evident'):
I'm looking out over my whole human family
and I'm raising my glass in a toast
here's to our last drink of fossil fuels
let us vow to get off of this sauce
shoo away the swarms of commuter planes
and find that train ticket we lost
Where's the 8 billion Obama promised to spend on high speed rail? I'm gonna hold him to it, by goddess.
Only 8b for high speed rail (I take it that it's light rail) for the entire nation? I thought far more is needed. What are these rails made of that's supposed to make them cheap? I hear they can help reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce traffic congestion in the big cities. And he's spending more money to bail out the auto giants ! I guess the auto giants win again.
>What are these rails made of that's supposed to make them cheap?
Hopefully something like this:
http://www.maglev.net/
http://www.maglev2000.com/
"We meet today as three sovereign nations joined by a common goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat Al Qaeda."
That statement ought to bump Santa O'Bamaba's approval rating up to 80%.
One of the reasons our railway system went west was because it was next to impossible to find anyone who would work on the railroad gangs repairing switches, replacing ties and tamping down the rails. Even the Mexican illegals would take almost any job other than that. So GM,Chrysler and Ford killed the passenger trade. Those brave enought to ride the trains spent their time holding on during the days and tying themselves in their bunks to keep from falling out.
Today, railroad travel in many countries is so far ahead of anything we have or have ever had that comparison with the USA equipment and trackage is not even considered.
Coast to coast rail travel at an average of 125 mph is completely feasible, but the expense now would be prohibitive unless those out of work could be enticed to return go work and gain some self-respect.
So on and on it goes. The air travel is dismal and expensive. Autos pollute and are still unreliable in many ways and our highways are reverting to cattle trails. Vast projects should not be started with half-vast ideas, but reconstruction of our railroads would take care of ridding ourselves of a lot of pollution, would be safer and faster.
Anyone agree with me?
Yes, if you're talking about maglev trains.
http://www.maglev.net/
http://www.maglev2000.com/
The development of the rail system also suffered from the lobbying efforts of the auto industry and oil. Also the US love affair with the private automobile and our preference for individual solutions rather than social solutions to problems. We built an enormous network of interstate highways with public money rather than expand rail lines.
Aside from converting from steam to diesel and the addition of a few commuter branches here and there, rail systems have not changed much or expanded for the last 100 years in the US. They remain fundamentally a creation of the 1800's.
We have missed out on a system that provides a very pleasant travel experience with economy and ecological responsibility. We should develop it. People will do the work if pay and benefits are above the subsistence level.
Joe
You go guys. Before long we are going to be so pissed we might actually get organized and THEN they will HAVE to bring our soldiers home to keep us from restoring the government to the people.
We are there for the pipelines that will deliver oil from
other countries to other countries..It is that simple..
Obama is a prisoner of the Ivy League Brainwashing.
Why are we in Afghanistan?
Haven't finished the gas pipeline yet...
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
There are material reasons, including oil. But there are other ways to get energy, far less expensive, violent and draining than invading countries.
I think now that PERMANENT WAR ITSELF is the objective. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, we have to manufacture enemies in order to justify feeding the war machine. We have to keep up a constant state of fear, obedience and secrecy to protect the positions and enterprises of the inner circles of our permanent government. We keep up the clamor of war hoping that nobody will notice our decaying economy and spirit.
Like Candide, some of us find solace in planting a garden. It is a good thing to do for a while when events become too much to contemplate. It creates a spot of Paradise.
Joe
Right on Joe.
I just finished lunch, and now am heading back out to my little patch of paradise to finish transplanting my strawberries and to try to figure out where to put in squash and melons.
What war? Oh yeah, I almost forgot. At least I tried temporarily to forget.
Back to the garden...