Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
US Is Doing No Good in Afghanistan
Eight years ago, women's rights were used as one of the excuses to start this war. But today, Afghanistan is still facing a women's rights catastrophe. Life for most Afghan women resembles a type of hell that is never reflected in the Western mainstream media.
In 2001, the U.S. helped return to power the worst misogynist criminals, such as the Northern Alliance warlords and druglords. These men ought to be considered a photocopy of the Taliban. The only difference is that the Northern Alliance warlords wear suits and ties and cover their faces with the mask of democracy while they occupy government positions. But they are responsible for much of the disaster today in Afghanistan, thanks to the U.S. support they enjoy.
The U.S. and its allies are getting ready to offer power to the medieval Taliban by creating an imaginary category called the "moderate Taliban" and inviting them to join the government. A man who was near the top of the list of most-wanted terrorists eight years ago, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, has been invited to join the government.
Over the past eight years the U.S. has helped turn my country into the drug capital of the world through its support of drug lords. Today, 93 percent of all opium in the world is produced in Afghanistan. Many members of Parliament and high ranking officials openly benefit from the drug trade. President Karzai's own brother is a well known drug trafficker.
Meanwhile, ordinary Afghans are living in destitution. The latest United Nations Human Development Index ranked Afghanistan 181 out of 182 countries. Eighteen million Afghans live on less than $2 a day. Mothers in many parts of Afghanistan are ready to sell their children because they cannot feed them.
Afghanistan has received $36 billion of aid in the past eight years, and the U.S. alone spends $165 million a day on its war. Yet my country remains in the grip of terrorists and criminals. My people have no interest in the current drama of the presidential election since it will change nothing in Afghanistan. Both Karzai and Dr. Abdullah are hated by Afghans for being U.S. puppets.
The worst casualty of this war is truth. Those who stand up and raise their voice against injustice, insecurity and occupation have their lives threatened and are forced to leave Afghanistan, or simply get killed.
We are sandwiched between three powerful enemies: the occupation forces of the U.S. and NATO, the Taliban and the corrupt government of Hamid Karzai.
Now President Obama is considering increasing troops to Afghanistan and simply extending former President Bush's wrong policies. In fact, the worst massacres since 9/11 were during Obama's tenure. My native province of Farah was bombed by the U.S. this past May. A hundred and fifty people were killed, most of them women and children. On Sept. 9, the U.S. bombed Kunduz Province, killing 200 civilians.
My people are fed up. That is why we want an immediate end to the U.S. occupation.
- Posted in
64 Comments so far
Show AllCall off Code Pink, as well.
This woman is not only brave, she is one of the best and brightest. The Emperor ought to heed her advice and invite her for a special meeting at the White House.
It has been 8 years, 100s of billions of dollars and with no results exept making things WORSE and destroying the place. What an efficient investment of our tax money eh.
What is the official reasoning for occupying Afghanistan? Fighting "terrorism"? Getting rid of "Al Quaida"? Finding bin Laden? Obama has repeated the pathetic Bush lie: "if we don't fight them over there, then they will come over here" What is this the third grade? F! Bush and F! Obama
Of course all of these excuses are insults to anyone who thinks and studies the facts.
Is there anyone reading this that can get it into Obama's hands? Bill Press, Thom Hartman, Ralph Nader, Kucinich? Anyone with some visibility and access? If I knew Obama read this article, and still proceeded to send troops, I'd instantly write him off as someone I could in no way support, as much as I want to believe he's trying to do good.
With all respect, you still support Obama?
Like I have said before, millions of sheeple still support OBOMBA because he is the consummate con man.
Well, that is why I believe Obama is more dangerous than Bush. Bush was a terrible salesman and PR manager. Obama is the best in the business, he can tell a lie without a smirk.
Absolutely!
So true.
Bingo! GWB v2.0- "he can tell a lie without a smirk."
No, I supported him because he DID talk a good game, seemed very intelligent, and had more support and goodwill than any other candidate I've ever encountered. Based on that I gave him my NOT-unconditional support. What I don't like is sheeple like yourself who instantly cry like babies when somebody doesn't immediately do exactly what they themselves would. That's unthinking, unrealistic, and just as "sheeple-y" as those who give him unconditional support.
Just wandering past, cropping the turf-- but geez, it really hurts to be branded a "sheeple" in the very same paragraph in which the brander candidly admits that it is manifestly a poor judge of character, and gullible to boot.
Jeeves might have done better to stop after the apology; instead, he (?) goes a bridge too far, and burns off the traces of pitiable but becoming humility clinging to him by deploring as "sheeple" those of us who are manifestly savvier than him in the first place!
The very choice of "sheeple" is hilarious bit of projection in a critique that can accurately be boiled down to defending support for a reprehensible flim-flam man because one is easily duped-- and besides, everybody ELSE seemed so happy with the guy! So who's the "sheeple" here, exactly?
Not much of a recommendation to adopt the "thinking", "realistic" views with which it implicitly credits itself. Still, it's always nice to get an unexpected giggle.
· Yr Obd't Servant
The Jeeves on Jeeves and Wooster (BBC comedy) was very knowledgable, this Jeeves is an imposter.
Kane, in future elections, please don't vote for a politician merely because he (or she) "talks a good game."
Check his voting records.
Pay closer attention to what he really says, and what he fails to say.
Notice the people he surrounds himself with, and look into their backgrounds as well.
Don't base your opinions on how much support and goodwill a candidate has; millions of Americans are lousy judges of political candidates, as our history makes clear. Besides, Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini had plenty of supporters, which shows that strong support proves nothing about a politician's virtue. Make up your own mind based on whatever facts you can gather.
Well said, John Mitchell.
Let's say I really REALLY wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt until Jan 2010. My support has slipped to about 2%. If after reading this article Obama still proceeded to send troops, my support would vanish.
Good for you. When the troops are sent and your support for Obama vanishes, I suggest you support Kucinich.
I tell you that if the King only KNEW of the iniquities perpetrated by his corrupt and depraved Ministers, he would speedily set things right! God save him!
· Yr Obd't Servant
I suggest you toss out your irrational belief that Obama's purpose is to try to "do good." First and foremost, he's a politician (professional manipulator)--a servile courtier to the corporate oligarchs. Hence, there should be no doubt that Obama will send more troops to Afghanistan. I guarantee you he's not losing any sleep 'wrestling' with this decision. The US is not spending hundreds of billions of dollars in private contracts to construct more bases and embassies in Afghanistan only to leave them sit empty (see Iraq). Afghanistan should consider itself permanently occupied. I'm sure the speech he gives justifying the troop increase will have plenty of the obligatory, angst-filled, yet utterly disingenuous, rhetorical flourish that has become his 'trademark'.
You, like the Obedient Servant clown above, seem to have jumped to conclusions without even giving the guy a chance. At least I and others gave him a chance, on the off-chance that he might be slightly different and better than your typical politician. Turns out he's not, but at least I didn't bury my head in the sand like all the anti-Obamanuts on CD. To me that's just as close minded and falsely idealistic (i.e. naive) as some of the righties who won't even consider the possibility that he might do some good.
I don't believe this is about Obama it is much larger than that. This is structural and systemic and goes way beyond one president. The president is selected by corporate interests anyway, we have very little choice. The ruling elite has narrowed political discourse to a choice between a far-right nutcase, or a more articulate moderate right imperialist.
The same arguments happened from the Left when Bill Clinton was in office, yet we already forgot.
We need to re-think our voting, elections and campaign systems for starters.
Smearing folks that have legitimate grievances with Obama aint gonna help. Obama has indeed proven himself. How many years shall we wait to 'give him a chance'?
Exactly. This was never about giving Obama a chance. This is about a brutal, callous political machinery that governs the USA. Focusing on personalities clouds the issue.
The issue is and always was PROFIT at the expense of anything and anybody not on the take. Geithner and Bernake are poster boys for this monetery mafia that perpetuates wars.
The iron discipline that this elite dictatorship wields was in full display this week. Obama and Geithner are twisting arms in Japan and Asia. North Korea gets into a shooting match with South Korea. This is bad PR for the happy hype of the Obama trip. SO the shootout majically dissapears from the media. POOF! Now consider if Venezuela had a shootout with a US destroyer. Would this be spiked? NO. Would they be screaming bloody musder? YES.
and the Orwellian bullshit continues... Geithner insists he supports a strong dollar while visiting Japan. Notice how this blatent lie covers the real purpose of his visit (a panic to make sure Japan toes the line on money and military issues for Wall Street).
And they say the economy is improving (for Israel and their wall street chronies, not us). Pfizer just laid off 600 plus employees in the Plattsburgh area. Bright Warren Buffet sold the Wyeth plants to Pfizer earlier this year. And this is what Pfizer does with the plants. Isn't Warren Buffet such a "great" fucking American?
Of course there was no conspiracy to get out of labor contracts..no...no..no. It's just honest capitalism, you see. Don't you?
Obama is just a cog in the machine. Forget him and concentrate on Wall Street murderers (Blankfein of Goldman Sachs just said his employees were the most productive people in the world...sure. if productivity is measured in fecal coliforms and human misery).
I rest my case.
Microsoft and other hi-tech firms such as IBM also layu of thousands of people. The interesting thing is that almost as soon as they lay off these hi-tech workers they go to the Governmnet pleading for an Increase in h1b visas because they can not find enough skillled workers in America.
AGG:
The iron discipline that this elite dictatorship wields was in full display this week. Obama and Geithner are twisting arms in Japan and Asia. North Korea gets into a shooting match with South Korea. This is bad PR for the happy hype of the Obama trip. SO the shootout majically dissapears from the media. POOF! Now consider if Venezuela had a shootout with a US destroyer. Would this be spiked? NO. Would they be screaming bloody musder? YES.
and the Orwellian bullshit continues... Geithner insists he supports a strong dollar while visiting Japan. Notice how this blatent lie covers the real purpose of his visit (a panic to make sure Japan toes the line on money and military issues for Wall Street).
==========
GEITHNER and OBAMA can try to "twist arms" all they want in Japan or "asia"........
they are ALREADY TOO LATE in the new games there.
the yen has appreciated - or rather the dollar has depreciated against the yen..but that is not too bothersome to japan because japan can afford its losses vis-a-vis the usa dollar holdings so long as japan's trade with china KEEPS GROWING - which is now a bigger trade partner for japan than the usa.
and they are only JUST BEGINNING. japan - well - the japanese PEOPLE clearly have matured to a point that - recognizing their own imperial past and the wariness of asia against that, while asia ALSO has to be wary OF china - and china has to "behave" as the giant if it is to continue its rise and be respected as a trade partner and leader -
japan is CLEARLY throwing its LOT WITH asia.
the proof of this:
despite the nice rhetoric about "preserving our good relations with USA" - japan is NOW OPENLY - for the first time since world war 2 - OPENLY demanding "EQUAL" partnership with USA .
the okinawans are NOT stopping, indeed INCREASING their thousands-strong protests against continued USA military presence - DESPITE the growing power of China. what does that say?.
THEY KNOW china is never going to attempt to place its military presence on japanese territory because of their growing rapport which NEITHER can afford to jeopardize. therefore, whatever china's growing military power is going to be naturally curtailed by ITS interests to be "accepted" BY ITS ASIAN NEIGHBORS as the BETTER alternative to the USA and western imperialists of the past towards a "greater asia".
they know this.
in that view - in japanese minds - WHAT USE IS US "protection" which has only COST JAPAN a LOT of money for its share ...when it can INSTEAD come into a mutual agreement WITH china and other asian countries to have their own regional "mutual protection?" from EACH OTHER through a regional alliance - much like say - the Russian/chinese/central asian military alliances are - or like NATO between western nations?
clearly - the "protectionist" racket of the USA is coming to an END IN ASIA. they DON"T NEED IT - and are showing that they recognize this and are readying themselves to act and decide on it..
Japan has already decided to WITHDRAW its 8year old participation with warships and refueling ships in the indian ocean with the USA for its ships and war machines going to the middle east and afghanistan/pakistan.
to mollify the USA - japan is putting money to build infrastructures, schools, highways , etc. in afghanistan..BUT NO MORE MILITARY REFUELING alliance in the indian ocean.
HOWEVER - it is willing to participate WITH CHINA and other asian countries a naval alliance to "ensure safety" in the indian ocean for the growing asian trade WITH ..guess what?
middle east and africa.
the USA is simply "out of the picture" on this.
obama and geithner are going to asia to TWIST ARMS?
does geithner so EASILY FORGET that , in trying to LECTURE about economics and banking in SHanghai and beijing's universities - he was laughed at..with students rolling their eyes at his stupidities?. (little reported in the usa of course) .
what's obama going to do? say , insist, that "china is a threat to japan" and insist on japan keeping okinawa open to americans -- when the okinawans are literally up in arms ?
the usa has to face one thing - ASIA is not about to continue to be "our territory". it has its own long history and rivalries and alliances and commerce and can take care of itself and asians KNOW IT. and the USA has NOTHING to offer them except the memory of ITS imperialism and attempts to undermine their economies all these many decades and make them "subjects".
despite the shooting between the navies of south and north korea - that's not going to escalate into something china or japan will allow . it's TOO costly for ALL of them ..and china continues to have great influence over the north to allow that . it's only a matter of time before the north will eventually be absorbed into the rest of asia's relatively more "open" intercommerce. and once again - it's NOT UP TO THE USA to decide that.
it's up to china and south korea. and THEY have too much to lose to allow the north to entirely collapse and become a REAL headache - more than it has already been as a "poverty" basket case .
again -- what does the USA have to offer on THAT? nothing but a continuation of ITS "cold war" mentality which is the VERY thing that CAUSED the situations today when the USA tried to 'contain china' decades ago - and used north korea and the korean war as a PROXY to achieve that "containment" - in which it has FAILED.
obama thinks he can go and visit countries there "one by one" and make his american duplicities come into effect some more?
he is ALREADY TOO LATE.
Yeah... I'M a clown.
· Yr Obd't Servant
Who has their heads buried in the sand? Not me. Not most of the people who read these posts. Like most of these intelligent people, I'm a realist who does not suffer from willful ignorance or cognitive dissonance. I do not subscribe to magical thinking about politicians and I refuse to buy into ridiculous campaign propaganda. Jump to conclusions? You bet--based on facts, evidence, and history-- and more of us should, instead of 'hoping' and 'wishing' and 'praying' that these political simps actually toss the masses a bone from time to time so that we can remain comforted by "idealistic (i.e. naive)," delusional fantasies of 'democracy'. I've lived long enough to understand that the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. In other words, I possess historical perspective. I knew what Obama was all about before he became president and I never held any illusions that he would be anything other than what he has proven himself to be: just another mediocre, corporate ass-kisser whose sole job is to maintain the deeply entrenched, conservative, elite status quo. He wouldn't be occupying the Oval Office if he was hell-bent on pursuing a populist, social agenda because the system would never have allowed it.
Jeeves says: "At least I and others gave him a chance, on the off-chance that he might be slightly different and better than your typical politician."
Does the above make any sense?????
Can 0bama possibly not know that Afghanistan is worse off than it was in peace and worse off than it will be when it returns to peace?
Search for any believable scenario in which that might be possible, and you may be able to write him off this afternoon.
(On a related note, you might look for a recent Real News interview with Daniel Ellsberg in which he discusses his conviction that 0bama has already been advised that the war in Afghanistan is "unwinnable," as was Lyndon Johnson with respect to Vietnam.
If one assumes that Ellsberg is right, that would indicate that 0bama and current leaders are condemning thousands to death for penney-ante political advantages. Ellsberg freely admits that he concludes this by analogy and not from direct evidence, but Ellsberg's is a fairly well informed analogy, and the stink of familiarity - whew!)
Here's the link to the Daniel Ellsberg interiew:
http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=4375
It's very important to listen carefully to what he says in the last part about the role of the military and the threat it poses.
Malalai Joya, You are a very honest and brave person and like you say OBOMBA has killed many innocent civilians in Afghanistan and many were innocent women and children and to you these people were your countrymen but to the U.S. Fascists, they are just collateral damage. You are a beautiful person; with a beautiful name; with a beautiful message.
we need a new guy for the 2012 new hampshire primary. a girl will do. it is apparent that the bishops , generals , and high wire capitalists have hijacked the government. obama's tentativeness left a void, one that nature may have abhorred, but one that the above classes have gladly filled. i'll buy the plane ticket. let's go!
Would 0 were more tentative and less psychopathic.
Ms Joya. Sad to inform you, the people of the U.S. are so brainwashed that even the ones who are "anti-war" will not give up their energy-wasting suburbs to end the energy wars. Our only hope is to appeal to their dislike of heavy traffic [please don't laugh unless you are laughing to keep from crying].
http://freepublictransit.org
sorry, your post just put an image of a stereotypical American in my head:
A huge SUV waiting at the drive through at the local junk food outlet, a "support our troops" ribbon sticker on the back bumper along side a large US flag sticker, two hugely obese people inside eagerly awaiting their order, listening to Rush Limbaugh spewing hatred on the radio.
Exactly and sadly true.
You forgot the bumper sticker that says: IF YOU CAN'T GET BEHIND THE TROOPS YOU ARE WELCOME TO GET IN FRONT OF THEM!
haven't seen that one around here. How about: America, Love it or Leave it? Or a Confederate Flag. I ve seen those.
In the United States of America Militaries visit schools and impress upon them how COOL all that killing machinery is as children peep through gunsights at images of enemies of the United States and encouraged to gun them down.
In the United States of America people see those men in uniform, who drop bombs on women and children and people who are no threat to them as HEROES defending freedom and liberty.
In the United States of America children see their President justify use of killer drones in Pakistan to kill "bad guys" even when 90 percent killed are innocent civilians.
In the United States of America people working for a Mercenary outfit that shot down 17 civilans in an orgy of violence walk the streets as free men.
In the United States of America children see their President claiming "we must look forwards and not back" when he refuses to charge persons involved in torture and murder with war crimes.
In the United States of America should one of these Children pick up a gun and shoot a neighbor, they are called MONSTERS , unfit to walk the streets as free men and given life sentences without parole.
Regretfully, I feel Malalai Joys pleas fall on deaf ears.
Asking that a President of the United States of America respect the wishes of the peoples of Afghanistan and their right to live without war, violence and oppression is like asking those Warlords the same.
After all the United States of America knows what is best for EVERYONE.
This is an eloquent plea written by a former member of the Pakistan government. As the nation and our president deliberates on what our policy should be (yes, snark) with all the range and thoroughness that our healthcare industry bailout entailed, surely a bigger newspaper than the San Jose Mercury News will bring Joya's words to the attention of the public. Maybe one of our brave progressive Dems will enter it into the record. Maybe the Congress will consider that not only are they digging a whole big enough to bury humanity in, they skipped the heavy equipment and went straight to the bunker busters to do it with. Every day the damage done becomes harder to undo. What a waste. What a disaster for a country that once considered itself a light unto the world. What a disaster for that world. What a shame.
Afghan Government Parliment or Jurga Convention
"Eight years ago, womens' rights were used as one of the excuses to start this war."
The 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force resolution passed by Congress says nothing about womens rights. Or bringing democracy to Afghanistan. Or drug trafficking. Or oil and natural gas pipelines. Or any of the other rationales sometimes cited as reasons for continuing or even escalating the US military presence now in this region of the world (restoring stability, shoring up the Afghan army, preventing the falling of dominoes in Pakistan or the tribal areas, nation building, etc.).
The AUMF is very specific: American/NATO military forces are in Afghanistan solely in response to the 9/11 attacks upon the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, for the limited purpose of bringing those involved in that act of terrorism (Osama bin Laden, Zwahiri, and cohorts) to justice. Period. No other agenda. No other stated reason or reasons.
Malalai Joya is of course absolutely correct about the plight of Afghan women, the heroin trade, the corruption, the poverty, and the carnage that the continued US military presence in Afghistan brings. The notion that a rabid fanatic like the former CIA asset warlord Gulbaddin Hekmatyar - renown for throwing acid in the faces of women who dared not to wear a veil during his college days - is being invited into the big tent of political respectability in Kabul is a truly depressing sign. We took one step forward to take ten steps back.
But my basic point is this: for Barack Obama to justify McChrystal's proposed escalation, or keeping US troops in this region with some altered mission emphasizing use of drones, there must be a new Congressional resolution authorizing this change. I do not think any such revised AUMF would pass. Just because the Obama administration may want to redefine the goals and the tactics in a way that sounds more touchy feely moderate doesn't make it legal. There still must be a vote in the Congress.
Bill from Saginaw
The AUMF was passed in violation of the Constitution.
Congress abdicated it's power to declare war.
junior assumed powers "implied" in his roll as Commander in Chief.
A status only activated when the combined Armed Forces are "in actual service"; i.e. at war.
But I doubt if the current gang, or current SCOTUS, would concur with the above layman's view.
''My people are fed up. That is why we want an immediate end to the U.S. occupation''
OK then, Ms Joya, suppose you get your wish fulfilled 100% ,
please tell us WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO YOUR COUNTRY NEXT ??
At this point, like the majority in this country, I am for
pulling out all together; but when I think of the
PLAUSIBLE horrific consequences, I have second thaughts...
Let us hear your ''best case scenario'' on the day-after
the US pull out...
this is the same absurd argument used to stay in Iraq. The suffering the US has brought to both these countries should make one ashamed of making such an argument!!
Let's give the worst-case scenario: one less group of racist thugs with bullets, and a lot fewer and less lethal fancy armaments altogether.
The horrific consequences -- would we agree that those include the warlords and the Taliban? -- are already there, and not controlled but fed by US presence.
Oye Amigo, tu dices mentiras
So, you know more about it than Ms Joya does eh? Have you ever been to Afghanistan?
Put your money where your mouth is tough guy and get on a plane and go to Afghanistan. You speak Dari? Pashto? Tajik? You probably don't even know what those are.
Ignorance and hypocrisy are not virtues.
Well said.
Where people get the unadulterated arrogance to make sweeping judgements on a country they know little or nothing about (US propaganda doesn't count as knowledge), must be from the world class brain washing we have here. Only in the USA do off duty telemarketers with a high school "education" feel free to pontificate about "underdeveloped" countries.
Gorbachev knows wwhat he is talking about. The Afghans are ungovernable by foreign invaders. Afghanis are an ancient people and, given some breathing room, will govern themselves AT LEAST as well as we govern ourselves here...of course that isn't saying much...
I doubt very seriously that they will allow an AIPAC lobby in Afghanistan, though. LOL.
Yeah, Gorbie knows, and the British ought to know. They got their asses kicked out of Ahghanistan three times. You would think that Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and now Afghanistan would have taught the US a lesson... not until the Empire bankrupts itself
The best case scenario would be better than now but possibly not as good as before the USA attack.
But your correct the main effort such be put into the wisest and most peaceful withdrawal possible.
u have some nerve, u want us out, how bout us not wanting people trained in ur country to fly planes into our buildings biatch!
The babysitter needs to keep the site clear of foul-mouthed illiterate brats like the one above, please