OCCUPY AFGHANISTAN September 18, 2012Posted by wmmbb in Modern History, Terrorism Issues.
The occupation of Afghanistan, much like the occupation of Iraq, cannot and will not last. The question then, other than to grease the palms of the weapons manufacturers, what was the point?
Dennis Kucinich, redistricted from Congress, has written:
I cannot begin to describe what a nightmare of epic proportions the situation in Afghanistan has become. Our troops are sitting ducks while they try to defend Afghanistan. They are being murdered, shot dead at close range by Afghan police (or insurgents wearing fake or stolen police uniforms). US bases are under attack by well equipped, well-trained insurgents wearing (stolen or fake) US uniforms. We still have 77,000 US troops in Afghanistan and each one is at risk.
Stand up for our troops! Bring them home!
Innocent civilians are being slaughtered by “precision” NATO airstrikes. The latest in an endless list of appalling NATO actions: Last night, a small group of women and girls were out gathering firewood for their families in a remote Afghan province. NATO mistakenly identified them as insurgents and launched an air attack with “precision munitions” which killed eight and injured seven\, putting the lie to the sanitized war.
NATO, in the name of liberating countries, has been responsible for a horrific toll of innocent civilian deaths by airstrikes, creating deep hatred toward the US, which is NATO’s largest funding source, making our troops even more vulnerable. Should NATO leaders be held accountable for their air strikes which kill innocent civilians? Don’t you think the US should get out of Afghanistan?
That said, it will be surprising if the question of the continued occupation of Afghanistan is brought up in the presidential debates, which would be a lot more revealing and interesting if the other presidential candidates were given the opportunity to participate. The Dutch have demonstrated that a parliament can set a limit on military participation in these imperial adventures with no apparent retaliation – although this judgment might be too soon.
Still the deeper question is why does not Parliament insist that all members exercise a conscience votes on participation in these imperial extravaganzas. The money spent on Iraq and Afghanistan would have been better spent at home, where it is needed and where it would be accounted for.
According to RT the “film” acted as the spark that set off protests across the Islamic World (a context that is lost in Australia):
Of course the Americans and their allies will withdraw from Afghanistan, and as happened previously left to their own resources their civil war will be resolved with terrible consequences, which is the rationale for the continued occupation. The fundamental problem is largely due to attempting to solve problems with military violence and domination, and expressly refusing to enter into negotiations with the contending forces, although in recent years this posture has been changed. It was as immoral to leave Iraq without any process of reconciliation and reparations for reconstruction, as it will be to leave Afghanistan to the same plight. Ironically, non-nuclear and IAEA member, Iran will be again a winner.
- Afghans: Eight village women killed in NATO airstrike (latimesblogs.latimes.com)
- John Simpson, Afghanistan’s Best and Worst Case Scenarios (BBC)
- James Joyner, The Day We Lost Afghanistan (The National Interest)
- Mark Thompson, Afghanistan: “It’s just damage control now” (Time US)