Nir Rosen: How We Lost the War We Won
By Cernig Friday Oct 17, 2008 6:00pmAmy Goodman talks with Nir Rosen about his Taliban embed.
Nir Rosen imbedded with the Taliban for his latest report on Afghanistan, out now in Rolling Stone. His experiences included almost being executed by a fanatical Taliban local warlord, but he came away with the conclusion that adding more troops to Afghanistan won’t work, and that we should prepare an exit strategy.
Simply put, it is too late for Bush's "quiet surge" — or even for Barack Obama's plan for a more robust reinforcement — to work in Afghanistan. More soldiers on the ground will only lead to more contact with the enemy, and more air support for troops will only lead to more civilian casualties that will alienate even more Afghans. Sooner or later, the American government will be forced to the negotiating table, just as the Soviets were before them.
"The rise of the Taliban insurgency is not likely to be reversed," says Abdulkader Sinno, a Middle East scholar and the author of Organizations at War in Afghanistan and Beyond. "It will only get stronger. Many local leaders who are sitting on the fence right now — or are even nominally allied with the government — are likely to shift their support to the Taliban in the coming years. What's more, the direct U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan is now likely to spill over into Pakistan. It may be tempting to attack the safe havens of the Taliban and Al Qaeda across the border, but that will only produce a worst-case scenario for the United States. Attacks by the U.S. would attract the support of hundreds of millions of Muslims in South Asia. It would also break up Pakistan, leading to a civil war, the collapse of its military and the possible unleashing of its nuclear arsenal."
In the same speech in which he promised a surge, Bush vowed that he would never allow the Taliban to return to power in Afghanistan. But they have already returned, and only negotiation with them can bring any hope of stability.
John McCain's strategy - following the Bush administration in handing policymaking to General Petraeus - isn't going to work any better. Talking our way to an exit from the doomed adventure in Afghanistan really is the only way out of that grim trap.
Spencer Ackerman calls Rosen's report an instant classic of war reporting and I totally agree. Just read it, ok?
Crossposted from Newshoggers
Login or Register to post comments.
Here is what the Iraqi People feel about the New Military Accord and Timeline about to be signed with the puppet government in Iraq.
nuff said.
Braf smegland = http://www.filthyrichmond.com
From what I gather the Taliban have penetrated to such an extent that Kabul is now virtually surrounded. All supply lines to and from Kabul now have to go through the Taliban. Basically, Kabul is under siege and the Karzai Government will be rendered irrelevant. In addition, the amount of Afghan troops deserting the Afghan Army and joining the ranks of the Taliban have also increased. With all of this mind its no wonder that the Karzai Government is looking to negotiate with the Taliban. The U.S. and NATO roles are becoming more inconsequential by the day.
when we have to read about how the Taliban beat us.
Of course when you have zero allies in the world.
Judging from Georgia it shouldn't be a difficult rout this time out having had 8 years to prepare.
The Russians had thier head handed to them in Afganistan.
First, Russia doesn't share a border with Afghanistan, where the USSR did.
Secondly, I'm still of the opinion that the reason the Soviets were in Afghanistan was to gain a platform to get to Pakistan- and a warm water port. But I don't think they care so much about Mahan's theory of naval supremacy leading to global supremacy. They don't need to now that they have overland routes partners with which to move their leading commoditities to willful trading partners.
don't know what the objective of The Soviets was to invade them. Your theory is as good as any. That said,I believe navel supremacy is most important to conduct military might. An aircraft carrier can bomb those pipelines at anytime.
And whether it's possible or not, even Bushco would have a hard time drumming up support, domestically or internationally, to go to war with Russia. At one point the US might have had some moral high ground to use as diplomatic leverage against the USSR, but seeing that "democratic" Russia now engages in free trade, "respects" human rights, yaddayadda, the US can't pretend to be the city on the hill.
And Mahan's theory is irrelevant in the context of a nation like Russia, astride the Eurasian landmass and the majority of human population. The whole theory is based on naval power protecting the shipping lanes. The USSR couldn't trade with its neighbors without traveling overseas. Modern Russia can.
worked on parts for a plane that can do just that and more. I can't say more because they would kill me AND you.
I think those planes are irrelevant now. Not because of their mechanical capabilities, but because of the changed face of global political and economic factors.
Anyone over 50 here who says'gee this sounds familiar'?
But I'm old enough to remember the end of Vietnam...and, yeah, it sounds, looks, feels and tastes familiar to me.
point made.
Ironically, Afghanistan was called "Soviet Union's Vietnam." Will it be called "America - Vietnam: the Sequel!?"
The Vietnam reference is apropos as is the idea that this is the sequel now. The Afghanistan invasion to get the perpetrators/masterminds & OBL was lost the day W told us to go shopping rather than sacrifice or pay a little more for gas to fund that invasion. And if that wasn't bad enough, when we strayed off course for Iraq, the party was over. Two wars on the cheap? What pathetic imbecile thought that would work? "Stay the course", "Mission Accomplished" (now approaching 2000 since that utterance),"We'll go to the ends of the earth", my butt!
To save the Site Monitor the trouble, I just deleted a lot of words. I really have strong emotions about W's, Dick's, Rummy's, Wolfie's, the neo-con's, PNAC's, et.al. failure in all of this.
What if the question to prove you're a human was "What is the derivative of X squared?".
Read somewhere...Afghanistan is where Empires go to die.
I'm 49 1/2 and I remember. Can I be in the club?
welcome to the 'as memory serves club' LMAO
What hill? Where? I don't remember going over any hill!?!.....
Doesn't even make me worry for Afghanistan or Pakistan either, really.
I do worry for India, however. Once the ISI has it's way and wraps up Afghanistan tightly, the ISI will turn really focus on New Delhi and Mumbai.
The nuclear clock is ticking down towards midnight, and it's not the usual (read: Cold War) suspects that will be involved.
You have it exactly backwards. Pakistan as a entire country has been entirely, *entirely* focused on war with India and has actively fought 3 full scale hot wars with India in the past 60 years. The very creation of Pakistan from millenia old India by a illegal colonial occupation was illegal, and was done ostensibly to "protect" muslims from Hindus. However, it is Pakistan (having initiated and then lost the 3 wars) that has waged asymmetric warfare against India in Kashmir and elsewhere and killed, in brutal, gruesome ways, both countless Indian civilians and military, including sleeping pregnant women, and children on pilgramages.
The ISI exists only for that purpose and the Taliban itself was created only for that purpose: Jihadi fodder to sent over the border to Kashmir. Why would the ISI stop supporting Taliban and Jihad: that's the primary goal of Pakistan in the first place. It would be like dissolving their army.
But I think that the ISI wants to get us off of the back porch before they sharpen the focus on India. I don't think that the ISI wants to risk having the US military right next door when they start attacking India- they'd risk almost immediate intervention by the US on the behalf of India. Surely you've noticed the lull in the tensions in Kashmir since the US went into Afghanistan, no?
A quick reply to your post above.
They are focused on India like a laserbeam for the past 30 years with fullscale Jihad in Kashmir.
You are kidding right ? They are attacking India every single day. Today. Yesterday. Last week. Every day. In Jaipur. Delhi (huge bombs just 2 weeks ago, hundreds killed and injured). Kashmir. Bombay. Udaipur. Just this year (2008), thousands of civilians have been murdered by Jihadis in Kashmir.
You are kidding, right ? This is the same US that gave Pakistan 10 billion dollars to fight "terror" and then realized that all of that money, had been spent on the Pakistan army to prepare to fight India even better. The Taliban is part of the Pakistan army as well, they are just the uncoventional troops used asymmetrically.
The US is about the most clueless entity in this picture, evidenced by them actually giving Pakistan 10 billion dollars to fight terror. That's like giving Osama Bin Laden 10 billion dollars to fight terror...and then expecting Pakistan (or osama) to actually do it. That's insanely clueless.
You are kidding right ?
Look at what has- or, rather, what hasn't- happened since the Kargil War ended in 7/00: there haven't been traditional military invasions along the borders. This is very important.
I know that since that war ended that diplomatic ties were restored. I know that there have been bombings, and those bombings were almost assuredly carried out by agents of the ISI. I also know that Zadari has denounced the bombings as acts of terrorism. However, the ISI has seen to it that they can plausibly deny the attacks as independent acts by separatist Indian nationals and/or rogue elements who sneak across the border with no sanction from the Pakistani government.
Look, I'm not denying that this is happening. It is and has been. What I'm saying is that without evidence that directly ties Pakistan to this anti-Indian terrorism campaign, nonaligned and un-allied India will have a hard time getting anyone to intervene on their behalf. And the Pakistani military and ISI aren't about to give them that direct evidence with the US military already pushing their border from Afghanistan.
has proven for hundreds of years that foriegners(sp?) are most unwelcome. We didn't get BinLadin.It's time to go.
Remove the bayonett first before using the barrel of your rifle to clean out your ears.
)O(
I'll remember that.
I just found this on another blog and am passing it on. Evidently, this group of Rabbis have never supported a candidate for president but find McCain & Palin's tactics deplorable so they are endorsing Obama and suggesting that American jews do likewise.
This is great news for Camp Obama and very bad news for McCain. Can't say that McCain hasn't done his level best to deserve this attack from American Rabbis.
The law of cause and effect is coming home to roost on John McCain's bald head.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1029326.html
I wasn't of the Vietnam War era, but I remember watching news clips of soldiers marching through rice paddies, and body bags coming back from Vietnam, between cartoons on Saturday morning TV, while munching on my bowl of Frosted Flakes.
It always sounded like we were about to turn another corner.
By the time I was 13 it seemed like the war had always been around, and I was seeing that within a relatively short time I could be drafted into it. My older brother by three years was near panic.
in the middle of that 'panic' and believe Me it wasn't fun. I got lucky. I drew a high lottery number.
My brother-in-law got a low number but was lucky enough to get in the National Guard and stayed here. I was 16 when the war ended, and was glad our boys were coming home.
Deja vu, though: my nephew is currently in Iraq. I fear for him every day.
Silly Rabbis
Tricks is for republitards.
The war was won at first with might, and after might we needed brains but if you'll remember we were robbed of the brains and given 4 more years of thinking with the Bush.
If we would have had Gore in 2000 I'm pretty sure we could have avoided this whole mess, but that's hard to even imagine anymore.
the biggest word in the Universe. I can imagine having sex with playmates. Yesterday is gone. Tomorrow is uncertain. Today is all we have.
I never played kick the can, or mumbly peg with ya.
)O(
Now That brings back memories! I'm not sure what You mean. Expound,please.
'If'
Fri, 10/17/2008 - 20:04 — UncleDave
the biggest word in the Universe. I can imagine having sex with playmates. Yesterday is gone. Tomorrow is uncertain. Today is all we have.
Playboy playmates???
Think the real reason the Bush Crime Family even went into Afghanistan was to secure that lovely crop of high-grade heroin they produce. There's almost as much money to be made with that as with oil stolen from Iraq.??
the 'real' reason was to drop old ordinance,so the Military had need to buy more to bomb Iraq.
I've seen Nir Rosen here and I concur. Much like the semantics of everything that is being debated here in this country doesn't make sense to me in light of the truth (turn to any foreign satellite feed - learn to speak hindi, french, polish, etc), which is that our foreign policy is untenable in the long run in all countries were we cannot kill everything and re-make it into sweden, but even they have issues with immigration. I wish I could write a little more lucidly on the matter, but my anger towards the complete lack of truthiness baffles me and leads me to have conversations where people blame dissenters, ACORN, the poor... WTF ? What do I do ? I am not an educational establishment, I'm just one guy. It's surprising that everything I was recounting having read to an NPR journalist fell on a set of wide open ears. It's frankly depressing, like the Johnstown thing, I guess you all have to take the cool-aid, because otherwise it's a bloodbath that you're left holding the bag for.
Tragic. A tragedy unfolding and I cannot seem to stop it.
People should abandon their desire for violence, it foments more of it and for generations to come. First the Russians, then US, and now NATO ?
Surge is working ? Ha ! What a joke ! Look at the satellite feeds and you see the journalists harping about how that line of questioning is too obtuse ? FUCK WHAT ? I understand the business model has now crept into everything, including our grade schools, but this is dumbing all of us down.
That is why we don't have a tv and we can monitor our intake through various sources, but more so articles and radio - I am getting really tired of the fairness or appearance of balance on NPR - thank god for the tapert brothers, because the news has been spun into politics by the very media that is supposed to just report it. Stop trying to get your seat at the next White House Correspondents Dinner - be a rabble rouser and report for a change. All these pieces from the Pentagon and what every fucking happened to those retired military people that were used by the networks ? NOTHING !#$#$#$!%@!@
Enough, I need fresh air and some cuddling with the significant other and maybe a little kundera or posner. Something to take the edge off the fact that obama will hopefully win and then disappoint like Clinton - hamstrapped by the others that force him to accept the death of the steagall glass act and the futures trading modernization act that .... sigh.
Have a great evening all. I hate being angry, but the truth is being ignored and like a good cancer, at some point, it's too late.
k
Don't give up Hope.....But. Humans ,by nature, are prone to violence. Our brains have not caught up with our minds. Evolution states that We will be changed. make the most of it and try for happiness.
I would say our brain and our mind is one thang.
They die with the body.
And part of our cerebral inheritance is reptillian, which is the site where our fight or flight, reproduction, and the eternal quest for nachos are found.
But then maybe the Hindus are right and behind our soul/spirit/mind is the Atman
Atman....duh...duh...duh...duh...duh...duh...duh...duh...Atman...Atman...Atman...
)O(
Check out the Weekly World News online - "Batboy" supports Obama, who admitted he has a half-brother who's half-boy, half-bat - Obatma!
Are they really online now?
For awhile the only subscriptions I had was Weekly World News and Mad.
Absolutely!!! My heart leapt when I found this out! Go there at weeklyworldnews.com (OK, I don't know how to post links. Can anyone tell me how succinctly, w/o disdain? Thanks.)
Recent headline: Palin Exterminating Bigfoot.
Matt in Texas,
www.torturingdemocracy.org
Laugh. Our government tortured.
The "banality of evil."
george bush and richard cheney, war criminals.
"Just as you supported and carried out a policy of not wanting to share the earth with the Jewish people and the people of a number of other nations—as though you and your superiors had any right to determine who should and who should not inhabit the world—we find that no one, that is, no member of the human race, can be expected to want to share the earth with you. This is the reason, and the only reason, you must hang." - Hanna Arendt
Part of our tendency toward violence, besides our simian forbears, is found in the concept of gesellschaft. This is typified by a lack of personal ties, and a sense of alienation, narcissism and materialism. When these stressers are combined with lack of an appreciable horizon (like in cities), and anomie, brought on by rapid societal changes in societies lacking traditions, they can make us lash out in an atavistic manner.
)O(
Interesting. Shares a lot of the same things that are related to depression.
Pretty much the same symptoms, only depression is more of a personal reaction and gesellschaft a societal reaction. I suppose one can get depressed in a gemeinschaft situation too though. This is typified by a small town where everyone knows each other, but instead of feeling physically crowded and alienated, one actually feels a loss of privacy, because everyone knows everybody else's business.
Think the downside of Mayberry RFD.
That's one reason "Peyton Place" was such a success years ago (OK, dating myself): it revealed the not-so-cheery side of small town America. I grew up in such a small town, where everyone knows everyone else's business. There's bad and good everywhere, cities and villages both have their plusses.
(P.S. I always thought Barney Fife and Thelma Lou were into kinky stuff like bondage. He DID have access to handcuffs and jail cells......)
Funny I did too.
And I've heard some mighty fine dirty Gomer Pyle jokes as well.
You get impregnated by the Devil.
Barney Fife always feigned knowing what he was doing, and Thelma Lou deferentially always went along with him.
Did they take over the White House in 2000?
I always wanted to know what Aunt Bea was into.
)O(
what Andy ? doubts? consternations? the very things i was acussed of? the worm has surely turned!
Hey, tyree, how's it going? Done any anti-American, pro-
Obamaterrorist hell-raising lately?that the reason I've chosen to ignore you has got anything to do with your views, tyree: It's the way you treat those who disagree with you.
Errr.....replying isn't ignoring him. I have no idea what the history here is, but let's remember that we're all basically on the same side.
Eyes on the prize: get the rethugs out of office and rescue America.
and I was sick of the abuse. First time I've addressed him since the spring.
Gotcha. Let's work together to elect Obama and a filibuster-proof Senate. Then we can have healthy debate amongst ourselves!
well andy you useualy get the treatment you deserve, unlike some i dont follow the herd, as for ignoreing me , really who cares, its not like i owe you or anyone else here all the good posters left long before you got here,
K--I'm right with you...I hear you loud and clear---just so ya know that somebody else out there feels the same as you.
Well that was depressing. I knew we were doing poorly in Afghanistan, but to hear how freely the Taliban is operating is more than disconcerting, and shows what a miserable failure our approach in that region is.
The article misses the point--no American President of either party is leaving Afghanistan without Bin Laden. That is the critical difference between Iraq, which we could leave tomorrow, and Afghanistan. If the Taliban would be willing to discreetly point us to Bin Laden, we could leave the next day, and no one would care except Karzai. Otherwise, they can stay in the hills and play chicken with the US Army for a generation, and no one in this country will object. I think they may find Bin Laden expendable at some point.
Osama bin Laden is DEAD!
Direct quote from Bush ---- For Immediate Release --- Office of the Press Secretary --- November 24, 2003
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/... --- ''Working with a fine coalition, our military went to Afghanistan, destroyed the training camps of al Qaeda, and put the Taliban out of business forever.'' (Applause.)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/... --- September 27, 2004
"And as a result of the United States military, Taliban no longer is in existence. And the people of Afghanistan are now free. (Applause.) In other words when you say something as President you better make it clear so everybody understands what you're saying, and you better mean what you say. And I meant what I said." (Applause.)
Me go now, before I pass out in front of my P.C.
(Politically Correct Personal Computer?)
That would be P.C.P.C.
Who in the he|| went and messed with the layout of C&L? Man it was the best place to comment and follow a story. Now it's like an act of congress just to post this stupid comment.
Why would you change something that worked so well? You even won the 2008 Bloggies and you do this?
Later, uh probably not.
[It's been nearly two weeks since the change. The site got a record number of hits over the last few days, and the volume would have crushed our servers if we were still using the old format on Wordpress. If your complaint is with the nested comments or lack of HTML buttons, you get those buttons and the ability to view the comments in-line when you register and log in with the password you receive in your e-mail in-box. Site Monitor]
I personally find this format quite good, especially if you compare it to Alternet's, which is ridiculously cumbersome. Enjoy the dialogue and keep up the good work.
Two journalists who are REAL journalists, who report the TRUTH.
And kudos, once again, to the Rolling Stone (and Cernig for this great post)
I'm a constant visitor to this site. But I rarely read the comments, because the content is so straight-forward and thought-provoking by itself. In that Rosen took Obama somewhat to task, I was interested in what the rabble made of the piece. I figured the comments would go something like: "Yes, Afghanistan is a hopeless shit-storm but at least our guy" fill in the blank. Turns out the first dozen or so comments are utterly informed and add even more context and nuance to the discussion. This site and its visitors are a rare testament to the supremacy of ideas. I'm with Obama 100 percent, but I believe his base will hold him accountable more so than the other side is capable of--for lack of intellectual honesty and/or intellectual ability. Yeah, I said it, we ARE smarter--whether right or wrong. I would like to think that makes us right more often than not, but nonetheless.
I'd expect that an Obama presidency would concentrate a lot on the policing aspect. Most terrorist activity is stopped by police work and eventually they'll find ways into the battle lines from behind the front. Cut off poppy exports with massive international cooperation in two or three years and that would slow the taliban down a lot.
It's also not up to us but for the UN and Nato to help. Perhaps India, perhaps not. We need a Marshall plan in there even before the battles are over. So many countries have stomped on Afghanistan through the ages that pretty much every country surrounding it deserves to put in for some reparations.
Perhaps as a short term solution Kabul can lease land for an oil pipeline. The warlords will be also less isolated probably every half decade from now unless globalization grinds to a halt.
If you expect that from Obama, you'd be wrong...he's a hawk and has the Pentagon right up his b**t, just like all the other Dems, except for a few like Kucinich. What a shame he wasn't allowed to be a part of the election...shunned and waylaid by the sellout DEm "leaders" like Pelosi...But I digress--Obama WANTS to continue the war in Afghanistan/Pakistan!
Very well stated. This is an excellent post which focuses on the terrific reporting of Nir Rosen but it is also a dishonest post because it does not point out that Obama wishes to escalate the war in Afghanistan as well as emulating the policies of Bush in Pakistan. I watched Nir Rosen on Democracy Now! and heard him tell Amy Goodman that what the United States should be doing in Afghanistan is to immediately pull its troops out and to begin negotiations with the Taliban. Of course since Crooks and Liars avidly supports Obama, Rosens's recommendations were not mentioned in the post as it just might place the [alleged] antiwar candidate in a [justifiably] bad light.
Yesterday in Baghdad al-Sadr had the Iraqis burn Bush in effigy. One can be certain that the Afghans will be doing the same thing to Obama if he is elected president as his policies will undoubtedly add to more misery and suffering to the Afghan if not also the Pakistani people.
But are you daft, Erroll?
Rosens's recommendations were not mentioned in the post as it just might place the [alleged] antiwar candidate in a [justifiably] bad light.
From my post: "he came away with the conclusion that adding more troops to Afghanistan won’t work, and that we should prepare an exit strategy."
I've written several posts on Afghanistan and Pakistan since I became a contributor to C&L and have mentioned more than once that I strongly disagree with the hawkish part of Obama's regional policy position as he has stated it. I honestly figured I didn't need to say it again, especially since repetition would have lengthened a post about Nir Rosen's amazing reporting.
Come to think of it - you commented on a couple of those previous posts of mine, so I'm sure you read them.
Regards, C
No, Cernig, I am not, to use your less than elegant term, daft. What I did do, however, was reread your post three times. Each time I read Nir Rosen's excellent analysis of the situation in Afghanistan and underneath that your comment on how McCain's strategy vis a vis Afghanistan would not work. But nowhere did I find, however brief, a criticism of Obama's hawkish strategy of that country. You say that you have written before regarding Obama's bellicose rhetoric. But that does not obviate the fact that you said nothing, IN THIS PARTICULAR POST, concerning Obama's position in regard to Afghanistan. That is why I labeled your post dishonest, since a reader, seeing what you have written, would certainly get the impression that you were being critical of McCain's policy but yet decided not to comment regarding Obama's desire to escalate the situation in Afghanistan. Claiming that you have written about Obama's Middle East strategy in the past will hardly get you off the hook here. My suggestion is that if you have any pretense of objectivity, try including comments about Obama in your posts when you also [justifiably] critique McCain. Or will you once again deign to label me "daft" for daring to bring up this justifiable criticism of how Obama's name is not mentioned while McCain's name is? Since there is a very good chance that Obama will be elected president, any time Middle East strategy is mentioned, I think his militant positions should certainly be considered extremely relevant to the readers of Crooks and Liars. Your comment simply proves that those on the left [or at least what constitutes the left these days] can be just as intolerant of criticism of their heroes as those on the right.
I actually linked in the text to two of my posts on other blogs which have been highly critical of Obama's policy. What, you don't click links?
And, despite your assumptions (making an ass of you and umptions) Obama isn't particularly a hero of mine. I didn't back him in the primaries and I've stated often and loud that I'd be far happier with Bernie Sanders as a candidate.
You're out on a limb and wriggling while it creaks, Erroll. Let it go.
"Let it go". If I do not, will you then complain to Crooks and Liars to ban me from the site because I dared to point out the truth? Underneath what Nir Rosen had said on Democracy Now!, you had written "John McCain's strategy following the Bush's administration in handling policymaking to General Petraeus isn't going to work any better." Again, as I attempted to point out, apparently to no avail, there is absolutely no mention of any criticism involving Obama. You try to hide behind the fact that you make a reference to Obama in the links which does not deter from the fact that nowhere in the body of your comments was made any reference to the militant policies of Obama which, as I said before, certainly gives the impression to the reader that McCain is supposed to be more militant than Obama which, as we know [or at least we should know], is hardly the case. To paraphrase your sentence, what, you can not make a direct criticism of Obama instead of that criticism being stated in a link?
You try and claim that you are not a great fan of Obama because you did not back him in the primaries and would have preferred Bernie Sanders. But that does not appear to have prevented you from giving your full support to him in the presidential election, apparently believing that the lesser of two evils is supposed to somehow obscure the fact that one would still end up with an evil [as the Afghans and the Iraqis and quite possibly the Pakistanis would surely agree after Obama is elected and he goes ahead with carrying out his murderous policies].
If I do not, will you then complain to Crooks and Liars to ban me from the site because I dared to point out the truth?
Don't be silly. Of course not. I just cringe in empathic embarassment at how far you're reaching in an attempt to maintain you have a point, is all.
what, you can not make a direct criticism of Obama instead of that criticism being stated in a link?
I've said already that I decided while writing the post that recovering ground I'd already written on would make the post too long. That's all. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but you're insisting that there's grounds (which you keep shifting) for supposing a grand conspiracy. There isn't, ok? I swear it by the Gods my ancestors swore by. Does that keep you happy?
Sheesh.
Further proof that people in general, and our leaders in particular, have no sense of history when it comes to that region.
Our experience is turning out to be the 21st century repeat of the Soviet experience there. Which, of course, was basically the 20th century version of the British 19th century experience in Afghanistan.
How far we have come. What complete idiots.
Further proof that people in general, and our leaders in particular, have no sense of history when it comes to that region.
Our experience is turning out to be the 21st century repeat of the Soviet experience there. Which, of course, was basically the 20th century version of the British 19th century experience in Afghanistan.
How far we have come. What complete idiots.
Nir Rosen's conclusions are very similar to a young man (34) from Afghanistan who was studying here in the States on a Fulbright Scholarship from 2004- until recently. Every week he was here in the states we would talk about what he was hearing from his very large family back in Afghanistan. They would report weekly that the Taliban were regaining power and his father a Retired Brigadier General kept asking "does the Bush administration want to lose in Afghanistan?" This man had fought against the Russians. My friend also shared that just after the U.S. invaded Afghanistan in 2001 the Taliban were really on the run for the following year, but that the U.S. had made a huge mistake by not following through and focusing on keeping them running (at least the very radical element of the Taliban). But as his family would share with him while he was here he came to the conclusion the only way to deal with the Taliban is to be inclusive especially with the less violent and radical elements of the Taliban. That the Taliban had to be brought to the table and included in the process and decisions of improving the lives of the Afghani people. He is now back in Afghanistan working on these issues, he continues to communicate.
Two things that he shared with me that I had never read in the media.
1. The Afghanistan government has asked the U.S. government to provide hard evidence that Osama Bin Laden was involved in 9/11. That has never happened.
2. That most Afghanis consider the U.S. as occupiers and would like the U.S. to leave.
I TRULY PRAY FOR PEACE, SECURITY AND PROSPERITY IN A HEALTHY SENSE AND ON THEIR TERMS UPON ALL OF THE PEOPLE IN AFGHANISTAN. THEY HAVE SUFFERED FAR TOO MUCH.
To Afghans, Obama will be the agent of despair
Sat, 10/18/2008 - 08:40 — Erroll (not verified)
Very well stated. This is an excellent post which focuses on the terrific reporting of Nir Rosen but it is also a dishonest post because it does not point out that Obama wishes to escalate the war in Afghanistan as well as emulating the policies of Bush in Pakistan.
TA DA...
It's Karnak the Magnificent.
I have no idea what your comment "It's Karnak the Magnificent" is supposed to mean as what I had written concerning Obama, that he wishes to escalate the war [make that occupation] in Afghanistan while also advocating that American troops be sent into Pakistan, where they will undoubtedly end up killing more innocent Pakistanis [as happened a few weeks ago], is most certainly true.
Login or Register to post comments.