Blue America's new Afghanistan action on war funding: 'No Means No!'
By John Amato Tuesday Sep 22, 2009 9:00am
(h/t Heather)
Rachel Maddow highlights portions of the ridiculous McChrystal memos that were leaked to try and strong-arm Obama into sending more troops to Afghanistan.
Maddow: Over and over and over again this leaked report raises the specter of failure, of defeat in Afghanistan. Even as it defines what's going on in Afghanistan right now as I quote, "not a war in the conventional sense." If it's not a war but a thing that's not a war that we could lose....
Of course no one quite understands what it would be to win this not war either, but losing is perhaps politically stronger than the existentially dread of doing something indefinitely that just can't be won.
Blue America is taking a stand against an escalation in the Afghanistan war as the military is putting on their propaganda full court press on President Obama to send more troops in. We want to empower the 32 progressives in Congress that voted no to funding the war supplemental last time out and also expand the list so we can block further funding of the war. The American people do not like this war and Congress should represent that fact. C&L honors our troops and makes sure to list the members of the military that have fallen in Iraq Afghanistan every Sunday and although the media for the most part ignores our fallen heroes, we do not. I was happy to see that the President wasn't immediately bowing to the mighty general and remained cautious in his approach to the Afghanistan situation.
“Until I'm satisfied that we've got the right strategy I'm not gonna be sending some young man or woman over there — beyond what we already have,” Obama said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I'm not interested in just being in Afghanistan for the sake of being in Afghanistan or saving face or, in some way – you know, sending a message that America is here for the duration.”
Starting today expect to see a concerted attack on the president from the "We-Want-Obama-To-Fail-Right," making it harder for Democrats to back away from his misguided Afghanistan policies. But none of these games changes the fact this is a pointless and unwinnable war and must be brought to a close as soon as possible. This week Blue America is launching No Means No! a fundraising effort to help bolster members of Congress who already know that and who have been working diligently to end it.
If Obama keeps his pledge to end the Bush-era supplemental funding process, future appropriations for Afghanistan will be part of the budget, which means Pay-Go rules kick in. That leaves Congress with two choices when allocating money for the occupation of Afghanistan: raising taxes or cutting social programs. That's the next big battle facing Washington.
Here's the list of the House members who stood tall and refused to be strong-armed by Rahm Emanuel into voting for more war funding. I'll be having on Alan Grayson Thursday for a live chat on C&L to discuss the unfortunate situation George Bush left President Obama and America to deal with.
Digby lends her sharp perceptions to the latest campaign being waged by the military to hijack another war.
The military is obviously turning up the heat in Washington to get us into a much bigger war in Afghanistan and it's being done the usual way, with lies and leaks and back stabbing and grandstanding. And the politics are as confused as ever.
For me, this one is easy. Afghanistan is the most unlikely place to win a war on the planet. To apply the lessons learned in Iraq (such as they were) to this country seems insane to me --- especially the concept of "counter-insurgency," so beloved by the McChrystalites, which is being bizarrely misapplied. But more important than that: whenever you hear people saying that the primary purpose in continuing a war is because "to leave would send the wrong message" and declaring that "perceptions" are the reasons for continuing a slaughter, you know you are in Pentagon NeverNever land.
When you realize that we've had a hundred thousand more troops in Iraq -- which is like a third of the size of Afghanistan geographically -- then you really see how insane it is to send in a few more thousand troops into the impossible situation of trying to maintain the peace and defeat an insurgency and Taliban uprising. The Karzai government is also having problems being viewed as a legitimate ruling body by the Afghan people with all the charges of voter fraud.
Rachel Maddow, in the above video clip, goes over McChrystal's memo in detail and makes some accurate observations. His arguments are silly and really make no sense at all. Kevin Drum writes that even Gen. McChrystal describes the Afghanistan government as corrupt:
"The weakness of state institutions, malign actions of power-brokers, widespread corruption and abuse of power by various officials, and ISAF's own errors, have given Afghans little reason to support their government," McChrystal says.The result has been a "crisis of confidence among Afghans," he writes. "Further, a perception that our resolve is uncertain makes Afghans reluctant to align with us against the insurgents."
Spreading 28,000 troops throughout a country where we already had 140,000 in place would almost certainly have had no effect. But most of the troops were deployed in Baghdad, where it meant a near doubling of capacity, and that did have an effect. Baghdad was so central to the rest of Iraq that a reduction of violence there had a country-wide effect.
But no such concentration is possible in Afghanistan. Kabul isn't as important to Afghanistan as Baghdad is to Iraq, and in any case Kabul is already relatively safe. It's the rest of the country that needs more troops, and it's hard to think of any single place they could be concentrated enough to have a real impact.
Even though Kevin is uncertain about what will happen, what he outlines is a hopeless situation. How can we win this war, if it is a war and the hand-picked government is corrupt and their people know it? It's not shocking that Bush turned the country over to a man that seems to have rigged the election.
But let's face it, Americans don't like to lose in anything. So using the "we'll lose if you don't give me more troops or else" " strategy can have an impact to some who have not been following the situation closely.
Obviously the Neocon warhawks who helped get us in Iraq and Afghanistan will be given a huge megaphone to attack the president by the media even though they should be shunned. So please join in Blue America's action, because these bold progressives will be put under tremendous pressure again to vote for more war funding...
Login or Register to post comments.
Maddow's monologue is actually quite superficial and not really worthy to quote if you're halfway informed about the war. The whole thing is complicated enough to need 30-60 minutes for a fair description of the situation.
I personally dislike it very much and agree a lot with folks like Bacevich and Krulak. Nation-building in a multi-ethnic 'state' didn't work in Bosnia (the West has still troops there after about 15 years!), there's really little reason to expect a better result in Afghanistan under more averse conditions.
It looks as if in the end we'll support the warlords when they resume their fight against the Taliban just as they did before we began to meddle in Central Asian affairs.
For those who are really interested in the whole Afghan/Pakistan war thing and discussion about it: The standard forum on this is the SWJ forum at http://smallwarsjournal.com/
The median opinion there is a rather hawkish one because most members are soldiers with an attitude of "we need to succeed, how can we do it?".
Get out of there. NO MORE BLOOD and MONEY for the MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX!
NO BLOOD for OIL or any PIPELINES!
Wouldn't be cheapier and easier to reinvestigate the reason why we are there?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBOWAtLhR_Q
Are you Dick?
No more 9-11 Truthers! I've had it with these people. I wish fellow liberals would do more to push these Truthers out of the liberal movement. You may be the real dick.
as talk about getting out of Afghanistan revs up we suddenly get some arrests and terrorist alerts.
Remind you of anything?
Zazi isn't a credible threat. No, wait, he's the most serious threat since 9/11.
Now it's the old 'subway train' card.
Even a child eventually figures Uncle Johnny ain't really pullin' a quarter out of their ear.
needs to get some intestinal fortitude...Pulling out of Afghanistan is a knee jerk reaction to a difficult situation we inherited from the republicans and Bush...
How about we help the people who's country, culture , and infastructure the republicans destroyed with zeal after 9/11 with no plan to get out and nothing to support the people or knowledge of the culture..Talk about the 'Ugly American' our courageous men and women were sent over there with NO cultural awareness and no one to teach them..Clinton had gutted the military and the CIA to balance the budget for the repubs to spend over the next 9 years!
I do not have the answers but cut and run is too risky and gutless..Solutions folks --we can do it if we quit playing arrogant and listen to the needs of those people!
Money to blow people up - YES!
Money to put people back together - NO!
And it's all your money. Enjoy.
Amen..It took me 3 # to say what you did in 2 lines...Thanks!
And to think a lot of this would not be happening if the republican controlled congress would've ponied up the dough Clenis asked for to help the former USSR destroy their atomic weaponry.
Now much of it has entered the underground market where states like Pakistan and India can get it along with the terrorists.
... Afghanistan was brought to you by the same administration that gave us Iraq. Goals? Objectives? Plans?
Right.
Let's face it, Afghanistan was classic George W. Bush: muddle your way through, fake a smile, hope nobody notices how bad you fucked up, wait for Daddy's friends to save your bacon.
A troop surge will essentially be like TARP - throwing good money after bad, giving the GOP plenty to talk about (though we'll never hear about how they were cheerleading a-plenty when the Frat Boy in Chief was steering the Ship of State into a ditch), blame it all on the black fella in the White House.
..w f***'d this up, w should be in jail or sent to Afghanistan to try and get all the warlords to sit down and start singing Kum-By-Yah! Either scenario works with the troops back here.
Obama should find out who leaked this and fire his ass. Obama is the Commander in Chief and whoever leaked this did it to undermine Obama. An argument could be made for treason.
This appears to be nothing more than an excuse for Obama to do what he already wanted to do. In other words: a Cheney-type leak.
But you're right: an argument could be made for treason.
Y'all never heard of a trial balloon?
Additionally such leaks are a form of diplomacy for the target to hear and react to, hopefully to back down.
Next step would be some kind formation of troops for "exercises" in the region.
Money to accomplish Capitalistic Imperialism wrapped in a u.s. flag-YES
Money to provide a competitive health insurance reform plan
that would help stimulate the economy/reduce bankruptcies/keep people in their homes-NO
You're so verbose.
Howie says:
The assumption is that the Dems, including Obama, actually want to stop these meaningless wars and that it's the Republicans we must counter. Unfortunately, no.
Even in the minority, the Dems fully funded these wars. They continued to do so in the majority, and, with the White House under Dem control, they expanded their war in Afghanistan. The Dems, including (or should I say "especially") Obama like this War, and they like it a lot.
It's the same strategy used in the Health care "debate": a faux opposition is staged from the Right; this faux opposition is then made the focus of media attention (and even some lefty blogs); actual opposition from the majority of Americans is thereby drowned out. And the Dems get to pretend they are fighting the Right even as they totally and completely capitulate.
A large majority of Americans support a strong public health care plan; a large majority of Americans are against the war in Afghanistan. Who cares? We must support our President against birthers, deathers, and, now, those who say he isn't tough enough.
We are being played... again.
what is 'victory' in afghanistan?
and, as is probably the case, if the majority of people in afghanistan actually prefer a strict theocracy to a western-style liberal democracy, what does the US do? how do you force democracy, while, at the same time, discount the results if they prove to hurt "american" interests? or, if you forget popular elections, and a american-friendly leader is propped up (see, US foreign policy for the past bajillion years), will there be a need for permanent US military presence? and, if so, how do you mitigate the surge of extremism that would be created?
TAPI should never be far from people's lips when discussing our 'interest' in afghanistan.
What we need in Afghanistan is an army of bears.
Let me explain.
In the Islamic culture and man who is clean shaven is seen as being gay, openly gay, which is very frowned upon. So what we see as the greatest fighting force in the world, they see as an army of homosexuals come to convert them to what ever it is that westerners do, which every Muslim knows is non-stop gay sex.
If we send in the bears it will help to pacify their fears because their "uniforms" will be more appropriate. The hairiest men the army has to offer should be sent there.
... gave Stephen Colbert nightmares for a week.
The American right wing...America's anus.
Everytime it lets out a drippy fart, we all have to change our underwear.
Dick Cheney on FOX in 5...4...3...
Money for schools, hospitals, kid's lunches, healthcare, green projects.
Ooooo.... scarey! Waste of money, Y'all!
Money for napalming pregnant women. cluster bombing office buildings, firebombing hospitals, cruise missling newspapers and radio stations.....
Mmm, Mmm, Good!
I'm starting to wonder what church these negativists were raised in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG5lJNXy66w
remember that a general will never have enough troops, time, or supplies ever.
More troops are not the answear, it will have to be a settlement with all the groups in afghan, that means the taliban, as much as that sucks.
Afghan will be like the house that needs a lot of work and you dont have the cash. You can sell, raze, or try to rehab on the cheap, but staying in the house is not an option.
Afghanistan Pullback: U.S. May Focus On Drone Attacks On Terrorists
... but I'm not buying it. Drones are going to attack "terrorists"? How do the drones know who the "terrorists" are? Unless, of course, the "terrorists" are just those who've lost family in the previous drone attacks. Or are the "terrorists" just more bogeymen to scare us into that 9/11 way of thinking? We've been doing drone attacks for 8 years.
And what's with this "pullback"? Is it anything like the "pullback" Obama just did in Iraq? We supposedly pulled back out of Iraqi cities - except what Obama's military did was just re-classify areas with American troops as "not in the a city." Camp Victory is in Baghdad.
And I see how Obama is "reluctant" to send more troops (now that he has some semi-vocal opposition from progressives in Congress). But remember: Obama was "reluctant" to grant telecoms immunity; he was "reluctant" to cut a deal with drug companies; and I'm sure he's "reluctant" to escalate the troop levels in Afghanistan even though he's already been doing so since his inauguration.
You mean we're going to bomb then with FOX anchors?
Last month's "clearly stolen" Afghan election should demonstrate to everyone that no matter the outcome, Afghanistan is going to be left with a corrupt, illegitimate government.
So what is the point of expending more lives and money when, in the end, Afghanistan is left with the same miserable government?
The current strategy needs to be changed 180'. Throwing more troops at the problem can't fix what's already wrong with Afghanistan.
Stolen by the U.S.
This has been going on for decades.
Trust me, it is in the interests of the elites for Ahmedinajan to have "won" in Iran.
Isn't it amazing that there is a total news blackout on Iran. Anyone want to even venture a GUESS as to the purge that is being conducted in that country right now. Next year we will hear about the mass graves, thousands killed...and we will be SHOCKED! SHOCKED I TELL YA! And the U.N. will issue a strong condemnation, America will use the incidents to ramp up the fear in this country...and life will go on.
do Americans constantly fall for the boogeyman bullshit ? Always someone or something. Indians, witches, negroes, commies. yellow people, brown people, Muslims etc. etc. I know few of the posters here are dumb enough to believe it. Answer me this .. why would the biggest baddest dog on the block ( US Military ) fear anyone anyways ? Could it be that war is profitable ? Too bad the profit takers never send their fucking kids to fight them then.
For whatever it worth, I'd feel great pulling the 'End the War' sign out of the closet (it's all painted and ready to go). But I'm confused. Blue America wants everyone out of Afganistan? Or just no escalation? Things are going well now and we should leave it alone, or they could be better with a new plan and the same amount of troops? If it's out that we want, do we encourage other NATO countries to stay or to leave as well? Are we betting the warlords who like growing poppies will take it upon themselves to beat the Taliban (which I'd be fine with), or are we saying that the Taliban taking over the country is acceptable?
I remember before 2001, we used to argue about what was the Worst Place on Earth. Wrigley Field always got a few votes, but the winner was generally Afganistan hands down. I suppose, if you're not worried too much about the ladies, the Taliban might not be so bad.
I recognize the depth of the mistakes we've made in Afganistan and why the prospects looks pretty grim. And I think, unless it can be fixed, the election there might be the last straw, but I'm quite sure what the solution's supposed to be.
...lets bring the troops back home and save some money, we've caused enough deaths already. We have our own problems :-/
The bulletin on stadiums notes that an al-Qaida training manual specifically lists "blasting and destroying the places of amusement, immorality, and sin... and attacking vital economic centers" as desired targets of the global terror network.
Amusement- “150 to 200 people were injured at about 1:15 A.M. when the explosion struck a tower near a stage where thousands of people were watching a concert.”
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/27/us/scores-a...
Motives http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/13/eric.rudolp...
Immorality- Franklin's level of violence continuously escalated; before he committed his first known murder, he firebombed a synagogue and sprayed mace at a racially mixed couple. Starting in 1977, he went on a continual murder spree, supporting himself by robbing banks. He admitted his racist ideology; God, he said, wanted him to start a race war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Paul_Fran...
Sin- Yates' family says he is at peace with the decision, his attorney, Roger Hunko, said Yates will fight execution. Not doing so would be akin to suicide, which under Yates' Christian faith would be an unforgivable sin, Hunko said.
http://www.adherents.com/people/py/Robert_L_Y...
Forensic evidence reportedly links the 1996 bomb blast to the three subsequent attacks, which hit an office building north of Atlanta housing a family planning center, a gay nightclub in Atlanta and an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama.(an al-Qaida training manual specifically lists "blasting and destroying the places of amusement, immorality, and sin)
They just want to be left alone... Let "XE... formerly called Blackwater" stay, they seem to enjoy it?
"I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war." --Barack Obama
did i see/hear keith olbermann denounce an ad put out by ActBlue/FDL about blanche lincoln and ross (?) because it used video of him without permission?
what's up with that?
Peace Talks With Taliban Now !
PRESIDENT OBAMA, DO NOT SEND MORE TROOPS TO AFGHANISTAN
The Generals are saying that without more troops war effort in Afghanistan will be lost. What they cannot visualize is that with more troops, failure will come sooner.. Many military and independent observers admit that 80% of Afghanistan is already lost to Taliban and this, after eight years of military effort!
Those of us old enough to remember early days of Vietnam war, remember well that troop levels were around 50,000 at first, then 100,000, then 250,000 and still the Generals wanted more, saying that we can only defeat the enemy if we have more troops. President Johnson listened to them and increased troop levels to over 400,000. United Sates still lost the war and to this day, hasty retreat of U.S. troops from Vietnam haunts many a mind.
Afghanistan is no different, same scenario will be played out again if troops are increased, only more American young men and women will die, more Afghans will be bombed and the resultant hatred against the U.S. will last for another 20 to 30 years. It is time to learn a lesson from history. "Nations who do not learn from past mistakes are bound to repeat them".
It is no fault of the Generals that they ask for more troops. This is what they know - have strength to fight the enemy. Generals are no politicians and it is not in their purview to think politically, that is the job of the politicians and the President.
It is still not too late to achieve a reconciliation in Afghanistan. Mullah Omar and other Taliban leaders have hinted more than once that they are willing to talk. U.S. has the means and the motive to accomplish a reconciliation. What is needed is an immediate ceasefire and a conference of all Afghan players, Northern Alliance, Hazaras, Pashtuns, Taliban and all others. U.S. and NATO should tell them that if you want foreign troops to leave, they have to reconcile and get along with each other.
Annul the Presidential elections and hold fresh elections after a peace conference so all parties can freely participate and if the people of Afghanistan want an Islamic Government, let them have one, only do not isolate them like before, so they go to bed with terrorists. Bring the new Afghan Government into the fold of international community and let them realize their responsibilities to the international community.
Afghanistan and its people have suffered a great deal in the super power rivalry. It is time this country was at peace and started rebuilding its infrastructure, an education system and created job opportunities for its young so they don't follow religious extremists. A Marshall style reconstruction plan for Afghanistan and Western part of Pakistan could change the political landscape of that part of the world and yet, it would cost a great deal less than extending the war.
President Obama, do not send more troops to Afghanistan. Start a reconciliation process in that country and bring all American troops home from Afghanistan within a year.
I am originally from India, and continue monitoring the Indian intelligence blogs for reports about the Pakistani criminality across its western (Afghanistan) and eastern (India) borders. My perspective is quite different than Blue America's, even though I am a big supporter of Obama.
The elephant in the room is Pakistan and its rogue army. Unlike other countries that have an army, Pakistan is an army in possession of a country. But because of its Dr. Strangeglovian politicians and army brass, coupled with its nuclear weapons program, the US and rest of the world can only swat at the gnats that is the insurgency in Afghanistan. But till the elephant can be tamed, Afghanistan needs to be contained. If the US and NATO forces withdraw, then it will be 100x easier for the ISI and Pakistan army to expand into Afghanistan at will, than it would have been for Al Qaeda to expand in Iraq. The open border and proximity make this almost inevitable. And with no US pressure on Pakistan, most likely it will become fertile territory for Al Qaeda's expansion as well. Yesterday LA Times reported a story that Taliban are now sheltering in southern Punjab, which is the lifeline of whatever remains of the state of Pakistan. And yesterday also General McChrystal reported that the Pakistani state, through the aegis of ISI, is still contributing weapons and knowhow to Al Qaeda and Taliban. I work on the chemistry of explosives, and have often wondered how the brainwashed illiterates that make up the majority of Al Qaeda can come up with such sophisticated agents of chemical warfare (TATP in the shoe bomber case - one chemical that the US agencies had given up long time ago because it is so hard to handle), steganography, IEDs, etc. No doubt it is the Pakistani army (and Iranians as well) that are providing this knowledge base.
If the US withdraws from Afghanistan, it will have much broader implications for that theater. Most likely Pakistan will catch fire, and that will spread to India, Nepal, and Bangladesh. If there is further confrontation with India (like attempts to attack the Indian parliament, the popular Taj Hotel in Bombay, and several other national incidents), then India will have NO option but to respond. China will be drawn in as will Russia.
Unfortunately, when Obama came to office he spoke of "regional solutions", knowing that to solve the Pakistani problem, he had to perhaps convene a dialog of all involved parties. That has not happened yet. Yet is the operative word.
I don't support a withdrawal from Afghanistan. I don't support unlimited troop increases either, absent a properly formulated strategic plan. I am hoping he will get to that sooner rather than later. The approaching winter will provide some respite, but not much.
I don't buy it. They'd receive the same fate as any other foreign invaders.
Where have you been? Afghanistan has been the playground for the ISI since the Soviet invasion. Pakistani ISI presence is NOT the same as the British, Soviet, American, or NATO forces.
I am really surprised at how naive some American opinion is about a part of the world that is increasingly critical to American security!
Like I said when the memo was first "leaked" McChrystal sounds retarded in it.
Login or Register to post comments.