tagged w/ War in Afghanistan
-
Navy SEAL Jon Tumilson lay in a coffin, draped in an American flag, in front of a tearful audience mourning his death in Afghanistan. Soon an old friend appeared, and like a fellow soldier on a battlefield, his loyal dog refused to leave him behind.
Tumilson’s Labrador retriever, Hawkeye, was photographed lying by Tumilson’s casket in a heart-wrenching image taken at the funeral service in Tumilson’s hometown of Rockford, Iowa, earlier this week. Hawkeye walked up to the casket at the beginning of the service and then dropped down with a heaving sigh as about 1,500 mourners witnessed a dog accompanying his master until the end, reported CBS.
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44271018/ns/today-today_pets_and_animals/#.TlcVnOYt1cZNavy SEAL Jon Tumilson lay in a coffin, draped in an American flag, in front of a... more
-
-
Sign our petition to end the Afghanistan War: http://rethinkafghanistan.com
Memorial Day is coming up, and we've just passed a grim milestone: 1,500 U.S. troop deaths in Afghanistan. Enough is enough. The war isn't making us safer and it's not worth the cost, and this should be the last Memorial Day when we put military families through this kind of agony. Bring the troops home.Sign our petition to end the Afghanistan War: http://rethinkafghanistan.com... more
-
-
Shocking photographs were released this week of American soldiers murdering Afghan civilians. Three photographs, published by the German magazine “Der Spiegel” in its March 20th print edition, show members of the self-designated “Kill Team” comprised of United States Army soldiers who are accused of making a sport of killing innocent Afghans, as they show off one of their victims in a kind of trophy photo; another photograph shows two Afghan civilians who appear to be dead.
Five of the soldiers involved in the killings are now facing court martial proceedings for the deaths of three, unarmed Afghan civilians. The men are accused of faking combat situations to justify killing randomly chosen Afghans with grenades and guns. The case came to light after one of the soldiers informed military investigators about the killings; he was then beaten so severely by other members of the unit for betraying them that he had to be hospitalized.
The photographs are reminiscent of the torture and humiliation suffered by Iraqis at the hands of American troops in the Abu Ghraib prison, which came to light in the spring of 2004. However, there were dozens of those pictures and they clearly showed the victims’ faces, making their pain all the more apparent. That case reverberated across the Muslim world in ways that this case has yet to do, in part because of the absence of photographs. The release of these images threatens to change that.
This piece includes the shocking photographs, as well as a video of the “Kill Team” soldiers telling about the killings and cover-ups.
http://disembedded.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/explicit-photographs-released-of-american-soldiers-murdering-afghan-civilians/Shocking photographs were released this week of American soldiers murdering Afghan... more
-
-
Join the fight to end the war: http://facebook.com/RethinkAfghanistan
"The great initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to end it must be ours."
--Martin Luther King, Jr., speaking of Vietnam.
This week the Pentagon sank to a new low: claiming that Dr. King would "understand" the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. King's legacy is clear: he opposed war and other violence and condemned war as "an enemy of the poor."
Help us stop the Pentagon's lies and attempts to justify the brutal, futile war in Afghanistan. Spread the truth by sharing this video with your family and friends.Join the fight to end the war: http://facebook.com/RethinkAfghanistan
"The... more
-
-
Obama Should Read WikiLeaks Documents
Monday 03 January 2011
by: Ray McGovern | Consortium News | Op-Ed
Perhaps President Barack Obama should give himself a waiver on the ban prohibiting U.S. government employees from downloading classified cables released by WikiLeaks, so he can better understand the futility of his Afghan War strategy.
For instance, if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has hidden from him Ambassador Karl Eikenberry’s cables from Kabul, he might wish to search out KABUL 001892 of July 13, 2009, in which Eikenberry reports that Afghan President Hamid Karzai is “unable to grasp the most rudimentary principles of state building.”
And, while he’s at it, he should dig out the September 2009 cable from the U.S. Ambassador in Pakistan, Anne Patterson, in which she warns: “There is no chance that Pakistan will view enhanced assistance … as sufficient compensation for abandoning support to these [Taliban and similar] groups in Pakistan.”
The same conclusion is contained in the recent National Intelligence Estimates on Afghanistan and Pakistan. My advice to Obama would be: Don’t let anyone gist them for you; read at least the Key Judgments.
Yet, in his recent defense of his Afghanistan-Pakistan policy, Obama acted as if he didn’t know or understand the full import of these disclosures. Instead, he simply reiterated the “three areas of our strategy” in Afghanistan:
“To break the Taliban’s momentum and train Afghan forces so they can take the lead; to promote effective governance and development; and regional cooperation, especially with Pakistan, because our strategy has to succeed on both sides of the border.”
But the Taliban’s momentum has not been broken nor is it likely to be, Mr. President. And good luck with President Karzai on that “effective governance” thing, not to mention the part about getting cooperation from Pakistan.
Indeed, the real Achilles heel of Obama’s strategy, the true showstopper, is the forlorn hope of stronger cooperation with Pakistan.
Other WikiLeaks cables make Pakistan’s deep concern about the encroachment of India in Afghanistan unmistakably clear. In one cable, for example, Pakistani Army chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani is reported to have been “utterly frank” about the consequences of a pro-India government coming to power in Kabul.
Kayani: “The Pakistani establishment will dramatically increase support for Taliban groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan … as an important counterweight.”
Go to the next Page:
http://www.truth-out.org/ray-mcgovern-obama-should-read-wikileaks-docs66524Obama Should Read WikiLeaks Documents
Monday 03 January 2011
by: Ray McGovern |... more
-
-
Wikileaks has shown that our government and military form a 'vast lying machine' that perpetrates mass murder in our name.
January 3, 2011
Do you believe that it is in Americans' interest to allow a small group of U.S. leaders to unilaterally murder, maim, imprison and/or torture anyone they choose anywhere in the world, without the knowledge let alone oversight of their citizens or the international community? And, despite their proven record of failure to protect America -- from Indochina to Iran to Iraq -- do you believe they should be permitted to clandestinely expand their war-making without informed public debate? If so, you are betraying the principles upon which America was founded, endangering your nation, and displaying a distinctly "unamerican" subservience to unaccountable authority. But if you oppose autocratic power, you are called to support Wikileaks and others trying to limit U.S. Executive Branch mass murder abroad and failure to protect Americans at home.
These two issues became officially linked for the first time when former U.S. Afghan commander General Stanley McChrystal explicitly stated that the murder of civilians increases rather than decreases the numbers of those committed to killing Americans, and actually implemented policies -- since reversed by General Petraeus -- to reduce U.S. murder of civilians. McChrystal said that “for every innocent person you kill, you create 10 new enemies." By so doing he made it clear that killing civilians is not only a moral and war crimes issue, but -- in today's interdependent world -- also threatens U.S. national security.
As important as is the issue of free speech, it is the question of whether the U.S. Executive is in fact protecting the American people through its mass murder abroad that really lies at the heart of the Wikileaks controversy. Executive Branch officials justify persecuting and threatening to murder Assange on the grounds that he has damaged U.S. "national security." If McChrystal is right, however, it is the past decade of U.S. Executive mass murder in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, now revealed beyond any doubt by Wikileaks, that is the real threat to U.S. national security.
The chilling fact is this: whether you believe that September 11, 2001 was due to incomprehensible fanaticism or genuine grievances, it seems likely that U.S. leaders’ murder of countless Muslims since 2001 will cause the next 9/11 should, God forbid, it occur, The recent suicide-bomber in Sweden who came perilously close to succeeding taped a message saying "so will your children, daughters, brothers, and sisters die, like our brothers, sisters, and children die." Similar sentiments were voiced by the Times Square bomber, and it is likely that those responsible for future American deaths will also be motivated by revenge for the hundreds of thousands of Muslims for whose deaths U.S. leaders are responsible since 2001.
This is not, of course, to justify such attacks. Any attacks on civilians, whether by the Taliban or General Petraeus, are totally unjustified and crimes of war. But if the issue is how best to enhance U.S. national security, it is critical to rationally discuss the most prudent and sensible means of preventing further attacks -- which in this case is to stop creating huge numbers of people who want to kill Americans. If General McChrystal is correct, every American should tremble at the long-term danger to America caused by the last decade of U.S. war-making in the Muslim world. If only 1/100th of 1% of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims are moved to want to attack America because of America's post-9/11 killing of Muslim civilians, for example, the U.S. Executive will have created a pool of 160,000 Muslims devoted to murdering Americans.
View Next Page:
http://www.alternet.org/story/149393/wikileaks_most_terrifying_revelation:_just_how_much_our_government_lies_to_usWikileaks has shown that our government and military form a 'vast lying... more
-
-
The official line of the NATO command in Afghanistan is that the war against Afghan insurgents is vital to the security of all the countries providing troops there. In fact, NATO was given the central role in Afghanistan because the Bush administration wanted no significant U.S. military role there that could interfere with its plans to take control of Iraq, according to a U.S. military officer.
http://www.skeeterbitesreport.com/2011/01/bushs-obsession-with-saddam-got-nato.htmlThe official line of the NATO command in Afghanistan is that the war against Afghan... more
-
-
On Thursday there was a large protest outside the White Office against the War in Afghanistan but for whatever reason--at a time when that very war has been extensively reported--no 'major news outlet' took the time to cover it. I think this speaks to the breakdown in coverage and the failure of the press to live up to there mandate. If it doesn't fit into the media narrative they won't cover it. Not to shocking, unfortunately.
http://mediaroots.org/media-black-out-of-veterans-chained-to-wh-fence.phpOn Thursday there was a large protest outside the White Office against the War in... more
-
-
Latest News Updates A new video released by the Taliban shows Spc. A new video of Idaho soldier Bowe Bergdahl has surfaced from a production house associated with the Taliban. A family spokesman, Col. Mr Tim Marsano...Latest News Updates A new video released by the Taliban shows Spc. A new video of... more
-
-
believe that the counrty will be handed over on time...
-
-
Military security contracts aided Taliban, Senate inquiry finds
Millions of dollars, and sometimes sensitive information, have flowed to militants via Afghans hired to provide security at military bases in Afghanistan, a Senate report says.
Reporting from Washington — Defense Department security contracts in Afghanistan have funneled millions of dollars to local powerbrokers, some with ties to the Taliban and who carried out killings, bribery and kidnappings, a congressional investigation has found.
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told reporters at a news conference Thursday that a yearlong inquiry has uncovered "significant evidence that some security contractors even worked against our coalition forces, creating the very threat that they are hired to prevent."
The Senate inquiry is the latest investigation of millions of dollars suspected of going astray in the war effort. Last week, an audit by the inspector general of the U.S. Agency for International Development found a U.S.-funded development project near Jalalabad, in northern Afghanistan, may have inadvertently paid millions to militants for security.
In one case detailed in the Senate report, an Afghan named Reza Khan, described by the committee as a "warlord" who was supplying armed guards at a NATO air base in Herat province, was killed when U.S. forces raided his house in 2008 after receiving intelligence that Taliban commanders were meeting there.
The U.S. raid was denounced at the time by Afghan officials, including President Hamid Karzai, and led then- President George W. Bush to call Karzai and apologize for causing civilian casualties. But the committee said a U.S. military investigation concluded that "22 anti-coalition militia" were among the 55 Afghans killed in the raid, including Khan and seven air base guards.
As U.S. troop levels have gone up in Afghanistan over the last two years, the number of armed security guards under contract with the Defense Department has risen sharply, from about 1,000 in 2007 to more than 16,000 this year; most of them are Afghans. The total number of private security personnel in Afghanistan is about 26,000 — larger than a U.S. Army division.Military security contracts aided Taliban, Senate inquiry finds
Millions of dollars,... more
-
-
ayipis
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
An Afghan soldier opened fire at a training base in northern Afghanistan, leading to the deaths of two US civilian trainers, Nato has said.
The suspected gunman and another Afghan soldier were also killed, Nato's International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) said.
The incident took place at Camp Shaheen, an Afghan army training base, outside Mazar-e-Sharif.
Last week, an Afghan soldier killed three UK soldiers in Helmand province.
One Nato soldier and one Afghan soldier were wounded in the incident at Camp Shaheen, Isaf said.
Afghan Shootings of Foreign Troops and Civilians
Continue reading the main story
* 20 July - 2 US civilian trainers killed
* 13 July - 3 UK troops killed by Afghan soldier
* 4 Nov 2009 - Afghan policeman kills 5 UK soldiers
* Sept-Oct 2008 - 2 US soldiers killed by Afghan police in separate attacks
Afghanistan's ministry of defence and Isaf are investigating the shootings.
"Our joint investigation will find out how such an event could have occurred to help us prevent any future acts," Afghan ministry of defence spokesman Maj Gen Zahir Azimi said.
"The actions of this individual are not representative of the thousands of men and women who train and fight side by side with Isaf every day to protect their fellow citizens from insurgent brutality," said Isaf spokesman Brig Gen Josef Blotz.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai has just closed a major international conference on his country with a call for it to control its own security by 2014.
There are currently about 150,000 foreign troops in Afghanistan under Nato and US command fighting the Taliban insurgency.An Afghan soldier opened fire at a training base in northern Afghanistan, leading to... more
-
-
"I'm hardly one to stick up for Michael Steele.
Although a thoroughly pleasant individual, Steele was never the right man to reinvigorate the GOP as its National Committee Chairman and has - on countless occasions - endeavored to put his foot in his mouth, alienating the very people who send those checks to 310 First Street.
And now Steele's remarks at a Connecticut fundraiser pertaining to Afghanistan may well signal the end of his tumultuous Chairmanship of the GOP. ...
In fact, Steele should be commended for raising the matter, whether he did it publicly or not. Despite the worrying death-- and financial--toll in Afghanistan, nobody is talking about it. It's baffling. There appears to be some sort of wicked consensus across party lines that we will stay in Afghanistan "until the job is done" with very little reference as to what "the job" is. I imagine that most Americans would be alarmed at the notion of Afghanistan as a perpetual war. But it's looking like one, especially with a vague strategy of not leaving until "Afghanis can stand up for themselves."
That's not to say we should pull out. The Obama administration should be given the time to execute its strategy. But that being said there must be a serious dialogue about the costs - both short and long term - being incurred by Americans. Excuse the GOP imagery, but Afghanistan is the elephant in the room. For both parties."
Read more: http://www.ypnation.net/michael-steele-and-afghanistan"I'm hardly one to stick up for Michael Steele.
Although a thoroughly... more
-
-
Ever since Michael Steele was elected chairman of the Republican National Committee 18 months ago, party conservatives have sought to undermine his leadership almost from day one. Now they are openly calling for Steele to resign after the chairman made remarks during a GOP fundraiser last week in which he called into question the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan, even as he criticized President Obama's handling of it.
http://www.skeeterbitesreport.com/2010/07/steele-may-have-doomed-his-leadership.htmlEver since Michael Steele was elected chairman of the Republican National Committee 18... more
-
-
Is the war in Afghanistan a just war? We'll talk to an expert. It's a different kind of prayer — and plenty of Catholics are practicing it.Is the war in Afghanistan a just war? We'll talk to an expert. It's a... more
-
-
gooma2
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
An angry President Obama removed Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal from his position as Commander of American forces in Afghanistan on Wednesday, and named as his replacement the architect of the 2007 surge in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus. President Obama said he had done so because an article in “Rolling Stone” magazine featured contemptuous quotes from the general and his staff about senior administration officials, threatening to erode trust among administration and military officials, as well as to undermine civilian control of the military.
“War is bigger than any one man or woman, whether a private, a general or president,” President Obama said. “As difficult as it is to lose General McChrystal, I believe it is the right decision for our national security.” “I welcome debate among my team,” he said, “but I won’t tolerate division.”
This piece includes color photographs, as well as the full video of President Obama's remarks.
http://disembedded.wordpress.com/2010/06/25/an-angry-obama-relieves-runaway-general-mcchrystal-of-command/An angry President Obama removed Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal from his position as... more
-
-
The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.
The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe.
An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium,” a key raw material in the manufacture of batteries for laptops and BlackBerrys.
The vast scale of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth was discovered by a small team of Pentagon officials and American geologists. The Afghan government and President Hamid Karzai were recently briefed, American officials said.
While it could take many years to develop a mining industry, the potential is so great that officials and executives in the industry believe it could attract heavy investment even before mines are profitable, providing the possibility of jobs that could distract from generations of war.
“There is stunning potential here,” Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the United States Central Command, said in an interview on Saturday. “There are a lot of ifs, of course, but I think potentially it is hugely significant.”
The value of the newly discovered mineral deposits dwarfs the size of Afghanistan’s existing war-bedraggled economy, which is based largely on opium production and narcotics trafficking as well as aid from the United States and other industrialized countries. Afghanistan’s gross domestic product is only about $12 billion.
“This will become the backbone of the Afghan economy,” said Jalil Jumriany, an adviser to the Afghan minister of mines.
American and Afghan officials agreed to discuss the mineral discoveries at a difficult moment in the war in Afghanistan. The American-led offensive in Marja in southern Afghanistan has achieved only limited gains. Meanwhile, charges of corruption and favoritism continue to plague the Karzai government, and Mr. Karzai seems increasingly embittered toward the White House.
So the Obama administration is hungry for some positive news to come out of Afghanistan. Yet the American officials also recognize that the mineral discoveries will almost certainly have a double-edged impact.
Instead of bringing peace, the newfound mineral wealth could lead the Taliban to battle even more fiercely to regain control of the country.
The corruption that is already rampant in the Karzai government could also be amplified by the new wealth, particularly if a handful of well-connected oligarchs, some with personal ties to the president, gain control of the resources. Just last year, Afghanistan’s minister of mines was accused by American officials of accepting a $30 million bribe to award China the rights to develop its copper mine. The minister has since been replaced.
Endless fights could erupt between the central government in Kabul and provincial and tribal leaders in mineral-rich districts. Afghanistan has a national mining law, written with the help of advisers from the World Bank, but it has never faced a serious challenge.
“No one has tested that law; no one knows how it will stand up in a fight between the central government and the provinces,” observed Paul A. Brinkley, deputy undersecretary of defense for business and leader of the Pentagon team that discovered the deposits.
At the same time, American officials fear resource-hungry China will try to dominate the development of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth, which could upset the United States, given its heavy investment in the region. After winning the bid for its Aynak copper mine in Logar Province, China clearly wants more, American officials said.
Another complication is that because Afghanistan has never had much heavy industry before, it has little or no history of environmental protection either. “The big question is, can this be developed in a responsible way, in a way that is environmentally and socially responsible?” Mr. Brinkley said. “No one knows how this will work.”
With virtually no mining industry or infrastructure in place today, it will take decades for Afghanistan to exploit its mineral wealth fully. “This is a country that has no mining culture,” said Jack Medlin, a geologist in the United States Geological Survey’s international affairs program. “They’ve had some small artisanal mines, but now there could be some very, very large mines that will require more than just a gold pan.”
[More to read in the link]The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in... more
-
-
-
The Pentagon wants $33 billion in additional funding to pay for the war in Afghanistan this year and to train the Afghan military. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “We are in this intense phase that will be several years. Obviously, I don’t know that either of us could put a time-line on it.”The Pentagon wants $33 billion in additional funding to pay for the war in Afghanistan... more
-
-
British government documents show that corruption, desertion and drug abuse within the Afghan police are threatening its ability to take over the fight against the Taliban and the chances for foreign troops to exit the country.British government documents show that corruption, desertion and drug abuse within the... more
-
