Showing posts with label War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label War. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

After 10 years in Afghanistan why are we still there ?

As of March, 2011, the United States has spent over $455.5 BILLION dollars on the war in Afghanistan. DoD tallies (which differ from independent sources) report that again, as of March, 2011, 1,412 soldiers (including the 11 CIA civilians) have been killed and 10,468 wounded during Afghan hostilities.

If you break it down, this translates out to 2-3 lives and $796,328,671.00 in taxpayer money wasted every week on a war that nobody wants. That’s right; a recent poll revealed that 2/3 of the American public no longer thinks that the war in Afghanistan is worth fighting.

While the current official stance is that troops will begin being moved out of Afghanistan in July of 2011 (with all troops to be removed by 2014), there is talk of what a post 2014 US Presence in Afghanistan should look like, which doesn’t sound as if the US plans on ever leaving completely. This talk was corroborated by Defense Secretary Gates who observed that the transference of security to Afghani civilian forces (which are currently being trained by the US military) may very well take longer than the 2014 deadline. It is a statement that is not sitting at all well with the American people, nor is the fact that it has been pointed out by sources outside the government that even if the number of Afghans being trained to take over security (the number is over 300,000 at this point) can be trained in time, the cost to Afghanistan (a notoriously impoverished country) to keep them trained and paid and supplied would be greater than Afghanistan’s entire gross domestic product

In spite of President Obama’s assurances that troops will begin to be withdrawn in July of this year, General Patraeus was recently quoted as saying he will “provide options and a recommendation” to the President regarding the number of troops to remove from Afghanistan this year. That caution is needed, and he went on to say that while steps forward in Afghani security are real, that they are “fragile and reversible.”

But it isn’t just the idea of a continued US presence in Afghanistan that is sticking in the craw of the American public; it is also the suspicion that there has been an organized effort by the government to hoodwink the American public into support of the war. Everything from the supposed ‘wikileaks’ documents which reports ties between the Taliban and Pakistan, to the 2010 announcement by pentagon officials (backed up by American geologists) that over $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits have been ‘discovered’ in Afghanistan (a fact which has been known to geologists for decades) make it clear that the US government is doing everything within its power to stall the withdrawal of troops.

Is the reluctance on the part of the US government to withdraw from Afghanistan truly a result over the concern for the Afghani people or is it, as some claim, a reaction to the 2010 agreement between Iran and Pakistan to create the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline? (which would give Afghanistan – given its border with Iran – a strategic significance in the world oil market).

In short, what began eleven years ago as a commitment by the American Government to find and bring to justice those responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks on American soil (specifically Osama bin Laden, who was being harbored by the Islamic extremist Taliban government, headquartered in Afghanistan) has turned into a full-scale headache, complete with the responsibility of rebuilding Afghanistan (for whatever reason) within a democratic framework and maintaining an American presence in the country even after we have turned security over to the Afghanis.

Is it truly the security of America and Americans that is now at stake? Or is it something more?

Monday, March 7, 2011

Did Bill O'Reilly really ask the Hard questions with Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld ?



When Bill O'Reilly interviewd President Obama he was criticized for what some say was talking down to the President and also asking ridiculous questions. When Bill O'Reilly  interviewed former defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld he could of  seen it as an opportunity to look more " fare and balanced " lol . A lot of commentators on both sides of the isle are saying that Bill really gave it to Rumsfeld in this interview, that  he asked the hard questions.  At one point during the interview Bill wants to know why Rumsfeld did not let the citizens of the United States know all the potential problems with a war with Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Rumsfeld just answers back that we the citizens knew everything that we had to know and that was good enough.

Is it me or does Rumsfeld seem like he is not in touch with reality ? I think people in high positions should have  psychological reviews if that's already not happening. Rumsfeld looks like a bit from "Saturday Night Live" but it's not an actor it's him playing him. Take a look at the Interview tell me what you think.

Monday, February 28, 2011

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates WARNS against Land Wars in Asia and the Middle East.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates spoke very candid to the Cadets at West Point on Wednesday. Secretary Gates is known to be a well thought out Defense Secretary who has served under both President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama. Secretary Gates reminded the Cadets that since the 9/11 attacks 80 West Point Graduates have fallen in the line of duty. They were serving our Nation in both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

In what could be considered a slight jab to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld Secretary Gates gave a word of warning to our future leaders. He quoted what General MacArthur said to President Kennedy in regards to the build up to the Vietnam War “Any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should 'have his head examined,'. I guess you can say that Secretary Gates made it pretty clear about how he feels about deploying our troops in these areas of the world.

I understand why we first got into Afghanistan but we have to figure a way out of there soon. I guess the older you get you realize that history does just repeat itself over and over again. First it was the Russians and now it's the Americans in Afghanistan. We just pulled out of the "Pech Valley" that was supposedly critical to our success in Afghanistan. We are pulling out of the Valley because it's consuming to many resources.

Look what happen to the Roman Empire, they spread themselves out around the world fighting needless battles and depleting there resources. Then internal politics became corrupt and they could not satisfy the needs of the Republic. Then society began to break down from within and no one cared anymore. Does this sound familiar ?

Ny Times - U.S. Pulling Back in Afghan Valley It Called Vital to War

Christian Science Monitor - Gates's warning: Avoid land war in Asia, Middle East, and Africa