Tag Archives: Afghanistan

Between truces.

It’s been more than 15 years and we’re still at war in Afghanistan; a deployment and occupation considerably longer than that of the now-defunct Soviet Union. It’s been more than 14 years and we’re still at war in Iraq, a conflict longer than the one military historian Dilip Hiro once described as “The Longest War” (the Iran/Iraq war of the 1980s). We’re killing people in Roqqa, Syria, in Mosul, Iraq, in Yemen, and quite a few other places. Far from stepping away, we are preparing to double down, sending another contingent of thousands of American troops to Afghanistan on some quixotic effort to tamp down the wildfire we helped ignite thirty-seven years ago.

Well, it was at the time.Endless war in an of itself is now an invariant reality of modern U.S. foreign policy, regardless of which major party holds the reins of power. The broad political consensus has built a nearly unassailable war machine – not in the sense that it is impervious to military defeat, but rather that it is designed to run on and on regardless of what the American people have to say about it. The killing machine is well insulated from the voting, tax paying public – there’s no conscription, no war tax, no apparent sacrifice associated with these extended deployments except with respect to the volunteer soldiers who are sent to fight, be grievously wounded, and even die. The beauty of this political creation is that it appears to defy gravity; only a herculean effort on the part of the American people could stand a chance of ending these wars.

Of course, Donald Trump has now been stitched into the driver seat of the killing machine. I am among those who consider this a very dangerous state of affairs, even though the background level of warfare remains about the same. The danger is in the fact that Trump is (a) phenomenally ignorant, (b) supremely incurious about any topic that doesn’t bear directly on him, his image, his family, his fortune; and (c) recklessly arrogant in a third-world dictator kind of way. His response to foreign policy challenges reminds me of D’artagnan on his first day in Paris, unwittingly challenging all three of his future fellow musketeers to a duel. A dispute with the Syrians, the Russians, the North Koreans, and the Iranians all in one week. It’s not too hard to imagine a quintet of new conflicts breaking out all at the same time, largely because Trump doesn’t really understand or believe in diplomacy.

We live in dangerous times, to be sure. But at the very least, unless we all decide to make a point of it, we are well and truly stuck with these wars for years – even decades – to come.

luv u,

jp

Soldiers and their uses.

There are a lot of things to write about this week, to be sure, but I just wanted to get something down about Bowe Bergdahl and the political shit storm that erupted around his disappearance and release from his imprisonment by the Haqqani Taliban network. This is prompted in part by the current season of the Serial podcast, which is focusing on Bergdahl’s case, but also by the fact that Republicans – and particularly Donald Trump – regularly hold this guy up as emblematic of everything that’s wrong with America. (On this they appear to be in agreement with the Haqqanis.)

Unworthy victimI won’t run through the particulars of the story. For that, I suggest you listen to the podcast. Suffice to say that Bergdahl suffered grievously over his five years as a guest of the Taliban. He attempted to escape several times, once for as long as nine days, escaping barefoot into the Hindu Kush, injuring himself severely, eating grass, etc. He was beaten badly, cut with razors, kept in a cage not fit for a chimp, threatened with beheading – you name it. He was the first P.O.W. held for anything like this long since the Vietnam War, and under conditions that rival any horror stories from that conflict. Frankly, it’s a testament to his physical and mental strength that he survived.

When he got home, though, he received something less than a cordial reception from his fellow Americans, aside from the folks in his home town and the Obama administration. Now, of course, he’s facing court martial. This is more a political response by the military than anything else, given the heated rhetoric that has accompanied his return. John McCain has insisted that Bergdahl is “clearly a deserter” and threatened to haul top military brass in front of his Senate committee if they didn’t prosecute him as such. Something to bear in mind the next time you consider using the words “McCain” and “integrity” in the same sentence. Mean as a snake.

This is the flip side of the “hero” treatment we give our military personnel – specifically,  referring to them as heroes without actually doing anything substantive to help them, keep them from being deployed pointlessly, etc.  Bergdahl made a mistake under a great deal of pressure; he did so with the best intentions, and he has more than paid for it. The vast majority of those who criticize him now wouldn’t last five minutes under the conditions he suffered for five years. Time to let him continue with his life and move on.

luv u,

jp

New year, old bottle.

Here we go headlong into 2016. It feels as if we’ve already had the year, since pop culture obsesses over the horse-race aspect of elections even if it rarely delves into the substance of what’s at issue. Truth be told, the talk shows have been talking about 2016 since 2012, the day after election day. Evidently, it’s an eyeball magnet for them, so they’ll never stop talking about it, particularly now that we’ve entered the age of Trump. Good television will always trump (no pun intended) good politics, hands down.

So, what are the substantive issues that we should be grappling with in this election year? Same ones as in practically every other year, and you can name them as credibly as I can. Here’s my list:

Cheap eyeball magnetCapitalism’s Failure. This is an issue that touches on everyone, young and old, working and unemployed or retired, poor and not-so-poor. The internal contradictions of American and, by extension, global capitalism came to a head in the crash of 2008, and we are still living in the aftermath of that disaster. Yes, the government can point to select data points that indicated a modest level of recovery, but the fact remains that an economic system that has consistently failed the vast majority of the population over the past 30 years has entered into an entirely new phase of failure. Most working Americans are toiling at the only job they can find, earning an inadequate rate of compensation. Our major cities are choked with legions of homeless people. This system is broken; it only serves the top one percent. We need to take a hard look at this, sooner rather than later.

Phony Wars. Our military adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq are entering a new year with no end in sight, and we’re building up presences in Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere. These conflicts spawn other conflicts, inspire retail terrorists, and generally create havoc. I’m not hearing a lot of meaningful discussion about this from the current herd of presidential candidates. Let’s hold their feet to the fire this year.

Climate Change. While it is snowing like hell today, this has been the warmest and most snowless late fall – early winter in upstate New York in my experience. And while we have the Paris accord, very little is being done to reduce emissions and prevent this ongoing climate disaster from becoming an unmitigated catastrophe and a threat to human survival in the decades ahead. We have the means to move the needle on this; now we just need the will. That’s totally up to us.

Black Lives Matter. With the failure to indict the Cleveland PD officers who shot 12-year-old Tamir Rice last year, it is clear that we need to set new standards for law enforcement methods and accountability. That said, the problem evident in these deadly interactions runs much deeper than what can be corrected through police reform. Law enforcement methodology reflects the values of the society it serves; namely, white society in America. There are deep historical, economic, and cultural reasons for this, and we need to address these at their root, not simply prune the unsightly branches.

The list goes on, but we would do well to inject these issues into the election year discussion, preferably in a manner that draws connections between all three.

luv u,

jp

Bad old days.

I’m beginning to dread the next administration, whoever wins the upcoming election. It’s hard to dispel the notion that we are heading into a period of increasingly bellicose foreign policy, in response to circumstances that are the direct result of our previous decades of bellicose foreign policy. Ugly as these circumstances are, they do not justify the further application of American military power in places like Afghanistan, where we’ve been blowing things (and people) up for 14 years, and Syria, where we appear to be fighting on both sides of the ongoing conflict. And yet virtually every presidential candidate sounds ready to keep the imperial ball rolling, even though the policy is an obvious failure in every sense of the word.

What 40 years of bad policy looks like.The trouble with approaching these issues with an imperial mindset is that we are blind to our own failures while expressing righteous indignation over the failings of others. Russia’s military action in Syria is a good example. They are perhaps the fifth or sixth power to drop bombs in that unfortunate country. Their strategy, while militaristic and morally bankrupt, is not difficult to understand – they view Islamic radicalism as an extreme threat, and they make the not unrealistic assumption that the fall of Syria’s government would result in a failed state something like Libya or Somalia or Iraq (all of which are beneficiaries of our aforementioned bellicosity). So, like the U.S.’s support of Saudi’s murderous campaign in Yemen, they are applying force in support of Assad’s crumbling regime.

Of course, when we or our allies commit crimes (as we so often do), it’s presented as understandable, even noble. When official enemies commit crimes, it’s reprehensible. That’s vintage imperial statecraft. The offense taken at Russia’s actions fits this template, but also speaks to another dynamic – that of a kind of longing for the simplicity and drama of the Cold War. I’m not entirely referring to the administration here – they encourage this to some extent – but the corporate media, the pundits, the opinion-makers are all fully vested in this enterprise. The more elderly among them, those who lived through the actual Cold War, want to get the band back together again, so to speak. The younger pundits and journalists were brought up to revere the fairy tales told by their elders and want to join in the melodrama of facing off with an “evil empire”.

We are in such a cultural moment, I believe (just look at the current crop of blockbuster movies). At a time in human history when it is absolutely imperative that the nations of the world work together, we cannot afford this poisonous brand of nostalgia.

luv u,

jp

Next up.

I can’t decide whether the Syrian conflict is becoming more like the Afghan war of the 1980s or the Lebanon civil war (1975-90). It certainly has elements of both. Great and regional power proxies. A U.S. ally that is also a conduit for extremists (Pakistan in the 1980s Afghan war; Turkey in today’s Syria). Multiple armies running up against one another in a relatively small space (Lebanon when the Israelis, Syrians, and U.S. were all operating there at once). Rich Saudis bankrolling fanatical foreign fighters (Afghanistan). Now Syria has the misfortune of having drawn the interest of two great powers, one the global hegemon (us), the other its former and increasingly current rival (Russia).

When THEY do it, it's wrong. Got that?It is a bit maddening to see Defense Secretary Ash Carter denounce the Russians for being the gang that can’t shoot straight (which they apparently are) when only days ago our forces in Afghanistan blew up a Medecins Sans Frontieres hospital – an accident, of course (we seem to have a lot of them). While we’re railing against Putin, we might pause to remember that we have been in Afghanistan for fourteen years, and that the place is still ungovernable. We’ve been in Iraq for 12 years at some level or another, and large swaths of it are under the control of a group we profess to hate – ISIS or ISIL, nurtured in the government-free zone we carved out in the cradle of civilization, supported by Saudi and Turkey. (I guess the friends of our friends are somehow our enemies. And the enemies of our enemies … also our enemies. Have we no friends?)

When you invade countries without cause or a thought to the consequences, you shouldn’t expect to make any friends. When you pursue policies that undermine the stability of an entire region, you shouldn’t be surprised when the whole place starts caving in. I’ve said it before but it bears repeating – sometimes things are broken so badly that they cannot be put back together. As Americans, we can’t get our heads around that concept. We always think there’s something we can do. Basically, the one thing we can do right now is to stop actively making things worse. Once that’s pursued, other solutions may present themselves.

Speakerstakes. Speaking of ungovernable, there will be no Speaker McCarthy and, hell, maybe no speaker anybody for a while. The bug-fuck-nuts conference in the House must be high-fiving one another over yet another victory. Word to the wise: when you put government haters in charge of government, bad things will happen.

luv u,

jp

Bodies count.

Though you probably didn’t hear about it on the evening news or NPR, the group International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (of which Physicians for Social Responsibility is a member) released a report on casualties of the so-called “war on terror” in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. The toll is conservatively estimated at 1.3 million in total, with 1 million in Iraq killed as a result of our 2003 invasion. Anyone familiar with the figures breezily tossed around by the last two administrations might be surprised by this total. (I recall W. Bush casually offering 30,000, as if guessing the number of marbles in a jar.) Actually, the number is roughly in line with what the Iraq Study Group estimated in 2005-06.

This is what hegemony looks likeNo matter – this wasn’t worthy of comment, except on Democracy Now! That’s not surprising. We can’t acknowledge the magnitude of our own crimes, only those of our official enemies. Assad is an execrable mass murderer, right? Sure he is. But has he killed as many as we have over the past fifteen years? Not nearly. How about ISIS? Killer crackheads, to be sure. But pikers next to us. Absolute freaking amateurs. We have a long tradition of outdoing those we criticize. No one denounced the Russians for their invasion of Afghanistan more than we did; and yet here we are, 14 years into our own Afghan war, no end in sight. Noble mission vs. international crime. Curiously, the former has a higher body count.

This is nothing new. We’ve just passed the fiftieth anniversary of our invasion of South Vietnam – the arrival of the first contingent of combat units in the country. If they think about it at all, most Americans generally think the number of dead in the Vietnam war as being in the hundreds of thousands, perhaps – maybe 300,000. Given that millions were killed, millions more gravely wounded, this is akin to holocaust denial. Kind of sickening. It’s estimated that about 40,000 Vietnamese have died since the war due to unexploded ordinance alone – see this recent article in the Nation.

Unless we come to terms with this as a people, we will be condemned to repeat it. We already have, and we will again. But we don’t have to. It’s up to us.

luv u,

jp

Christmas bot.

Oh, Christmas bot, oh, Christmas bot! It’s hard to see just what you’ve got!

heres-bobYes, yes … we’re polishing up the holiday songs here at the abandoned Cheney Hammer Mill. T’is the season and all that. What, you’re not familiar with the dirge of the Christmas Bot? Small wonder. We just made it up. What kind of songwriters would we be if we resorted to used Christmas Carols? It would be a total cop out. So we are resolved to write lame Christmas numbers each and every December, five minutes before we hastily record them and throw them up on the internet. You’re welcome!

Legend has it that every year around this time, the sound of holiday ridiculousness wafts out of the old abandoned mill by the old abandoned canal in this old abandoned town. What an asinine legend. Just the sort of thing you’d expect in this lame backwater. Whoops – should have closed the window before I said that. Now all the neighbors know that I have NOTHING BUT CONTEMPT FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD!

Okay, well …. It’s probably obvious to all of you that I not only do not like having neighbors here at the mill. And it may seem to you that I am trying to drive them away with my obnoxiousness. That couldn’t be farther from the truth. We are trying to drive them away with the obnoxiousness of our raucous Christmas music. That’s probably the best way to scare away undesirables. Trouble is, we can’t keep it up for long enough to reach critical obnoxiousness mass, so we resort (as we always do) to Marvin (my personal robot assistant), who makes a fairly decent stereo system when he really tries. He just plugs his sorry ass into a couple of stereo speakers, plugs a memory stick into his ear, and cranks it up to twelve.

Unethical? Not a bit of it. We have no ethics, no code. That’s what Big Green is all about. THAT’S WHY WE’RE ABOARD HER. Do I hear a “no” vote?

New war.

Well, we’ve gotten our marching orders from the President. Time to start hammering the extremist group that grew out of the chaos we created after attacking and destroying Iraq; the jihadists that have benefited from our aid to the Syrian opposition and from the piles of money rolling in from Saudi and other gulf states whose wealthy are only too happy to support extremist Sunnis. Once again, we’re “taking the fight to” some group that wouldn’t have existed without our bankrupt imperial foreign policy. The last round was with Al Qaeda, beneficiaries of our covert proxy war against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Now it’s ISIS.

Digging our way out of the holeI can’t say which part of Obama’s proposed campaign against ISIS seems the most confused and misguided. It may be the notion that we should fund the training of “moderate” Syrian opposition forces in Saudi Arabia, of all places. First of all, there is no meaningful moderate opposition in Syria. The lead forces opposing the Assad regime are hyper-religious extremists. They have walked off with many of the weapons we have dropped on the so-called moderates, just as billions of dollars worth of weapons have gone missing in Afghanistan (probably falling into the hands of the Taliban or worse). Any effort to train the “moderates” will be symbolic at best and will likely result in yet another stream of jihadist heading from the gulf to the conflict zone.

Let’s face it, folks. When we destroyed a nation as complex as Iraq – a country that represents the ethnic, religious, and political divisions that run through the entire Middle East – we made an irreparable mess that is still exploding; a process of implosion that has continued unabated from the days of “shock and awe”. We are always encouraged to think that our actions have no lasting consequences, that bad situations are somehow reparable through the application of additional force, more bad policy, etc. Not so.

Those who think we should do this intervention need to ask themselves, when has this ever turned out well? Answer honestly, now.

luv u,

jp

The other side.

Last week I wrote about the P.O.W. Bergdahl and how he and his family were being used as a political football. The other half of the story is about the prisoner trade the Taliban negotiated with our government. The same voices that were denigrating the Bergdahl clan described the traded Guantanamo detainees as a  Taliban “dream team” or a set of “MVPs” for the other side in the Afghan war. Setting aside the ridiculousness of the sports analogy, this characterization is as stupid as it is irrelevant.

Let's ask this guy.First of all, they were not high-value detainees. They were leadership within the Taliban regime of the 1990s – 2001, yes, but they were not implicated in the deaths of any Americans. Nor were they captured at great cost, as has been suggested by some. Two or more of them turned themselves in; others were turned in by Pakistani intelligence, probably in exchange for some payment. Will they return to “the fight”? Well, that may be, but keeping Guantanamo open all these years has inspired more (younger) people to join the fight than we could ever release from that legal limbo on Cuban soil. A lot of people want us dead; are we that worried, really?

Then there’s the simple fact that the Afghan war is going to end. Face it, McCain, Graham, Ayotte, etc. … stick a fork in it. Your awesome war is coming to a close, whether you like it or not. Only you are in favor of keeping it going, just as only you were in favor of expanding the Global War on Terror to Syria. The American people are sick of the Afghan war, and they will not miss it.

Now the same political hacks have their hair on fire about Iraq because it is melting down as a result of our having trashed the place with their blessing. This, they suggest, is the argument for staying in Afghanistan for … well, forever. Does anyone, anyone in America agree? Does anyone want their kid to go over there and take a bullet for this sorry project? My guess is no.

Next week, I’ll rant a bit about Iraq. Stay tuned.

luv u,

jp

New year, old news (part 2).

Some more thoughts about issues of the day that seem very much like those of yesteryear (2013, that is).

The last battle of Fallujah.Iraq revised (again). After an absolutely awful year of conflict, fueled by the ongoing civil war on its northern border in Syria, Iraq has been back in the news this past couple of weeks – more specifically, the Iraq war and the battle of Fallujah. There has been the predictable discussion of, was the battle (actually, two battles) worth it, have the sacrifices our troops made been in vain, should we have left a residual force in place?  In the process, though, the picture that emerges of the American invasion and occupation of Iraq is, frankly, hard to recognize.

Just one example: when network regular General Barry McCaffery was on MSNBC this weekend weighing in on the capture of Fallujah and Ramadi by al Qaeda linked elements, he opined that, if Saddam Hussein hadn’t been removed by the disastrous U.S. invasion of Iraq, he would have had a nuclear arsenal by now. The lie that wouldn’t die, right? Somehow, no matter how thoroughly it is debunked and disproven, it always rises to live again. Does anyone wish American troops were still in Iraq? Does anyone still think that invasion was a good idea? Let’s see a show of hands.

Gates. Note to Obama: this is what you get when you retain a Republican cabinet member and give him the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Robert Gates was appointed to oversee the last two years of the W. Bush administration, since the first six had so seriously driven the American empire off the rails. He was billed as a steady hand on the tiller, and I think Obama bought that as well. Gates reportedly criticizes Biden for being wrong on every foreign policy issue for decades – this, of course, coming from the man who, as deputy director of the CIA in 1984, wanted to initiate a bombing campaign in support of his agency’s terrorist Contra army in Nicaragua. He was close to the Iran Contra operation, though managed to escape prosecution (like his boss and good friend, George H.W. Bush).  So … people who live in glass houses.

As it happened, Biden took a pass on voting to confirm Gates as Defense Secretary in 2006 (he didn’t vote). Probably the start of a beautiful friendship. As faithful stewards of the empire, you’d think they’d be nicer to one another.

More next week.  luv u,

jp