President Trump is seeking a renewed approach to Afghanistan and reportedly is considering increased troop deployments as well as using paid mercenaries as first line troops. In light of history and moral conscience both approaches seem ludicrous.
Apparently troop withdrawal is also being considered and yesterday, toward that end, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan—the Taliban—provided an open letter to President Trump. The letter was acknowledged by a number of media outlets and makes many very reasonable points which are typically ignored in western mainstream press. Among them are:
- 1. "Your previous officials decided to invade Afghanistan without weighing its consequences. They occupied Afghanistan under irrational arguments which had nothing to do with the Afghans. The Afghans who rose against your forces in defense of their land, creed and people did so as a legitimate struggle ... The Afghans have no ill-intention towards the Americans or any other nation around the world but if anyone violates their sanctums then they are mighty proficient at beating and defeating the transgressors"
- 2. "Everyone now understands that the main driver of war in Afghanistan is foreign occupation ... Previous experiences have shown that sending more troops to Afghanistan will not result in anything other than further destruction of American military and economical might therefore it would be wise if you adopt the strategy of a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan instead of a troops increase. On the one hand, this strategy will truly deliver American troops from harm's way and on the other, it will bring to an end an inherited war by rectifying the mistakes of former American officials."
There is no cause for argument with any of those words. The letter also mentions that "everyone is utilizing these war conditions for their self-interests" and many Americans understand how Congress and the military-industrial-surveillance complex are conjoined at the head through the cohesive power of public plunder and how that relationship precludes troop withdrawals.
It would take enormous public outcries—like those of the 1960's—to bring an end to America's ongoing Middle East
misbehavior. Since the end of the Vietnam War the pugilistic powers-that-be have invested heavily in ensuring
that won't happen again.
We need a Martin Luther King to remind us that
the United States is "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today" and that "A nation that continues year after year
to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."
Many—nowadays including Tony Blair's second-in-command Lord Prescott—believe that the UK's Chilcot Report well-documents regime change to be the primary goal of the US-led invasion of Iraq—which makes that invasion an illegal crime of aggression under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.1
However in 2006—presumably to protect U.K. officials sanctioning illegal Middle East activites—the U.K. House of Lords ruled that "there is no such crime as the crime of aggression under the law of England and Wales". Therefore Tony Blair cannot be prosecuted in private court for colluding in activities which ultimately produced the greatest European refugee crisis in the history of the world as a byproduct of unnecessarily killing over two million2 innocent individuals and consequently fueling exponential growths in worldwide extremism.
Nothing herein is new. Around 1850 Frederick Bastiat showed us that the class with purview over law characteristically dispenses justice in its own interests.
1Less well-documented are the same motivations for U.S. presence in Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria. See more HERE
Today is the 10th anniversary of a U.S. Apache helicopter's notorious 2007 East Baghdad attack which needlessly killed at least a dozen people including two Reuters news agency employees. A passerby who stopped his vehicle to help the wounded was also killed and his two children were injured.
In 2007, using the Freedom of Information Act, Reuters unsuccessfully solicited the U.S. government for detailed information about the deaths of its employees as well as video footage of airstrike(s) in the area. That same year a U.S. military investigation whitewashed the incident, cleared all participants, and claimed to have no information pertaining to the children's injuries—no surprise there. If it were not for involuntary transparency there would be no U.S. transparency at all.
Nevertheless roughly three years later Wikileaks published the airstrike video Reuters was seeking. It was provided to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange by Bradley Manning, now known as Chelsea Manning, in a trove of purloined documents.
For reasons obvious to more sentient viewers, that controversial footage has come to be known as the "Collateral Murder" video. However the U.S. military maintains all conduct therein to be entirely consistent with "battlefield" Rules of Engagement.
If nothing else the video well-shows how war destroys participants on both sides—either literally or psychologically.
Don't construe comments in the 06/01/2017 entry below as pro-Trump—nothing is further from truth. Today's crass presidential reality show appeals only to those reveling in its installation—that's no one here.
Only America's Green Party espouses putting "People, Planet, and Peace before Profit". For decades both of America's dominant political parties have reflected a nation devoid of humanitarian goals, dismissive of human rights, and primarily exporting war. Change is long overdue.
This blog is temporarily suspended, for possibly as long as it takes Killary ro comprehend that her track record caused her election defeat. As of today she seems to blame "1,000" imaginary "Russian agents" and Democratic voters' complacency.
Yesterday from newsline.com.