[Peace-discuss] Why is the Obama administration killing people?

[Robert Naiman]

Thomas Friedman explained the choice of targets after 9/11 very
clearly. Because we could.

Thomas Friedman Sums Up the Iraq War: "Suck. On. This."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOF6ZeUvgXs

On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> As you often say, you just can't make this stuff up.
>
> Ricky
>
> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
>
> --- On Wed, 10/7/09, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu> wrote:
>
> From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Why is the Obama administration killing people?
> To: "Ricky Baldwin" <baldwinricky at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "Peace-discuss" <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
> Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:15 AM
>
> Yes. Yesterday.
>
> The USG refused to negotiate with the Afghan government over the extradition of Bin Laden & Co. -- and attacked the country instead -- because it was less interested in prosecuting al-Qaeda than in using 9/11 as an excuse for the continuation of its long-standing policy of domination of the region.
>
> The 9/11 Commission report reveals the wide range of places the USG considered attacking after 9/11.  (The remarkable Douglas Feith suggested bombing South America "because they won't be expecting that" -- IANMTU.)
>
>
> Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> > ... "less sophisticated" meaning "less convoluted" presumably ... By the way,
> > it's worth remembering that the taliban didn't "refuse" to turn over
> > al-Qaeda, strictly speaking.  They said it would be difficult to find them,
> > but they would try if the US supplied the evidence against them.  Bush's
> > sophisticated answer: "We don't need evidence.  We already KNOW they're
> > guilty."  Faced with such irresistable logic, who could "refuse"?  Only those
> > whose acceptance would not be, well, accepted.
> >
> > We really need out of there.  Yesterday.
> >
> >
> > --- On *Wed, 10/7/09, C. G. Estabrook /<galliher at illinois.edu>/* wrote:
> >
> >
> > [The Obama administration's justification for killing people in AfPak
> > ("stopping terrorism") is so transparent -- less sophisticated in fact than
> > the previous administration's case for killing people in Iraq -- as to reveal
> > a contempt for real political discussion in the US.  Obama wrote,
> > outrageously, that the biggest casualty of Vietnam war was "the bond of trust
> > between the American people and their government." But he is attempting to
> > establish that "bond of trust" now by lying, not by being candid about what
> > his administration is doing.  The rest of the world knows that we're in AfPak
> > to "deny terrorists a safe haven" in the sense that "terrorists" are those
> > who oppose US military domination of the Mideast.  --CGE]
> >
> > October 07 2009 Afghan Taliban say they pose no threat to the West By Sayed
> > Salahuddin Reuters
> >
> > KABUL (Reuters) - The Afghan Taliban pose no threat to the West but will
> > continue their fight against occupying foreign forces, they said on
> > Wednesday, the eighth anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion that removed them
> > from power.
> >
> > U.S.-led forces with the help of Afghan groups overthrew the Taliban government during a five week battle which started on October 7, 2001, after
> > the militants refused to hand over al Qaeda leaders wanted by Washington for
> > the September 11 attacks on America.
> >
> > "We had and have no plan of harming countries of the world, including those
> > in Europe ... our goal is the independence of the country and the building of
> > an Islamic state," the Taliban said in a statement on the group's website
> > www.shahamat.org.
> >
> > "Still, if you (NATO and U.S. troops) want to colonize the country of proud
> > and pious Afghans under the baseless pretext of a war on terror, then you
> > should know that our patience will only increase and that we are ready for a
> > long war."
> >
> > U.S. President Barack Obama has said defeating the militants in Afghanistan
> > and Pakistan is a top foreign policy priority and is evaluating whether to
> > send thousands of extra troops to the country as requested by the commander
> > of NATO and U.S. forces.
> >
> > In a review of the war in Afghanistan submitted to the Pentagon last month,
> > U.S. General Stanley McChrystal, in charge of all foreign forces, said
> > defeating the insurgents would likely result in failure unless more troops
> > were sent.
> >
> > There are currently more than 100,000 foreign troops in the country, roughly
> > two-thirds of who are Americans.
> >
> > SAFE HAVEN
> >
> > The Taliban statement comes at a time when Western officials warn that
> > deserting Afghanistan could mean a return to power for the Taliban and the
> > country could once again become a safe haven for al Qaeda militants, who
> > could use it as a base to plan future attacks on Western countries.
> >
> > The Taliban have made a comeback in recent years, spreading their attacks to
> > previously secure areas. The growing insecurity has further added to the
> > frustration of ordinary Afghans with the West and President Hamid Karzai's
> > government, in power since the Taliban's ouster.
> >
> > Since 2001, each year, several thousand Afghans, many of them civilians, have
> > been killed in Afghanistan, with Taliban and al Qaeda leaders still at large
> > despite the rising number of foreign troops.
> >
> > In the statement, the Taliban said the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan for its
> > refusal to hand over al Qaeda leaders, was hasty and unjustified. Washington
> > had not given leaders of the movement any proof to show the involvement of al
> > Qaeda in the September 11 attacks, it said.
> >
> > Washington was using the so-called war on terror in Afghanistan and in Iraq
> > as part of its expansionist goals in the Middle East, central and southeast
> > Asia, it said.
> >
> > It recalled the defeat of British forces in the 19th century and the fate of
> > the former Soviet Union in the 1980s in Afghanistan as a lesson to those
> > nations who have troops in the country.
> >
> > Qari Mohammad Yousuf, a spokesman for the Taliban, said the withdrawal of
> > foreign troops was the only solution to a conflict that has grown in
> > intensity and has pushed some European nations to refuse to send their
> > soldiers into battle zones or to speak about a timetable to withdraw from the
> > country.
> >
> > Some 1,500 foreign troops have also died in Afghanistan since the Taliban's
> > ouster causing many nations to question the presence of its soldiers in the
> > country and whether stability can ever be achieved eight years after the
> > overthrow of the militants.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>



--
Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org

Senator Feingold Calls for Timetable for U.S. Troop Withdrawal from Afghanistan
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/exit-afghanistan