[Peace-discuss] The wider war

[Ricky Baldwin]

Hard to tell for sure, I guess.  A sociopath, by definition, being hard to spot.

A fair number of people seem to buy it somehow, though.

Ricky



"Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn

--- On Wed, 9/23/09, John W. <jbw292002 at gmail.com> wrote:

From: John W. <jbw292002 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] The wider war
To: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at illinois.edu>
Cc: "peace-discuss" <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
Date: Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 9:17 PM

I always wonder whether our "leaders" really understand these simple concepts and are just blatantly lying to us about their agenda.  The alternative is that they really don't understand, which would make them quite stupid, or that they are, in some complex way, lying to themselves.


John Wason



On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 7:46 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu> wrote:


>From <http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/09/22/mcchrystals-conundrum/>:



...The Afghan government – the government our troops are fighting and dying to protect – is described by McChrystal as riddled with corruption and "malign." This has led to a “crisis of confidence among Afghans. Further, a perception that our resolve is uncertain makes Afghans reluctant to align with us against the insurgents."




But of course the Afghans are "reluctant" to welcome foreign invaders with open arms – yes, even if they are Americans. When have they ever done so?



...McChrystal himself fails to grasp the essential fact about the country he is invading and occupying, which is that Afghans – like people everywhere – hate invaders and invariably resist occupation. Just ask the Russians or the British. The reason for the insurgency isn’t because the Afghan government is any more corrupt than governments in that region of the world generally tend to be: it’s because President Karzai is an American puppet who was installed because we invaded the country and continue to occupy it. Without U.S. military support, the Karzai regime wouldn’t last but a month or two, at most – and the same is true of any regime we support, no matter who is at the head of it.




...Which leads me to believe that this isn’t about Afghanistan at all, that the country is just a staging ground for a wider, much more ambitious military campaign, whose immediate target is Pakistan. The insurgency, the general avers, "is clearly supported from Pakistan. Senior leaders of the major Afghan insurgent groups are based in Pakistan, are linked with al-Qaeda and other violent extremist groups, and are reportedly aided by some elements of Pakistan’s ISI,” which is its intelligence service. Al-Qaeda and other extremist movements “based in Pakistan channel foreign fighters, suicide bombers, and technical assistance into Afghanistan, and offer ideological motivation, training, and financial support."




McChrystal is clearly itching to strike targets in Pakistan with more than just a few drones every now and then – and before you know it, we’ll be launching yet another invasion and occupation, while the good general exhorts his troops to decrease their "distance" from the Pakistanis and tells us we ought to build more schools and hospitals.




Yes, well, they’ll need more hospitals, no doubt about that...



        ###


-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090923/ae1af74d/attachment.html