Comments on: The way out of the Afghan abyss Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:37:49 +0000 hourly 1 By: Chip_H Tue, 20 Mar 2012 11:22:15 +0000 Rohde reminds me of Ronald Reagan on the eve of Star Wars and the S&L Blowout. ‘Results take time (and $Bs and $Bs, to paraphrase Carl Sagan), but I know we will get there’ (‘there’ being a permanent Corporate Junta).

Afghanistan is strategically unimportant to the United States? It doesn’t matter if it is, or isn’t! Let’s not forget that Karzai was Taliban Ambassador to the UN when they met with the future Cheney Energy Policy Committee in Houston in *1997* to discuss Afghanistan’s treasures, then were put up in a Manhattan penthouse right up until the final days of 2001. Karzai went on as ‘America’s Puppet’ reselected in 2009 to award the fabulous Aynak copper reserve to … China, and recently the 100-years of oil and gas reserves to … China. Our kids dying in harm’s way and our $100 billion a year in lost taxes are protecting the foreign resource leases of … Red China! Who wants to be the last American to die for the former Taliban Ambassador and Premier Wen Jiabao!?

All Afghans want Americans forces to leave immediately? Actually, they DO! The only Afghans who want America to stay are Karzai’s National Monopoly, his ANA/ANP gestapo and $2 billion a year agencies intelligentsia living off the American ‘aid’ budget, as cover for round-tripping 85% (according to our own ambassadors) of our lost taxes right back to WADC-NOVA war profiteers and mercenaries. The Average Afghan only sees 55c a YEAR of American aid!

An immediate American withdrawal will bring peace to Afghanistan? NOTHING will bring peace to Afghanistan, not since Zbigniew Brzezinski put a bug in President Carter’s ear to open a black ops budget for Afghanistan, and in his hatred for the Soviets, plunged Afghanistan, once the ‘Garden of Central Asia’, into a death spiral on behalf of the WADC apparatchik and their rabid PNAC, then Zbig has the brass to LECTURE US on Afghanistan!

All Taliban are rabid fundamentalists uninterested in compromise? Not at all. They were savvy enough to tell Cheney to stuff it, when Cheney offered a ‘carpet of gold, or a carpet of bombs’, for Afghanistan’s resources at an obscene 1c royalty. They were savvy enough to beat the US-funded Northern Alliance and take control of a proud country shattered by 10 years of industrial meat grinding and another 10 years of open looting, highway robbery and civil war. That takes real compromise. But nobody, nobody, surrenders their homeland to Corporate without a fight. Davey Crockett and Daniel Boone didn’t.

It’s over. All that’s left is the looting of America’s Social Security Trust Fund, which now ‘owns’ 48% of Bush Oil Wars Junk Bonds, and more being pawned off secretly by Fed and Treasury every single day, to pay for a $T+ runway blowout of ‘defense’ (sic) grift. ‘The Sound of Freedom’ is the groans of American homeless and wage slaves, now 1/5th of USA, and more every day until our SSTF is completely looted by 2014, and you know and I know those Bush Oil War Junk Bonds will NEVER be repaid.

If you want to really understand what’s going on, read:

Marc Herold, ‘Afghanistan as an Empty Resource Space’ l


Peter Torbay ‘Diminution and Development’

By: hogsmile Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:02:45 +0000 Everything Mr. Rohde writes is basically correct. But to implement such sweeping strategic changes requires more than simple courage. It requires decisiveness and iron-fisted determination come-what-may in the face of absolute calamity on the ground there. And even with that it requires no small amount of good luck.

We’ve seen all this before, and in the not-too-distant past, elsewhere: in mid-July, 1914, and early-August, 1939. If those missed opportunities to sidestep decades of catastrophe offer any insight, one has a better chance of commanding the Sun to rise in the west and being obeyed … .

By: Grousefeather Sat, 17 Mar 2012 23:51:18 +0000 China doesn’t need a pipe line over the mountains to get oil from Iran. They have enough buck$ to outbid everybody else to get all the oil they want from any country with oil for sale.

By: contrarianview Sat, 17 Mar 2012 13:09:09 +0000 The only reason we are in Afghanistan is to deprive China of oil, since Afghanistan is between Iran and China. When are we going to stop misleading everyone for the real reason for Western presence, as well as Russian presence before that? Afghanistan would be a perfect route for a pipeline to China from Iran, and would have to pass through Afghanistan. Why else would anyone want to be in the “graveyard of civilizations”? Plus, U.S. has not been able to win any wars in Asia, the best they have managed in a stalemate in Korea. So why keep doing something that ends in failure? Simply a way to line pockets of the military/industrial complex. We will end running away with our tail between our legs, and then have the Right claim that the war was won on the ground, but our boys were abandoned by the politicians, just as in Vietnam. We are just postponing the inevitable.

By: ptiffany Fri, 16 Mar 2012 22:27:22 +0000 This ranks as one of the most naive and misleading analyses ever written by a person over twelve years of age. Maybe it was intended as a joke piece. Yeah, that must be it.

(This isn’t abuse, just a statement of opinion.)

By: majkmushrm Fri, 16 Mar 2012 18:14:27 +0000 Sorry, dude, but:
Afghanistan IS strategically unimportant to the US. Your doomsday scenario of the Afghani Taliban suddenly getting control of Pakistan’s nukes is a pipe dream. Pakistan had nukes for quite some time before we attacked Afghanistan and they weren’t in any danger then. The Taliban aren’t going to suddenly gain seriously improved capabilities now.

The vast majority of Afghanis want the US out. Your poll data is from 2010, two years ago. Matters have deteriorated significantly since then and even two years ago a majority wanted us out by your own data. Frankly, your poll data of the number of Afghanis that support the Taliban is a red herring. Weather or not the Afghanis support the Taliban is unrelated to weather or not they want us to leave. You claim that the Afghanis want the US to assist in crafting a peace agreement to end their civil war but offer nothing to support such a claim.

The only thing that will bring peace to the Afghanistan is a political settlement among the various political actors in the country. Such a political settlement will have to include the Taliban. If the US were an honest political broker we might be able to assist, but we’re not. You yourself admit that when you say that the point behind leaving a large residual force in Afghanistan after our alleged departure is to hold off the Taliban. That is simply not going to work. They were in the midst of a civil war when we invaded and our invasion didn’t make that civil war go away.

Beyond all that, your piece reeks of imperial arrogance and the clear assumption that we should make Afghanistan a client state of the US where we are the ultimate power brokers. Are we unhappy with our current puppet, Karzai? We, and not the Afghanis, will find a replacement puppet. An underlying assumption in your nostrums is that Afghanistan should have the governmental structure we saddled them with even though it wasn’t the structure they had before we invaded. The reality is that if the various parties in Afghanistan cut a political deal and returned to their traditional political structures, there would be no need for hundreds of thousands of “police” (army troops with a stickum that says police). The fact that we’re trying to saddle them with structures that the country couldn’t afford in a million years tells you we’re going down the wrong path.

Yes, we should be negotiating with the Taliban but not just the Taliban. We should have all the Afghani parties sitting down and negotiating a solution while we assist. But, in fact, we are sitting down with only the Taliban because we wish to impose OUR solution on the country. That will do exactly zero to resolve the civil war they were engaged in prior to our invasion. Furthermore, making ludicrous demands like insisting that the Taliban renounce international terrorism, which they never engaged in, evinces a total lack of comprehension of the situation. The Taliban are not Al-Qaeda and vice versa. Yes, our invasion forced them into each others arms but a statement by the Taliban breaking ties with Al-Qaeda will be meaningless as long as our actions continue to drive them into each others arms.

By: TobyONottoby Fri, 16 Mar 2012 15:55:44 +0000 matthewslyman –

Couldn’t you add that you are strongly supportive of Mr Romney’s presidential aspirations?

By: TobyONottoby Fri, 16 Mar 2012 15:45:20 +0000 It’s too bad Afghanistan, the USSR and the US didn’t work out an agreement whereby Afghanistan was spared from becoming a battleground in the cold war. Instead, starting in the late 1960s or early 1970s, the three countries could have set aside their differences and cooperated on mutually beneficial economic development.

It’s too bad Iran, the USSR, the UK and the US didn’t work out an agreement whereby Iran was spared from becoming a battleground in the cold war. Instead, starting in the late 1940s or early 1950s, the four countries could have set aside their differences and cooperated on mutually beneficial economic development.

It’s too bad Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Taliban and the US can’t work out an agreement whereby Afghanistan is spared from remaining a battleground in the Global War Against Terrorism. Instead, starting ASAP, the four parties could set aside their differences and cooperate on mutually beneficial economic development.

In short, it’s too bad human beings weren’t some other species that was capable of setting aside their differences and cooperating on mutually beneficial economic development.

By: matthewslyman Fri, 16 Mar 2012 15:40:35 +0000 @Susanbsbi: Couldn’t you be more bold and honest, and say the withdrawal should be completed by November 6th, 2012?

By: Nickntime Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:50:51 +0000 Are we going to wait so long that we’ll see people evacuating Kabul by helicopter, as we did in Saigon?