"It is our right to defend our country. We are not a threat to other countries. But we have to use our rights when our country is occupied by foreign forces." - Mullah Omar, Taliban leader
13/02/08 [i.e. Feb 13 '08 - ICH evidently is now using the Euro style generally] "ICH" -- It was supposed to be "the good war"; a war against terror; a war of liberation. It was intended to fix the eyes of the world on America's state of the art weaponry, its crack troops and its overwhelming firepower. It was supposed to demonstrate—once and for all-- that the world's only superpower could no longer be beaten or resisted; that Washington could deploy its troops anywhere in the world and crush its adversaries at will.
Then everything went sideways. The war veered from the Pentagon's script. The Taliban retreated, waited, regrouped and retaliated. They enlisted support from the Pashtuns and the tribal leaders who could see that America would never honor its commitments; that order would never be restored. Operation Enduring Freedom has brought neither peace nor prosperity to Afghanistan; just occupation. Seven years have passed and the country is still ruled by warlords and drug-merchants. Nothing has gotten better. The country is in shambles and the government is a fraud. The humiliation of foreign occupation persists while the killing goes on with no end in sight.
War is not foreign policy. It is slaughter. Seven years later; it's still slaughter. The Taliban have taken over more than half of Afghanistan. They have conducted military operations in the capital of Kabul. They're dug in at Logar, Wardak and Ghazni and control vast swathes of territory in Zabul, Helmand, Urzgan and Kandahar. Now they are getting ready to step-up operations and mount a Spring offensive. That means the hostilities will progressively intensify.
The Taliban's approach is methodical and deliberate. They've shown they can survive the harshest conditions and still achieve tactical victories over a better-equipped enemy. They are highly-motivated and believe their cause is just. After all, they're not fighting to occupy a foreign nation; they're fighting to defend their own country. That strengthens their resolve and keeps morale high. When NATO and American troops leave Afghanistan; the Taliban will remain, just as they did when the Russians left 20 years ago. No difference. The US occupation will just be another grim footnote in the country's tragic history [F6 note -- and see http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=22503898 and http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=22511066 (and preceding and following)].
The United States has gained nothing from its invasion of Afghanistan. US troops do not control even a square inch of Afghan soil. The moment a soldier lifts his boot-heel; that ground is returned to the native people. That won't change either. General Dan McNeill said recently that "if proper US military counterinsurgency doctrine were followed; the US would need 400,000 troops to defeat Pashtun tribal resistance in Afghanistan." Currently, the US and NATO have only 66,000 troops on the ground and the allies are refusing to send more. On a purely logistical level; victory is impossible.
The battle for hearts and minds has been lost, too. A statement from the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) sums it up like this:
"The reinstatement of the Northern Alliance to power crushed the hopes of our people for freedom and prosperity and proved that, for the Bush administration, defeating terrorism has no meaning at all....The US doesn’t want to defeat the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, because then they will have no excuse to stay in Afghanistan and achieve their economic and strategic goals in the region....After seven years, there is no peace, human rights, democracy or reconstruction in Afghanistan. The destitution and suffering of our people is increasing everyday. ...We believe that if the troops leave Afghanistan, our people will become more free and come out of their current puzzlement and doubts...Afghanistan’s freedom can only be achieved by Afghan people themselves. Relying on one enemy to defeat another is a wrong policy which has just tightened the grip of the Northern Alliance and their masters on the neck of our nation." (RAWA http://www.rawa.org )
Gradually, the Allies are beginning to see that Bush's war cannot be won and that continuing the fighting is counterproductive. There is no military solution to the conflict in Afghanistan and the political objectives are getting murkier all the time. The lack of direction just adds to the growing frustration.
Recently Secretary of Defense Robert Gates tried to bully the allies into sending more combat troops to fight in the South, but he met with stiff resistance . He said:
"I am concerned that many people on this continent may not comprehend the magnitude of the direct threat to European security," Gates said. "We must not become a two-tiered alliance of those who are willing to fight and those who are not. Such a development, with all its implications for collective security, would in effect destroy the alliance."
But public support for the war is waning in Europe. This is America's war, not theirs. Europeans don't need to occupy foreign nations to meet their energy needs. Their economies are thriving and they can simply pay for their fuel on the open market. Only America wants the war. It's all part of a crazy geopolitical "grand strategy" to project US power into the region to control its resources. So far, there's no indication that the plan will succeed.
Germany has the third biggest economy in the world. Over the last few years, they have strengthened ties with Russia and made agreements that will satisfy their long-term energy needs. But German involvement in Afghanistan has put a strain on relations with Moscow. Putin thinks that the US is using the war to put down roots in Central Asia so it can control pipeline-routes from the Caspian Basin while surrounding Russia and China with military bases. Putin is right. Naturally, he'd like to persuade German Chancellor Angela Merkel to withdraw from Afghanistan which would strike a blow against the US-led alliance. And, that is the way it will probably turn out, too.
Eventually, German leaders will see that its foolish to tweak the nose of the people who provide them with energy (Russia) just to support Washington's adventures. When Germany withdraws from Afghanistan; NATO will disband, new coalitions will form, and the transatlantic alliance fall apart. The cracks are already visible.
President Bush has said that the war in Afghanistan must continue or the country will become a haven for drugs, terrorism and organized crime. He says we are fighting a “poisonous ideology of Islamic extremism which threatens to become a global movement”.
But the Taliban and Pashtun tribesmen see it differently. They see the conflict as an imperial war of aggression which has only added to the suffering of their people. A recent report by the United Nations Human Development Fund appears to support this view. It shows that Afghanistan has fallen in every category. The average life expectancy has gone down, malnutrition has risen, literacy has dropped, and more than half the population is living below the poverty-line. Hundreds of thousands of people have been internally displaced by the war. The occupation has created plenty of misery, but no democracy. The war was a failure.
Afghanistan now produces 90% of the world's opium; more than any other country. The booming drug trade is the direct corollary of the US invasion. No one even denies this. Bush has created the world's largest narco-colony. Is that success?
Presently, there are no plans to improve the lives of ordinary Afghanis or to remove the warlords. Reconstruction is at a standstill. If the US stays in Afghanistan, the situation 10 years from now will be the same as it is today, only more people will have needlessly died. Most Afghanis now understand that the promise of democracy was a lie. The only thing the occupation has brought is more grinding poverty and random violence.
There's no back-up plan for Afghanistan. In fact, there is no plan at all. The administration thought the Taliban would see America's high-tech, laser-guided weaponry and run for the hills. They did. Now they're back. And now we are embroiled in an “unwinnable” war with a tenacious enemy that grows stronger and more resolute by the day.
Eventually, the Europeans will see the futility of the war and leave. And that will be the end of NATO.
By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent 26 minutes ago
President Bush suffered a painful diplomatic setback Wednesday when NATO allies rebuffed his passionate pleas to put former Soviet republics Ukraine and Georgia on the path toward membership in the Western military alliance.
The decision, to be made final on Thursday, was sure to be cheered by Moscow, which heatedly opposes NATO's eastward expansion.
In another sign of discord, Greece blocked Macedonia's request to join the 26-nation alliance because of a dispute over its name. Only Croatia and Albania will be invited as new members.
It was a sour outcome for Bush at his final NATO summit as he sought to polish his foreign policy legacy. Instead, he wound up sidetracked by opposition and splits among European allies. It was a result that was foreshadowed by public statements from France and Germany but Bush nevertheless put his prestige on the line and even made a stop in Ukraine on Monday to argue his case.
"We are convinced that it is too early to grant both states the (pre-membership) status," German Chancellor Angela Merkel said as she arrived in Bucharest for the summit. It only takes one NATO member to block a decision, because policy-making is reached by consensus.
Bush was counting on the summit to strongly endorse plans for an anti-missile shield in Europe despite once-heated objections from Moscow.
The summit's opening dinner ran two hours longer than scheduled as the discussion went around the table, with each leader making his or her case. The White House expressed confidence that NATO would give a strong statement of support for its mission in Afghanistan and that a number of countries would pledge additional troops.
Bush, going into the talks, said he was "optimistic that this is going to be a very successful summit."
Diplomats said the alliance would offer a statement saying NATO's door will remain open if Ukraine and Georgia move ahead with political and military reforms and build support for NATO among their citizens.
Afghanistan loomed as the summit's No. 1 topic, a point of contention between some Europeans who see the NATO mission as largely a humanitarian effort and the Bush administration and others who see it as a central front in the fight against terrorism.
Canada had threatened to pull its troops from the front lines in southern Afghanistan unless other allies sent an additional 1,000 combat troops to help.
NATO has about 47,000 troops in Afghanistan, but commanders are pleading for more troops in the south, where Taliban insurgents are wreaking the most havoc. The United States supplies the largest contingent, about 14,000 for NATO, plus the United States has 13,000 operating separately in eastern Afghanistan hunting terrorists and training Afghan forces.
"We expect our NATO allies to shoulder the burden necessary to succeed" in Afghanistan, Bush said a midday news conference with Romania President Traian Basescu on a Black Sea beach.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has offered a battalion — normally about 700 to 800 troops — for the volatile eastern region, NATO spokesman James Appathurai said, reporting on the dinner. That would free up U.S. troops to move south. Appathurai said the offers on the opening day of the summit would meet Canada's demands.
To make up for other allies, Bush has pledged to send an additional 3,200 Marines to Afghanistan. The White House on Wednesday said the actual number would be 3,500.
Bush hailed NATO's expected endorsement of missile defenses.
"It looks like to me that the ingredients are coming together where that could be a distinct possibility," Bush said. "And that would be a very important statement because NATO could assure its members and the people within NATO that there would be defenses available to prevent a Middle Eastern nation, for example, from launching a strike which could harm our security."
The U.S. worries most that Iran could someday launch such as missile.
NATO chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, talking with Bush before the summit, said NATO would "take a clear position on missile defense, recognizing the threat and working on the answers to that recognized threat."
De Hoop Scheffer also said the alliance would publish a "vision statement" about NATO'S long-term commitment to Afghanistan. "We should not forget that we are on one of the front lines in a fight against terrorism in Afghanistan," he said.
Taking note of the dispute over Ukraine and Georgia, de Hoop Scheffer said before the dinner: "I think this can never be a question of `whether.' The `whether' is not questionable. If these nations fulfill the criteria, and if they want to enter — want to enter themselves through NATO's open door, I think that door should be open."
A senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the leaders' meeting was private, said the Bush administration would still consider the summit a success if NATO makes clear that the door to membership remains open. The debate, according to the official, is whether the Bucharest meeting was the right time to settle the question about Ukraine and Georgia.
The alliance is due to invite Croatia and Albania to join, but Greece is pledging to veto Macedonia's bid unless there is a last-minute agreement to change the candidate country's name. Greece says that implies a claim on its northern region, also called Macedonia.
"Until the name issue is resolved there cannot be consensus" on Macedonia's bid, Appathurai said.
"I feel good about what I'm hearing from my fellow leaders about their desire to support Afghanistan," the president said after meeting with de Hoop Scheffer. "I think if tomorrow we get clarification on troop support ... the people of Afghanistan are going to be more than grateful." He did not mention any specific numbers of additional troops.
Bush plans to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sunday in the resort city of Sochi, the last such session of their presidencies. Bush is also to meet with Putin's hand-picked successor, Dmitry Medvedev.
The White House is holding out hopes of an agreement easing Russia's opposition to a missile shield.
Bush said Putin should not fear NATO, but rather should welcome the alliance because it "is a group of nations dedicated to peace."
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
