Senlis Council: AFGHANISTAN IS BEING LOST.

[Harper_is_Bush]

Here's the rundown by a SunMedia columnist:

West won't win Afghan war

As Canadian, American and British soldiers continue to die in Afghanistan, it is time the truth be told about this ugly little war.

Much of what we’ve so far been told by our governments and media has been untrue, wishful thinking, or crass jingoism.

The respected European think tank, Senlis Council, which focuses on Afghanistan, just reported the Taliban is “taking back Afghanistan” and now controls that nation’s southern half. According to Senlis, southern Afghanistan is suffering “a humanitarian crisis of starvation and poverty.

“U.S. policies in Afghanistan have re-created the safe haven for terrorism that the 2001 invasion aimed to destroy,” Senlis found.

http://torsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Margolis_Eric/2006/09/17/1852269.html

Here is the link to the Senlis Council report:
http://www.senliscouncil.net/modules/publications/014_publication/preface

It's bad, worse than we're being told. No surprise there, I guess.

[Harper_is_Bush]

1. Kick. "US policy in Afghan. has re-created terrorist safe haven"

This think tank has 4 field offices in Afghanistan.

Are they non-partisan?

[High Plains]

9. Senlis has an agenda, one of which I approve.

I attended a conference last fall in Kabul where Senlis presented a very well-researched proposal to deal with the opium problem by licensing the farmers and diverting the opium into the legitimate medicinal market. Senlis claims there is a shortage of opioid pain medication worldwide, especially in the developing world. The International Narcotics Control Board, the UN agency charged with such matters, disagrees.

The Senlis licensing proposal would certainly reduce hostilities between poor farmers and the Afghan state (and its NATO and US backers) and divert cash flows away from the black market. But I imagine traffickers would resist this or attempt to sow new fields...

At any rate, the Senlis licensing proposal has little chance of being implemented. While there is interest, it is not coming from the US, Afghan, or NATO governments.

[SoCalDem]

2. No one has ever truly "won" in Afghanistan..n/t

[Jcrowley]

3. Agreed

What would it mean for the West to "win"? That usually means take over.

[bhikkhu]

16. especially true for its residents. n/t

[Nikki Stone 1]

4. Like the Clean Air Act dirtying the air, the war on terror is about

facilitating terror. And I don't think it's inadvertent.

[Harper_is_Bush]

6. I do.

It's not be design. It's stupidity, pure and simple.

[Nikki Stone 1]

20. Lots of people share your opinion and certainly it is possible

But, the more I look at the planning behind this ME debacle, the more I see a plan for chaos, a controlled kind of chaos through US infiltrated/controlled terrorist groups, like Al Qaeda. Yes, I am one of those :tinfoilhat: who think that Binladin is still working for the CIA. Actually, I think it may be more than that: I think that OPEC and American intelligence (and probably other nations) are partners on this with the goal being to control the oil and the money, leaving most of the ME in a state of violence and chaos, weak and unable to fight for its own resources, and fighting each other instead. Fundamentalist religion married to violence channels the rage that is bound to have built up. That is why the Saudi royal family supports the Madrassas and why American universities (like the University of Nebraska) developed the books for the Madrassas in Afghanistan in the 90s. The Taliban were not just about the USSR but about a much larger strategy of controlled instability.

The US has a light version of the same phenomenon: drug gangs, violence in the cities--I think this is one reason we will not see a full gun ban for awhile. The violence is to instill fear, a need for government intervention (by more restrictive laws and policing), and compliance. We also have a huge fundamentalist movement in this country that sanctions violence against Planned Parenthood and the like, but also supports violence (wars, torture) against Muslims in general and gun-toting "minutemen" on the border to shoot down entering brown people. Not as bad as the ME for sure, but then we have been being lulled by creature comforts and television for a long time. The fundies talk more violence than they do, as do neocons like Anne Coulter and David Horowitz who would certainly run screaming away from any real battlefield.

Ultimately, we are all being prepared for a world run by corporations which have hijacked all legitimate forms of government and whose main quest is cheap labor and market domination. They are willing to kill (or sponsor government killing) to do it. Eventually this means a poor standard of living for most people--hence the religious outlet. And a sort of controlled chaos--we will be kept at each other's throats so that we don't go after the real culprits. And weapons have been and are being developed to keep us from even trying.

[EFerrari]

12. I think you are right, NIkki.

:(

[Nikki Stone 1]

21. IT would be far more comforting if it were just stupidity, incompetence

Then you could just replace these guys with more competent ones. I happen to think that things are actually going as planned, except I think this administration has lost some control somewhere--the chaos is more uncontrolled than they bargained for. Their backers are not happy, which may be why Junior is more testy than usual.

[ConcernedCanuk]

5. The Soviet Union destroyed itself trying to control Afghanistan . . .

.
.
.

Why are WE there?

Do we have some sort of death wish?

Canada is already losing some world respect by jumping from a peacekeeping role to a combat role - and I sure hope our voters kick that Bush butt-licker out of our PM's office real soon

Or I will lose some more of my pride in being a Canuk.

How much depends on our next Prime Minister.

I can only hope my wait is short

(sigh)

[Harper_is_Bush]

7. We're there becuase it was a worthy cause at one time but...

due to the negilgence of the USA it's become a lost cause.

Afghanistan was winnable. It could have been made peaceful with enough attention and involvement. In a word: "Iraq" is why it's now lost.

[ConcernedCanuk]

8. "In a word: "Iraq" is why it's now lost." - 'Zactly. - If the War-Machine

.
.
.

had sent the resources and manpower they have wasted ruining Iraq to Afghanistan,

Afghanistan WOULD be under control.

Instead,

The "War-Machine" is floundering in BOTH their major wars

And nothing positive resulting in either one of them.

Gotta admit tho,

The USA has superior weaponry

But alas,

Ain't much use when ya got shit-for-brain types running it . . .

Just a whole lot of young trained troops dying for nothing -

And of course don't forget all the civilians that are getting slaughtered, dismembered, wounded, tortured, and displaced as a result.

YUP

They hate y'all for your "freedoms" alright - -

Your "freedom" to slaughter, dismember, wound, torture and displace their family, friends and loved ones . . .

Did I furget to mention invade and occupy?

AND poisoning with Depleted Uranium?

I know too much . . .

(sigh)

[Harper_is_Bush]

11. You know exactly what you should...not "too much".

The truth is always a good thing.

It is a tragedy that Afghanistan was neglected and Iraq torn apart, but that's the reality. You always want to be armed with that, no matter how disturbing and painful it is.

[ConsAreLiars]

17. How silly. You think Chimpy and the PNACers were engaged in

some "worthy cause?" Quite the contrary. Their goals and methods were not worthy, and they were totally deluded (along with you) if they had any belief that military force would accomplish anything positive at all. They fucked up completely at the very beginng when they claimed (believed?) that killing people in that very poor land would yield anything more than anger and resistance.

(edit typos)

[Harper_is_Bush]

19. The initial invasion into Afghanistan was justified.

If you don't think so then perhaps you can tell me what your response to 9/11 would have been?

[Hosnon]

10. I hate, hate, hate, hate what Bush has done. nt

[roamer65]

13. So it was with the Soviet Union...

so it shall be with the US. Bin Laden knew the twit in WH would take bait, and he did.

[ConcernedCanuk]

14. The "twit" is just a puppet of Pappy and the PNACers - I doubt GW

.
.
.

has too many original thoughts

George is the PNACers "poodle"

And Pappy has a firm grip on his "puppeteer" strings.

Bush 1 was probly gonna disown Junior if he didn't get out of the oil bizness and get into the Genocide business.

GeeDub is obviously doing better at genocide than making money in the Oil bizness!

By the time all them deaths from sanctions, Depleted Uranium, and "collateral damage" are added up,

The BFEE will have outdone Hitler many times over.

Do the math.

[Selatius]

15. Everybody loses when they try to take and impose on Afghani lands

The British Empire was defeated and driven out several times. The Russian Czars never gained the ground either. The Soviets lost there, and it looks like the US and its NATO allies will be the latest to bury its ambitions in Afghani soil.

If you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains
And the women come out to cut up what remains
Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your God like a soldier

Rudyard Kipling

[OneBlueSky]

18. the objective of the West is no longer to WIN wars . . .

it is simply to CONDUCT wars so that the profiteering from which their leaders and their cronies benefit can continue unabated . . . winning a war would mean the end of that war -- and a halt to the ocean of dollars streaming their way . . .