Eurasia Takes Shape: How the SCO Just Flipped the World Order

The whole Global South, stunned by the accelerated collapse of the western Empire and its unilateral “rules-based order, now seems to be ready to embrace the new groove, fully displayed in Dushanbe: a multipolar Greater Eurasia of sovereign equals.

With Iran’s arrival, the SCO member-states now number nine, and they’re focused on fixing Afghanistan and consolidating Eurasia.

The two defining moments of the historic 20th anniversary Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Dushanbe, Tajikistan had to come from the keynote speeches of – who else – the leaders of the Russia-China strategic partnership.

Xi Jinping: “Today we will launch procedures to admit Iran as a full member of the SCO.”

Vladimir Putin: “I would like to highlight the Memorandum of Understanding that was signed today between the SCO Secretariat and the Eurasian Economic Commission.

It is clearly designed to further Russia’s idea of establishing a Greater Eurasia Partnership covering the SCO, the EAEU (Eurasian Economic Union), ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) and China’s Belt and Road initiative (BRI).”

In short, over the weekend, Iran was enshrined in its rightful, prime Eurasian role, and all Eurasian integration paths converged toward a new global geopolitical – and geoeconomic – paradigm, with a sonic boom bound to echo for the rest of the century.

That was the killer one-two punch immediately following the Atlantic alliance’s ignominious imperial retreat from Afghanistan.

Right as the Taliban took control of Kabul on August 15, the redoubtable Nikolai Patrushev, secretary of Russia’s Security Council, told his Iranian colleague Admiral Ali Shamkhani that “the Islamic Republic will become a full member of the SCO.”

Dushanbe revealed itself as the ultimate diplomatic crossover. President Xi firmly rejected any “condescending lecturing” and emphasized development paths and governance models compatible with national conditions.

Just like Putin, he stressed the complementary focus of BRI and the EAEU, and in fact summarized a true multilateralist Manifesto for the Global South.

Right on point, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev of Kazakhstan noted that the SCO should advance “the development of a regional macro-economy.”

This is reflected in the SCO’s drive to start using local currencies for trade, bypassing the US dollar.

Watch that quadrilateral

Follow the new silk road

Dushanbe was not just a bed of roses.

Tajikistan’s Emomali Rahmon, a staunch, secular Muslim and former member of the Communist Party of the USSR – in power for no less than 29 years, reelected for the 5th time in 2020 with 90 percent of the vote – right off the bat denounced the “medieval sharia” of Taliban 2.0 and said they had already “abandoned their previous promise to form an inclusive government.”

Rahmon, who has never been caught smiling on camera, was already in power when the Taliban conquered Kabul in 1996.

He was bound to publicly support his Tajik cousins against the “expansion of extremist ideology” in Afghanistan – which in fact worries all SCO member-states when it comes to smashing dodgy jihadi outfits of the ISIS-K mold .

The meat of the matter in Dushanbe was in the bilaterals – and one quadrilateral.

Take the bilateral between Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar and Chinese FM Wang Yi. Jaishankar said that China should not view “its relations with India through the lens of a third country,” and took pains to stress that India “does not subscribe to any clash of civilizations theory.”

That was quite a tough sell considering that the first in-person Quad summit takes place this week in Washington, DC, hosted by that “third country” which is now knee deep in clash-of-civilizations mode against China.

How China is Taking the Silk Road to Financial Dominance

Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan was on a bilateral roll, meeting the presidents of Iran, Belarus, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.

The official Pakistani diplomatic position is that Afghanistan should not be abandoned, but engaged.

That position added nuance to what Russian Special Presidential Envoy for SCO Affairs Bakhtiyer Khakimov had explained about Kabul’s absence at the SCO table: “At this stage, all member states have an understanding that there are no reasons for an invitation until there is a legitimate, generally recognized government in Afghanistan.”

And that, arguably, leads us to the key SCO meeting: a quadrilateral with the Foreign Ministers of Russia, China, Pakistan and Iran.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Qureshi affirmed: “We are monitoring whether all the groups are included in the government or not.”

The heart of the matter is that, from now on, Islamabad coordinates the SCO strategy on Afghanistan, and will broker Taliban negotiations with senior Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara leaders.

This will eventually lead the way towards an inclusive government regionally recognized by SCO member-nations.

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi was warmly received by all – especially after his forceful keynote speech, an Axis of Resistance classic.

His bilateral with Belarus president Aleksandr Lukashenko revolved around a discussion on “sanctions confrontation.”

According to Lukashenko: “If the sanctions did any harm to Belarus, Iran, other countries, it was only because we ourselves are to blame for this.

We were not always negotiable, we did not always find the path we had to take under the pressure of sanctions.”

Considering Tehran is fully briefed on Islamabad’s SCO role in terms of Afghanistan, there will be no need to deploy the Fatemiyoun brigade – informally known as the Afghan Hezbollah – to defend the Hazaras.

Fatemiyoun was formed in 2012 and was instrumental in Syria in the fight against Daesh, especially in Palmyra. But if ISIS-K does not go away, that’s a completely different story.

Particular important for SCO members Iran and India will be the future of Chabahar port. That remains India’s crypto-Silk Road gambit to connect it to Afghanistan and Central Asia. The geoeconomic success of Chabahar more than ever depends on a stable Afghanistan – and this is where Tehran’s interests fully converge with Russia-China’s SCO drive.

What the 2021 SCO Dushanbe Declaration spelled out about Afghanistan is quite revealing:

1. Afghanistan should be an independent, neutral, united, democratic and peaceful state, free of terrorism, war and drugs.

2. It is critical to have an inclusive government in Afghanistan, with representatives from all ethnic, religious and political groups of Afghan society.

3. SCO member states, emphasizing the significance of the many years of hospitality and effective assistance provided by regional and neighboring countries to Afghan refugees, consider it important for the international community to make active efforts to facilitate their dignified, safe and sustainable return to their homeland.

As much as it may sound like an impossible dream, this is the unified message of Russia, China, Iran, India, Pakistan and the Central Asian “stans.” One hopes that Pakistani PM Imran Khan is up to the task and ready for his SCO close-up.

That troubled Western peninsula

The New Silk Roads were officially launched eight years ago by Xi Jinping, first in Astana – now Nur-Sultan – and then in Jakarta.

This is how I reported it at the time.

The announcement came close to a SCO summit – then in Bishkek. The SCO, widely dismissed in Washington and Brussels as a mere talk shop, was already surpassing its original mandate of fighting the “three evil forces” – terrorism, separatism and extremism – and encompassing politics and geoeconomics.

In 2013, there was a Xi-Putin-Rouhani trilateral.

Beijing expressed full support for Iran’s peaceful nuclear program (remember, this was two years before the signing of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the JCPOA).

Despite many experts dismissing it at the time, there was indeed a common China-Russia-Iran front on Syria (Axis of Resistance in action). Xinjiang was being promoted as the key hub for the Eurasian Land Bridge.

Pipelineistan was at the heart of the Chinese strategy – from Kazakhstan oil to Turkmenistan gas.

Some people may even remember when Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, was waxing lyrical about an American-propelled New Silk Road.

Now compare it to Xi’s Multilateralism Manifesto in Dushanbe eight years later, reminiscing on how the SCO “has proved to be an excellent example of multilateralism in the 21stcentury,” and “has played an important role in enhancing the voice of developing countries.”

The strategic importance of this SCO summit taking place right after the Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) in Vladivostok cannot be overstated enough.

The EEF focuses of course on the Russian Far East – and essentially advances interconnectivity between Russia and Asia. It is an absolutely key hub of Russia’s Greater Eurasian Partnership.

A cornucopia of deals is on the horizon – expanding from the Far East to the Arctic and the development of the Northern Sea Route, and involving everything from precious metals and green energy to digital sovereignty flowing through logistics corridors between Asia and Europe via Russia.

As Putin hinted in his keynote speech, this is what the Greater Eurasia Partnership is all about: the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), BRI, India’s initiative, ASEAN, and now the SCO, developing in a harmonized network, crucially operated by “sovereign decision-making centers.”

So if the BRI proposes a very Taoist “community of shared future for human kind,” the Russian project, conceptually, proposes a dialogue of civilizations (already evoked by the Khatami years in Iran) and sovereign economic-political projects. They are, indeed, complementary.

Glenn Diesen, Professor at the University of South-Eastern Norway and an editor at the Russia in Global Affairs journal, is among the very few top scholars who are analyzing this process in depth.

His latest book remarkably tells the whole story in its title: Europe as the Western Peninsula of Greater Eurasia: Geoeconomic Regions in a Multipolar World.

It’s not clear whether Eurocrats in Brussels – slaves of Atlanticism and incapable of grasping the potential of Greater Eurasia – will end up exercising real strategic autonomy.

Diesen evokes in detail the parallels between the Russian and the Chinese strategies.

He notes how China “is pursuing a three-pillared geoeconomic initiative by developing technological leadership via its China 2025 plan, new transportation corridors via its trillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative, and establishing new financial instruments such as banks, payment systems and the internationalization of the yuan.

Russia is similarly pursuing technological sovereignty, both in the digital sphere and beyond, as well as new transportation corridors such as the Northern Sea Route through the Arctic, and, primarily, new financial instruments.”

The whole Global South, stunned by the accelerated collapse of the western Empire and its unilateral “rules-based order, now seems to be ready to embrace the new groove, fully displayed in Dushanbe: a multipolar Greater Eurasia of sovereign equals.

Did Israel Supply Intel on Kabul Strike that Killed 10 kids? Remember Soleimani?

US condemns rocket attacks in Israel

Gaza rocket fire raises pressure on Israel government | CBC News
Israel above, Palestine below. Where there’s terror, there’s  “Israel”.
Half a year after devastating war, life in Gaza seems worse than ever. - Post - Arab America

Russian jammers sent most our missiles into the water…others landed peacefully and they were flown to Russia for examination.

We have those photos as well.

They left from Hatay, from a facility that houses a Google Jigsaw/Idea’s Group mercenary team.

This was the safehouse that Serena Shimm was murdered for finding…when it was involved in an earlier gas attack.

Trump knew the truth all along about the White Helmets.

Then he had Soleimani murdered…

Then Iran destroyed two of our bases and probably killed 84 Americans whose deaths Trump covered up.

Now Israel is after Milley…not a VT favorite by any means.

They have been controlling the fake intel that the Pentagon gets since January 2001.

They control all of it. With Trump they no longer had to simply control the Pentagon, they started passing it directly.

Worse still, Trump started getting his own off Facebook.

What did they do?

They hacked his IPhone and began sending him things to make him crazier. Think we are kidding?

As for the dead kids…that was no accident. Nobody is that stupid.

We might remind you of the sniper videos from Iraq…dating back to 2010.

There were videos posted of “Iraqi” snipers killing Americans using rifles with camera phones mounted on them…special mounts…made in Israel I might add.

Afghanistan withdrawal is a shock to the Israel lobby

Palestine must never be for the Palestinians. And that is the shock.

Zionism, like American, Australian and South African nationalisms, was at the same time colonial.

Military occupations excite violent resistance throughout history.

The U.S. has given up the fantasy of transforming Afghanistan.

This removes Israel’s cover for its occupation and is generating panic among Israel’s friends.

For the Israel lobby, the U.S. occupation is in the image of the Israeli occupation, which the Israel lobby wants to go on forever even as it laments its presence and wishes this were not necessary.

As we reflect on the Afghan withdrawal, I remember well the ideological thrill experienced by Israel supporters in the sadness and shock of 9/11.

Now you know what it is like to live in Israel.

The U.S. and Israel are in the same boat.

Our tough neighborhood has come to your shores. Let us advise you how to deal with radical Islamist terror.

In the years that followed, the Israeli mindset and model were adopted by American policymakers.

We occupied two Muslim countries and set about to reform their societies and governance.

We dedicated ourselves to fighting the terrorists that hated us for who we are, a democracy.

Yes, I know there were some Good Old American reasons to undertake these militant imperial activities; but the role of Israel and its lobby were significant.

Netanyahu and AIPAC and the leading thinktanks urged the U.S. to go into Iraq.

The neoconservatives who populated the Bush administration and had Rumsfeld’s ear had a near-religious faith in the use of American force (in a world of one superpower) to transform the Middle East.

From the start the causes of terrorism were never thoughtfully considered by our media.

Only leftwingers and realists discussed Robert Pape’s exhaustive research in “Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism,” showing that many suicide terrorists through history were seeking to rid their lands of occupiers.


Alongside that blindness was the failure by the media and the government’s 9/11 Commission to consider a primary motivation of the 9/11 attackers: hatred of America’s role in oppressing Palestinians.

That motivation got a few uncomfortable lines in the massive 9/11 report.

But because Israel support is actually an article of faith in Washington– “unwavering commitment”, in Biden’s words; we support Israel even “if the Capitol crumbled to the ground,” in Pelosi’s words– such support must never be made to seem problematic.

So the media and politicians distort the facts.

Just as the media and political establishment today ignore the fact that the leading human rights groups have labeled Israel an apartheid state.

Jon Stewart Iran Nuclear Deal GIF - Find & Share on GIPHY

The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan has delivered a shock to the U.S. identification with Israel.

The Israel lobby liked the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan.

Israel lobbyists said that the occupation could go on indefinitely and the occupation was a lot better than the alternative: a terrorist state created by the people who live there who hate America and the west.

For the Israel lobby, the U.S. occupation is in the image of the Israeli occupation, which the Israel lobby wants to go on forever even as it laments its presence and wishes this were not necessary.

Little kids rocked, Israel shocked : Izlam

Now the United States has withdrawn from Afghanistan amid scenes reminiscent of France leaving Algeria or the U.S. leaving Vietnam, and Afghanistan is for the Afghans.

Palestine must never be for the Palestinians. And that is the shock.

The decolonization of Afghanistan damages the Israeli-American identification since 9/11, and removes a geopolitical justification for Israel’s neverending occupation of Palestinian lands.

But neverending occupation is Israel’s only answer to the Palestinian question.

If a Palestinian state is created, it will just be a terror state, the Israeli leaders always say; and the Israel lobby echoes the propaganda.

And says, Afghanistan will become a terror state.

You could see the panic in Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s meeting with Joe Biden last week. Bennett gave a long/bush-league/biblical lecture to the president.

He spoke with evident angst about all the terror groups that surround Israel, from Hamas to Islamic Jihad to Hezbollah.

He urged the U.S. to stay in Syria.

He described Iran as a terror state outside civilized parameters and said Israel will continue to take it on– presumably by continuing to murder Iranian scientists.

It was the same old war on terror, being sold to Americans who polls show overwhelmingly want an end to the Afghanistan war.

And the Israel lobby exulted over the summit meeting, saying it shows that the bipartisan consensus for Israel that Trump wrecked has been restored

. A rightwing PM became “close friends” with a Democratic president, who all but endorsed the use of force against Iran.

Being idealistic, I say the good times at the White House can’t last.

The paradigm has shifted on the war on terror, and Israel as an apartheid state.

Israel will continue to experience terror attacks, and will deliver terror ten-fold back to Palestinians– so long as it constitutes itself as a majority “Jewish” state that grants higher rights to Jews and forces rights-less Palestinian into cantons.

No one in the Israeli government has challenged these concepts of governance.

Israel is in national mourning today for a sniper who was shot at the wall of the Palestinian ghetto of Gaza by a Palestinian who is confined to that space.

The Israel lobby tells Americans that a “Hamas terrorist” killed a good soldier.

The Israel lobby doesn’t care that 2 million Palestinians can’t move outside a tiny area whose water is undrinkable. It doesn’t care that Israeli snipers maim and kill Palestinians who protest their imprisonment.

Iran's Holocaust Cartoons: A Daily Dose Of Anti-Semitism, Anti-Americanism and Israel=Nazis ...

When liberal Zionists say the occupation is unsustainable, they leave out the inevitable sequel: Palestinians who want a better future are always going to resist Israeli rule, by whatever means.

That’s why Israel is a security state surrounded by terrorists. It’s not a democracy.

This was all foreseen. Hannah Arendt said during the Nakba in 1948 that Israel was doomed to “degenerate” into a Spartan warrior state so long as it ignored the desires of its neighbors.

In the same year State Department advisers warned the White House that helping to implant a Jewish state in Palestine would result in decades of unrest. Both predictions have come to pass.

Nobel Peace Prize-winner Obama bombed 7 Muslim-majority nations.

The Israel lobby has worked tirelessly to overcome these brutal realities by projecting the Israeli experience and saying the Israeli condition is the American condition, and everything bad about its neighborhood also threatens America.

So Israel is our great ally.

The lobby has repackaged that ally again and again through the Cold War and the war on terror and on Iran too.

“Both of us… are a lighthouse in a very, very stormy world,” Bennett told Biden.

The Afghanistan withdrawal reminds us that the U.S. and the so-called Jewish state have very different interests in the Middle East.

If only we could discuss it.

Bonus Video

Afghanistan’s pop star, Aryana Sayeed escapes from Taliban on US flight

 

Afghanistan’s pop star,  has escaped on a US flight out of Kabul as fears from the Taliban grows. 

Aryana Sayeed, a singer and judge on the Afghan version of The Voice, was one of those fortunate to escape the country on a US cargo jet on Wednesday, the Mail Online reported. 

‘I am well and alive and after a couple of unforgettable nights, I have reached Doha, Qatar and am awaiting my eventual flight back home to Istanbul,’ the 36-year-old told her 1.3 million Instagram followers. 

Ms Sayeed later posted an update showing that she had flown onward to Turkey. 

 

Don’t Use Girls as Justification for Bombing Afghanistan, Again

by Nandini Archer

Back in 2001, the UK prime minister’s wife, Cherie Blair, called for moves to “give back a voice” to Afghan women.

In 2010, then US secretary of state Hillary Clinton vowed to defend Afghan women’s rights.

This was a huge part of her so-called feminism—vowing to save the Afghan women, while bombing them.

Now, in 2021, we’re hearing something not too dissimilar: dangerous militarism cloaked in humanitarian and women’s rights language, recycling the same arguments made by Clinton.

“Western intervention is something million[s] are praying for right now,” tweeted anti-FGM campaigner Nimco Ali over the weekend.

“It is not too late for [the] US and UK to send troops to help hold Kabul,” tweeted Justin Forsyth, a former aide to Gordon Brown, who has also served as CEO at both UNICEF and Save the Children.

He linked to a BBC article headlined ‘Kabul’s young women plead for help as Taliban advance.’

The piece reads: “For 20 years the West has inspired, financed and sheltered this new generation of Afghans. They have grown up with freedoms and opportunities that they fully embraced.”

Journalists across the media are pursuing a similar narrative. Reporting the story of an Afghan woman, who two decades ago, at the age of 12, was forced to get engaged to her cousin, the Financial Times yesterday wrote: “After the 2001 US-led invasion of Afghanistan, the teenager discovered a freedom that would have been unimaginable”.

That’s exactly the problem: all these statements seem to rest on the assumption that the occupation of Afghanistan was a good thing for women and girls—something Hilary Clinton herself claims.

But it absolutely wasn’t. Nearly 70,000 civilians were killed and injured in the US’s longest-running war—many of whom were women.

But the violence has been entirely legitimized or brushed over by claims that women and girls in Afghanistan once again need Western rescue efforts—as if the people being murdered are just collateral damage.

What have the US and UK been doing in Afghanistan for the past 20 years?

How could you possibly believe in this liberal interventionist narrative when Afghan women’s empowerment apparently fell apart in a matter of days?

Haven’t we learnt anything from intervention in Iraq—or Libya?

If they really cared, Western leaders could offer immediate asylum to people fleeing Afghanistan

In 2011, liberals including human rights groups actively called for intervention through the backdoor, via a no-fly zone (a euphemism for bombing that meant NATO’s were the only planes flying.)

And what was one of NATO’s justifications at the time?

That Gaddafi was using mass rape as a weapon of war—which Amnesty International failed to find any evidence of.

Sure, I get the desire to want the UK government to do ‘something’ to support those fleeing the Taliban and I don’t think any of us have all the answers—but sending troops is never the solution.

And when warmongerers and imperialists claim to care for women’s rights—don’t believe them.

If they really cared, Western leaders could offer immediate asylum to people fleeing Afghanistan.

The Stop the War coalition, which was set up ahead of the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, said in a statement yesterday: “The British government should take a lead in offering a refugee programme and reparations to rebuild Afghanistan, an act which would go a great deal further in advancing the rights of the Afghan people, women in particular, than continued military or economic intervention in the fate of Afghanistan.”

This would be a start. And while the UK has announced that it is “looking at bespoke arrangements”, suggestions that the scheme “will be similar to that used to help Syrian refugees” tell a more accurate story: in reality, only tiny numbers of those fleeing will be allowed in—the UK government doesn’t care.

It’s already emerged from senior military sources that the Home Office is reluctant to give many people asylum because of the message it will send to other refugees.

Regardless, offering asylum alone isn’t enough. The hard truth is that governments around the world will have to negotiate with the Taliban like they would with any other state, whether they agree with it or not.

Women in Afghanistan are not a monolithic group and many have long resisted both the Taliban and Western intervention, and they don’t need your rescuing now.

After two decades of failed Western intervention, don’t be fooled again.

As was the case with Tony Blair’s illegal invasion of Iraq and David Cameron’s catastrophic intervention in Libya, when the UK sends troops, it spells destruction for women and girls—and today would be no exception.


CIA-Backed Afghan Death Squads Massacred Muslim Children Campaign of Terror

A shocking exposé reveals CIA-backed death squads in Afghanistan have killed children as young as 8 years old in a series of night raids, many targeting madrassas, Islamic religious schools.

In December 2018, one of the death squads attacked a madrassa in Wardak province, killing 12 boys, of whom the youngest was 9 years old.

The United States played key roles in many of the raids, from picking targets to ferrying Afghan forces to the sites to providing lethal airpower during the raids.

The Intercept reports this was part of a campaign of terror orchestrated by the Trump administration that included massacres, executions, mutilation, forced disappearances, attacks on medical facilities, and airstrikes targeting structures known to house civilians.

“These militias … were established in the very early days of the Afghan War by CIA officers, many of whom had been brought back into the fold after the invasion of Afghanistan in late 2001 who had previously been working in Afghanistan during the 1980s,” says reporter Andrew Quilty.

“This network of militias was set up and appear to be entirely under the control of the CIA but made up entirely of Afghan soldiers.”

 

America’s Costliest Wars Unjustified and ‘Stupid’

The decision by the US to fight both of those “stupid” wars was made by powerful people in government and industry for their own selfish economic and political purposes.
The little people who actually had to do the fighting and dying had no say in the matter and either went because they had to, or volunteered because they had been lied to and convinced that it was the patriotic thing to do.
These US soldier testimonies educational, heartbreaking and valuable.


In the latest scandal precipitated by Commander in Chief Donald Trump — a man who notoriously got a doctor to lie for him about his having debilitating “bone spurs” so he wouldn’t have to serve in the military during the Vietnam War — we have a president who is the leader of the military but who, it is reliably confirmed, has disparaged the people who fought in those wars.

He has called them “losers” for being killed or captured in battle. He has declined to memorialize them.

He has had wounded veterans kept out of military parades because he felt vets in wheelchairs and on walkers or crutches or missing limbs “are not a good look.”

He has called soldiers who served in Vietnam “losers and suckers” for going and fighting and dying there, since, as he knew from his own experience, the draft was “easy to get out of.” 

And he has declined to visit the graves in France of US dead from WWI, calling them “losers” for getting killed. 

It’s all pretty outrageous, particularly for a man who as president of the US, has for four years been sending American military personnel into battle or keeping them in battle zones in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and elsewhere around the globe, creating more dead “losers” in the process.

But let’s also at least acknowledge that, whether by accident or not, the president did say two correct things, for which he should not be criticized.

One was that Vietnam was a “stupid” war.  The other was that, in the case of World War I, it was hard to know “Who were the good guys in this war?” 

Braindead US pundits have reflexively attacked the president for saying these things about these two wars as though that is a sacrilege and somehow an insult to American veterans, but they’re wrong.

Those wars were indeed both stupid and unnecessary.

There are two issues to be raised here. One is the national policies and leadership that have historically sent Americans abroad into battle to kill, fight, be maimed for life and even to die.

The other is the behavior in battle of those soldiers who have been dispatched to fight America’s wars.

And let me be clear: Trump’s dismissal of WWI and Vietnam as “stupid” wars is not indication that he is anti-war.

His unilateral abrogation of the multi-national agreement with Iran on limiting its nuclear power program, his pull-out from the Reagan-Gorbachev Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty, his continuation of President Obama’s trillion-dollar nuclear-weapons “modernization” and development program, his creation of a US Space Force, officially militarizing outer space, and his record expansion of the US military budget make it clear that he is as much a warmonger as most of his predecessors.

That still doesn’t mean we should criticize the two valid criticism he has made about two of America’s major wars.

Trump’s problem, as a man of supreme self-importance with a complete lack of human empathy, is that he cannot see the difference between criticizing a war, and criticizing the soldiers who had to fight in it.

To Trump, a man who casually used his father’s money and connections to escape a draft that less wealthy and powerful young men couldn’t avoid, those who ended up in the “stupid” Vietnam War probably deserved whatever happened to them.

They were to Trump “losers and suckers” for ending up in Nam. The same for the soldiers and marines who ended up being chewed up on the front line trenches in France during World War I.

I happen to know a bit about World War I and the sacrifices US fighting men made. My maternal grandfather, a gifted athlete who had a potential Olympic opportunity as a sprinter that was forfeited because of the war, was hit with mustard gas on the front which left his lungs scarred for life, ending his athletic career.

He wound up being a coach and head of the athletic program for the school system in Greensboro, NC.  My other grandfather on my father’s side earned a silver star for heroically driving an ambulance on the front lines in France through that war, rescuing allied and German wounded.

It was an experience so horrible that my father, a Marine in WWII, said his dad never once spoke of it to his children.

My silver-star grandfather, the son of two German immigrants to this country, who died in his 40s of colon cancer, probably had no idea why he was fighting soldiers from the nation of his parents; origin. Trump is right that there was no real moral issue in that most bloody of wars.

It was simply a war of competing empires — the old British and French and Italian ones on one side, and the rising German and Austria-Hungarian one, aided by the declining Ottoman Empire on the other. 

(The picture was complicated by the convergent timing of the Russian Revolution which ousted the Tsar and eventually led to the Communist government which sued for peace and left the field of battle, only to become the target of the WWI victors, including the US, after the so called Great War ended in 1918.)

I know a bit about the Vietnam War too, as a war resister who decided before my 18th birthday that the US invasion of Vietnam was a criminal enterprise against a nation simply seeking independence and that I would not allow myself to be drafted to fight in it.   

Trump, certainly not for any intellectual or moral reason (which would be beyond him),  is nonetheless correct that both wars were stupid and never should have been fought.

But that doesn’t make the men who fought and died in those wars “stupid” or “losers.”

First of all, most of the people who fought for the United States in those wars were drafted into the military. They went because they had little alternative.

Those who enlisted “voluntarily” were often driven to do so by the promise of a job or out of a sense of patriotism —  itself the response to massive government and media propaganda.

In the case of WWI, the target of that propaganda was the “evil Germans” while with Vietnam, it was about an imagined “Communist menace” that we were warned would sweep the globe if Vietnam, half a world away, were to “fall” under the sway of that alien ideology of worker revolution against the rich.

We can say that American military enlistees were brainwashed or deluded in volunteering to fight such wars, but that doesn’t make them “losers” or “suckers.” 

In fact many American soldiers, sailors and marines have shown themselves in battle to be courageous, selfless in defending their comrades in arms, often noble in extending compassion and generosity to those that they have captured or defeated, and heroism in risking or sacrificing their own lives in order to save others. 

(Of course there are plenty of examples of US soldiers, just as with soldiers of other countries, behaving criminally and brutally, but that too, is not a reflection on soldiers in general.)

The point is, as Commander in Chief, President Trump, himself a draft-dodging liar, has demeaned, as a class of people, American soldiers for whom he, as their commander and chief policy maker when it comes to sending them into battler or ending the battles they are engaged in, has exhibited a reprehensible disrespect for their service and their sacrifice.

But at the same time, let’s not condemn the president for the two truthful things he has said in this latest Trump scandal:  that the Vietnam War and World War I should never have been fought. 

It’s no dishonor to those who fought, died or were gravely injured in those wars that they fought in them.

The decision by the US to fight both of those “stupid” wars was made by powerful people in government and industry for their own selfish economic and political purposes.

The little people who actually had to do the fighting and dying had no say in the matter and either went because they had to, or volunteered because they had been lied to and convinced that it was the patriotic thing to do. 

They deserve to be honored for doing their duty or for going beyond the call of duty for what they at least thought was right, and Trump should be tossed out of the White House and his role as Commander in Chief for mocking them and dishonoring them.

At the same time, let’s also acknowledge that this nation still has a great reckoning that is overdue. We all need to recognize too the honor, courage and heroism of those brave people who, when the war drums were beating in the early days of World War I, and during the late 1950s and early 1960s as US involvement in the Vietnam War grew and through the course of those two wars, struggled to oppose them, who refused to fight them, and who as a result lost jobs, went to jail, left the country, were deported, and were condemned by the more deluded of their fellow citizens.

We especially need to honor those servicemen and women who, once in the military, realized the true nature of the wars they were being sent to fight, and who refused to continue, either deserting or simply refusing to fight, facing arrest and prison, a life of struggle with a dishonorable discharge, exile and public disrespect.

Trump Ending Wars Gimmick

Trump has sent more new troops to the Middle East than he’s bringing home from Afghanistan. Are we suckers? Yes we are, they know it and they love it.

By Khury Petersen-Smith

When President Trump spoke to army wife Amy Wiliams during his speech and told her he’d arranged her husband’s return home from Afghanistan as a “special surprise,” it was difficult to watch.

Sgt. Townsend Williams then descended the stairs to reunite with his family after seven months of deployment. Congress cheered.

A military family’s reunion — with its complicated feelings that are typically handled in private or on a base — was used for an applause line.

That gimmick was the only glimpse many Americans will get of the human reality of our wars overseas.

There is no such window into the lives or suffering of people in Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan, or beyond.

That’s unacceptable. And so is the myth that Trump is actually ending the wars.

As German soldiers’ scribbles on the walls of troops’ quarters or train compartments put it: “We have to fight only for the purse of others. Anything else they keep telling us is rubbish.”

The ‘war on terror’ was not designed to end.

The U.S. has reached a deal with the Taliban to remove 3,400 of the 12,000 U.S. troops currently in Afghanistan, with the pledge to withdraw more if certain conditions are met.

That’s a long overdue first step, as U.S. officials are finally recognizing the war is a disaster and are negotiating an exit.

But taking a step back reveals a bigger picture in which, from West Africa to Central Asia, Trump is expanding and deepening the War on Terror — and making it deadlier.

Far from ending the wars, U.S. airstrikes in Somalia and Syria have skyrocketed under Trump, leading to more civilian casualties in both countries.

In Somalia, the forces U.S. operations are supposedly targeting have not been defeated after 18 years of war.

Where is the anti-war movement?

It received little coverage in the U.S., but the first week of this year saw a truck bombing in Mogadishu that killed more than 80 people.

Everywhere, ordinary people, people just like us except they happen to live in other countries, pay the price of these wars.

Last year saw over 10,000 Afghan civilian casualties — the sixth year in a row to reach those grim heights.

And don’t forget, 2020 opened with Trump bringing the U.S. to the brink of a potentially catastrophic war with Iran.

And he continues to escalate punishing sanctions on the country, devastating women, children, the elderly, and other vulnerable people.

Trump is not ending wars, but preparing for more war. Over the past year, he has deployed 14,000 more troops in the Middle East — beyond the tens of thousands already there.

If this seems surprising, it’s in part because the problem has been bipartisan. Indeed, many congressional Democrats have actually supported these escalations.

In December, 188 House Democrats joined Republicans in passing a nearly $740 billion military budget that continues the wars.

They passed the budget after abandoning anti-war measures put forward by California Representative Barbara Lee and the precious few others trying to rein in the wars.

It’s worth remembering that State of the Union visual, of Congress rising in unison and joining the president in applause for his stunt with the Williams family.

Because there has been nearly that level of consensus year after year in funding, and expanding, the wars.

Ending them will not be easy. Too many powerful interests — from weapons manufacturers to politicians — are too invested.

But ending the wars begins with rejecting the idea that real opposition will come from inside the White House.

As with so many other issues — like when Trump first enacted the Muslim Ban and people flocked to airports nationwide in protest, or the outpouring against caging children at the border — those of us who oppose the wars need to raise our voices, and make the leaders follow.

CIA ‘Dark Prince’, Soleimani Killer & Bin Laden Hunter, dead on Jet in Afghanistan

Image result for taliban with missile launcher

The Taliban relentlessly pressure Afghan soldiers and police to turn and fight the Americans as invaders (and rightly so)

In the late morning, the British media Daily Mail had spread the news with a very in-depth article on the figure of Michael D’Andrea before giving space, in the following hours, to an anonymous US military source that would obviously have denied the presence of CIA agents on the crashed flight, of which the Pentagon first it denied even the very fact of the crashed plane and then the downed by the Taliban, without however providing credible versions on the reason for the disaster in the usual strategy of information manipulation.

Instead, the high counterintelligence official who would have died in the crash appears little known by Adnkronos as he briefly summarizes the immense profile despite the fact that dozens of articles on the web are available on the intelligence and anti-terrorism expert who was even the role of “The wolf” in a drama / thriller film about the history of the hunt for the worst terrorists in the world, as explained in our article on the profile of “Dark Prince”…

The Russian agency Avia.pro in the last hours has also spread the news that it could have been a missile of the Iranian Padaran of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to shoot down the plane with a missile.

But the IRGC itself has not confirmed and many sources do not consider the indiscretion true.

The hypothesis is that the paramilitaries of Tehran wanted to hit the plane precisely because they believed that the CIA mobile command and the commander Michael D’Andrea were on board who would have planned the assassination of General Qasem Soleimani of the Pasudar Quds Forces.

This would have been accomplished by sending a special unit armed with Manpada missiles for shoulder launch in that area of ​​eastern Afghanistan which is 600 km from the border with Iran.

Even if the hypothesis is not currently highly accepted, this would explain why the Taliban, Islamic fundamentalist rebels, would have first claimed and then denied the shooting down of the plane.

Brzezinski died safely in a hospital bed, unlike the millions of displaced and murdered civilians who were pawns in Brzezinski’s twisted, geopolitical chess games of blood and lunacy.

The news is so big that we have to write it running the risk of a denial, even if at the moment it is confirmed by intelligence russian sources not better identified. And a little curious riddle in his Wikipedia history…

Ayatollah Mike” or “Dark Prince”, the famous and very dangerous Michael D’Andrea, commander of the Central Intelligence Agency of Langley (Virginia) in operations in the Middle East would have been killed in the crash of the US Air Force military plane crashed yesterday in central Afghanistan on which CIA, NSA officers were traveling ( National Security Agency).

The death of the crew was reported by the Taliban spokesman, Zabihullah Mujah, who in a statement released a few hours after the accident (and reported by Il Giornale in Italy) described the incident as follows: «A special American plane was flying for an intelligence mission in the Sadukhil area, Dehk district, Ghazni province.

The entire aircraft crew and several senior CIA officers from the United States were killed. The wreckage and bodies of the deceased are still in the area».

The news of the alleged death of D’Andrea has been previous posted by on Veterans Today inside the investigations on the disaster of the Bombardier / Northrop Grumman E-11A. An then in our website Gospa News.

Later, in the last hours, the iranian website Tasnim relaunched the topic. Then the other iranian Mizan, the mouthpiece for Tehran’s Judiciary, did, according to the British media Mirror that write an item about, in wich recalled the VT scoop. Lastly also Jerusalem Post and Daily Mail reported the news.

«There were conflicting claims over the number of dead and people on board, with the Taliban claiming it recovered six bodies, an Afghan police chief saying four were dead and two were missing, and a US official stating the jet was carrying fewer than five people.

The US has not yet commented on reports that Michael D’Andrea was on board the jet and among those killed» reports Mirror.

Michael d’Andrea, CIA operations chief for the Middle East. nicknamed Dark Prince or Ayatollah Mike

«The downed plane was the mobile CIA command for Michael D’ Andrea, head of operations against Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan, America’s most advanced spy platform and mobile command center with all equipment and documents now in enemy hands» read on VT (for wich I am honored to be a correspondent from Italy).

«VT Damascus: (Russian intelligence sources confirm) It has been reported that (Mike de Andrea) responsible for the assassination file of the martyr Major General Qassem Soleimani was killed in the accident of the American plane that was shot down in Afghanistan. He is the most prominent figure of the CIA intelligence in the region.

The CIA top official was killed in the US bomber crash in Afghanistan».

At the moment there is no confirmation from the Pentagon even on the nature of the accident and on the victims therefore the presence of Michael d’Andrea, also nicknamed Dark Prince because coordinator of the activities of the National Clandestine Service, the dark arm of the CIA licensed to kill, remains shrouded in mystery.

«A U.S. Bombardier E-11A crashed today in Ghazni province, Afghanistan. While the cause of crash is under investigation, there are no indications the crash was caused by enemy fire.

We will provide additional information as it becomes available» it is the only concise official press release issued on Twitter by the spokesman for the US Force Army Col Sonny Leggett.

Some chilling images and the flight Bombardier / Northrop Grumman E-11A crashed or shot down in Afghanistan

If the commander of all the CIA operations in the Middle East is really died on the crashed spy plane, this would represent sensational news that could create even greater instability in relations between the US and Afghanistan after the tensions with Iran for the killing of General Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Forces of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRGC or Pasdaran), who died in the attack carried out by a Ud Air Force drone near the airport of Baghdad last 3 January together with Abu Mahdi Al Muhandis, deputy commander of the Iraqi Hashid paramilitary troops of the People’s Mobilization Forces.

The Iranian news website Tasnim has posted the news of the killing of D’Andrea in an article with many details in which it mentions Veterans Today and also Gospa News, as the first sources of this sensational indiscretion.

The Tasnim.com page of January 28 with machine translating by Farsi (Persian) in English

The position of the Taliban about the crash is ambiguous. Previously, in a press release in Pashtu language, they claimed the shooting down of the “American occupation” plane, as reported by the Tasnim news agency, but subsequently released a press statement that referred instead the shootings of an unknown number of helicopters and aircrafts by the Mujaheddin without explicit reference to the Bombardier / Northrop Grumman E-11A.

May be that they realized only later the importance of the downed plane’s travellers within the leaders of American intelligence on board. An harsh action that could trigger heavy bombing retaliation by the US Air Force.

«Since 2017, D’ Andrea has run the CIA’s false flag and assassination programs in the Middle East, allegedly responsible not only for the murder of General Soleimani but the killing of 300 Iraqi demonstrators as well» Veterans Today writes again referring to the recent statements by the Iraqi prime minister and the Armed Forces command spokesman, reported in the previous Gospa News reportage, regarding killer infiltration among the rioters to further inflame the protests as happened in 2014 in Piazza Madian in Kiev, during the coup in Ukraine supported by American President Barack Obama.

Ayatollah Mike’s resume is truly impressive. Therefore we report in full the Wikipedia entry which cites as many as 10 different authoritative sources to support the information. In which happened a big mystery…

Image result for us kill team in afghanistan

When we write first version of this post whe highlighted that the biography starting with “Michael d’Adrea was an officer” as a an implicit confirmation of his death.

Now, an hour after the posting of the item the sentence has been modified.

But no problem! We have the screenshot that demonstrate the first version. A simple mistake of writing??? Maybe but this coincidence, about a secret agent history, seems more an attempt of coverage…

«Michael D’Andrea was an officer of the Central Intelligence Agency, that in 2017 was appointed to head the Agency’s Iran Mission Center.

He was a major figure in the search for Osama bin Laden, as well as the American drone striketargeted killing campaign» starts biography on Wikipedia.

D’Andrea was raised in Northern Virginia. He met his wife while working overseas with the Central Intelligence Agency, and converted to Islam in order to marry her (for this reason his nickname became Ayatollah Mike).

His wife, Faridah Currimjee D’Andrea is a daughter of a wealthy Muslim family from Mauritius with Gujarati origins.

D’Andrea joined the CIA in 1979, and he was considered an underperformer atCamp Peary. D’Andrea reportedly began his overseas career in Africa, and he is listed as a foreign service officer at the Embassy of the United States in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

D’Andrea previously served as chief of station in Cairo, Egypt and later in Baghdad, Iraq. D’Andrea was reportedly one of the CIA officials who failed to track Nawaf al-Hazmi, who would later participate in the September 11 attacks.

D’Andrea became head of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center in 2006, replacingRobert Grenier. This is the exact year in which George Bush jr began to finance the Syrian rebels and terrorists to prepare for the civil war planned by the CIA since 1983 as shown by the Gospa News reports.

During his nine-year tenure, D’Andrea presided over hundreds of American drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen, advocating for the program to the United States Congress. In 2015, leadership of the drone program was passed to Chris Wood, following bureaucratic reshuffling by Director John O. Brennan.

During his time at the Counterterrorism Center many reporters referred to him only by the codename “Roger”, which was considered unusual for an official not posted overseas.

During the hunt for Osama bin Laden, D’Andrea directed an analysis of competing hypotheses as to who, besides Osama bin Laden, could be in the targeted compound in Abbottabad.

D’Andrea’s operatives also oversaw the interrogations of Abu Zubaydah, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, which a United States Senate report described as torture.

He was reportedly involved in the assassination of Hezbollah member Imad Mughniyah in Damascus, Syria. He received much blame for the Camp Chapman attack in Khost, Afghanistan, when seven CIA operatives were killed by a suicide bomber, who was allegedly backed Pakistan’s ISI.

Michael d’Andrea, CIA operations chief for the Middle East interpreted by actor Fredric Lehne as The Wolf in the movie Zero Dark Thirty – click on the pics to watch the trailer

D’Andrea was the inspiration for the character of “The Wolf” in Kathryn Bigelow’s Zero Dark Thirty.

We just have to wait for the moment when there will be any official confirmation of the death of Ayatollah Mike or the possible denial by the CIA that after hours of late arriving … For now there have only been anonymous denials by US officers in front of others who speak of at least 5 people on the plane of which nothing is known.

Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio
© COPYRIGHT GOSPA NEWS
no reproduction without authorization

SOURCES

GOSPA NEWS – INVESTIGATION ON JIHADISTS

GOSPA NEWS – WARZONE REPORTS

IL GIORNALE – CIA CREW DEAD IN PLANE CRASH

WIKIPEDIA – MICHAEL D’ANDREA

MEHR NEWS AGENCY – DARK PRINCE AYATOLLAH MIKE

MIRROR – CIA BOSS KILLED IN DOWNING OF JET

RUSSIA TODAY – PLANE DISASTER IN AFGHANISTAN

Former traitor Afghan soldiers turn their guns on allied American Invaders

Image result for us kill team in afghanistan

The Taliban relentlessly pressure Afghan soldiers and police to turn and fight the Americans as invaders (and rightly so)

As U.S. forces have shrunk their presence and interaction with regular Afghan soldiers, American airstrikes have reached record numbers, often pounding areas close to where the soldiers come from and sometimes killing civilians. In an age of social media and Taliban news, the news of those attacks spread quickly, and outrage against the American presence rises.

“We were devoid of a fundamental understanding of Afghanistan — we didn’t know what we were doing,” Douglas Lute, a three-star Army general who served as the White House’s Afghan war czar during the Bush and Obama administrations, told government interviewers in 2015. He added: “What are we trying to do here? We didn’t have the foggiest notion of what we were undertaking.”

“If the American people knew the magnitude of this dysfunction . . . 2,400 lives lost,” Lute added, blaming the deaths of U.S. military personnel on bureaucratic breakdowns among Congress, the Pentagon and the State Department. “Who will say this was in vain?”

“All I gotta do now is take Dick Cain and work deals for the CIA and the Outfit … all over the world. … Overseas is where it’s all headin’, Chuck,” Mooney continued. I’ve got Trafficante on board for Asia. The Vietnam War is gonna make a lot of guys rich.”                                          – Mob boss Sam Giancana, speaking in 1966, “Double Cross”, 1992 (111)

Israel
You can’t understand what’s been going on around the world with American covert operations and the Israeli covert operations until you understand that the two countries have this secret arrangement.~ Andrew Cockburn

Just as the U.S. uses its economic and military power, its sophisticated propaganda system and its position as a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council to violate international law with impunity, it also uses the same tools to shield its ally Israel from accountability for international crimes. Since 1966, the U.S. has used its Security Council veto 83 times, more than the other four Permanent Members combined, and 42 of those vetoes have been on resolutions related to Israel and/or Palestine. Just last week, Amnesty International published a report that, “Israeli forces have displayed a callous disregard for human life by killing dozens of Palestinian civilians, including children, in the occupied West Bank over the past three years with near total impunity.” Richard Falk, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied Territories condemned the 2008 assault on Gaza as a “massive violation of international law,” adding that nations like the U.S. “that have supplied weapons and supported the siege are complicit in the crimes.” The Leahy Lawrequires the U.S. to cut off military aid to forces that violate human rights, but it has never been enforced against Israel. Israel continues to build settlements in occupied territory in violation of the 4th Geneva Convention, making it harder to comply with Security Council resolutions that require it to withdraw from occupied territory. But Israel remains beyond the rule of law, shielded from accountability by its powerful patron, the United States.

Since 2001, more than 775,000 U.S. troops have deployed to Afghanistan, many repeatedly. Of those, 2,300 died there and 20,589 were wounded in action, according to Defense Department figures.

The interviews, through an extensive array of voices, bring into sharp relief the core failings of the war that persist to this day. They underscore how three presidents — George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump — and their military commanders have been unable to deliver on their promises to prevail in Afghanistan.

Afghan opium soaring since US invasion, 90 % of world’s illegal opium is now from Afghanistan

See the documents More than 2,000 pages of interviews and memos reveal a secret history of the war.

Part 2: Stranded without a strategy Conflicting objectives dogged the war from the start.

Responses to The Post from people named in The Afghanistan Papers

With most speaking on the assumption that their remarks would not become public, U.S. officials acknowledged that their warfighting strategies were fatally flawed and that Washington wasted enormous sums of money trying to remake Afghanistan into a modern nation.

Whose Side Is the CIA On?

“Following its ignoble defeat in Vietnam, America was driven by a reactionary impulse to reassert its global dominance. The justifications used to rationalize Phoenix were institutionalized as policy, as became evident after 9/11 and the initiation of the War on Terror.”

Large picture: the CIA’s Paul Helliwell with the CIA’s Michael Hand (mid) and Frank Nugan (right) of the Nugan Hand Bank, a laundromat for CIA heroin profits. Small picture, left: Former CIA director, vice president, and chief U.S. drug trafficking “fighter” George H. W. Bush with Panama’s Noriega, a decades-long CIA asset and Medellin Cartel-allied cocaine exporter to the U.S. – until he became too much of a liability in 1989. Small picture, right: Seizure in Mexico of cartel weapons and drugs.

The interviews also highlight the U.S. government’s botched attempts to curtail runaway corruption, build a competent Afghan army and police force, and put a dent in Afghanistan’s thriving opium trade.

The U.S. government has not carried out a comprehensive accounting of how much it has spent on the war in Afghanistan, but the costs are staggering.

Since 2001, the Defense Department, State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development have spent or appropriated between $934 billion and $978 billion, according to an inflation-adjusted estimate calculated by Neta Crawford, a political science professor and co-director of the Costs of War Project at Brown University.

Those figures do not include money spent by other agencies such as the CIA and the Department of Veterans Affairs, which is responsible for medical care for wounded veterans.

“What did we get for this $1 trillion effort? Was it worth $1 trillion?” Jeffrey Eggers, a retired Navy SEAL and White House staffer for Bush and Obama, told government interviewers. He added, “After the killing of Osama bin Laden, I said that Osama was probably laughing in his watery grave considering how much we have spent on Afghanistan.”

The documents also contradict a long chorus of public statements from U.S. presidents, military commanders and diplomats who assured Americans year after year that they were making progress in Afghanistan and the war was worth fighting.

Several of those interviewed described explicit and sustained efforts by the U.S. government to deliberately mislead the public. They said it was common at military headquarters in Kabul — and at the White House — to distort statistics to make it appear the United States was winning the war when that was not the case.

“Every data point was altered to present the best picture possible,” Bob Crowley, an Army colonel who served as a senior counterinsurgency adviser to U.S. military commanders in 2013 and 2014, told government interviewers. “Surveys, for instance, were totally unreliable but reinforced that everything we were doing was right and we became a self-licking ice cream cone.”

John Sopko, the head of the federal agency that conducted the interviews, acknowledged to The Post that the documents show “the American people have constantly been lied to.”

The interviews are the byproduct of a project led by Sopko’s agency, the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. Known as SIGAR, the agency was created by Congress in 2008 to investigate waste and fraud in the war zone.

In 2014, at Sopko’s direction, SIGAR departed from its usual mission of performing audits and launched a side venture.

Titled “Lessons Learned,” the $11 million project was meant to diagnose policy failures in Afghanistan so the United States would not repeat the mistakes the next time it invaded a country or tried to rebuild a shattered one.

The Lessons Learned staff interviewed more than 600 people with firsthand experience in the war. Most were Americans, but SIGAR analysts also traveled to London, Brussels and Berlin to interview NATO allies. In addition, they interviewed about 20 Afghan officials, discussing reconstruction and development programs.

Drawing partly on the interviews, as well as other government records and statistics, SIGAR has published seven Lessons Learned reports since 2016 that highlight problems in Afghanistan and recommend changes to stabilize the country.

But the reports, written in dense bureaucratic prose and focused on an alphabet soup of government initiatives, left out the harshest and most frank criticisms from the interviews.

“We found the stabilization strategy and the programs used to achieve it were not properly tailored to the Afghan context, and successes in stabilizing Afghan districts rarely lasted longer than the physical presence of coalition troops and civilians,” read the introduction to one report released in May 2018.

The reports also omitted the names of more than 90 percent of the people who were interviewed for the project. While a few officials agreed to speak on the record to SIGAR, the agency said it promised anonymity to everyone else it interviewed to avoid controversy over politically sensitive matters.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, The Post began seeking Lessons Learned interview records in August 2016. SIGAR refused, arguing that the documents were privileged and that the public had no right to see them.

The Post had to sue SIGAR in federal court — twice — to compel it to release the documents.

The War In Afghanistan: America’s Fictitious Drug War

The US has spent 8 billion $ in anti-drug operations during the war on Afghanistan vs Afghan drug trafficking brings US $50 billion a year.

short clip

short clip
The US is not going to stop the production of drugs in Afghanistan as it covers the costs of their military presence there, says Gen. Mahmut Gareev, a former commander during the USSR’s operations in Afghanistan.

This war is a complete fiasco, and it IS America’s newest Vietnam! We are in Afghanistan to support the shipment of Opium to markets around the world. The Rothschild drug lords demanded that we send in troops in 2001 because the Taliban were both destroying the Poppy fields, and executing the Afghan drug lords.
The Zionist controlled BS media did their part in vilifying the Taliban as a group of Ultra radical Islamic Extremists, which is a total falsehood. The public was conditioned by the attacks of 9-11 into wanting immediate justice against “Al-Qaida”, and since the plans for the invasion of Afghanistan had been drawn up before the 9-11 attacks, the Americans decided quickly to go forward with the Afghanistan invasion.

Afghanistan: It’s Imperialism, Stupid

After 17 bloody years, the longest war in US history continues without relent or purpose in Afghanistan.

Vietnam is a blueprint for all US wars.

“To understand how the United States got bogged down in this horrible disaster that ended up in an epic tragedy for both the people of Vietnam and a large part of the American population? Call the second age of imperialism.
The Dulles Brothers were so intent upon putting down this rebellion against the French attempt to recolonize the area because to them, it was an example of an industrial or already commercialized western power going ahead and exploiting cheap labor and cheap materials in the Third World. In large part, that’s what their law firm (Sullivan & Cromwell) represented.” ~James DiEugenio


Watching the world’s greatest power bomb and ravage little Afghanistan, a nation so poor that some of its people can’t afford sandals, is a huge dishonor for Americans (just like Vietnam)

Afghanistan: The War That Shames America 08/19/2018

There, a valiant, fiercely-independent people, the Pashtun (Pathan) mountain tribes, have battled the full  might of the US Empire to a stalemate that has so far cost American taxpayers $4 trillion, and 2,371 dead and 20,320 wounded soldiers.  No one knows how many Afghans have died. The number is kept secret.

Pashtun tribesmen in the Taliban alliance and their allies are fighting to oust all foreign troops from Afghanistan and evict the western-imposed and backed puppet regime in Kabul that pretends to be the nation’s legitimate government.  Withdraw foreign troops and the Kabul regime would last for only days.

The whole thing smells of the Vietnam War. Lessons so painfully learned by America in that conflict have been completely forgotten and the same mistakes repeated. The lies and happy talk from politicians, generals and media continue apace.

This week, Taliban forces occupied the important strategic city of Ghazni on the road from Peshawar to Kabul. It took three days and massive air attacks by US B-1 heavy bombers, Apache helicopter gun ships, A-10 ground attack aircraft, and massed warplanes from US bases in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Qatar and the 5th US Fleet to finally drive back the Taliban assault. Taliban also overran key military targets in Kabul and the countryside, killing hundreds of government troops in a sort of Afghan Tet offensive.

Afghan regime police and army units put up feeble resistance or ran away. Parts of Ghazni were left in ruins. It was a huge embarrassment to the US imperial generals and their Afghan satraps who had claimed ‘the corner in Afghanistan has finally been turned.’

Efforts by the Trump administration to bomb Taliban into submission have clearly failed. US commanders fear using American ground troops in battle lest they suffer serious casualties. Meanwhile, the US is running low on bombs.

Image result for Reagan-bush drug running

Roads are now so dangerous for the occupiers that most movement must be by air. Taliban is estimated to permanently control almost 50% of Afghanistan. That number would rise to 100% were it not for omnipresent US air power. Taliban rules the night.

Taliban are not and never were ‘terrorists’ as Washington’s war propaganda falsely claimed. I was there at the creation of the movement – a group of Afghan religious students armed by Pakistan whose goal was to stop post-civil war banditry, the mass rape of women, and to fight the Afghan Communists.

When Taliban gained power, it eliminated 95% of the rampant Afghanistan opium-heroin trade. After the US invaded, allied to the old Afghan Communists and northern Tajik tribes, opium-heroin production soared to record levels. Today, US-occupied Afghanistan is the world’s largest producer of opium, morphine and heroin.

US occupation authorities claim drug production is run by Taliban. This is another big lie. The Afghan warlords who support the regime of President Ashraf Ghani entirely control the production and export of drugs. The army and secret police get a big cut. How else would trucks packed with drugs get across the border into Pakistan and Central Asia?

The United States has inadvertently become one of the world’s leading drug dealers. This is one of the most shameful legacies of the Afghan War. But just one. Watching the world’s greatest power bomb and ravage little Afghanistan, a nation so poor that some of its people can’t afford sandals, is a huge dishonor for Americans.

Even so, the Pashtun defeated the invading armies of Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, the Mogul Emperors and the mighty British Raj. The US looks to be next in the Graveyard of Empires.

Nobody in Washington can enunciate a good reason for continuing the colonial war in Afghanistan. One hears talk of minerals, women’s rights and democracy as a pretext for keeping US forces in Afghanistan. All nonsense. A possible real reason is to deny influence over Afghanistan, though the Chinese are too smart to grab this poisoned cup. They have more than enough with their rebellious Uighur Muslims.

Interestingly, the so-called ‘terrorist training camps’ supposedly found in Afghanistan in 2001 were actually guerilla training camps run by Pakistani intelligence to train Kashmiri rebels and CIA-run camps for exiled Uighur fighters from China.

The canard that the US had to invade Afghanistan to get at Osama bin Laden, alleged author of the 9/11 attacks, is untrue. The attacks were made by Saudis and mounted from Hamburg and Madrid, not Afghanistan. I’m not even sure bin Laden was behind the attacks.

My late friend and journalist Arnaud de Borchgrave shared my doubts and insisted that the Taliban leader Mullah Omar offered to turn bin Laden over to a court in a Muslim nation to prove his guilt or innocence.

President George Bush, caught sleeping on guard duty and humiliated, had to find an easy target for revenge – and that was Afghanistan.