Johnnyanon's comment yesterday captured the absurdity of the Afghan/Iraq war. The U.S. and Canada and NATO went to war against sovereign states because why? Because 100 or 1000 or 3000 criminals attacked the United States. Stateless criminals. And now there are apparently less than 100 al qaida operating in Afghanistan but the U.S. and Canada and NATO are still occupying the country.
Eight years is long enough. But not long enough correct a bad decision. Not long enough to justify a mistake. And too long to suffer the consequences of the mistake. Johnnyanon should be Canada's foreign minister. Peacenik says bring the troops home now.
by Robert Scheer
Every once in a while, a statistic just jumps out at you in a way that makes everything else you hear on a subject seem beside the point, if not downright absurd. That was my reaction to the recent statement of the president’s national security adviser, former Marine Gen. James Jones, concerning the size of the terrorist threat from Afghanistan:
“The al-Qaida presence is very diminished. The maximum estimate is less than 100 operating in the country, no bases, no ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies.”
Less than 100! And he is basing his conservative estimate on the best intelligence data available to our government. That means that al-Qaida, for all practical purposes, does not exist in Afghanistan—so why are we having a big debate about sending even more troops to fight an enemy that has relocated elsewhere? Because of the blind belief, in the minds of those like John McCain, determined to “win” in Afghanistan, that if we don’t escalate, al-Qaida will inevitably come back.
Read on...
Showing posts with label Canadian foreign policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Canadian foreign policy. Show all posts
10/8/09
9/24/09
For Mexico and Canada, the 'War on Terror' Is Over
Peacenik wishes this headline was telling the truth. But Peacenik doesn't see it. Don Cherry, on Hockey Night in Canada, will still have cart blanche to promote the war. Canadians are still afraid to criticize the war without the perfunctory "we support the troops but". Public vehicles are still adorned with ribbons. The Canadian anti-war movement remains invisible. The war on terror has, like the war on drugs, morphed into something sick. Canada needs to bring the troops home now and re-think Canada's foreign policy. Peacenik doesn't see Stephen Harper doing that.
by Louis Nevaer
MEXICO CITY- On the eighth anniversary of the United States declaring a global "war on terror" this September, America's continental neighbors - Mexico and Canada - have had enough.
When President George W. Bush addressed a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001, the nation - and much of the world - was still in disbelief that Islamic terrorists had successfully carried out the greatest attack on U.S. soil since Japan's assault on Pearl Harbor.
That night Bush rallied the nation to support a "war on terror" that was "global" in nature, and which would lead to the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Read on...
by Louis Nevaer
MEXICO CITY- On the eighth anniversary of the United States declaring a global "war on terror" this September, America's continental neighbors - Mexico and Canada - have had enough.
When President George W. Bush addressed a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001, the nation - and much of the world - was still in disbelief that Islamic terrorists had successfully carried out the greatest attack on U.S. soil since Japan's assault on Pearl Harbor.
That night Bush rallied the nation to support a "war on terror" that was "global" in nature, and which would lead to the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Read on...
9/23/09
Canada set to boycott Iran's UN speech
Peacenik says: Yawn....who cares?
Canada will boycott Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech at the United Nations today, saying his outbursts about the Holocaust and Israel are "shameful."
Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon will be at the world body to attend the opening of the UN General Assembly's annual debate, but officials signal he and other members of the Canadian delegation will vacate when the Islamic republic's president approaches the podium.
Walking out of the chamber is seen as a strong diplomatic show of disgust at the UN -- and since the 192-member chamber is generally packed on the first day of the annual summit, Canada's empty seats will not go unnoticed.
9/9/09
Tomgram: Measuring Success in Afghanistan
The futility of America's and Canada's military adventure in Afghanistan is palpable. There is no need for Canada to be involved in Afghanistan. Maybe the original reason for Canada to get involved was so that Canada would have an excuse for not getting involved in Iraq. And to curry favour with an neo con president of the U.S. Neither good reasons.
But nothing good is coming from Canada's involvement. Unless you think the militarization and brutalization of Canadian society is a good thing. Unless you think spending money on killing is better than spending money on healthcare. You like the militaristic patriotism of the U.S? It has taken root in Canada. Peacenik was proud of Canada's foreign policy when Canada was a peacemaker. Time to exit Afghanistan. Past time.
Measuring a War Gone to Hell
By Tom Engelhardt
Here may be the single strangest fact of our American world: that at least three administrations -- Ronald Reagan's, George W. Bush's, and now Barack Obama's -- drew the U.S. "defense" perimeter at the Hindu Kush; that is, in the rugged, mountainous lands of Afghanistan. Put another way, while Americans argue feverishly and angrily over what kind of money, if any, to put into health care, or decaying infrastructure, or other key places of need, until recently just about no one in the mainstream raised a peep about the fact that, for nearly eight years (not to say much of the last three decades), we've been pouring billions of dollars, American military know-how, and American lives into a black hole in Afghanistan that is, at least in significant part, of our own creation.
Imagine for a moment, as you read this post, what might have happened if Americans had decided to sink the same sort of money -- $228 billion and rising fast -- the same "civilian surges," the same planning, thought, and effort (but not the same staggering ineffectiveness) into reclaiming New Orleans or Detroit, or into planning an American future here at home. Imagine, for a moment, when you read about the multi-millions going into further construction at Bagram Air Base, or to the mercenary company that provides "Lord of the Flies" hire-a-gun guards for American diplomats in massive super-embassies, or about the half-a-billion dollars sunk into a corrupt and fraudulent Afghan election, what a similar investment in our own country might have meant.
Read on...
But nothing good is coming from Canada's involvement. Unless you think the militarization and brutalization of Canadian society is a good thing. Unless you think spending money on killing is better than spending money on healthcare. You like the militaristic patriotism of the U.S? It has taken root in Canada. Peacenik was proud of Canada's foreign policy when Canada was a peacemaker. Time to exit Afghanistan. Past time.
Measuring a War Gone to Hell
By Tom Engelhardt
Here may be the single strangest fact of our American world: that at least three administrations -- Ronald Reagan's, George W. Bush's, and now Barack Obama's -- drew the U.S. "defense" perimeter at the Hindu Kush; that is, in the rugged, mountainous lands of Afghanistan. Put another way, while Americans argue feverishly and angrily over what kind of money, if any, to put into health care, or decaying infrastructure, or other key places of need, until recently just about no one in the mainstream raised a peep about the fact that, for nearly eight years (not to say much of the last three decades), we've been pouring billions of dollars, American military know-how, and American lives into a black hole in Afghanistan that is, at least in significant part, of our own creation.
Imagine for a moment, as you read this post, what might have happened if Americans had decided to sink the same sort of money -- $228 billion and rising fast -- the same "civilian surges," the same planning, thought, and effort (but not the same staggering ineffectiveness) into reclaiming New Orleans or Detroit, or into planning an American future here at home. Imagine, for a moment, when you read about the multi-millions going into further construction at Bagram Air Base, or to the mercenary company that provides "Lord of the Flies" hire-a-gun guards for American diplomats in massive super-embassies, or about the half-a-billion dollars sunk into a corrupt and fraudulent Afghan election, what a similar investment in our own country might have meant.
Read on...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)