Afghan President Hamid Karzai has been doing a lot of peace efforts, and needs urgent support for his May 2, 2010, peace gathering, or jirga. Karzai actually met with the local elders in Kandahar and agreed to stop the latest offensive, the US trying to get around it with a slow buildup,
http://www.sananews.net/english/2010/04/01/insurgents-welcome-at-afghan-peace-jirga-in-may/
Somehow circumstances made it hard to honor his many peace efforts. When the Soviets left Afghanistan the world didn’t want to admit that a bloodbath was taking place over rebels fighting over who was in charge, thus Karzai’s peace efforts were ignored. He was arrested in 1994 while trying to mediate a cease-fire. Unfortunately instead of Karzai a peacemaker, one has to google "CIA prisoner believed to have rescued Karzai" for the details. His many calls to the Taliban for peace negotiations were usually met with "We won’t negotiate with a traitor" so praising these efforts would convey the idea that the Taliban didn’t want peace, something peace activists would not want to do. Finally the top Taliban supporting warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar agreed to comprehensive peace negotiations. Most would prefer that Mullah Omar would be in charge of power sharing. Mullah Omar refused to unequivocally denounce and agree to never to harbor al Qaeda like Hekmatyar agreed to, which is a key US demand and a key Saudi demand, Saudi Arabia somehow involved. Omar has spoke up against al Qaeda tactics with his strict code of ethics, (Google Taliban code of ethics with the NY Times), but Omar won’t specifically denounce bin Laden fearing an attack on shopping bazaars and mosques by al Qaeda getting even, like they are doing in Iraq with the on-going attacks against those Sunnis who ending up changing sides and joined with the Americans. Mullah Omar has been so careful to avoid unnecessary civilian casualties that when the central Afghan bank was failed to be penetrated, the suicide-vested bombers didn’t blow up on the crowded street, instead retreated to the shopping bazaar complex next door, and ordered everyone out instead of shooting at shoppers, holing up for hours, google it with the NY Times for some reluctant praise.
In 2007 Hamid Karzai first urged that the US avoid civilian casualties,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/02/AR2007050202757.html?hpid=sec-world
General McChrystal is bragging about less civilian casualties, Hamid Karzai and Mullah Omar are on the same wavelength. The US troops would be more brutal if while wandering around they would be snipped at instead of only in the heat of battle, or while chasing the Taliban.
The US peace movement is fixated on Vietnam War history comparing Karzai with Diem, read their biographies in Wikipedia for their vast differences. Karzai married a women working with Afghan refuges, and definitely doesn’t treat her like a slave. Ngo Dinh Diem represented the small Vietnamese Catholic community, while Karzai represented those who wanted the king to return, the largest anti-Taliban group. Diem wanted to fight with Ho Chi Minh opposing Ho’s Marxist atheism, but ended up attacking Buddhists as well. Karzai preferred to compromise not fight ever since the Russians left. Diem more brutal, not less brutal than his US supporters. Karzai’s recent attempts to compromise a little, with Taliban ethics, is in pursuit of peace. Karzai’s father and one brother was killed by the Taliban for supporting the idea of the king returning. He has as much reason to be full of hate as other Afghans instead he is a sea of if not
Incidentally I won’t let pass, the accusation that Karzai’s brother is an evil drug dealing warlord. Karzai rented property to the CIA and then paid the local Taliban not to attack it, paid them not to attack polling places in the last election etc. Basically the US poured money at him, which he partly gave to the local Taliban to not attack. How drugs fit into the picture I don’t know but we can all see what happens such as in Mexico when no one is throwing money around urging dealers and the police to be less violent, with themselves and each other.
Incidentally I left out how both India and Pakistan both want peace and get in the way of peace while they squabble over whether Afghanistan should be partial to India or Pakistan. However trying to avoid destructive gossip is why other peace sites end up avoiding talking about Hamid Karzai’s peace efforts,
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE60P14Z?feedType=RSS&feedName=everything&virtualBrandChannel
If President Obama listened to the shill parts of the peace movement and just left, and infighting over who was in charge shattered the relative peace civilians are now experiencing with Omar, McChrystal, and Karzai avoiding mayhem, it will be bad news indeed. If the peace movements would help Karzai make peace, it might get Obama back on track of working for a more peaceful world for us all.
Please google, "Western Peace Activists Ignore Real Afghan Peace Efforts"and click on,
readersupportednews.org/godot-recent
http://readersupportednews.org/pm-section/21-war/1473-peace-movement-betrays-afghan-president-karzai
By Richard Kane, RichardKanePA.blogspot.com
Read more!
Friday, April 16, 2010
US Peace Activists Ignore Real Afghan Peace Efforts
Afghan President Karzai is organizing a large peace Jamboree, conference and jirga starting May 2. He has rejected an assult on Kandahar first like the US wanted after he met with elders there. However, US officials are hinting of a slow buildup instead. Karzai has made some peace breakthroughs especially with former top Taliban supporting warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. In several ways the attack on Kandahar would be a major escalation of the war. Alert peace activist reporting could slow this until after Karzai tries to obtain peace
www.sananews.net/english/2010/04/01/insurgents-welcome-at-afghan-peace-jirga-in-may/
Rep. Kucinich's peace lobby is totally ignoring anything that might distract from setting a firm future end date for war funding seemingly oblivious to the fact that a negotiated settlement may be in the wind, especially if the US peace movement got on board. Congress won't end war funding any time soon unless there is an unrelated crisis during the vote such as an economic collapse in Greece, economic brinkmanship by China or unexpected bad domestic news at the same time as the vote. If Kucinich started demanding that the invasion of Kandahar be postponed or stopped until after the peace conference, real peace might be at hand. Of course Obama is already accused of being a softy by the Vice President Cheney crowd so if the US Peace Movement lobbied the European Peace Movement especially in Germany and England to lobby their countries to leave Afghanistan unless the assault on Kandahar is delayed or stopped, peace may be even more likely. At the moment the European peace movement is lobbying their countries to just leave. But if they got involved in the politics real peace could be more successfully be achieved. Anyway, people in Kandahar would really appreciate this. For comprehensive details google, "Peace Activists Betray Afghan President Karzai"
We in the West think non-Westerners can't be peace activists since we seem to have begun to forget about Gandhi's nonviolent revolution in India.
However, there have been circumstantial reasons why Hamid Karzai's many peace efforts have not been acknowledged. In 1994 he was arrested by Afghan police as he tried to negotiate an end to the bloodbath from rebel infighting. The rest of the world refused to look at this bloodbath because acknowledging a bloodbath occurred after the Russians left might make the Russians look good,
www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2010/04/07/cia_prisoner_believed_to_have_rescued_karzai
Karzai became head of Afghanistan at the international conference on Afghanistan in Germany in 2001. He was the leader of the faction that wanted the king to return. He made numerous attempts to negotiate peace with the Taliban whose usual answer was that he was a traitor not worth negotiating with. Again the western peace movement didn't note Karzai's peace efforts since they didn't want to spread the idea that the Taliban doesn't want peace.
Hamid Karzai asked Saudi Arabia to be the mediator, but they answered not until Mullah Omar first renounces bin Laden and promises never to harbor al Qaeda. Omar renounces al Qaeda's brutal tactics but won't renounce al Qaeda because he doesn't want al Qaeda to attack him like they did the Sunnis in Iraq who quit fighting the Americans. After al Qaeda attacked them those Sunnis ended up fighting along side the Americans. To this day, al Qaeda in Iraq is scheduling brutal revenge attacks against those Sunnis who sided with the Americans.
In January the UN asked that the Taliban be taken off the terrorist list to facilitate the backdoor meetings they were having with the Taliban,
www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE60P14Z?feedType=RSS&feedName=everything&virtualBrandChannel=11563%C2%A0
The US complied partly by taking four retired Taliban officials off the list, who made benchmark negotiations or comments depending on whose interpretation, such as no night raids in return for no road bombs. This stopped when Pakistan arrested a top Mullah Omar aid Mullah Baradar. Afghan President Karzai complained bitterly that arresting Baradar got in the way of the back door peace feelers Baradar was making to Saudi Arabia. Pakistan refused to return Mullah Baradar to Afghanistan like President Karzai demanded.
Finally top Taliban siding warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar entered into comprehensive peace negations with Karzai and Karzai thought the war might soon be over. Hekmatyar controlled territory in northern Afghanistan is far from any al Qaeda members so his vow to arrest any al Qaeda members who came there doesn't mean much. Al Qaeda bloggers instead of calling Hekmatyar a despicable traitor mentioned that he changed sides frequently and mused that he will probably be on al Qaeda's side again as circumstances change. Unfortunately this doesn't mean that Omar who has philosophical differences with al Qaeda disagreeing with bin Laden's brutal tactics can go on to totally denounce al Qaeda without being attacked by them. If he repeated Hekmatyar's anti al Qaeda comments, if al Qaeda couldn't reach him they might attack mosques, bazaars and funerals like al Qaeda liked to do in Iraq.
Peace organizations seem to have two jobs, one is raising money, and one is promoting peace. Dealing with convoluted intertwined Afghan peace efforts won't bring in funds the way trying to set a firm Afghan war funding cut off date will.
There is some good news that may end up bad news in the end. The US really is killing far less civilians than it did in Iraq, and as I noted above there are no tit-for-tat ethnic reprisals between Sunnis and Shiites today in Afghanistan that used to happen in Iraq, (note the Taliban used to be brutal toward Sunnis).
Israel's last incursion into Palestine shows what not avoiding civilian casualties looks like, no one had praised Israel for restraint in earlier wars. Recent wars in Africa led to even greater civilian bloodbaths. This isn't occurring in Afghanistan because we hear General McChrystal carefully avoids civilian casualties. But Karzai also avoids civilian casualties and constantly complains that the US isn't doing enough, and Mullah Omar also has a strict code of ethics. The most noted example being when the Central Afghan bank wasn't successfully penetrated the suicide-vested attackers didn't blow themselves up on the crowded street in front of the bank but retreated next door to the shopping bazaar complex, ordering everyone out and holding up for hours, not even blowing the bazaar up.
However mass civilian deaths like in other wars could occur if Karzai dies or is out of power, if Omar dies, maybe if Omar does renounce al Qaeda and al Qaeda responds by attacking mosques and bazaars, or there is economic turmoil in the US meaning a firm cut off date and the US leaving without any agreement on what will come next.
Somehow the NY Times ignored Karzai's praise of Iran and Ahmadinejad speaking before the Afghan Parliament until much later when Karzai entered into peace negotiations with Taliban supporting warlord Hekmatyar. Suddenly when negotiations with Hekmatyar started State Department officials began complaining about corruption again in an election system that is so flawed that even UN observers refused to note that husbands were casting their wives' votes.
Peace will likely come and President Obama will be back on the peace track if Dennis Kucinich acknowledges that Hamid Karzai is a peace activist, or if the European peace movement instead of demanding that German and British troops just get out, that they instead get out the moment the US defy's President Karzai again.
There is important Vietnam war history that historians and activists avoid talking about, such as, as the Vietnam War lingered, frustrated hawks began calling for "Nuke Vietnam", these picket signs were at pro-war rallies toward the end of the Vietnam War. In the end, Paul Harvey News came out with "Win or Get Out" which became very popular with the former pro-war circle. Frank Ford, the husband of the former Philadelphia DA, lead the "win or get out" movement locally. Today, as time goes on, less and less people will favor Obama emptying our treasury on the Afghan War. Hawks will say stop worrying about civilian casualties as doves urge that the US get out. By the 2012 election Hawks will demand that the US carpet bomb Afghanistan ever more angry at General McChrystal, Afghan President Karzai and Obama for avoiding civilian casualties. Doves will win out unless a terror attack leads to a George Wallace type more shrill than Glenn Beck seeking the White House. Thought that George Wallace substitute probably won't get elected. If the US leaves Afghanistan without a comprehensive peace treaty and revenge killings follow some voters may hold those voting for the Kucinich resolution responsible. If the European peace movement suddenly became interested in negotiations not a quick exit of their country's troops, they might be able to get the world and Obama back on track again. The Afghan War may be like a roach glue trap where there is no way to win anything and no way to get out. Karzai comes from an intellectual background. He married his wife a fellow intellectual not a slave. He has a lot of political skill. I trust he is more likely to know what's best in relation to what is possible than anyone else.
Hamad Karzai's father and brother were killed by the Taliban. He has as much reason to be angry as most Afghans, under the circumstances he is truly a man of peace. Whatever deal he can work out with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Mullah Omar is probably the best deal available for his country.
For a different version perspectives see,
http://www.readersupportednews.org/godot-recent
"Peace Movement Betrays President Karzai",
http://readersupportednews.org/pm-section/21-war/1473-peace-movement-betrays-afghan-president-karzai
by Richard Kane RichardKanePa.blogspot.com
Read more!
www.sananews.net/english/2010/04/01/insurgents-welcome-at-afghan-peace-jirga-in-may/
Rep. Kucinich's peace lobby is totally ignoring anything that might distract from setting a firm future end date for war funding seemingly oblivious to the fact that a negotiated settlement may be in the wind, especially if the US peace movement got on board. Congress won't end war funding any time soon unless there is an unrelated crisis during the vote such as an economic collapse in Greece, economic brinkmanship by China or unexpected bad domestic news at the same time as the vote. If Kucinich started demanding that the invasion of Kandahar be postponed or stopped until after the peace conference, real peace might be at hand. Of course Obama is already accused of being a softy by the Vice President Cheney crowd so if the US Peace Movement lobbied the European Peace Movement especially in Germany and England to lobby their countries to leave Afghanistan unless the assault on Kandahar is delayed or stopped, peace may be even more likely. At the moment the European peace movement is lobbying their countries to just leave. But if they got involved in the politics real peace could be more successfully be achieved. Anyway, people in Kandahar would really appreciate this. For comprehensive details google, "Peace Activists Betray Afghan President Karzai"
We in the West think non-Westerners can't be peace activists since we seem to have begun to forget about Gandhi's nonviolent revolution in India.
However, there have been circumstantial reasons why Hamid Karzai's many peace efforts have not been acknowledged. In 1994 he was arrested by Afghan police as he tried to negotiate an end to the bloodbath from rebel infighting. The rest of the world refused to look at this bloodbath because acknowledging a bloodbath occurred after the Russians left might make the Russians look good,
www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2010/04/07/cia_prisoner_believed_to_have_rescued_karzai
Karzai became head of Afghanistan at the international conference on Afghanistan in Germany in 2001. He was the leader of the faction that wanted the king to return. He made numerous attempts to negotiate peace with the Taliban whose usual answer was that he was a traitor not worth negotiating with. Again the western peace movement didn't note Karzai's peace efforts since they didn't want to spread the idea that the Taliban doesn't want peace.
Hamid Karzai asked Saudi Arabia to be the mediator, but they answered not until Mullah Omar first renounces bin Laden and promises never to harbor al Qaeda. Omar renounces al Qaeda's brutal tactics but won't renounce al Qaeda because he doesn't want al Qaeda to attack him like they did the Sunnis in Iraq who quit fighting the Americans. After al Qaeda attacked them those Sunnis ended up fighting along side the Americans. To this day, al Qaeda in Iraq is scheduling brutal revenge attacks against those Sunnis who sided with the Americans.
In January the UN asked that the Taliban be taken off the terrorist list to facilitate the backdoor meetings they were having with the Taliban,
www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE60P14Z?feedType=RSS&feedName=everything&virtualBrandChannel=11563%C2%A0
The US complied partly by taking four retired Taliban officials off the list, who made benchmark negotiations or comments depending on whose interpretation, such as no night raids in return for no road bombs. This stopped when Pakistan arrested a top Mullah Omar aid Mullah Baradar. Afghan President Karzai complained bitterly that arresting Baradar got in the way of the back door peace feelers Baradar was making to Saudi Arabia. Pakistan refused to return Mullah Baradar to Afghanistan like President Karzai demanded.
Finally top Taliban siding warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar entered into comprehensive peace negations with Karzai and Karzai thought the war might soon be over. Hekmatyar controlled territory in northern Afghanistan is far from any al Qaeda members so his vow to arrest any al Qaeda members who came there doesn't mean much. Al Qaeda bloggers instead of calling Hekmatyar a despicable traitor mentioned that he changed sides frequently and mused that he will probably be on al Qaeda's side again as circumstances change. Unfortunately this doesn't mean that Omar who has philosophical differences with al Qaeda disagreeing with bin Laden's brutal tactics can go on to totally denounce al Qaeda without being attacked by them. If he repeated Hekmatyar's anti al Qaeda comments, if al Qaeda couldn't reach him they might attack mosques, bazaars and funerals like al Qaeda liked to do in Iraq.
Peace organizations seem to have two jobs, one is raising money, and one is promoting peace. Dealing with convoluted intertwined Afghan peace efforts won't bring in funds the way trying to set a firm Afghan war funding cut off date will.
There is some good news that may end up bad news in the end. The US really is killing far less civilians than it did in Iraq, and as I noted above there are no tit-for-tat ethnic reprisals between Sunnis and Shiites today in Afghanistan that used to happen in Iraq, (note the Taliban used to be brutal toward Sunnis).
Israel's last incursion into Palestine shows what not avoiding civilian casualties looks like, no one had praised Israel for restraint in earlier wars. Recent wars in Africa led to even greater civilian bloodbaths. This isn't occurring in Afghanistan because we hear General McChrystal carefully avoids civilian casualties. But Karzai also avoids civilian casualties and constantly complains that the US isn't doing enough, and Mullah Omar also has a strict code of ethics. The most noted example being when the Central Afghan bank wasn't successfully penetrated the suicide-vested attackers didn't blow themselves up on the crowded street in front of the bank but retreated next door to the shopping bazaar complex, ordering everyone out and holding up for hours, not even blowing the bazaar up.
However mass civilian deaths like in other wars could occur if Karzai dies or is out of power, if Omar dies, maybe if Omar does renounce al Qaeda and al Qaeda responds by attacking mosques and bazaars, or there is economic turmoil in the US meaning a firm cut off date and the US leaving without any agreement on what will come next.
Somehow the NY Times ignored Karzai's praise of Iran and Ahmadinejad speaking before the Afghan Parliament until much later when Karzai entered into peace negotiations with Taliban supporting warlord Hekmatyar. Suddenly when negotiations with Hekmatyar started State Department officials began complaining about corruption again in an election system that is so flawed that even UN observers refused to note that husbands were casting their wives' votes.
Peace will likely come and President Obama will be back on the peace track if Dennis Kucinich acknowledges that Hamid Karzai is a peace activist, or if the European peace movement instead of demanding that German and British troops just get out, that they instead get out the moment the US defy's President Karzai again.
There is important Vietnam war history that historians and activists avoid talking about, such as, as the Vietnam War lingered, frustrated hawks began calling for "Nuke Vietnam", these picket signs were at pro-war rallies toward the end of the Vietnam War. In the end, Paul Harvey News came out with "Win or Get Out" which became very popular with the former pro-war circle. Frank Ford, the husband of the former Philadelphia DA, lead the "win or get out" movement locally. Today, as time goes on, less and less people will favor Obama emptying our treasury on the Afghan War. Hawks will say stop worrying about civilian casualties as doves urge that the US get out. By the 2012 election Hawks will demand that the US carpet bomb Afghanistan ever more angry at General McChrystal, Afghan President Karzai and Obama for avoiding civilian casualties. Doves will win out unless a terror attack leads to a George Wallace type more shrill than Glenn Beck seeking the White House. Thought that George Wallace substitute probably won't get elected. If the US leaves Afghanistan without a comprehensive peace treaty and revenge killings follow some voters may hold those voting for the Kucinich resolution responsible. If the European peace movement suddenly became interested in negotiations not a quick exit of their country's troops, they might be able to get the world and Obama back on track again. The Afghan War may be like a roach glue trap where there is no way to win anything and no way to get out. Karzai comes from an intellectual background. He married his wife a fellow intellectual not a slave. He has a lot of political skill. I trust he is more likely to know what's best in relation to what is possible than anyone else.
Hamad Karzai's father and brother were killed by the Taliban. He has as much reason to be angry as most Afghans, under the circumstances he is truly a man of peace. Whatever deal he can work out with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Mullah Omar is probably the best deal available for his country.
For a different version perspectives see,
http://www.readersupportednews.org/godot-recent
"Peace Movement Betrays President Karzai",
http://readersupportednews.org/pm-section/21-war/1473-peace-movement-betrays-afghan-president-karzai
by Richard Kane RichardKanePa.blogspot.com
Read more!
Peace Movement Betrays Afghan Pres Hamid Karzai
Some in the peace movement have been critical of Afghan President Karzai, and so have some who support the war. Hamid Karzai has made persistent calls for peace and for face to face peace negotiations with the Taliban especially for the past year.
The Taliban's traditional response even early in Karzai's presidency was that he was a traitor not worth negotiating with. If Western antiwar leaders had dwelt on Karzai's comments, it would have tended to convey an idea they wouldn't want to express, that the Taliban is unreasonable. Suddenly top Taliban supporting warlord, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar has made peace proposals with Karzai, who was very disappointed that Washington wasn't taken it seriously. The discussion in the US media and among some State Department and Defense officials rather quickly mostly changed to corruption and future election procedure as it always coincidentally does when a US client does something the US doesn't like. Karzai had heaped lavish praise on such countries as Saudi Arabia and Iran, trying to get their help to end the war. Saudi Arabia firmly said it wouldn't mediate between Karzai and Mullah Omar unless Mullah Omar first renounced bin Laden. Karzai's lavish praise of Iran and inviting Ahmadinejad to speak before a joint session of the Afghan Parliament at first received no mention in the US media. But as soon as peace talks with Hekmatyar became concrete proposals, the NY Times lashed out at Karzai for being too close to Iran, dwelling on Ahmadinejad's comments while in Afghanistan. Karzai responded, to all this, that the US is beginning to become occupiers and even suggested that he might have to eventually side with the Taliban if the US clearly became an occupier.
There is an US native American Indian proverb about walking a mile in someone else's shoes, and I think the peace movement's joining of the criticism of Karzai for being undemocratic wouldn't occur if the peace movement would do so.
Karzai came to power at the international conference on Afghanistan in Germany in 2001. He was the leader of the faction that wanted the king to return. He has always been either for peace or a less violent or less vengeful response than those around him. Karzai's brother and father were killed by the Taliban for trying to get the king to return. Karzai's first attempt at peace was in 1994 when the Afghan rebels first began fighting with each other after the Russians left. The following link is hard to follow but clearly indicates that Karzai has consistently gone out of his way in pursuit of peace,
www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2010/04/07/cia_prisoner_believed_to_have_rescued_karzai
When the UN tried to get all of the Taliban off the terror list to facilitate the hush-hush negotiations the UN had been conducting with the Taliban, the US response was to take four retired Taliban leaders off the list. And they conducted mostly benchmark negotiations or suggestions such as no night raids in exchange for no road bombs. These talks or comments ended when a top Taliban leader Mullah Baradar was arrested by Pakistan, some say because he was trying to meet the Saudis conditions to be the mediator that the Taliban first renounce al Qaeda. Al Jazeera News says Pakistan was afraid of India getting too close to Afghanistan, and wanted any possible peace negotiations channeled through Pakistan. Karzai was extremely disappointed in Mullah Baradar's arrest, which made him extra elated when Hekmatyar got interested in negotiations.
In Iraq al Qaeda is vowing to get even with the former al Qaeda supporting Sunnis who changed sides and joined with the Americans and have continued to have brutal revenge killings against Sunnis who changed sides in Iraq. This is why Mullah Omar hasn't agreed to renounce al Qaeda despite the fact that Omar shuns the mayhem violence al Qaeda specializes in. However, instead of calling Hekmatyar a despicable traitor, al Qaeda internet bloggers suggest that since Hekmatyar has a habit of changing sides he will probably be on al Qaeda's side again as circumstances change.
US ex-Ambassador to Afghanistan Peter Galbraith suggested that Karzai was unstable and may be on drugs. However Karzai has a right to be angry and frustrated at the way the Afghan government seems so powerless to in any way direct what is going on in its name. The sudden US pressure against election fraud is not what it seems. When it comes to fair elections in Afghanistan even the UN slipped up by not complaining of men voting for their wives. Almost every political figure on both sides of the war actually represents his one sub-tribal neighborhood or a warlord representing himself. This except for Mullah Omar who represents the Taliban's longing for tradition and Hamid Karzai who represented those longing for the king and the good old days when Afghans didn't have to be fighting with each other all the time.
If the NY Times and others didn't like the head of Iran speaking before the Afghan legislator why didn't they write and complain at the time instead of just when a peace attempt was taking place? Al Qaeda in Iraq made a concerted effort to blow up the Iranian Embassy. Iran is an important source of hard cash in Afghanistan since Shiite Afghans working in Iran, in the oil industry, and sending some of the money back home to relatives is the only important source of money that Afghans have other than drugs or being in the US supported or Taliban army. Al Qaeda loves to attack Shiite religious sites and religious processions. If one googles, "al Qaeda declares war on Iran", one would note many skirmishes and threats from al Qaeda against Iran. Al Qaeda clearly believes Iranian economic policies and even political policies are getting in the way of the world al Qaeda wants. Al Qaeda wants any Muslim who feels abused and insulted by the West, and that Western culture is overwhelming the world to believe al Qaeda's brutal policies is the only hope to change things.
If anyone notices, the tit-for-tat revenge horror stories that we heard in Iraq haven't occurred in Afghanistan, especially not recently. The war in Afghanistan is being fought differently than other wars. We hear there is a lot less civilian deaths and atrocities in Afghanistan because of General McChrystal and his efforts to avoid civilian casualties. But actually General McChrystal, President Karzai, and Mullah Omar are all going out of their way to avoid collateral damage. Karzai frequently lectures the US to be more careful against civilian causalities, instead of like in Iraq, when US troops had to be on their best behavior following the Abu Ghraib exposes, US interrogators could always turn over suspects to the locals to be roughed up.
When the warlord Hekmatyar proposed comprehensive peace talks he noted that when the Russians left the deaths drastically increased due to the infighting between rebel factions. Hekmatyar wants the Afghan army to remain intact and slowly merge with the Taliban militia as the US leaves to avoid the power vacuum that led to internal warfare and confusion. It would be considered unhelpful for a peace site to mention the possibility of a fast US withdrawal leading to revenge attacks against those the Americans supported and possibly even a lot of infighting over which rebel leader should be in charge. However I'm sure Obama knows this is possible and dreads not only the US being blamed but that he in his own mind might feel some responsibility for such results. I also think certain accusations that Obama doesn't believe, such as that the US is mainly interested in oil and other resources, when confronted with, "Why are you fighting a war for oil and other resources?" leads Obama to have less respect for those lobbying for an end to the war, making him less likely to change course. If somehow the US actually accepts a coalition government between Hekmatyar and Karzai in the name of pursuing peace and the results turn out differently, such as Hekmatyar ending up trying to be totally in charge, and war does break out between rebel leaders wanting to be in charge, it will be an Afghanistan decision not something to hold the US responsible for. Muslim terrorists are fascinated that the Soviet Union fell apart soon after the Afghan war and they believe they were the cause. This inspires militants in places like Chechnya to believe they can defeat Moscow again by getting a lot of Russians killed. Muslim terrorists know that if they attack the US like they did to Russia and Indonesia and earlier London and Madrid, the draft would be back and the US wouldn't be paying a fortune in military recruitment. A worst case withdrawal scenario like happened to the Soviet Union is impossible with the US, but some scenarios are better than others. If Kucinich succeeds at introducing an Afghan cut off date bill at the very moment there is some severe international economic crisis such as Greece goes into total collapse, or the unemployment rate in the US suddenly and unexpectedly going up sharply or there is a severe run on the dollar because of something China did and due to its timing Kucinich's firm war end date bill passes, and the US gets out abruptly. And revenge killings of US supporting Afghans or worse follows, at the very least those who supported the war ending resolution bill wouldn't look good in the next election and al Qaeda might seem to offer more hope to desperate people who believe they are being insulted and abused by the Western world. Karzai is a man of peace far more so than someone who is working on an arbitrary peace date, oblivious to current events in that part of the world.
A few hawks like Dick Cheney aren't interested in what happens to the Afghans, but just thinks the issue is really a handy opportunity to make what he considers import changes in the US. Actually, most Americans kind of hope for similar result over there such as at least have a fleeting desire that women over there not being forced to or even wanting to wear burkas, and that the desperate of the world not seeing something inspiring in bin Laden, and we would all like a reasonable way out of the war, and we are all at least a little worried that the overwhelming drain on the US treasury will be in the long run extremely harmful to the people of the US. During the Vietnam War some thought North Vietnam was a wonderful country where such things as woman's rights were respected, while other Americans thought North Vietnam was a grim dictatorship. In Afghanistan most Americans only argue whether the US is inadvertently making a bad situation much worse, than if we stopped being involved.
To change the subject only a little, who is the real peace activist is sometimes hard to tell. Everyone agrees that General Musharraf was a harsh dictator in Pakistan. However in 2001 after the bombing of the Indian Parliament by Muslim extremists, who were getting (or once had been getting) aid from Pakistan, skirmishes broke out in between Indian and Pakistani troops that were escalating. Pakistan suddenly pulled its troops back away from the border and the potential for, an up to even nuclear war between India and Pakistan was averted. Not much was publicly mentioned of this until the 2006 US election when then Secretary of State Powell began praising President Bush for his involvement in this event. One peace group since then, the Transnational Foundation met with Musharraf on several peace discussions.
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar clearly was an evil monster during his youth and during several periods in his life. However he reminds me of a few vowed racists in the US like Elwin Hope Wilson who in old age recanted their past and tried to make amends. Being 61 is very old by harsh Afghan political standards. Hekmatyar's peace proposal makes a lot of sense. He is right that there is a real chance that Afghans will be killing and dying after the US leaves Afghanistan. If Hekmatyar received half the praise that Elwin Wilson and a few other vowed racists that recanted did, the world we live in might be a better place to live in. Hekmatyar once made a determined attempt to assassinate Karzai. Hamid Karzai has as much reason to not trust Hekmatyar as anyone else does. And Karzai has more knowledge on whether this peace proposal can work than the US State Department officials have. Let's again sing "Give Peace a Chance" and let's sing it with our eyes open.
by Richard Kane, RichardKanePA.blogspot.com
Read more!
The Taliban's traditional response even early in Karzai's presidency was that he was a traitor not worth negotiating with. If Western antiwar leaders had dwelt on Karzai's comments, it would have tended to convey an idea they wouldn't want to express, that the Taliban is unreasonable. Suddenly top Taliban supporting warlord, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar has made peace proposals with Karzai, who was very disappointed that Washington wasn't taken it seriously. The discussion in the US media and among some State Department and Defense officials rather quickly mostly changed to corruption and future election procedure as it always coincidentally does when a US client does something the US doesn't like. Karzai had heaped lavish praise on such countries as Saudi Arabia and Iran, trying to get their help to end the war. Saudi Arabia firmly said it wouldn't mediate between Karzai and Mullah Omar unless Mullah Omar first renounced bin Laden. Karzai's lavish praise of Iran and inviting Ahmadinejad to speak before a joint session of the Afghan Parliament at first received no mention in the US media. But as soon as peace talks with Hekmatyar became concrete proposals, the NY Times lashed out at Karzai for being too close to Iran, dwelling on Ahmadinejad's comments while in Afghanistan. Karzai responded, to all this, that the US is beginning to become occupiers and even suggested that he might have to eventually side with the Taliban if the US clearly became an occupier.
There is an US native American Indian proverb about walking a mile in someone else's shoes, and I think the peace movement's joining of the criticism of Karzai for being undemocratic wouldn't occur if the peace movement would do so.
Karzai came to power at the international conference on Afghanistan in Germany in 2001. He was the leader of the faction that wanted the king to return. He has always been either for peace or a less violent or less vengeful response than those around him. Karzai's brother and father were killed by the Taliban for trying to get the king to return. Karzai's first attempt at peace was in 1994 when the Afghan rebels first began fighting with each other after the Russians left. The following link is hard to follow but clearly indicates that Karzai has consistently gone out of his way in pursuit of peace,
www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2010/04/07/cia_prisoner_believed_to_have_rescued_karzai
When the UN tried to get all of the Taliban off the terror list to facilitate the hush-hush negotiations the UN had been conducting with the Taliban, the US response was to take four retired Taliban leaders off the list. And they conducted mostly benchmark negotiations or suggestions such as no night raids in exchange for no road bombs. These talks or comments ended when a top Taliban leader Mullah Baradar was arrested by Pakistan, some say because he was trying to meet the Saudis conditions to be the mediator that the Taliban first renounce al Qaeda. Al Jazeera News says Pakistan was afraid of India getting too close to Afghanistan, and wanted any possible peace negotiations channeled through Pakistan. Karzai was extremely disappointed in Mullah Baradar's arrest, which made him extra elated when Hekmatyar got interested in negotiations.
In Iraq al Qaeda is vowing to get even with the former al Qaeda supporting Sunnis who changed sides and joined with the Americans and have continued to have brutal revenge killings against Sunnis who changed sides in Iraq. This is why Mullah Omar hasn't agreed to renounce al Qaeda despite the fact that Omar shuns the mayhem violence al Qaeda specializes in. However, instead of calling Hekmatyar a despicable traitor, al Qaeda internet bloggers suggest that since Hekmatyar has a habit of changing sides he will probably be on al Qaeda's side again as circumstances change.
US ex-Ambassador to Afghanistan Peter Galbraith suggested that Karzai was unstable and may be on drugs. However Karzai has a right to be angry and frustrated at the way the Afghan government seems so powerless to in any way direct what is going on in its name. The sudden US pressure against election fraud is not what it seems. When it comes to fair elections in Afghanistan even the UN slipped up by not complaining of men voting for their wives. Almost every political figure on both sides of the war actually represents his one sub-tribal neighborhood or a warlord representing himself. This except for Mullah Omar who represents the Taliban's longing for tradition and Hamid Karzai who represented those longing for the king and the good old days when Afghans didn't have to be fighting with each other all the time.
If the NY Times and others didn't like the head of Iran speaking before the Afghan legislator why didn't they write and complain at the time instead of just when a peace attempt was taking place? Al Qaeda in Iraq made a concerted effort to blow up the Iranian Embassy. Iran is an important source of hard cash in Afghanistan since Shiite Afghans working in Iran, in the oil industry, and sending some of the money back home to relatives is the only important source of money that Afghans have other than drugs or being in the US supported or Taliban army. Al Qaeda loves to attack Shiite religious sites and religious processions. If one googles, "al Qaeda declares war on Iran", one would note many skirmishes and threats from al Qaeda against Iran. Al Qaeda clearly believes Iranian economic policies and even political policies are getting in the way of the world al Qaeda wants. Al Qaeda wants any Muslim who feels abused and insulted by the West, and that Western culture is overwhelming the world to believe al Qaeda's brutal policies is the only hope to change things.
If anyone notices, the tit-for-tat revenge horror stories that we heard in Iraq haven't occurred in Afghanistan, especially not recently. The war in Afghanistan is being fought differently than other wars. We hear there is a lot less civilian deaths and atrocities in Afghanistan because of General McChrystal and his efforts to avoid civilian casualties. But actually General McChrystal, President Karzai, and Mullah Omar are all going out of their way to avoid collateral damage. Karzai frequently lectures the US to be more careful against civilian causalities, instead of like in Iraq, when US troops had to be on their best behavior following the Abu Ghraib exposes, US interrogators could always turn over suspects to the locals to be roughed up.
When the warlord Hekmatyar proposed comprehensive peace talks he noted that when the Russians left the deaths drastically increased due to the infighting between rebel factions. Hekmatyar wants the Afghan army to remain intact and slowly merge with the Taliban militia as the US leaves to avoid the power vacuum that led to internal warfare and confusion. It would be considered unhelpful for a peace site to mention the possibility of a fast US withdrawal leading to revenge attacks against those the Americans supported and possibly even a lot of infighting over which rebel leader should be in charge. However I'm sure Obama knows this is possible and dreads not only the US being blamed but that he in his own mind might feel some responsibility for such results. I also think certain accusations that Obama doesn't believe, such as that the US is mainly interested in oil and other resources, when confronted with, "Why are you fighting a war for oil and other resources?" leads Obama to have less respect for those lobbying for an end to the war, making him less likely to change course. If somehow the US actually accepts a coalition government between Hekmatyar and Karzai in the name of pursuing peace and the results turn out differently, such as Hekmatyar ending up trying to be totally in charge, and war does break out between rebel leaders wanting to be in charge, it will be an Afghanistan decision not something to hold the US responsible for. Muslim terrorists are fascinated that the Soviet Union fell apart soon after the Afghan war and they believe they were the cause. This inspires militants in places like Chechnya to believe they can defeat Moscow again by getting a lot of Russians killed. Muslim terrorists know that if they attack the US like they did to Russia and Indonesia and earlier London and Madrid, the draft would be back and the US wouldn't be paying a fortune in military recruitment. A worst case withdrawal scenario like happened to the Soviet Union is impossible with the US, but some scenarios are better than others. If Kucinich succeeds at introducing an Afghan cut off date bill at the very moment there is some severe international economic crisis such as Greece goes into total collapse, or the unemployment rate in the US suddenly and unexpectedly going up sharply or there is a severe run on the dollar because of something China did and due to its timing Kucinich's firm war end date bill passes, and the US gets out abruptly. And revenge killings of US supporting Afghans or worse follows, at the very least those who supported the war ending resolution bill wouldn't look good in the next election and al Qaeda might seem to offer more hope to desperate people who believe they are being insulted and abused by the Western world. Karzai is a man of peace far more so than someone who is working on an arbitrary peace date, oblivious to current events in that part of the world.
A few hawks like Dick Cheney aren't interested in what happens to the Afghans, but just thinks the issue is really a handy opportunity to make what he considers import changes in the US. Actually, most Americans kind of hope for similar result over there such as at least have a fleeting desire that women over there not being forced to or even wanting to wear burkas, and that the desperate of the world not seeing something inspiring in bin Laden, and we would all like a reasonable way out of the war, and we are all at least a little worried that the overwhelming drain on the US treasury will be in the long run extremely harmful to the people of the US. During the Vietnam War some thought North Vietnam was a wonderful country where such things as woman's rights were respected, while other Americans thought North Vietnam was a grim dictatorship. In Afghanistan most Americans only argue whether the US is inadvertently making a bad situation much worse, than if we stopped being involved.
To change the subject only a little, who is the real peace activist is sometimes hard to tell. Everyone agrees that General Musharraf was a harsh dictator in Pakistan. However in 2001 after the bombing of the Indian Parliament by Muslim extremists, who were getting (or once had been getting) aid from Pakistan, skirmishes broke out in between Indian and Pakistani troops that were escalating. Pakistan suddenly pulled its troops back away from the border and the potential for, an up to even nuclear war between India and Pakistan was averted. Not much was publicly mentioned of this until the 2006 US election when then Secretary of State Powell began praising President Bush for his involvement in this event. One peace group since then, the Transnational Foundation met with Musharraf on several peace discussions.
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar clearly was an evil monster during his youth and during several periods in his life. However he reminds me of a few vowed racists in the US like Elwin Hope Wilson who in old age recanted their past and tried to make amends. Being 61 is very old by harsh Afghan political standards. Hekmatyar's peace proposal makes a lot of sense. He is right that there is a real chance that Afghans will be killing and dying after the US leaves Afghanistan. If Hekmatyar received half the praise that Elwin Wilson and a few other vowed racists that recanted did, the world we live in might be a better place to live in. Hekmatyar once made a determined attempt to assassinate Karzai. Hamid Karzai has as much reason to not trust Hekmatyar as anyone else does. And Karzai has more knowledge on whether this peace proposal can work than the US State Department officials have. Let's again sing "Give Peace a Chance" and let's sing it with our eyes open.
by Richard Kane, RichardKanePA.blogspot.com
Read more!
Afghan Peace Fever Grips Karzai
The Afghan capitol is in the midst of peace fever. After many years of asking the Talian to join peace negotions, only to be told that the Taliban doesn't negotiate with traitors, the top Taliban supporting warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar entered into peace negotiations with the Karzai government. Some in Kabul fear of such things as the having to wear the veil in public again as President Karzai works together for a comprehensive peace plan with 60-year-old Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. Al Qaeda telling the Internet that Hekmatyar has a habit of changing sides and urging the rest of the Taliban supporters to consider he only represents himself.
War coverage unlike in past wars has been limited so for detains google "Peace Negotiation Breakthrough in the Afghan War", then Insurgent Faction Presents Afghan Peace Plan,
rtednews.org//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1324
http://readersupportednews.com/pm-section/24-afghanistan/1324-peace-negotiation-breakthrough-in-afghan-war
President Obama, just returning from visiting Afghanistan, when I began writing this essay, partly pulled the rug out from under Karzai when Obama scolded Karzai about corruption. This, since Hekmatyar the top al Qaeda supporting warlord who Karzai is negotiating toward power sharing with is clearly corrupt. Every Afghan political official came to office through corruption and/or through being a warlord with the exception of Karzai, who used to be a top Northern Alliance official living off his brother's income, but not directives. In the US almost everyone including so-called experts are fixated with Vietnam War history. The UN peace negotiating experts are very much involved in the negotiations. UN peace experts know that peace overwhelmingly comes, or fails, through negotiations, never because legislators set a date for cutting off funds. The Vietnam War probably ended sooner because Congress quietly avoided funding the last war supplemental spending bill, not by announcing a cut off date where they publicly pledged to do so. Kucinich's peace movement is on the wrong track. Senator Specter makes far more sense, except some interpret his statements that we keep fighting al Qaeda in the wrong place as meaning sending troops to Yemen. If UN peace negotiators had been in charge, "Negotiate Now" would be the peace rallying cry. The US peace movement is betraying peace, and pulling the rug out from under Karzai, a peace-oriented Afghan official who constantly pressures the US to avoid civilian deaths.
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is spreading some valuable information. President Bush constantly warnrd of a bloodbath if the US left Iraq as a tit-for-tat bloodbath was occurring between Shiites and Sunnis. Hekmatyar reported a bloodbath after the Soviets left as warlords and others fought over who should be in charge. Hakmatyaar thus wants the Afghan army to stay intact while power sharing was being arranged and the US leaves Afghanistan. If Kucinich musters the support to cut off funding and US troops leave, followed by a bloodbath, Kucinich's supporters will have nothing to brag about during the next election cycle. Both General McChrystal and Mullah Omar are clean fighters without bloodbaths. No massacres, no shopping bazaars being blown up by a 7-year-old remotely detonated suicide bomber like in Iraq. When the central bank of Afghanistan wasn't penetrated, the suicide-vested bombers retreated to the shopping bazaar complex next to it, holding up for hours without blowing themselves or the shopping complex or killing the shoppers. Google "Taliban code of ethics" for comprehensive detail google with "NY Times" Hekmatyar is right, chaos again would increase the casualties.
Bin Laden is intrigued that the US spends several hundred thousand dollars to keep each soldier equipped as safely as possible, including follow up medical care. He knows that turning the US into a bloody mess such as bombing shopping bazaars, police and soldier funerals, and religious sites and public transit like in Russia, London and Spain would mean a draft and maybe less than five or ten thousand dollar back up per GI. Al Qaeda is confident that the US will bankrupt itself though military spending and I think teases us to spend more. Expecting that the American people in a US currency-less world will have to desperately barter for goods and services, where almost no food is grown close to where the people who are bartering are. Usually al Qaeda, all over the world, has back ups on terror attacks. None on the Christmas Day “underpants” bomb might have meant it was intended to not blow up the plane only scare us to spend more money, and screw up air travel. An al Qaeda operative telling an unsympathetic relative, his father, “You will never see me again”, goes against al Qaeda’s usual intense secrecy. Even if al Qaeda is wrong about US future bankruptcy, it still means that as long as the war continues Obama’s health and job’s programs will be 20% less successful than it would be had the war ended. And the Democrats will have around 20% less representatives in the next election cycle. And if the Republican Party continues shifting to the right, US culture at least 20% more to bin Laden’s liking.
Let’s back Karzai’s showing independence of Washington for his own good as well as ours.
Maybe I should end this article here, and I was banned from Daily Kos because my add-ons were called repeat submissions of the same article. Washington always gives an inch toward Karzai's constant attempts to negotiate with everyone, and his efforts to keep some independence. If Washington ever gave a firm "No!", the US peace movement would come to Karzai's defense. The UN asked that the Taliban be taken off the terror list to facilitate its back door peace negotiations with the Taliban. The US response was to take four retired officials off the terror list, who immediately got busy on a benchmark approach. "No night raids, in return for no roads being blown up". So there was no public UN complaints against the US dragging it's feet. Mullah Omar kept denying that negotiations were going on.
Kai Eide, a Swedish UN Afghan special envoy after he retired or quit lashed out of Pakistan arresting Mullah Omar's second in command Mullah Abdul Baradar, according to Eide just as back door negotiations were going on. Al Jazeera News reporting that Pakistan arrested Mullah Baradar to prevent him from going to the Saudis because they didn't want a Saudi rather than Pakistan brokered peace that might leave Afghanistan not dominated by Pakistan and possibly too close to India.
US doves are letting the Afghan negotiators down by not supporting them and since reality is weird and most US hawks hope for a better Afghanistan. in the long run, US hawks are letting the negotiators down as well.
America ends up with two goals that often overlap. One is as some kind of police force dealing with bin Laden’s dream of Islam as a permanent warfare state as long as there is a religiously divided world. The other is promoting Western values. Mullah Omar goes against most of bin Laden’s practices but won’t officially oppose him because he doesn’t want a new war between him and al Qaeda. Hekmatyar doesn’t mind condemning bin Laden’s desire for war without end but not on the social values of what society should look like. I long for a way of not requiring Mullah Omar to condemn al Qaeda, and take advantage of Omar’s strict code of ethics against excessive vengeance that makes life far more bearable for the Afghans. Perhaps the Hekmatyar could become the unintended catalysts in this direction.
I'm from a peace tradition but got peace activists upset by not crying out against the drone war. However if one googles "Kandahar Becomes Battlefield Even Before a U.S. Offensive" one will note farmers digging ditches killed by drone attacks. The drones could take pictures of what's being dug instead of shooting and when it comes to some real goons hiding in Pakistan some brave heroes could try to capture them with stun guns, especially if the US ends capital punishment. This may seem ridiculous to most, but the Kucinich's and Cindy Sheehan blanketly condemning drone attacks as immoral and trying to Congressionally mandate a fund cutoff date in no way makes the war end any sooner. Kucinich has some good ideas especially when it comes to standing up to the monopolies and big business, but we desperately need a more mature peace movement. We should look to UN peace keeping officials for guidance.
NEWS FLASH: Finally there is an article that should show the Kucinich’s and Cindy Sheehan’s that Karzai is no puppet and is really for peace and allow the US peace movement to help peace efforts on the ground in Afghanistan. Google “Afghan leader is seen to flout influence of U.S.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/world/asia/30karzai.html
RichardKanePA.blogspot.com
By Richard Kane
Read more!
War coverage unlike in past wars has been limited so for detains google "Peace Negotiation Breakthrough in the Afghan War", then Insurgent Faction Presents Afghan Peace Plan,
rtednews.org//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1324
http://readersupportednews.com/pm-section/24-afghanistan/1324-peace-negotiation-breakthrough-in-afghan-war
President Obama, just returning from visiting Afghanistan, when I began writing this essay, partly pulled the rug out from under Karzai when Obama scolded Karzai about corruption. This, since Hekmatyar the top al Qaeda supporting warlord who Karzai is negotiating toward power sharing with is clearly corrupt. Every Afghan political official came to office through corruption and/or through being a warlord with the exception of Karzai, who used to be a top Northern Alliance official living off his brother's income, but not directives. In the US almost everyone including so-called experts are fixated with Vietnam War history. The UN peace negotiating experts are very much involved in the negotiations. UN peace experts know that peace overwhelmingly comes, or fails, through negotiations, never because legislators set a date for cutting off funds. The Vietnam War probably ended sooner because Congress quietly avoided funding the last war supplemental spending bill, not by announcing a cut off date where they publicly pledged to do so. Kucinich's peace movement is on the wrong track. Senator Specter makes far more sense, except some interpret his statements that we keep fighting al Qaeda in the wrong place as meaning sending troops to Yemen. If UN peace negotiators had been in charge, "Negotiate Now" would be the peace rallying cry. The US peace movement is betraying peace, and pulling the rug out from under Karzai, a peace-oriented Afghan official who constantly pressures the US to avoid civilian deaths.
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is spreading some valuable information. President Bush constantly warnrd of a bloodbath if the US left Iraq as a tit-for-tat bloodbath was occurring between Shiites and Sunnis. Hekmatyar reported a bloodbath after the Soviets left as warlords and others fought over who should be in charge. Hakmatyaar thus wants the Afghan army to stay intact while power sharing was being arranged and the US leaves Afghanistan. If Kucinich musters the support to cut off funding and US troops leave, followed by a bloodbath, Kucinich's supporters will have nothing to brag about during the next election cycle. Both General McChrystal and Mullah Omar are clean fighters without bloodbaths. No massacres, no shopping bazaars being blown up by a 7-year-old remotely detonated suicide bomber like in Iraq. When the central bank of Afghanistan wasn't penetrated, the suicide-vested bombers retreated to the shopping bazaar complex next to it, holding up for hours without blowing themselves or the shopping complex or killing the shoppers. Google "Taliban code of ethics" for comprehensive detail google with "NY Times" Hekmatyar is right, chaos again would increase the casualties.
Bin Laden is intrigued that the US spends several hundred thousand dollars to keep each soldier equipped as safely as possible, including follow up medical care. He knows that turning the US into a bloody mess such as bombing shopping bazaars, police and soldier funerals, and religious sites and public transit like in Russia, London and Spain would mean a draft and maybe less than five or ten thousand dollar back up per GI. Al Qaeda is confident that the US will bankrupt itself though military spending and I think teases us to spend more. Expecting that the American people in a US currency-less world will have to desperately barter for goods and services, where almost no food is grown close to where the people who are bartering are. Usually al Qaeda, all over the world, has back ups on terror attacks. None on the Christmas Day “underpants” bomb might have meant it was intended to not blow up the plane only scare us to spend more money, and screw up air travel. An al Qaeda operative telling an unsympathetic relative, his father, “You will never see me again”, goes against al Qaeda’s usual intense secrecy. Even if al Qaeda is wrong about US future bankruptcy, it still means that as long as the war continues Obama’s health and job’s programs will be 20% less successful than it would be had the war ended. And the Democrats will have around 20% less representatives in the next election cycle. And if the Republican Party continues shifting to the right, US culture at least 20% more to bin Laden’s liking.
Let’s back Karzai’s showing independence of Washington for his own good as well as ours.
Maybe I should end this article here, and I was banned from Daily Kos because my add-ons were called repeat submissions of the same article. Washington always gives an inch toward Karzai's constant attempts to negotiate with everyone, and his efforts to keep some independence. If Washington ever gave a firm "No!", the US peace movement would come to Karzai's defense. The UN asked that the Taliban be taken off the terror list to facilitate its back door peace negotiations with the Taliban. The US response was to take four retired officials off the terror list, who immediately got busy on a benchmark approach. "No night raids, in return for no roads being blown up". So there was no public UN complaints against the US dragging it's feet. Mullah Omar kept denying that negotiations were going on.
Kai Eide, a Swedish UN Afghan special envoy after he retired or quit lashed out of Pakistan arresting Mullah Omar's second in command Mullah Abdul Baradar, according to Eide just as back door negotiations were going on. Al Jazeera News reporting that Pakistan arrested Mullah Baradar to prevent him from going to the Saudis because they didn't want a Saudi rather than Pakistan brokered peace that might leave Afghanistan not dominated by Pakistan and possibly too close to India.
US doves are letting the Afghan negotiators down by not supporting them and since reality is weird and most US hawks hope for a better Afghanistan. in the long run, US hawks are letting the negotiators down as well.
America ends up with two goals that often overlap. One is as some kind of police force dealing with bin Laden’s dream of Islam as a permanent warfare state as long as there is a religiously divided world. The other is promoting Western values. Mullah Omar goes against most of bin Laden’s practices but won’t officially oppose him because he doesn’t want a new war between him and al Qaeda. Hekmatyar doesn’t mind condemning bin Laden’s desire for war without end but not on the social values of what society should look like. I long for a way of not requiring Mullah Omar to condemn al Qaeda, and take advantage of Omar’s strict code of ethics against excessive vengeance that makes life far more bearable for the Afghans. Perhaps the Hekmatyar could become the unintended catalysts in this direction.
I'm from a peace tradition but got peace activists upset by not crying out against the drone war. However if one googles "Kandahar Becomes Battlefield Even Before a U.S. Offensive" one will note farmers digging ditches killed by drone attacks. The drones could take pictures of what's being dug instead of shooting and when it comes to some real goons hiding in Pakistan some brave heroes could try to capture them with stun guns, especially if the US ends capital punishment. This may seem ridiculous to most, but the Kucinich's and Cindy Sheehan blanketly condemning drone attacks as immoral and trying to Congressionally mandate a fund cutoff date in no way makes the war end any sooner. Kucinich has some good ideas especially when it comes to standing up to the monopolies and big business, but we desperately need a more mature peace movement. We should look to UN peace keeping officials for guidance.
NEWS FLASH: Finally there is an article that should show the Kucinich’s and Cindy Sheehan’s that Karzai is no puppet and is really for peace and allow the US peace movement to help peace efforts on the ground in Afghanistan. Google “Afghan leader is seen to flout influence of U.S.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/world/asia/30karzai.html
RichardKanePA.blogspot.com
By Richard Kane
Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)