Osama Bin Laden Killed: Stratfor's First Take "We know little beyond what we have been told, but we know it matters."

From Stratfor's Red Alert (5/2/2011 0249GMT):

The United States has killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and recovered his body, according to numerous media reports May 1 citing U.S. officials. U.S. President Barack Obama is scheduled to make an announcement on the subject. It is not clear precisely how bin Laden was killed or how his body was recovered, but the assertion that he is dead is significant.

Bin Laden had become the symbol of al Qaeda, even though the degree to which he commanded the organization was questionable. The symbolic value of his death is obvious. The United States can claim a great victory. Al Qaeda can proclaim his martyrdom.

It is difficult to understand what this means at this moment, but it permits the Obama administration to claim victory, at least partially, over al Qaeda. It also opens the door for the beginning of a withdrawal from Afghanistan, regardless of the practical impact of bin Laden’s death. The mission in Afghanistan was to defeat al Qaeda, and with his death, a plausible claim can be made that the mission is complete. Again speculatively, it will be interesting to see how this affects U.S. strategy there.

Equally possible is that this will trigger action by al Qaeda in bin Laden’s name. We do not know how viable al Qaeda is or how deeply compromised it was. It is clear that bin Laden’s cover had been sufficiently penetrated to kill him. If bin Laden’s cover was penetrated, then the question becomes how much of the rest of the organization’s cover was penetrated. It is unlikely, however, that al Qaeda is so compromised that it cannot take further action.

At this early hour, the only thing possible is speculation on the consequences of bin Laden’s death, and that speculation is inherently flawed. Still, the importance of his death has its consequences. Certainly one consequence will be a sense of triumph in the United States. To others, this will be another false claim by the United States. For others it will be a call to war. We know little beyond what we have been told, but we know it matters.

Read more: Red Alert: Osama bin Laden Killed | STRATFOR

Claim victory and get out of Afghanistan and Pakistan (and Kazakhstan and a host of other -stans).

Tweet

Richard Holbrooke Dead; Obama Czars Now 35

US diplomat Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, aka Obama's Af-Pak czar who had collapsed in Hillary Clinton's office on Friday, died tonight from torn aorta. He was 69.

From ABC News:

Holbrooke, who served in the Obama administration as the U.S. special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, was putting the finishing touches on a major report on American military and diplomatic efforts in Afghanistan, due to be released on Thursday.

... Holbrooke had been in Clinton's office on Friday when he collapsed. He was rushed to George Washington University Hospital, where he went through 20 hours of surgery. His wife, along with their children and other family, were in the hospital room when he died. Just an hour before, they had had a private meeting with Obama at the State Department. The president praised him as "a tough son of a gun."

Tweet

War and Deficit As Far As Eyes Can See

The first three links go to the articles by Jason Diz on September 24, 2010 at Antiwar.com website:

US Combat Continues in 'Post-Combat' Iraq

...US military spokesman Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Buchanan announced today that “our rules of engagement have no changed,” meaning the claims that only “non-combat” troops remains in the nation were even more transparently false than they appeared on the surface.

Pants on fire!

Obama Vows US Troops to Stay in Afghanistan ‘Until the Job Is Done’

...In an interview today with the BBC’s Persian Television channel, President Barack Obama promised that the United States would not end the war in Afghanistan as a result of the July 2011 drawdown date.

Rather Obama insisted the war would continue “until the job is done”and went on to define the job as “to provide Afghans themselves the capacity to secure their own country.” He gave no indications of when he thought this might be.

Pants on fire! I thought the reason of going there was to grab Osama Bin Laden. No?

FBI Launching Mass Raids of Antiwar Activists’ Homes

...The FBI is confirming that this morning they began a number of “raids” against the homes of antiwar activists, claiming that they are “seeking evidence relating to activities concerning the material support of terrorism.”

Now, how do they define "material support" and "terrorism"?

Here's Paul Craig Roberts' take:

...Now we know what Homeland Security (sic) secretary Janet Napolitano meant when she said on September 10: "The old view that 'if we fight the terrorists abroad, we won't have to fight them here' is just that--the old view." The new view, Napolitano said, is "to counter violent extremism right here at home."

"Violent extremism" is one of those undefined police state terms that will mean whatever the government wants it to mean. In this morning's FBI's foray into the homes of American citizens of conscience, it means antiwar activists, whose activities are equated with "the material support of terrorism," just as conservatives equated Vietnam era anti-war protesters with giving material support to communism.

"Material support" is another of those undefined police state terms. In this context the term means that Americans who fail to believe their government's lies and instead protest its policies, are supporting their government's declared enemies and, thus, are not exercising their civil liberties but committing treason.

As this initial FBI foray is a softening up move to get the public accustomed to the idea that the real terrorists are their fellow citizens here at home, Kelly will get off this time. But next time the FBI will find emails on his computer from a "terrorist group" set up by the CIA that will incriminate him. Under the practices put in place by the Bush and Obama regimes, and approved by corrupt federal judges, protesters who have been compromised by fake terrorist groups can be declared "enemy combatants" and sent off to Egypt, Poland, or some other corrupt American puppet state--Canada perhaps--to be tortured until confession is forthcoming that antiwar protesters and, indeed, every critic of the US government, are on Osama bin Laden's payroll.

Almost every Republican and conservative and, indeed, the majority of Americans will fall for this, only to find, later, that it is subversive to complain that their Social Security was cut in the interest of the war against Iran or some other demonized entity, or that they couldn't have a Medicare operation because the wars in Central Asia and South America required the money.

And the multibillionaire Warren Buffett excoriates us for being angry at the government.

If you add up all the defense related expenditure, it adds up to slightly over $1 trillion. The federal deficit is $1.5 trillion. But "Suck it up" says Warren Buffet.

Will "gullible" Americans suck it up, for the sake of .....what?

Tweet

Obama's War in Afghanistan

It feels more and more like a cross between Apocalypse Now and Lord of the Flies.

Twelve U.S. soldiers face trial after Afghan civilians 'were killed for sport and their fingers collected as trophies' (9/10/2010 Mail Online)

"A dozen US soldiers are facing trail accused of being part of a 'kill team' that allegedly killed Afghan civilians in an arbitrary fashion - and they even collected their victims' fingers as trophies of war.

"Five soldiers have been charged with the killing three Afghan men 'for sport'. And seven more are accused of covering up the murders.

"In one of the most serious accusations of war crimes to come out of the Afghan war, the deaths are alleged to have been carried out by members of a Stryker infantry brigade based in Kandahar province, southern Afghanistan.

"But the father of one of the five accused of murder said today he tried to warn the Army that troops in his son's unit had killed civilians.

"By the time suspects were arrested in May, two more Afghans were dead.

"Christopher Winfield said his son Adam, 22, was so disgusted after the first killing that he sent Facebook messages home asking for help.

"Winfield called the Army and a military hot line asking officials to investigate - to no avail." [The article continues.]

Well, who needs Wikileaks to see the Afghan war for what it is?

What Obama is doing in Afghanistan, aside from killing Afghan civilians in the name of ... why are we there anyway? ... is to kill and maim the young Americans, both physically and psychologically.

Winfield's son says the following in the article:

'There are no more good men left here. It eats away at my conscience everyday.'

Will the Commander in Chief be playing yet another round of golf this weekend? Just curious...

Tweet

Israel Trains German Air Force on Afghan Drones

Irony is not lost on participants, but Germany is now a "very, very good friend, if not the best friend of Israel today in the world".

German drone pilots eye Afghanistan... from Israel
(Dan Williams, 7/27/2010 Reuters AlertNet)

"EIN SHEMER AIR BASE, Israel, July 27 (Reuters) - As World War Two raged in the years before Israel's founding, colonial British planes were scrambled here to fend off German forces. Now the German Luftwaffe is back, preparing for a far more remote fight with the modern equipment and expertise of the Jewish state established after the Nazi Holocaust.

"Worried by insurgent ambushes on its soldiers in Afghanistan and return fire that sometimes kills civilians or local allies, Germany last year ordered a small fleet of Israeli Heron spy drones designed to provide real-time images above a battlefield.

"That has brought German jet pilots to coastal Ein Shemer air base for accelerated retraining on the unmanned propeller planes, already daubed with their flag and Iron Cross emblem.

"...Israel is a pioneer of combat drones, having deployed them in Lebanon in the Palestinian territories. Heron's manufacturer, Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), says it is also used by Canadian, French and Australian forces in Afghanistan.

"Yet the fact Israeli know-how may now be saving German military lives offers up a unique historical irony lost on none.

"The Defence Ministry in Berlin declined to allow the Luftwaffe trainees to be interviewed about such symbolism, but one of them described how they took time off to visit the central Holocaust memorial at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem. Dressed in civilian clothes while in Israel, trainees on an earlier course stood at attention for annual commemorations in April of the six million Jews killed in the Nazi genocide.

"As a Jew, I felt very proud at this specific moment," said Tomer Koriat, deputy director of the IAI training programme, who praised the Germans' mastery of the Heron within intensive courses lasting just three-and-a-half weeks.

"All of us have learned that today we are talking about another Germany than what we used to know ... A very, very good friend, if not the best friend of Israel today in the world."" [The entire article at the link above.]

Tweet

Wikileaks' Massive Leak on Afghan War

Wikileaks made the secret military documents on War in Afghanistan available on Sunday. They leaked these documents to three major newspapers, who all have the special section titled "The War Logs" on their sites:

New York Times (US)

Der Spiegel (Germany)

Guardian (UK)

Those papers who didn't get the "leak" downplay (e.g. Telegraph UK, Washington Post).

Here's the headlines and snippets from the Washington Post coverage of the leak:

Leak itself gains more attention than contents
Experts say documents shouldn't alter approach
Wikileaks' revelations aren't anything new
This was all secret?

Here's Antiwar.com's Justin Raimondo, "Bradley Manning's Gift" (7/26/2010):

"They said the huge cache of classified documents – including 250,000 diplomatic messages passed from US embassies around the world to Washington – was a fantasy, “boasting” by Pfc. Bradley Manning, the intelligence analyst who gave Wikileaks that video of US soldiers laughing and shouting “good shot!” as they mowed down Iraqi civilians. The “hi tech” media, especially Wired magazine, did everything they could do discredit and smear him, including spreading rumors about his alleged sexuality. Now, with the release of over 91,000 internal US government communications, intelligence analyses and incident reports via Wikileaks, the motive behind the determined effort to smear Manning and shut down Wikileaks is all too apparent.

"The Guardian provides a helpful interactive map, in which you click on a location and read the “incident report.” Of course, you’re reading a selection of what the Guardian editors consider important, but it looks to me like their news judgment isn’t bad at all, because the first one I clicked on was an intelligence report detailing meetings of the Taliban with Osama bin Laden in Quetta, Pakistan, and in villages on the border with Afghanistan. So, bin Laden is not only alive, but they know where he is. I guess when Hillary was hectoring the Pakistanis about the whereabouts of bin Laden, the subtext was: “If we know, then you must know, too!”

"A good number of the incident reports are those that detail civilian casualties, which don’t seem to have been reported by our own “embedded journalists”: the title of this one, “Five in car, including toddler, machine-gunned by patrol,” is typical of what the reader has in store. Here’s another: “Special forces wound two, kill six, including young girl, plus donkey and chickens.” There are hundreds of such reports, detailing slaughters both horrifying (“56 civilians killed in NATO bombing”) and pathetic (“Practice shell kills child and 10 sheep, injures shepherd”).

"What’s particularly bad, from the perspective of the Obama administration officials charged with selling this war to the American people, is the dramatic portrayal of the sheer chaos enveloping our military effort, such as this one, entitled “Border police high on opium’ in shoot-out.” Oh, and by the way, the Taliban is apparently armed with portable heat-seeking missiles – a fact the administration has been covering up."

In "Notes in the Margin", Mr. Raimondo says:

"The release of the logs also brings into focus the Manning case, and its importance – really, at this point, its centrality – to all those opposed to our foreign policy of global intervention. Bradley is sitting in a jail in Kuwait, right now, being interrogated and, who knows, perhaps even tortured, within an inch of his life. This is intolerable. He is a hero, not a traitor: he is giving us the truth about what we’re doing in Afghanistan, and around the world. We should thank him for this priceless gift by working tirelessly to free him.

"Enveloped in a cloak of secrecy, our rulers get away with murder – literally – committing their crimes in the dark, until someone like Pfc. Manning shines a light on the truth. Now is the time for the American people to take up that cry, and declare: Not one more dime, not one more life!

"Hands off Wikileaks! Free Bradley Manning!"

Tweet

Eric Garris at Antiwar.com: Defend Michael Steele!

(I never thought I would feel like defending him either...)

The RNC chairman is being attacked from the Right and the Left (now that it's their dear leader's war) for his Afghan remark.

But stick to your guns, Mr. Steele. You spoke the truth, just like General McChrystal did.

Defend Michael Steele! (Eric Garris, 7/2/2010 Antiwar.com)

"Defend Michael Steele? I never thought I’d be writing that!

"But the neocons, led by Bill Kristol, are demanding his resignation as national chairman of the Republican Party.

"Why?

"At a fundraising event Steele was caught on video in a “gaffe” (a technical term signifying that a politician has spoken the truth).

"Steele suggested that Afghanistan is “a war of Obama’s choosing.” “Well if he’s such a student of history, has he not understood that, you know, that’s the one thing you don’t do is engage in a land war in Afghanistan,” Steele says of Obama. “Alright? Because everyone who has tried over a thousand years of history has failed. And there are reasons for that. There are other ways to engage in Afghanistan without committing more troops.” Steele suggests America should have a “background” role in the country, “sort of shaping the changes that were necessary in Afghanistan as opposed to directly engaging troops.”

"Steele also described the situation around the resignation of Gen. Stanley McChrystal as “very comical.”

"Although Steele later backtracked a bit in an official statement, he should be commended for even talking about what is quickly becoming the Democrats’ war in such a frank manner. The Democratic National Committee quickly attacked Steele for wanting to “walk away from the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban without finishing the job.”

"Here is a video of Steele’s original statement:

"I suggest that you call the Republican National Committee and indicate your support for Michael Steele’s original statement: 202-863-8500 "

Here's one reader's comment:

Makes perfect GOP sense. Annihilate Steele for the only sensible thing he's said
since he was hired.

Tweet

Taliban's Verdict on General Petraeus

"The new boss is the same as the old boss. And Petraeus is a wimp."

Ouch.

Taliban endorses General Petraeus, say new US Afghanistan war chief 'not smarter' than McChrystal (James Gordon Meek, 6/24/2010 NY Daily News)

"It seems the evildoers were just biding their time to see how the Rolling Stone flap would play out. Now that President Obama has sacked his top war boss in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, and replaced him with Iraq surge hero Gen. David Petraeus, the Taliban has finally weighed in.

"Their verdict? The new boss is the same as the old boss. And Petraeus is a wimp, they claimed Thursday.

""(Petraeus) is not smarter than McChrystal," Taliban spokesman Qari Muhammad Ahmed Yusuf said in a statement. "Also, his losing consciousness last week in an investigative hearing before the members of the U.S. Congress brought his physical competence and his courage into question."" [The article continues.]

Never skip your breakfast ever again, General...

Tweet

Justin Raimondo: Times Square Bombing Story Doesn't Quite Add Up

President Obama said this to the Jonas Brothers on Saturday, with the help from the Daily Show writers:

"Sasha and Malia are huge fans, but boys, don't get any ideas. Two words for you: predator drones. You will never see it coming. You think I'm joking?"

I thought it was in such a crude, bad taste.

On Sunday, a Pakistani man (US citizen) tried to blow up an SUV in Times Square, New York.

Antiwar.com's Justin Raimondo has this to say:

Faisal Shahzad: An Ordinary Man: From Wall Street to Waziristan: a story that doesn’t quite add up (5/5/2010 Antiwar.com)

"The day after President Obama made his Predator joke at the White House Correspondents dinner, Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistani-American, was in the middle of Times Square trying to blow the place up. I’m not saying there was any connection, although you never know: yet there is indeed a link between the casual arrogance that allowed an intelligent man like our chief executive to joke about a deadly weapon that has killed more innocent civilians in Pakistan than actual terrorists.

"It’s why they hate us." [It is "imperial hubris", according to Justin. The article continues.]

He says things don't quite add up in this case. Just like the previous "terrorism" case of a Nigerian young man trying to blow up an airplane with the bomb in his pants. (That story has gone dead very quickly, hasn't it?)

Tweet

UK Police Welcomes Armed Robot Drones Soon

This is getting to be too bleak and dismal a future for the rest of us.

Wired U.K. tells us what kind of assistance the Britain's 'coppers' are going to have: surveillance drones and armed robot drones. Not content having CCTV everywhere to monitor everyone, they will have drones to keep track of and attack, albeit non-lethal (supposedly), everyone that moves.

(Skynet cannot be too far away...)

Future police: Meet the UK's armed robot drones
(David Hambling, 2/10/2010 Wired UK)

"Police forces all over the UK will soon be able to draw on unmanned aircraft from a national fleet, according to Home Office plans. Last month it was revealed that modified military aircraft drones will carry out surveillance on everyone from protesters and antisocial motorists to fly-tippers [people who dump waste somewhere other than an authorized landfill], and will be in place in time for the 2012 Olympics.

"Surveillance is only the start, however. Military drones quickly moved from reconnaissance to strike, and if the British police follow suit, their drones could be armed -- but with non-lethal weapons rather than Hellfire missiles.

"The flying robot fleet will range from miniature tactical craft such as the miniature AirRobot being tested by Essex police, to BAE System's new HERTI drone as flown in Afghanistan. The drones are cheaper than police helicopters -- some of which will be retired -- and are as wide as 12m in the case of HERTI."

The article continues to explain what kind of "weapons" are being considered to be mounted on the drones. They include:

• LRAD (Long Range Acoustic Device), which was used against G20 protesters in Pittsburgh; it can permanently damage hearing.
• Light-based personnel immobilization device; think strobe light that can make you dizzy and disoriented, or worse, cause seizures.
• Double-barrelled 44mm Flash-Ball gun
• Taser, which has killed how many people by now?

The picture is iDrone, developed by a French company.



I can't wait to find out what the U.S. military and law enforcement have in store for us. After all, the U.S. has become such an expert in using drones, blasting funerals and wedding parties in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Tweet

Geopolitical Zigsaw Puzzle You May Not Want to Solve

The U.S. was bombing Yemen at the express order from the U.S. president prior to the failed Christmas Day bomb attack.

The so-called Christmas Day panty bomber says there are more like him in Yemen. The Yemeni government says 300.

That bomber may have been aided by an Indian to board the plane in Amsterdam without a passport.

Another Indian was detained after the plane landed in Detroit.

A U.S. analyst contends that the American who aided the Mumbay bombing terrorists in November last year was a double agent of CIA.

Pakistan has arrested 5 Americans who allegedly tried to blow up a nuke plant in Pakistan.

The U.S. is probably fighting in the Central Asia "-stans" - Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan as Afghan refugees flee to these countries.

On the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan is threatening Armenia with war. To the north of these countries sits a U.S. ally, Georgia. To the south, Iran. North of Georgia is Russia.

Information that Iran was developing "neutron initiater" was determined by the U.S. intelligence to be a forgery concocted probably by the Israeli intelligence agency.

Israel is having the first-ever meeting of all Israeli envoys to discuss the country's options.

By the way, Yemen has been in a civil war between northern Shi'ites and southern Sunnis. In other words, it's a proxy war. (Iran is Shia. Saudi Arabia is Sunni. Mostly, that is.)

Iran is said to be getting (or trying to get) uranium from Kazakhstan.

Russia says it will develop a new set of nuclear weapons, in response to the sea-based missle shield by the U.S.. It also says it needs more weapons to deter the U.S. from doing whatever it wants in the world.

All these commotions - where are they being directed? I don't think the president of the U.S. has a clue. Vladimir Putin and Hu Jintao may.

Only 29% of Americans think the country is going in the right direction, and this newsletter writer says that's a real good sign of a prolonged bull market in the stocks.

I can't shake off the unsettling feeling that something bad and wicked is coming our way. Maybe it's just Mercury Retrograde.

There were two events which I thought would never happen in my lifetime. One was a severe stock market crash that would trigger a severe recession. The other was a world war. The first one happened.

Tweet

War Bonds Proposed to Pay for Iraq, Af-Pak

So we are indeed in a depression like the last big one, when people struggled to survive and at the same time did the patriotic duty by buying war bonds from the government.

War bonds proposed to pay for Afghanistan, Iraq conflicts
(Lesley Clark, 12/16/09 McClatchy)

"WASHINGTON — Lawmakers in both houses of Congress have introduced legislation to pay for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq by using a method that's a throwback to prior U.S. conflicts: war bonds.

"Saying that it would "promote national shared sacrifice and responsibility," Rep. Kendrick Meek, D-Fla., introduced a bill Wednesday in the House of Representatives that would authorize the treasury secretary to issue and sell war bonds to Americans to fund the wars.

"Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., filed companion legislation in the Senate earlier this week.

""At a time of tremendous sacrifice for our military families, we need to promote shared sacrifice and shoulder collective responsibility as a nation as we fight two wars halfway across the globe," Meek said, calling war bonds a "cost-effective way" to reduce dependence on foreign creditors.
He also said the bonds would "create an outlet for Americans to express their patriotism and support for our service members as well as the security mission for which they are deployed."

"The legislation comes as Congress debates ways to pay for the wars, including a tax on the wealthy. Critics note that the bonds must be repaid eventually, merely postponing the debt.

"The United States last issued war bonds during World War II."

(The article continues.)

I'm wondering why these lawmakers think such war bonds sell. Who would buy them? Oh I forgot, a great number of Democrats are now for these necessary wars, now that their guy is at the White House.

Or just like the health care bill that's currently stuck in the Senate, would they force people to buy them somehow? Have ACORN push the bonds to patriotic low-income working class people?

I suggest they make it mandatory for any member of Congress who voted for the $634 billion defense appropriation bill (which doesn't include the cost for the surge announced by Obama) today to buy them. And allocate to each one of them certain number of bonds so that they can sell them to their friends, family and relatives.

Better yet, just let the Federal Reserve do what a central bank was set up for: to fund the war by accepting the government debts and print out money. War bonds would suck up the money from people who would have used it in productive ways. Then when the wars are over (if ever), the government would have to pay off. How would it do that? Either by raising taxes or printing more money and pay off through inflation. Who would be the sore losers? American people who bought war bonds.

Tweet

Michael Moore to Obama: This Is Absolutely Insane

Michael Moore is dead-set against Afghanistan surge.

Tweet

9,000 Marines Heading to Afghanistan Immediately

after Obama announcement on Tuesday

I wonder what will happen to that brilliant idea of taxing all Americans to support the Afghan war. I also wonder (in shudder) what will happen in Pakistan. (Read this Seymour Hersh article on Pakistan and her nukes and American role in destabilizing Pakistan.)

9,000 Marines Heading to Afghanistan Immediately After Obama Announcement (11/29/09 Antiwar.com)

"The United States is wasting no time in throwing more troops at the war in Afghanistan. Officials say as soon as President Obama makes his Tuesday announcement of the escalation of the war, 9,000 additional Marines will depart for Afghanistan.

"The 9,000 Marines will head to the Helmand Province, roughly doubling the number of marines on the ground in the tense province. It will also be a significant portion of the estimated 34,000 additional troops President Obama will commit to the war.

"Defense Secretary Robert Gates had said the escalation would come quickly, despite caution that it was complicated to add so many troops to a war in a landlocked, virtually infrastructure free country on the other side of the globe. Still, most assumed it would be at least January when the troops started arriving.

"That the troops are all heading to Helmand will no doubt be troubling news to Pakistan, as Prime Minister Gilani cautioned only two days ago that he was worried a US escalation in Helmand could destabilize the nation’s Balochistan Province."

"Might makes right, until they see the light..."

Tweet

New Income Tax for Everyone to Pay for Afghan War?

Influencial Democratic lawmakers called for new income tax for anyone with a taxable income to pay for the Afghan war, which President Obama is expected to broaden by pouring in tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers.

It is the "Share the Sacrifice Act of 2010" (H.R. 4130), introduced on November 19, 2009 with 10 co-sponsors. If the bill gets passed (no one at this point seems to think it will), the new tax will be in the form of "war surtax" ranging from 1% to 5% for personal income tax, and 2% to 10% for corporate income tax.

US lawmakers: New tax should pay for Afghan war
(11/19/09 AFP via Raw Story)

"Influential US lawmakers on Thursday called for levying a new income tax to pay for the war in Afghanistan, warning its costs pose a mortal threat to efforts like a sweeping health care overhaul.

""Regardless of whether one favors the war or not, if it is to be fought, it ought to be paid for," the lawmakers, all prominent Democratic allies of Obama, said in a joint statement on the "Share The Sacrifice Act of 2010."

"The proposal came with US President Barack Obama set to announce within weeks his decision on whether to send more US troops to fight the war, now in its ninth year.

"The group included House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey; Representative John Murtha, who chair that panel's defense subcommittee; and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank.

"The proposal, a heavily symbolic measure seen as having next to no chance of becoming law, would impose a war surtax on income beginning in 2011 -- though it would allow the president to delay implementation by one year upon deciding the US economy is too weak to sustain such a tax shift.

"It would also exempt members of the US military who have served in combat since the September 11, 2001 terrorist strikes, their families, and families of soldiers who died as a result of combat.

""The only people who've paid any price for our military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan are our military families," the lawmakers said. "We believe that if this war is to be fought, it's only fair that everyone share the burden."

"If the war is not paid for, its costs "will devour money that could be used to rebuild our economy by fixing our broken health care system, expanding educational opportunities and job training possibilities, attacking our long term energy problems and building stronger communities," they said."

How about not spending?

That aside, I strongly disagree with their statement that the U.S. military families are the only people who have paid any price for the U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. What about Iraqi, Afghani, and Pakistani families who've been killed or injured?

Non-military families of the U.S. have already been paying the price, regardless of whether they support the wars or not. The U.S. budget is a bust, thanks in large part to the ever-increasing defense budget. It is funded by selling the sovereign debts - IOUs that the taxpayers get to pay now and in the future without their express consent. In fact, the taxpayers are taxed twice - income tax, and inflation.

I don't know what the motivation is for these lawmakers (co-sponsors of the bill). Some, I suspect, signed on to this bill as a way to discourage the president from expanding Afghan involvement. Murtha may actually believe this is great idea for the military. Yet others no doubt think it is an excellent idea to grab whatever they can get away with from the least powerful lobby, the taxpayers. I don't know why AFP thinks this has virtually no chance of passing.

Here's more from Antiwar.com's Justin Raimondo. He seems to take this seriously.

Tweet

The Army Gunman Was a Psychiatrist

at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Another Government Agent Killing Spree
(Karen De Coster, 11/5/09 LRC Blog)

"The Army Major who went on a killing spree at Fort Hood killed at least twelve people and injured more than thirty at present count. And his business was tending to (and “repairing”) the mindsets of the guys who were sent overseas to kill for the state. He was a psychiatrist.

The alleged shooter, Maj. Hasan, was a psychiatrist who had been recently promoted to major and transferred to Fort Hood from the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington. Maj. Hasan’s professional specialties included post-traumatic stress disorder, combat stress and other emotional issues common to the troops implicated in earlier incidents of military fratricide. He was slated to deploy to Iraq in coming weeks, according to military officials.

"If this had been a non-military incident, with some regular Joe plotting and pulling off a slaughter of dozens of people, the media coverage would be loaded with anti-gun hysterics calling for immediate gun control laws. Yet all Obama could muster was, “It’s difficult enough when we lose these brave Americans in battles overseas.” Why does no one seem interested in the mindset of an Army psychiatrist who was about to be sent to Afghanistan to fight an unwinnable war?"

Tweet

Hillary Scolds Pakistan for Not Taxing Enough

... dead or alive, we tax, and that's the American way that Pakistan should follow.

State Secretary Hillary Clinton scolded the Pakistanis for not doing their part in hunting down the leadership of Al Qaeda. In her rather blunt message to Pakistan, she inadvertently revealed the reality of the U.S. tax system.

Al Qaeda leadership in Pakistan: Hillary Clinton
(10/30/09 Daily Times)

After expressing her firm belief that Al Qaeda is in Pakistan and strongly insinuating that the Pakistani government is complicit in the affair, Secretary Clinton said the following:

"“Maybe that’s the case; maybe they’re not gettable. I don’t know... As far as we know, they are in Pakistan,” Clinton told senior Pakistani newspaper editors in Lahore, AFP reported. “The percentage of taxes on GDP (in Pakistan) is among the lowest in the world... We (the United States) tax everything that moves and doesn’t move, and that’s not what we see in Pakistan,” she said."

So, the reason why the Pakistani government is having a tough time hunting down Al Qaeda may be the lack of fund, as Pakistan's tax collection is low? And she sounds disappointed that Pakistan is not doing what the U.S. does - tax everything that moves and doesn't move.

Oh boy. (Maybe her meds are off again.)

Well, at least in the U.S., even people who don't move any more can vote, along with Mickey Mouse.

Tweet

$1 Billion Makeover of U.S. Diplomatic Missions in Af-Pak

Remember the former president Bush? Remember his extravagant fortress called the U.S. embassy in Baghdad?

We will have another one or two, in case you missed the news. This time in Af-Pak.

US to spend $1 billion on embassy expansions in Pakistan, Afghanistan (5/28/09 Christian Science Monitor)

"The US is embarking on a $1 billion crash program to expand its diplomatic presence in Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan, another sign that the Obama administration is making a costly, long-term commitment to war-torn South Asia, US officials said Wednesday.

"The White House has asked Congress for – and seems likely to receive – $736 million to build a new US embassy in Islamabad, along with permanent housing for US government civilians and new office space in the Pakistani capital.

"The scale of the projects rivals the giant US Embassy in Baghdad, which was completed last year after construction delays at a cost of $740 million."

In addition, in Peshawar the U.S. government is negotiating to buy up a 5-star hotel to serve as the consulate.

"In Kabul, the US government is negotiating an $87 million purchase of a 30- to 40-acre parcel of land to expand the embassy. The Senate version of the appropriations bill omits all but $10 million of those funds."

You may also recall that President Obama recently appointed Lt. General McChrystal as new Afghan commander. Lt. General McChrystal was a black-op guy in Iraq. The Washington Post article called him and his guys as "manhunters".

Af-Pak is the place to be, it seems. At least that's where the money is going.

Tweet