Stars, Stripes and Suicides

How wankers with guns have screwed up the neighbourhood

In this case, we're talking the land once known as the Northwest Frontier (Pakistan and Afghanistan).

I'm going to start this travelogue in Peshawar. Peshawar is now officially recognized as being one of the Oldest Living Cities in Asia. Its history and culture has continued uninterrupted since several centuries. Loads of history sitting at the edge of the Khyber Pass.

Near Peshawar is Darra Adam Khel (درہ آدم خیل), which is what most people think of when you mention Peshawar. In particular:

a wide variety of firearms are produced in the town, from anti-aircraft guns to pen-guns. Weapons are handmade by individual craftsmen using traditional manufacturing techniques, usually handed down father-to-son. The quality of the guns is generally high and craftsman are able to produce replicas of almost any gun. Guns are regularly tested by test-firing into the air.

Guess what, The Constitution of Pakistan guarantees the right to keep and bear arms!

The "gun rights" situation changed after the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 where the new constitution included the right to keep and bear arms, similar to the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, but far more gun loon friendly! There are an estimated 18 million firearms in public ownership among the country's population of 180 million, of which 7 million are registered. The province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa permits the ownership of heavy weaponry including the use of rocket launchers, short-, medium-, and long-range rockets, anti-aircraft guns, mortars, etc. These heavy weapons may be made locally. Men usually own fully automatic firearms and Semi-automatic firearms whereas women usually own pistols.

I refer you to Wikipedia for more about this gunloon slice of heaven.

But head further up the Khyber and we come to Afghanistan which is another gun loon heaven. despite the Afghans being armed to the teeth, it hasn't stopped the Russians and NATO from invading with the usual results of a hot and heavy battle with the natives. If you seriously think about fighting a modern army, take a look at the cost to Afghanistan. Since Pashtuns cross the Pakistan-Afghan border, we can say this about their culture:

Other enduring customs and a strong culture of honor also promote the prevalence and importance of guns. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, where the Pashtun residents laud performances of strength and toughness, carrying a Kalashnikov or other gun is a sign of honour and respect.

Sound like anybody you know?

But, all those guns didn't stop the Taliban from taking over.

And talk about armed dickheads screwing things up, the Taliban decided to blow up the Buddhas of Bamiyan, these are two 6th century monumental statues of standing buddhas carved into the side of a cliff in the Bamyan valley in the Hazarajat region of central Afghanistan and designated a UNESCO World Heritage site.

The bottom line is that this is a part of the world which has loads of history and culture, but it isn't a place where anyone in their right mind would want to go.

Even if you were a total gun loon and wanted the ultimate holiday, this isn't a place you would want to visit:

Foreigners were once allowed to visit the town if they had a permit, obtainable from the Home Office in Peshawar (permits are no longer issued due to 'security concerns', however it is possible to take the Peshawar-Kohat bus and get off at the town, which will usually also involve being sent back by the local tribal police called 'khasadars'). Some 'fixers' in Peshawar offer to arrange a visit for a considerable sum. In this case a bodyguard will accompany visitors whilst they are in the town, and it may be possible to test-fire weapons for a small fee.

Technically visitors can buy guns, though they will usually be confiscated by guards - as the sellers inform them. Difficulties can only sometimes be avoided by judicious use of 'baksheesh' (bribes). As of early 2008 Darra Adam Khel has been the site of skirmishes between militants and the army, making visits by Westerners highly dangerous endeavors.

And that's only the beginning...

See also:

• Kalashnikov Culture: Talking Tough on Guns in Pakistan

End the War in Afghanistan Now

Afghanistan War Less Popular All the Time

via HuffPo

Support for the war in Afghanistan has hit a new low and is on par with support for the Vietnam War in the early 1970s, a bad sign for President Barack Obama as he argues that to end the war responsibly the United States must remain in Afghanistan another two years.

Only 27 percent of Americans say they back the war effort, and 66 percent oppose the war, according to an AP-GfK poll released Wednesday.

A November 1971 Harris poll showed a record-high 65 percent of Americans said that continued fighting in Vietnam was "morally wrong." By that time the United States was already drastically cutting the size of its fighting force in Vietnam on the road to a full withdrawal in 1973.

What's your opinion? Don't you think Obama can talk his way out of this one?

Please leave a comment.

Congressman Jim Moran on Afghanistan

via Fuck Conservatives

The Afghan Shooting

I agree with the president. This is not who we are as a country and this is not who the military is. Nevertheless, we should get the hell out of Afghanistan the sooner the better. And I mean all of us, not like they did in Iraq.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Bad Judgment..........But We ARM Them?

"This is my rifle, this is my gun; 
  One is for fighting, one is for fun."

Rick Perry wants to minimize the disgraceful actions of marines caught on video urinating on the bodies of dead Taliban fighters, while we are in negotiations in Afghanistan to end the war there.

I don't believe that this kind of behavior has ever been acceptable in any of the conflicts in which our military has engaged.  Certainly there have been incidents in the past; some were more tolerated than others.  In the Vietnam War, it was common for the Vietnamese and the Viet Cong alike to be referred to by American soldiers by derogatory terms like Gooks, inferior human beings.

This is in the same dehumanizing that the right wing justifies towards others, towards those they see as different, those they see as not conforming, especially those who believe in other religions.  It is no different from Perry's fellow ultra-conservative religious right-winger, Michele Bachmann objecting to zero tolerance for bullying gay students on the grounds of that kind of bully is justified, even encouraged, by Christianity.  It is the same dehumanizing that we see the 2nd Amendment gun nuts use in calling the people they want to shoot Goblins.

Gooks.  Goblins. Fags. Rag heads. Different names, different people, but it's all the same hatred.  All of it dishonors us, all of that disrespect for other human beings shames us.  Shame on Perry for his stupidity about the Geneva convention; he clearly lacks the knowledge he needs to run for the office of President.  And shame on these American soldiers in Afghanistan; they should know better than to behave like this.  I'm sure he would find it unacceptable for Taliban fighters to do this to dead American soldiers.  These kids are criminals; these kids stupidly think that shooting people is entertaining, or that it signifies winning.  This isn't winning; this is losing. Their ignorance, their lack of humanity and lack of understanding of what makes people civilized jeopardizes their fellow soldiers, and our national security and foreign policy.

From the Guardian:

Four US marines identified by the military as the soldiers filmed urinating on corpses in Afghanistan are likely to face a court martial after an American military commander said such actions are a "grave breach" of the laws of war.
The Naval Criminal Investigation Service (NCIS) has interviewed two of the soldiers featured in the video laughing and making snide remarks as they urinated on the bloodied bodies of three Afghan men, who have not been identified. It is not clear if the men were members of the Taliban.
In attempt to dampen the growing diplomatic storm around the abuse, the commanders of US forces in Afghanistan on Friday ordered American troops to treat the bodies of killed enemies and civilians with "appropriate dignity and respect".
The soldiers were members of a sniper unit that completed a six-month tour of duty in Afghanistan's Helmund province in September and returned to Camp LeJuene in North Carolina where the video was passed around. The two others are believed to have left the military.
The nature of the charges are unclear although desecrating bodies is a crime under US military law and the Geneva conventions. 

The deputy commander of US forces in Afghanistan, lieutenant general Curtis Scaparrotti, said in a message to troops on Friday that "defiling, desecrating, mocking, photographing or filming for personal use insurgent dead constitutes a grave breach" of laws governing armed conflict. He said it also violates "basic standards of human decency, and can cause serious damage to relations with the Afghan government".
The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, said she believed the men may be guilty of a war crime.

 and in an earlier Guardian article:

At least two of four US Marines shown in a video appearing to urinate on Taliban corpses have been identified, a Marine Corps official has told the BBC.

The BBC's Steve Kingstone says the official would not confirm the Marines' whereabouts, but reports suggested the unit involved was based at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina - a major military base.
US media reported that the unit belonged to the 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marine Regiment.

Taliban spokesman Qari Yousuf Ahmadi told the BBC that this was not the first time Americans had carried out such a "wild action" and that Taliban attacks on the Americans would continue.
But a different Taliban spokesman, Zabihullah Mujahid, said the video "is not a political process, so the video will not harm our talks and prisoner exchange because they are at the preliminary stage".
However Arsala Rahmani, a senior member of the Afghan government's High Peace Council, told Reuters the video would "leave a very, very bad impact on peace efforts".

We are better than this; well, most of us are.

From MSNBC.com

Perry: Marines in video are 'kids,' not criminals

By ANNE FLAHERTY

updated 2 hours 25 minutes ago

WASHINGTON — Republican presidential hopeful Rick Perry on Sunday accused the Obama administration of "over-the-top rhetoric" and "disdain for the military" in its condemnation of a video that purportedly shows four Marines urinating on corpses in Afghanistan.

Perry's comments put him at odds with Sen. John McCain, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, who said the images could damage the war effort.
"The Marine Corps prides itself that we don't lower ourselves to the level of the enemy," McCain said when asked about Perry's position. "So it makes me sad more than anything else, because ... I can't tell you how wonderful these people (Marines) are. And it hurts their reputation and their image."
No one has been charged in the case, but officials in the U.S. and abroad have called for swift punishment of the four Marines. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said last week that he worried the video could be used by the Taliban to undermine peace talks.
A military criminal investigation and an internal Marine Corps review are under way. The Geneva Conventions forbid the desecration of the dead.
Texas Gov. Perry said the Marines involved should be reprimanded but not prosecuted on criminal charges.
"Obviously, 18-, 19-year-old kids make stupid mistakes all too often. And that's what's occurred here," Perry told CNN's "State of the Union."
He later added: "What's really disturbing to me is the kind of over-the-top rhetoric from this administration and their disdain for the military."
Later appearing on the same show, McCain said he disagreed.
"We're trying to win the hearts and minds" of the Afghanistan population, he said. "And when something like that comes up, it obviously harms that ability."

Michael Hastings on Afghanistan

via Fuck Conservatives

Iraq and Afghanistan

The Register Guard of Eugene Oregon published an editorial, the type of which you can see in just about any newspaper. It caught my eye because it was brief, to the point and contained some basic stats which I found interesting.

For the first time since President George W. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq in 2003, an entire month has passed without a single U.S. soldier dying in a conflict that has claimed the lives of 4,474 American service members.

The U.S. military is preparing to pull the last troops out of Iraq by the end of the year in accordance with a 2008 security agreement between the two countries. But there is troubling talk in Washington and Baghdad of extending that deadline to have U.S. troops remain longer in Iraq.

While Iraq was becoming less lethal, 67 U.S. troops died last month in the Afghanistan war, making August the deadliest month for Americans in the longest-running war in U.S. history.

Obama should also continue — and expedite — the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan, site of a nearly decade-long war in which this country has invested $1 trillion, 10 years of effort and the lives of 1,754 U.S. troops.

I'm tired of the BS from Washington about withdrawing troops which usually comes with the disclaimer that the date could be postponed. What do the guys on the ground in Iraq think? Are they of the opinion that we're doing something worthwhile there? Or are they cynical and angry?

I suppose it's a good sign, no it definitely is a good sign that no fatalities happened in Iraq last month. My sincere prayer is that it may continue like that and somehow the government will do the right thing by the end of this year.

Afghanistan is another story. What in the hell has been accomplished there at such a cost? Was it all about Bin Laden and the Taliban? I doubt it, but whatever else it is, some strategic balance of power in the region or whatever, I say that's enough. Let's get out of there.

Unfortunately, as the August deaths indicate, it's going in the opposite direction. What do those troops think? Is the idea that the U.S. is policing the world in order to make it safer something that sustains them? Bush and Bush supporters always said that, but do people still think that way?

The op-ed I linked to made the point that in order to heal the economy at home we need to stop spending so much on these wars. That may be true, but to me there's a more important reason, a more human reason to end these ill-fated endeavors. We have young Americans dying over there and I honestly cannot see for what.

As has been said many times in defense of pacifist and non-intervention arguments, the best way I can see to support the troops is to bring them home, every one. We can spend some of that money on VA hospitals and PTSS clinics. We can invest in education and vocational programs for these young volunteers.

This is how we can make America strong.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Obama Talking at the American Legion

In Minneapolis today, President Barack Obama gave the first in a series of speeches marking the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The president spoke before a crowd of 6,000 veterans at the American Legion's national convention.

In his remarks, Obama called for Americans to honor the solemn anniversary by performing national service, and repeatedly praised the nobility of the 5 million Americans who have served in the U.S. military since 9/11. He called these soldiers and their families members of the "9/11 generation." Obama also expressed humble gratitude for the sacrifice of more than 6,200 American servicemen and women who have been killed in conflict since 9/11.

Isn't anyone else bothered by the failure to admit the invasion of Iraq, orchestrated by the Bush / Cheney administration, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 was a big lie? I certainly am.  I'm offended by that.  Where's the outrage, we asked just yesterday.

The Afghanistan operation was a ten-year-long hunt for Bin Laden, if I'm not mistaken.  Unlike attacking Iraq, at least this one made some sense, presuming Bin Laden was the author of the World Trade Center attack and really was hiding out with his Taliban buddies in Afghanistan.  But, what's happened since his dramatic death? Have we pulled out?  Has word one been mentioned about pulling out?  I haven't heard it.

My cynicism extends to the other major operations, Libya and Yemen, as well as the more hidden and secret ones.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not an extreme pacifist and I'm definitely not a Paulist, like I've recently been accused of. I applaud the heroic troops who usually remain unsung heroes, unlike what happened after the Osama's killing.

I can accept that some of the pre-emptive and covert missions are necessary and save lives. But I don't think that applies to the major wars we've been fighting or to most of the smaller ones.

I believe since the time of Viet Nam the government has been increasingly influenced by the Military Industrial Complex. The lobbying and contribution systems, which Obama promised he'd clean up, are what really run the country.

I'd like to see us less involved in policing the world. I'd like to see the military spending cut way down. I'd like to see fewer servicemen killed over the next ten years than the 6,200 Obama mentioned in his speech.

I wondered if that includes the suicides, but I suppose that's something for another post.

What's your opinion? Is casting a cynical eye on the American military involvement tantamount to NOT supporting the troops?  Wouldn't there be many active military members and recently discharged veterans who question these things like I do?

What do you think?  Please leave a comment.

Iraq Veterans Against the War

A long time ago, I belonged to The Viet Nam Veterans Against the War, even though I was only a Viet-Nam-Era veteran, no combat experience. Watching this video, it occurred to me that not only have things not changed, they've gotten way worse. Now the stakes are so much higher.

The only hopeful idea I can take from this is with the new technology, the internet and social media, that is available today, the charade that we need to be involved in perpetual war, will not remain hidden.

Like other pressing issues, popular opinion can make a difference. Our involvement in Afghanistan and Libya and Yemen and all the other hidden engagements has to be brought into the light and in many cases, stopped.

What do you think?  Please leave a comment.

Where Have the War Protesters Gone?

Salon published a fascinating article on what happened to the anti-war movement.

The movement's drawing power was limited from the start, and then, once the war was on in earnest, it felt -- realistically -- that it had run smack against the brick wall of George Bush's manic pigheadedness. Demonstrators are unlikely to invest their energies in what look from the start like very lost causes. And the demonstrations also tailed off because the mainstream media didn't pay attention -- refused to pay attention. The story line they were promoting was: America kicks ass, new era begins!

I thought that made pretty good sense.  In fact, I'd say one word, "apathy" says it all.  But the author took the article in another direction.

But also, in the new century, once war was on in earnest, the demonstrations dwindled because many former or potential demonstrators gravely doubted how nice the outcome would be if the expeditionary forces left -- or at least, lacking a tragic sense, downplayed the human costs of withdrawal.

From there he goes on with some type of apology for the current wars, comparing them to Viet Nam. Back in the late 60s and early 70s, "getting out" it was the right thing to do, but not today.

What's your opinion? Do you think even anti-war folks feel that our getting out of such places as Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya might be wrong?

I don't think that and I don't think anti-war activists think that. For me personally, the awful realization came gradually during Obama's 2nd year in office. We are powerless to change what "the owners," as George Carlin called them, want. From there apathy and cynicism set in, which unfortunately, would take the steam out of any movement.

What do you think? Please leave a comment.

Jon Stewart on Obama's Double Talk

The Daily Show
Tags: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Who Looks Weak Now

Here's a wonderful little article for all the Obama haters on The Daily Kos.

Conservative critics of President Obama long have derided him as weak. Intellectual, reserved, unemotional.

What do you think? Wasn't it a decisive move to get the General to resign on the part of Obama? I agree with Phuck Politics, though. Being just another puppet, Obama's gesture in this instance will change nothing.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

The Afghanistan War

Masslive.com says, "So as Memorial Day approaches let’s not discuss numbers, but instead remember that somewhere in America someone is mourning the most important person in the world. That’s an uncountable loss."

The Age.com from Melbourne Australia says, "The toll of American dead in Afghanistan passed 1000 this week, after a suicide bomb in Kabul killed at least five US service members."

Having taken nearly seven years to reach the first 500 dead, the war killed the second 500 in fewer than two."

WUSA9.com reports on the funeral of Marine Cpl. Kurt Steven Shea of Frederick, Maryland. "Shea loved horses, but military values of "honor, courage and commitment" are what drew him to the Marine Corps, Rev. Goulet told mourners."

That's just a few. My own feelings on this are that Obama inherited a difficult situation from Bush with regards the wars and that the new president has failed miserably to improve upon it.

What do you think? Please leave a comment.

It's Deja Vu All Over Again

Truthout reports on the situation in Yemen and its relationship with the United States. (Thanks for the tip Laci).

...there has been a dramatic turnaround in the fluctuating love-hate relationship between the two countries.

And this week's aborted attempt to blow up a U.S. plane by a Nigerian student, with ties to a terrorist group in Yemen, has brought the political spotlight back on a country which is proud of its gun culture.

Yemen reportedly has over 60 million handguns and small arms spread over a population of some 21 million people.

Yehya al-Mutawakil, a former interior minister, was quoted as saying that everyone in Yemen is armed with handguns, while members of various tribes have gone upscale: they are armed with assault weapons, rocket launchers and submachine guns.

Between 2002 and 2008, Yemen received some 69 million dollars in U.S. military aid; and 496 Yemeni military personnel were trained under the International Military Education and Training programme (IMET).

William D. Hartung, director of the Arms and Security Initiative at the New York-based New America Foundation, cites press reports to suggest that Washington will rapidly ramp up U.S. military aid to Yemen over the next 18 months.

The projected total, he said, is about 70 million dollars, or roughly the amount provided during the entire administration of former President George W. Bush.

"U.S. military aid to Yemen is a double-edged sword," Hartung told IPS.

On the one hand, the Yemeni government of President Ali Abdullah Saleh has participated in strikes against al Qaeda and al Qaeda-inspired groups within and around its borders.

On the other hand, he said, "The Yemeni government is one of the most unstable regimes in the world, and there is a danger that U.S. weapons and training could be turned against U.S. interests, if there is a change in government there."

This is my biggest disappointment with Obama. I was hoping he'd get us out of Iraq, wind down the business in Afghanistan and quit policing the world. I thought this was a characteristic of the Bush years. I was wrong. Now the only question seems to be, which will it be next, Iran or Yemen.

What's your opinion?

Markos Moulitsas on Afghanistan

Via Daily Kos TV

Another War-Time President

CNN posted a video of President Obama's comments at West Point in which he announced his decision to deploy an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan.

What's your opinion? Are the conservative war-hawks going to become Obama supporters now? Are the liberal doves going to abandon the Obama ship? Maybe we should all just switch sides.

Please leave a comment.

Get Out of Afghanistan Now

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Picture of Lance Cpl. Joshua Bernard, USMC

Yahoo News reports on the controversy over the publication of the picture of a mortally wounded marine in Afghanistan.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates expressed disappointment Friday at news outlets that used a picture taken and distributed by The Associated Press depicting a U.S. Marine mortally wounded in combat in Afghanistan.

The AP distributed the picture despite personal pleas from Gates and the dead Marine's family in a case that illustrated the difficult decisions in reporting on a conflict where Americans have seen relatively few images of fallen U.S. troops over eight years.

The picture, by AP photographer Julie Jacobson, showed Lance Cpl. Joshua "Bernie" Bernard, 21, lying on the ground with severe leg injuries after being struck by a grenade in an ambush on Aug. 14, his fellow Marines tending to him. Bernard later died of his wounds.

Secretary Gates seems to be saying the same thing as the family, basically that it's a question of "judgment and common decency" not to use the photo. I'm a little suspicious of that. What do you think? Isn't it more likely that the government has an interest in keeping the war sanitized in order to continue getting away with it? Remember all that business a year or two ago about the returning coffins never being allowed in TV?

John Daniszewski, AP senior managing editor, said he respected Gates' view but that sometimes the government and press have different perspectives.

"We thought that the image told a story of sacrifice; it told a story of bravery," Daniszewski said. "We felt that the picture told a story that people needed to see and be aware of."

That sounds about right to me, what do you think?

Gates wrote that use of the photo of a wounded Bernard would mark an "unconscionable departure" from the restraint that most journalists have shown in covering the military since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The AP did not change its decision.

"Why your organization would purposely defy the family's wishes knowing full well that it will lead to yet more anguish is beyond me," Gates wrote. "Your lack of compassion and common sense in choosing to put this image of their maimed and stricken child on the front page of multiple newspapers is appalling."

I don't believe that for a second. I don't believe publishing the picture could increase the anguish of the family. Even if they themselves request privacy and to be left alone, I'm wondering what could possibly increase the suffering of losing a 21-year-old child? Compared to the loss itself, the treatment in the media would be inconsequential.

Yet Secretary Gates is pushing this as the reason. I don't buy it.

I say it's a mistake for us to be there in the first place and the suppression of photos like this has played a part in the continuance of it.

The controversy over the picture is very real however.

The AP had received dozens of e-mails and phone calls about its decision by mid-Friday, many of them critical, Colford said. It was a topic on Twitter, with one tweet saying: "as the wife of a retired Marine, and the mother of a soldier who is now in Afghanistan, I find the AP's `choice' to be a disgusting one."

The AP received an e-mail from some former military supporting its decision. Dan Cahalan, an Afghanistan veteran, wrote that "this is one of the realest accounts from a journalist I have ever read and just wanted to thank (Jacobson) for her honest reporting of the war."

Jorge Ruiz of Glendale, Ariz., said he and other ex-Marines had often talked about the sanitation of war and the social implications of a lack of images showing what war is really like.

"Death and the ugliness of war is not something we look forward to but a necessity to put the war in its proper context," said Ruiz, who also wrote the AP. "A picture is worth a thousand words. I applaud your courage to distribute the photo and the story of the death of Lance Cpl. Bernard."

What's your opinion? Is it right or wrong to publish graphic pictures of the war? Should the family's opinion be respected? Why couldn't they simply publish other photos about which the families don't object?

Do you believe the government has had an agenda to keep the war out of the living rooms of America in order to maintain whatever public approval they could?

Please leave a comment.