Turning the Corner in Afghanistan?

Thomas Riggins

“Looking ahead to 2018, as President Ghani said, he believes we have turned the corner and I agree,” Gen. John W. Nicholson Jr. told Pentagon reporters on Nov. 28, referring to Afghanistan’s president, Ashraf Ghani. “The momentum is now with the Afghan Security Forces.” [Their momentum is in advancing to the rear.] 

"Turning the corner" is better, I suppose, than "seeing the light at the end of the tunnel" -- which our incompetent generals kept seeing in Vietnam. It's probably true that we have turned the corner -- the wrong way into a one way street.
It only took four or five to win WW2 so if we are are still peering around corners in Afghanistan after 14 or 15 it means 1) we have an incompetent military that doesn't know how to fight these kinds of wars and we are just wasting our money giving it to the toy soldiers running the Pentagon -- if we are going to puts troops in the field they deserve an officer corps that knows what it is doing. 

Of course 2) it's possible they don't want to win -- war is big business and makes billions of dollars in profits for those businesses and organizations that deal in war supplies, weapons, and collateral services to the military and we may need this and other conflicts we support to keep our economy functioning. 

The way the government treats the veterans and risks the lives of the troops, especially since the Republicans have had control, but also under the Democrats, indicates it doesn't much care about the troops, which means the war to them is just another use of working people to generate profits for their business supporters and manipulate those dumb enough to fall for their cynical faux patriotism. As Trump says, "Make American Great Again" (i.e., easier for the rich to make money).

Attacks Reveal What U.S. Won’t: Victory Remains Elusive in Afghanistan

In his State of the Union address, President Trump is expected to promote his strategy to win the war in Afghanistan. He’ll be the third president to do so.

NYTIMES.COM

LikeShow more reaction

Thoughts on Angela Davis' s Birthday

Angela Davis turned 74 yesterday and this brought to mind the fact that the state tried to destroy her and was unable to do because of the fight back by the people to defend her and that it was constrained by the jury system incorporated in the legal system created as a check on executive power and that this is a reminder that our bourgeois democracy is not a fascist system and it is worth preserving in the fight for socialism which must both replace it and preserve what is rational within it. This is why the fight against Trump is crucial as the forces behind him want to destroy the democratic residue that remains in the system and which can still be marshaled to thwart their attempts to completely subvert all three branches of government to their ends and purposes. The Republican Party's attempt to get absolute control of all three branches of government  and impose an authoritarian right-wing one-party state is due to the oligarchy's realization that both climate change and future economic chaos will spawn a mass people's movement that will threaten their control of the state by means of the present two-party good cop bad cop system of only providing the lesser of two evils choices. The only way to prevent this is for the popular forces to penetrate and take over the Democratic Party or destroy it and build a new mass popular people's party on its remains. This is why the fight against the HRC-Obama wing of the party, defacto allies of the same forces behind the scenes which presently back Trump but would prefer a more manageable Republican leader or a corporate Democrat running the country for them, must be fought tooth and nail. The only question is whether this internecine battle is to commence before or after the 1920 general election  -- i.e., is it a prerequisite for defeating the Republican one-party state or is a united Democratic Party victory even under corporate control a prerequisite for the reform of, or replacement of, the Democratic Party and the elimination of the corporate Democrats and the creation of a new majority mass progressive people's party?

US Military Fantasy: Winnable Wars With Russia and China (Vietnam defeated us)

Thomas Riggins

Forget spending increases to solve any of our domestic problems: " American military commanders and senior defense officials have fretted over whether 16 years of counterinsurgency fighting has left the military unprepared for a great powers land war. Pentagon officials say that the need to do both — fight insurgents and prepare for a potential war among great powers ." The Pentagon program has, since WW2, envisioned a military able to fight major wars on two fronts at the same time -- as we did against Germany (although the Soviet Union actually took out 80% of the German army) and Japan. The new fantasy -- we need a bigger military so we can wage two "conventional" land wars at the same time, one against Russia in Europe and another against China in Asia and win both. Of course nuclear weapons won't destroy Das Vaterland in the meantime. "Our" government is supposed to be working for our interests -- we better start electing one that does!

Military Shifts Focus to Threats by Russia and China, Not Terrorism

The Pentagon says the military is too stretched to both fight insurgents and prepare for war with great world powers.

NYTIMES.COM

Like

U.S. Beefs Up Nuclear Threat

Thomas Riggins 

This article reveals a blueprint for future use of nuclear weapons by the US as it pursues its aggressive prowar foreign policy of intimidation and the stoking of military conflicts around the globe. The fact is that as long as the US invokes a "first strike" nuclear policy other nations will seek to defend themselves openly and covertly with nuclear weapons of their own. The justification dragged out, as usual, for US belligerence is the so-called "Russian threat" which the US must counter (although we can mutually destroy ourselves and the world many times over already.) The three major allegations are 1) we must counter worldwide (!) Russian aggressive actions ( yet every example of a Russian "aggression" is a Russian reaction to a previous US action initiated against Russian allies or interests -- the Russian bear reacted to being poked: 2) Russia has threatened our allies with nuclear weapons (this is just a US lie as it is the US threatening the use of nuclear weapons not the Russians --unless attacked): 3) a mythical super nuclear torpedo has been created by the Russians which we must counter (this mythical torpedo is much discussed by weapons experts as to whether it actually exists, would work, or would have any effect on the balance of power if it did exist. The US simply asserts it's real so it is as far as the NYT is concerned.) This is just another US hoax to cover up the spending of trillions of dollars for the war profiteers and their weapons industry and reveals that the US system is the greatest threat to humanity since the deity told Noah to build his ark.

Pentagon Suggests Countering Devastating Cyberattacks With Nuclear Arms

President Trump has not yet approved a draft strategy that would expand “extreme circumstances” for nuclear retaliation to include a crippling cyberattack.

NYTIMES.COM

LikeShow more reactions

Comment

Sha

The Coming War?

Thomas Riggins
And the last shall be first: "At a wide-ranging meeting at his headquarters on Jan. 2, Gen. Tony Thomas, the head of the Special Operations Command in Tampa, Fla., warned the 200 civilians and service members in the audience that more Special Forces personnel might have to shift to the Korea theater from the Middle East in May or June, if tensions escalate on the peninsula."
The trail balloons are starting to be released: you can be sure the US will do what it can to escalate...

See More

Military Quietly Prepares for a Last Resort: War With North Korea

It’s normal for American commanders to draw up combat plans. But recent exercises signal that the military wants to be ready for options on the Korean Peninsula.

NYTIMES.COM

The FBI and Russiagate: Facts or Fabrications

Thomas Riggins

Well, here's the evidence that has so far been made public, with more to come, that the Putin/Russiagate scandal was cooked up by elements of the Obama administration's intelligence services to help Clinton win: it was our own government not the Russian government that tried to manipulate the election and sabotage our democracy. The corruption of the top leaders of both parties, but with respect to the Russiagate hoax, especially the Democrats, may have really bad consequences for them in the midterms. Those on the left who mindlessly went along with the hoax, even when there was no real evidence to back up the charges, and still promote and defend Hillary, have only themselves to blame for the aid and comfort this scandal will give the ultra-right. Let's hope they will learn from their mistakes and end their rightward drift and return to the progressive left camp, but if the past is prelude, they, as did the Bourbons, will have learned nothing and forgotten nothing.

The FBI Hand Behind Russia-gate

Special Report: In the Watergate era, liberals warned about U.S. intelligence agencies manipulating U.S. politics, but now Trump-hatred has blinded many of them to this danger becoming real, as ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern notes. By Ray McGovern…

CONSORTIUMNEWS.COM

Korean People Have to Solve Their Problems Themselves

Thomas Riggins

The Korean people have to work out solutions to their problems themselves. The U.S. should back off and let North and South Korea come to a mutual understanding on how to live together or on how to unify into one country. All their problems stem from this perpetual armistice and the two sides need to work out a peace treaty that ends the war and allows both sides to live in peace. The U.S. with its warmongering economy and military is the last country to look to for a peaceful constructive solution.

Kim Jong-un’s Overture Could Drive a Wedge Between South Korea and the U.S.

North Korea’s surprising call for dialogue with the South may undercut the Trump administration’s tough approach.

NYTIMES.COM