The Nobel Prize for War 2009 goes to ...

[Robert Mahnke]

At the risk of continuing to beat an ex-horse, Otto (I think) said below --

"I don't believe that a revolution imposed from outside can be
successful."

-- a point that might apply as well to the Taliban, who brought to
Afghanistan a flavor of Islam that isn't exactly indigenous.  A lot of
wealthy donors in the Persian Gulf have spent a lot of money trying to
foment a religious revolution, to bring a Saudi Islam to countries
like Pakistan and Afghanistan.  The Taliban were not exactly a
success, but nor have they been a complete failure, much as one might
say as well about what the U.S. has tried to do.

On 12/8/09, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>
> On Dec 8, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Otto wrote:
>
>
> > 2009/12/8 Kai Frederik Lorentzen <lorentzen at hotmail.de>:
> >
> > >
> > > Minister Jung --- "a pawn"??
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Ok, maybe he was more of a rook but the other two ones who had to go
> > before him were pawns. It didn't work out so the former Secretary of
> > Defense had to go.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > (I always love it when people who haven't got the faintest idea about the
> > > game think they have to use chess metaphors ...)
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Well, the term "Bauernopfer" is widely used in other contexts.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > And no, it's NOT the Afghan people's choice.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I don't believe that a revolution imposed from outside can be
> > successful. After 9/11 the West went there and smashed to pieces what
> > had been left after more than twenty years of war
> >
> a war which we sponsored by supporting what are essentially the Taliban and the crop of militant Islamic madrasas.
>
> > and so I think that
> > there is an obligation to put those people in a position where they at
> > least have a chance to govern themselves. This is the premise under
> > which we, the Germans, are there.
> >
> The question is how to do it and should this be converted to a peacekeeping mission instead of playing to politicized fearmongering.  We are currently stuck with taking sides in a civil war and justifying rather than acting to correct government corruption. We can't even compel a fair election where people are unafraid to vote.
>
> >
> > The trick to sell this war to the people was to call it not a war but
> > "nation building". If this is not the true purpose it's illegal.
> >
> Obama said it isn't nation building
>
> > And if the deadline isn't meant seriously it would be bad but I think that
> > Obama is serious about it. Does anybody really believe the guy is
> > happy about leading those two wars?
> >
> He is in a tough spot but he wanted the job, and it doesn't matter what he wants to do or likes or is happy about, but whether he has the courage to lead. I have no stomach for him spending the wages of the coming generations on bankers and wars when this generation refuses to pay their own way.
>
> The reason he has lost so much popular support in the US is that he starts every fight from an adulterated position and proceeds to work backwards until nothing of any meaning is on the table. That is what is happening in Afghanistan too.
>
> One more thing. I have a mixed race daughter who is a successful teacher, and now science curriculum director for a school district. For me this has nothing to do with race, and a lot to do with the corporate control of both major parties. It is this internal corruption that is most in need of correction in the US and is the cause for the long term global military strategies that are wreaking havoc  in the Middle East, Columbia, Haiti, the Congo etc.
>
> Otto
> nothing personal in any of this. Your arguments are reasonable and well stated and I am prone to self indulgent pissiness over current politics.  I guess I see the p-List as a place where that is indulged.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>