Pax Americana Falling apart in Afghanistan: Is it too soon to say we told you so?

[Dis]

and I'm not done.

I'm sick of americans blaming others for their problems. In fact I'm really pissed about this.

How about lazy assed americans take responsibility for their actions. It is not foriegners to blame for their problems. Their drug addictions are their own fault.

this is why I don't think the U.S. should interfere with what another nation grows to make money.

but I guess some people think that idea is stupid.

maybe you think it is OK for the U.S. to tell other countries what to grow.

[GeneralTacticus]

But is the flow of money into Afghanistan actually benefitting the people? No, it's benefitting the ones that sell the drugs on teh US market at hugely inflated prices and get rich as a result. Rich drug barons don't tend to be good for a country.

[Alexander's Horse]

There's an interesting parallel here between the way a distinguished correspondent like Fisk is dismissed as anti-American and the failures of US intelligence in the Middle East. The US pretty much shut down its human intelligence operations in the region prefering to rely predominantly on electronic means. Why? One reason was they didn't want to deal with "hostile" anti-Amercian sources. Consequently they were flying blind, excuse the pun, going into 9/11. They missed the vital clues. That attack should never have happened.

[Dis]

whether they grow legitimate crops or drugs the result will be the same.

the poor will be taken advantage of while the rich prosper.

Either way at least they are working and bringing in some money. They need to get the country back on its feet. Then maybe they can think about labour unions. But that is a long way off. Possiblye over 100 years for that country.

[GeneralTacticus]

But who is the money going to, again? It's not going to people who make productive use of it, ti's going to people who spend it on luxury for themselves and guns for their followers, which is not a great contribution to the situation in Afghanistan.

[Dis]

I'm not sure what to do about the guns and militias. They seem to like war over there

How can you calm a populace down? We could pipe in Barney videos, but that is likely to have the reverse effect.

[GeneralTacticus]

I'm not sure what to do about the guns and militias. They seem to like war over there

Actually I'm quite sure most of the peasants hate the war with a passion. They welcomed the Taliban as liberators whent hey first came through because they were bringing an end to the fighting. The only people who like the fighting are the warlords who fight over power, and they're not exactly the majority.

How can you calm a populace down? We could pipe in Barney videos, but that is likely to have the reverse effect.

You don't have to calm them down, just try to reduce the availablility of weapons and provide ways for them to improve matters peacefully.

[Dis]

reducing weapons is impossible.

Having a stable goverment would be the best solution. But how do you do that when everyone wants a piece of the action?

This is why I'm not a nation builder. Creating a goverment that pleases the masses is not an easy thing to do.

[Arrian]

Horse,

You've asked someone to point out the anti-American bias in Fisk's article. Nobody has bothered so far, I expect because it fairly jumps off the page - you'd have to be blind (or a troll ) to miss it. But I've decided to point it out for you anyway:

For since the Afghan war is the "successful" role model for America's forthcoming imperial adventure across the Middle East

Two things about this bit. 1) "successful" - the assumption that because everything isn't hunky dory within a year that the whole thing is a failure. 2) "imperial adventure" - self explanatory.

...Americans who are now sending their young men and women by the tens of thousands to stage another "success" story.

Uh-huh. Translation: the Americans ****ed up Afganistan (his assumption) and will now proceed to **** up Iraq (another assumption). He's not raising questions - he is asserting his beliefs. There is a difference between the two.

the majestically conservative Wall Street Journal – normally a beacon of imperial and Israeli policy in the Middle East and South-west Asia – has devoted a long and intriguing article to the American retreat

"a beacon of imperial and Israeli policy" ... the 'ole "Jews run America" schtick, with "imperial" thrown in for fun.

"Soldiers still confront an invisible enemy,'' is the title of Marc Kaufman's first-class investigation, a headline almost identical to one which appeared over a Fisk story a year or so after Russia's invasion of Afghanistan in 1979-80. The soldiers in my dispatch, of course, were Russian.

This is my favorite part of all. He calls the WSJ "majestically conservative" and "a beacon of imperial/Israeli policy" and pokes fun at the article title (translation: this uber conservative paper won't admit problems because they are a mouthpiece for the US gov't) and in the same breath mentions that he ran a similar story a couple of decades ago regarding the Soviet invasion of Afganistan. So, by his own reference points, that makes him "magnificently leftist" and "a beacon of revolutionary/Soviet policy."



-Arrian

[HershOstropoler]

Arrian:
Quite interesting, looks like a cultural disconnect.

"1) "successful" - the assumption that because everything isn't hunky dory within a year that the whole thing is a failure."

No, "success" as propagated by the US gov and many media by ignoring the problems. Otherwise he could have just called it a disaster right away.

"2) "imperial adventure" - self explanatory."

As US policy makers see themselves in the role of a hegemon, I don't know what the problem with "imperial" is. "adventure" - are you denying there are heavy risks associated?

" "a beacon of imperial and Israeli policy" ... the 'ole "Jews run America" schtick, with "imperial" thrown in for fun."

Not at all, he just points out that the WSJ propagates american nationalism and Israeli policy. As the US neo-conservatives seem to have switched from antijudaism to antiarabism - just staying with the antisemitic theme.

The last point - one article vs the general line of a medium - is just conjecture.

[Arrian]

Roland,

My point re: "successful" is that it's too early to tell (the US media needs to quit assuming all is well). One should expect problems in Afganistan.

"Imperial adventure" is a buzzphrase. Calling the US "imperialist" is straight from the old Soviet propoganda (capitalist imperialist pig-dogs!). "Adventure" connotes not just risk, but unnecessary risk.

I reject your attempt at rationizing Fisk's "Jew's run America" broadside. It's weak, at best. Having read many more Fisk opinion pieces than just this one, I know *exactly* what Fisk thinks of Israel & America's relation to it.

The last point - one article vs the general line of a medium - is just conjecture

Again, I've read a fair number of Fisk articles. I am familiar with Fisk's "general line" as well.

-Arrian

[DanS]

Consequently they were flying blind, excuse the pun, going into 9/11. They missed the vital clues. That attack should never have happened.

This is by and large true. It must also be pointed out that the intelligence agencies have been going balls out for 1.5 years to change that. Some real money is being thrown about.

[Ming]

Don't even bother Arrian... That's why I didn't think it was the effort to respond. They refuse to see it, as can be seen by the response. They claim to be familiar with Fisk... all his pieces have the same "tone"... but since they agree with him, they just nod their heads and worship at his feet. If they can't see it, nobody is going to convince them otherwise.

[HershOstropoler]

"They claim to be familiar with Fisk"

I do not claim that. Never heard of the guy. So I just wonder where the charge of bias comes from. Are his other articles different?

How is he writing about Russia or Britain? Is he all praise about government policy there?

Arrian:
"It's weak, at best. Having read many more Fisk opinion pieces..."

I haven't, as I said. The point you made there was a typical "build me an antisemitic strawman".

[Ming]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
Are his other articles different?

No... they all have the same "tone" and all he does (from what I've seen) is attack US foreign policy and Israel... He's like a broken record.