In a recent article by Tom Engelhardt on truthout.org Mr. Engelhardt makes the case for immediate and hasty withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan. He puts forth comparisons to the Vietnam war, among others, stating that Vietnam is now a prosperous country and all the doomsday scenarios flying around before the withdraw from that country never played out. He feels that we could get away with the same thing here.
And unfortunately, as much as I would like to agree with him and as much as I want our troops to come home safely and as quick as possible. I just don't think it's as viable as he thinks. The Taliban are a much different enemy than the Vietcong were. The Taliban have connections in high places with some of our worst enemies. If the worst possible scenario played itself out and the Taliban took over Afghanistan after our withdraw from the country, it would not be good news for us. We stand a chance here to make a strong political ally for ourselves in the middle east. As long as that is still in the realm of possibility, and it is, it is in our best interest to stay.
Plus, as Mr. Engelhardt pointed out, a withdraw of our troops would not mean zero troop presence in the middle east. We will always have troops there, just like we still have troops stationed in Germany, Japan, Korea, even Vietnam. So if we're going to have troops there anyways, why not keep enough there to really get the job done? It seems to me that Mr. Engelhardt thinks we shouldn't have troops in any of the above listed countries. If he had it his way it'd be nothing but embassies and diplomacy. Which is all well and good, but when diplomacy fails, I think we'd all feel a lot better knowing that we have troops on the ground, ready to protect us and all of our liberties.
In the end, I think what Mr. Engelhardt is asking for is wonderful and would absolutely work, in a perfect world. Unfortunately, we don't live in that world. And in our world, in reality, we have a real chance here to make something of Afghanistan. Withdraw would only plunge the country into darkness, dooming it to be taken over by the Taliban, a group that hates us and would likely seek vengeance for the years of war we waged in their country. We have to leave that country with a government in place that likes us and is committed to being our ally. Even though the task is hard, it does not excuse us from trying.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Senate Wants Changes to Afghan Police Training Program
The State and Defense department recently tried to explain to a Senate subcommittee how they managed to spend six billion dollars since 2002 trying to train an Afghan Police force that is currently at less than %15 operating capacity. According to Gordon S. Haddell, the inspector general of the Department of Defense: "Everything that could go wrong here, has gone wrong." The program has faced numerous problems, ranging from corruption, to a lack of recruitment and retention to a lack of training time.
The Defense and State department agree that they need clearer guidelines for the military contractors doing the training. I for one, think we should just oust those guys and have our military do the training. It may not be as cost effective but it would damn sure get the job done a lot better than these guys. The other key issue is the way-to-short training time: 6 weeks. That is not nearly enough time to train these recruits, who are as green as can be, to protect their country. Clearly this is not something that can be accomplished in a matter of weeks or months. Real dedicated time needs to be spent in this area.
Clearly this is not an issue that will be cleaned up over night. We are going to have to spend several more years and possibly billions of more dollars to get these men properly trained. I think Senator Claire McCaskill was correct when she stated "It's obvious that Afghanistan is not going to be able to afford what we're building for them, [US Tax payers] have made a billion dollar commitment for years to come."
The Defense and State department agree that they need clearer guidelines for the military contractors doing the training. I for one, think we should just oust those guys and have our military do the training. It may not be as cost effective but it would damn sure get the job done a lot better than these guys. The other key issue is the way-to-short training time: 6 weeks. That is not nearly enough time to train these recruits, who are as green as can be, to protect their country. Clearly this is not something that can be accomplished in a matter of weeks or months. Real dedicated time needs to be spent in this area.
Clearly this is not an issue that will be cleaned up over night. We are going to have to spend several more years and possibly billions of more dollars to get these men properly trained. I think Senator Claire McCaskill was correct when she stated "It's obvious that Afghanistan is not going to be able to afford what we're building for them, [US Tax payers] have made a billion dollar commitment for years to come."
Veteran Unemployment at 21.6 Percent
In a poll of 60,000 households, unemployment among male Gulf War Era-II (Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan veterans) veterans aged between 18 and 24 was at 21.6%. The survey says that these young males were having a hard time adjusting to life at home, specifically when it comes to finding gainful employment. Unemployment among non-veteran men in the same age range was only 19.1%.
Since 2001, there have been 1.9 million veterans who are now in that Gulf War Era-II group. Many of them suffer from mental problems such as PTSD, traumatic brain injury and substance abuse. These issues are understandably huge roadblocks to finding good work. It's not all bad news though, according to John Challenger of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, the nations oldest outplacement consulting organization, the young men who serve often display fantastic leadership qualities, something employers are looking for. In addition, these soldiers tend to be very mature individuals, as being in the war zone can age you. So in the end, these young veterans are mature, with good people skills and are very goal oriented. Sounds like an employers dream, so why are these young men having such trouble finding employment?
The key is matching a soldiers talents to the job. If a soldier has great social skills, put him in retail or customer service. A math wiz should obviously seek a job that is technology oriented. There are nine regional Veterans Employment Coordinators located throughout the country that help veterans find the work that would suit them best. However, it is obvious with unemployment rates as high as they are, that we could use some extra assistance in this area.
Since 2001, there have been 1.9 million veterans who are now in that Gulf War Era-II group. Many of them suffer from mental problems such as PTSD, traumatic brain injury and substance abuse. These issues are understandably huge roadblocks to finding good work. It's not all bad news though, according to John Challenger of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, the nations oldest outplacement consulting organization, the young men who serve often display fantastic leadership qualities, something employers are looking for. In addition, these soldiers tend to be very mature individuals, as being in the war zone can age you. So in the end, these young veterans are mature, with good people skills and are very goal oriented. Sounds like an employers dream, so why are these young men having such trouble finding employment?
The key is matching a soldiers talents to the job. If a soldier has great social skills, put him in retail or customer service. A math wiz should obviously seek a job that is technology oriented. There are nine regional Veterans Employment Coordinators located throughout the country that help veterans find the work that would suit them best. However, it is obvious with unemployment rates as high as they are, that we could use some extra assistance in this area.
In Other News... War Tears Families Apart.
Despite my cheeky title, this is going to be a serious entry. I read an interesting article on the Washington Post website today. It seems it is not uncommon for families to be split right down the middle, with some supporting the Taliban and Insurgency while the others support the war and the local government.
The article tells the story of Yar Dad Khan, a tribal leader in Mohmand who is strictly Pro-Government and his Taliban Leader cousin, Raheel Khan. According to Yar Dad: "There are some good people in the Taliban, who actually want to bring an Islamic system to Pakistan. But very few. Most of them are bad people, like my cousin."
Unlike many Taliban, Raheel was not the model Islam before joining. He was a grade school drop out who drank heavily and was generally not a religious man. His motivation for joining the Taliban was purely selfish. He was cut out of his father's inheritance and decided to go play Terrorist. Since then one family member has been killed, others have joined Raheel in the Taliban and the others live every day in fear of the man they once called family.
Not long after the emergence of the Taliban in the tribal lands that the Malik family held, they revealed their intentions to overthrow Tribal rule by assassinating the Maliks. They could be spared by vowing fealty to the Taliban but hundreds were killed anyways. The Maliks had plenty of enemies who were willing to help the Taliban in their crusade against the family. Plenty of lesser and rival tribesman where all to happy to grow a beard, join the Taliban and fight the righteous family. This is what enticed Raheel to join, since his father was a Malik.
After a Taliban raid of the Red Mosque in Islamabad, the Pakistan Army arrested Raheel's father and uncle, who would be held responsible for Raheel's actions as a Taliban fighter. His family begged Raheel to abandon his ways and return home. He gave a resounding No by crashing a family wedding with 25 of his Taliban buddies and kidnapped the groom. The man was eventually shot dead for no apparent reason. The man was Raheel's cousin.
Stories like this just go to show how deep and complex the Taliban issue really is. Although it appears to be just religious extremists, the groups radical ways attract other, non-religious extremists, who will use the groups resources to wage their own wars, sometimes, on their own families. How do you fight a group of men with morals such as this?
The article tells the story of Yar Dad Khan, a tribal leader in Mohmand who is strictly Pro-Government and his Taliban Leader cousin, Raheel Khan. According to Yar Dad: "There are some good people in the Taliban, who actually want to bring an Islamic system to Pakistan. But very few. Most of them are bad people, like my cousin."
Unlike many Taliban, Raheel was not the model Islam before joining. He was a grade school drop out who drank heavily and was generally not a religious man. His motivation for joining the Taliban was purely selfish. He was cut out of his father's inheritance and decided to go play Terrorist. Since then one family member has been killed, others have joined Raheel in the Taliban and the others live every day in fear of the man they once called family.
Not long after the emergence of the Taliban in the tribal lands that the Malik family held, they revealed their intentions to overthrow Tribal rule by assassinating the Maliks. They could be spared by vowing fealty to the Taliban but hundreds were killed anyways. The Maliks had plenty of enemies who were willing to help the Taliban in their crusade against the family. Plenty of lesser and rival tribesman where all to happy to grow a beard, join the Taliban and fight the righteous family. This is what enticed Raheel to join, since his father was a Malik.
After a Taliban raid of the Red Mosque in Islamabad, the Pakistan Army arrested Raheel's father and uncle, who would be held responsible for Raheel's actions as a Taliban fighter. His family begged Raheel to abandon his ways and return home. He gave a resounding No by crashing a family wedding with 25 of his Taliban buddies and kidnapped the groom. The man was eventually shot dead for no apparent reason. The man was Raheel's cousin.
Stories like this just go to show how deep and complex the Taliban issue really is. Although it appears to be just religious extremists, the groups radical ways attract other, non-religious extremists, who will use the groups resources to wage their own wars, sometimes, on their own families. How do you fight a group of men with morals such as this?
Pakistani Equivalent of Guantanamo Holds Thousands
The Pakistan Military is holding thousands of suspected insurgents in detention. The insurgents have been held for over a year and have not been allowed to contact friends, family, human rights organizations or legal representation. The military feels this is necessary because they cannot trust their own countries legal system to properly try and convict those guilty. The fear is that top names in the insurgency will use their power to pull the right strings and get out of jail time. While it is a noble endeavor to keep insurgents off the streets of Pakistan, how many innocent lives have been swept up in this mess? I fear that this is no better than what the US has been doing in Guantanamo these last few years.
Possibly worse than the detainees is the alleged 300 extrajudicial killings committed by the Pakistan military. They have no right to declare themselves Judge Jury and Executioner. It was their job to get them off the streets and they did that. If it's true that they went ahead and killed a vast number of them, then we have a bigger problem on our hands than we thought. 300 deaths isn't a little thing, it's a war crime.
There is no public record of who has been detained and until that record is made, more people, guilty and innocent, are at risk of being killed. Estimates put the number of prisoners being held at around 2,500, though some believe that to be a conservative guess. The prisoners are being held at various locations throughout the country, although exactly where these detention centers are is not public knowledge either.
The Pakistani government claims that its actions are law enforcement and not military, thus excusing their poor treatment of the prisoners. The US and our allies worry that this will not help gain favor from the Pakistan people, something we are in great need of right now. Without the Pakistani Public on our side, we risk creating even more insurgents. We need to make the Pakistani Military understand how crucial this is to stopping the insurgency.
Possibly worse than the detainees is the alleged 300 extrajudicial killings committed by the Pakistan military. They have no right to declare themselves Judge Jury and Executioner. It was their job to get them off the streets and they did that. If it's true that they went ahead and killed a vast number of them, then we have a bigger problem on our hands than we thought. 300 deaths isn't a little thing, it's a war crime.
There is no public record of who has been detained and until that record is made, more people, guilty and innocent, are at risk of being killed. Estimates put the number of prisoners being held at around 2,500, though some believe that to be a conservative guess. The prisoners are being held at various locations throughout the country, although exactly where these detention centers are is not public knowledge either.
The Pakistani government claims that its actions are law enforcement and not military, thus excusing their poor treatment of the prisoners. The US and our allies worry that this will not help gain favor from the Pakistan people, something we are in great need of right now. Without the Pakistani Public on our side, we risk creating even more insurgents. We need to make the Pakistani Military understand how crucial this is to stopping the insurgency.
The Real World vs the Game World
I was linked to an eye opening video by my professor recently. In comparison to previous wars our country has fought in, such as vietnam, the amount and type of footage being aired in our media is vastly different. Television viewers in the Vietnam era were treated to ghastly real images of war, something our government has shielded us from during this current conflict. However, every now and again, footage like this leaks out, where we see real soldiers battling real insurgents and at least in this case, the insurgents can shoot.
According to popular belief, the insurgents are not very good shots. I say popular belief because I can only say what I've heard, I'm not a soldier and have never been to the middle east. However, the insurgent or insurgents in this video from the New York Times definitely knew what he was doing with his gun, at least enough to catch a marine in the soldier with his bullet. I'll be honest, this is the first time I've seen such footage and it is unsettling.
As a life long video gamer my only experience with war has been the digital variety. An experience much softer than real life, filled with health kits and bonus lives, things that real soldiers don't have the privilege of using. Out there in the field it is actual life and death, something I think is lost on a lot of us back home. These soldiers are risking it all and sometimes losing it, all in the name of freedom.
But at some point we have to ask what we're fighting for. Is it the high score? No, of course not, this is no game. Then what is it? Bin Laden? Is he still our prime goal? Or is it to rebuild a country we helped tear apart? When it comes right down to it, I'm not sure exactly what we're there for.
According to popular belief, the insurgents are not very good shots. I say popular belief because I can only say what I've heard, I'm not a soldier and have never been to the middle east. However, the insurgent or insurgents in this video from the New York Times definitely knew what he was doing with his gun, at least enough to catch a marine in the soldier with his bullet. I'll be honest, this is the first time I've seen such footage and it is unsettling.
As a life long video gamer my only experience with war has been the digital variety. An experience much softer than real life, filled with health kits and bonus lives, things that real soldiers don't have the privilege of using. Out there in the field it is actual life and death, something I think is lost on a lot of us back home. These soldiers are risking it all and sometimes losing it, all in the name of freedom.
But at some point we have to ask what we're fighting for. Is it the high score? No, of course not, this is no game. Then what is it? Bin Laden? Is he still our prime goal? Or is it to rebuild a country we helped tear apart? When it comes right down to it, I'm not sure exactly what we're there for.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Majority of Guantanamo Prisoners were Innocent
Lawrence Wilkerson, an aide to the former Republican Secretary of State Colin Powell, recently accused George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donal Rumsfield of covering up the innocence of the vast majority of Guantanamo Bay prisoners. According to Wilkerson, the Bush administration was aware that the prisoners were innocent but felt that it was justifiable to lock them up, so long as some of the prisoners actually were terrorists. According to the Bush Administration it was "politically impossible" to release them, as it might do harm to the war efforts. A direct quote reads as follows "The detention efforts would be revealed as the incredibly confused operation that they were...this was not acceptable to the administration and would have been severely detrimental to the leadership at the Department of Defense"
I'm sorry but I fail to see how keeping innocent men against their will is helping anybody. On top of that, these men were regularly tortured as if they were honest to god terrorists. Adel Hassan Hamad, a Sudanese man, was held from March 2003 to December 2007 and claims that he was repeatedly tortured by the US agents in charge at Guantanamo. What reason would they have to torture a man which they have no hard evidence against? Even if he does admit to being a terrorist under such torture, it's probably only to get the pain to stop. A real terrorist would more than likely die before talking.
None of this makes any sense to me. I honestly believe that Cheney, Rumsfield and maybe even Bush ought to be charged as War Criminals. This senselessness should not be associated with the United States of America and the good people who live there. I said in my last blog that I would stop at very little to prevent another 9/11, however, the torture and detention of people that are known to be innocent is not something I can abide by. I don't care if the administration thinks we will look weak by releasing prisoners from Guantanamo, the fact is, as a freedom loving nation, we look like nothing but a bunch of hypocrites because of this whole situation.
I'm sorry but I fail to see how keeping innocent men against their will is helping anybody. On top of that, these men were regularly tortured as if they were honest to god terrorists. Adel Hassan Hamad, a Sudanese man, was held from March 2003 to December 2007 and claims that he was repeatedly tortured by the US agents in charge at Guantanamo. What reason would they have to torture a man which they have no hard evidence against? Even if he does admit to being a terrorist under such torture, it's probably only to get the pain to stop. A real terrorist would more than likely die before talking.
None of this makes any sense to me. I honestly believe that Cheney, Rumsfield and maybe even Bush ought to be charged as War Criminals. This senselessness should not be associated with the United States of America and the good people who live there. I said in my last blog that I would stop at very little to prevent another 9/11, however, the torture and detention of people that are known to be innocent is not something I can abide by. I don't care if the administration thinks we will look weak by releasing prisoners from Guantanamo, the fact is, as a freedom loving nation, we look like nothing but a bunch of hypocrites because of this whole situation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
