Archive for the ‘A War Based on Lies’ Category

Truth, Lies and Afghanistan

February 7, 2012

The Armed Forces Journal recently published an article by Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis that assesses the state of the war in Afghanistan. Lt. Col. Davis wrote two versions of his assessment: a classified version for security-cleared personnel only, and a shorter unclassified version. The unclassified article is amazingly candid. Here are excerpts from the unclassified article.

By Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, Armed Forces Journal, 07 February 2012

I spent last year in Afghanistan, visiting and talking with U.S. troops and their Afghan partners. … I covered more than 9,000 miles and talked, traveled and patrolled with troops in Kandahar, Kunar, Ghazni, Khost, Paktika, Kunduz, Balkh, Nangarhar and other provinces.

What I saw bore no resemblance to rosy official statements by U.S. military leaders about conditions on the ground.

I witnessed the absence of success on virtually every level.

I saw the incredible difficulties any military force would have to pacify even a single area of any of those provinces; I heard many stories of how insurgents controlled virtually every piece of land beyond eyeshot of a U.S. or International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) base.

I saw little to no evidence the local governments were able to provide for the basic needs of the people. Some of the Afghan civilians I talked with said the people didn’t want to be connected to a predatory or incapable local government.

I observed Afghan Security forces collude with the insurgency.

Much of what I saw during my deployment, let alone read or wrote in official reports, I can’t talk about; the information remains classified. But I can say that such reports – mine and others’ – serve to illuminate the gulf between conditions on the ground and official statements of progress.

In August, I went on a dismounted patrol with troops in the Panjwai district of Kandahar province. … One of the unit’s senior officers rhetorically asked me, “How do I look these men in the eye and ask them to go out day after day on these missions? What’s harder: How do I look [my soldier's] wife in the eye when I get back and tell her that her husband died for something meaningful? How do I do that?”

On Sept. 11, the 10th anniversary of the infamous attack on the U.S., I visited [a] unit in Kunar province, this one near the town of Asmar. I talked with the local official who served as the cultural adviser to the U.S. commander. Here’s how the conversation went:

Davis: “Here you have many units of the Afghan National Security Forces [ANSF]. Will they be able to hold out against the Taliban when U.S. troops leave this area?”

Adviser: “No. They are definitely not capable. Already all across this region [many elements of] the security forces have made deals with the Taliban. [The ANSF] won’t shoot at the Taliban, and the Taliban won’t shoot them.

In all of the places I visited, the tactical situation was bad to abysmal. If the events I have described – and many, many more I could mention – had been in the first year of war, or even the third or fourth, one might be willing to believe that Afghanistan was just a hard fight, and we should stick it out. Yet these incidents all happened in the 10th year of war.

I’m hardly the only one who has noted the discrepancy between official statements and the truth on the ground.

If Americans were able to compare the public statements many of our leaders have made with classified data, this credibility gulf would be immediately observable. Naturally, I am not authorized to divulge classified material to the public. But I am legally able to share it with members of Congress. I have accordingly provided a much fuller accounting in a classified report to several members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, senators and House members.

When it comes to deciding what matters are worth plunging our nation into war and which are not, our senior leaders owe it to the nation and to the uniformed members to be candid – graphically, if necessary – in telling them what’s at stake and how expensive potential success is likely to be. U.S. citizens and their elected representatives can decide if the risk to blood and treasure is worth it.

Likewise when having to decide whether to continue a war, alter its aims or to close off a campaign that cannot be won at an acceptable price, our senior leaders have an obligation to tell Congress and American people the unvarnished truth and let the people decide what course of action to choose. That is the very essence of civilian control of the military. The American people deserve better than what they’ve gotten from their senior uniformed leaders over the last number of years. Simply telling the truth would be a good start.

[Read entire article at Reader-Supported News]

[Read entire article at Armed Forces Journal]

Related Previous PeacePundit Posts

US Ends Iraq War… Again… Really?

October 23, 2011

Last Friday, Oct 21, President Obama declared the Iraq War “over”. He said “the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year.” He and US defense officials wanted to leave a few thousand soldiers there as trainers, but Iraq would not grant them immunity from prosecution, so Obama decided to withdraw all US troops. That’s the good news.

The bad news is that this isn’t the first time Obama has “ended” the Iraq War. On August 31, 2010, he announced the withdrawal of “the last US combat brigade from Iraq”. That description was highly misleading. About 50,000 US Army troops stayed in Iraq, most of them combat troops. Worse, an even larger number of private military contractors (aka mercenaries) also stayed. US combat casualties, not to mention Iraqi civilian casualties, continued to rise — in fact, the US military death rate spiked in June 2011. Since that first “ending” of the Iraq War, over 50 US troops died in Iraq, bringing the sad toll-to-date to 4479.

And this time? Is Obama’s claim that all US combat troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year true this time?

Answer: Perhaps more true than before, but there is still some “fine print” he didn’t mention in last Friday’s speech. Supposedly the US State Department will take over operations in Iraq from the Department of Defense. State Department officials have built a large force of military contractors to provide security for American diplomats and US facilities. But the Defense Department will not be totally out of the picture: a small number of US Marines will remain in Iraq to guard the US embassy and two consulates.

In addition to the “fine print” that Obama didn’t mention, there have also been statements from other US and Iraqi officials that contradict Obama’s claim that all US combat troops will be withdrawn. Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough states that the United States will continue to train Iraq’s military. Will the trainers be US military troops, military contractors, or civilians? Qubad Talabani, the Kurdistan regional government representative in Washington and the son of Iraq’s president, said “As part of a new agreement there will be Americans in Iraq training and assisting the Iraqi armed forces. These Americans will not be combat troops but they will be US soldiers.” Huh? Didn’t the deal to leave military trainers in Iraq fall through?

So what is the truth? We will find out.

Until then, I will remain cautiously pessimistic.

Related PeacePundit Posts

Lee, Jones, 93 House Members Demand Complete, Quick Iraq Withdrawal

July 29, 2011

On July 27, 93 House members led by representatives Barbara Lee and Walter Jones released a letter to President Obama calling for a complete US military withdrawal from Iraq by December 2011, as required by the US-Iraq pact of 2008.

In contrast, senior military and other administration officials have encouraged Iraq to “request” that US troops remain in Iraq indefinitely.

Lee’s letter challenges the president at a key moment: when the US debt-ceiling is being debated. Withdrawing the remaining 47,000 American troops (plus a large number of military contractors) from Iraq would save US taxpayer $50 billion annually.

The Lee-Jones Letter

July 22, 2011

The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President,

We are writing to urge you to hold to our nation’s Status of Forces Agreement with the government of Iraq that commits our nation to bringing all of our troops and military contractors home at the end of this calendar year.

The American people have made it clear that the war in Iraq must end. By wide and overwhelming margins, Americans approve of your plan to remove all the troops from Iraq by the end of this year.

We are deeply concerned to learn that your Administration is considering plans to keep potentially thousands of U.S. troops in Iraq beyond the end of this year. Extending our presence in Iraq is counterproductive – the Iraqi people do not support our continued occupation. Remaining in Iraq would only further strengthen the perception that we are an occupying force with no intention of leaving Iraq.

Leaving troops and military contractors in Iraq beyond the deadline is not in our nation’s security interests, it is not in our nation’s strategic interests, and it is not in our nation’s economic interests.

Mr. President, we look forward to working with you in maintaining our nation’s Status of Forces Agreement with the government of Iraq and bringing all of our troops and military contractors home at the end of this year.

Sincerely,

Barbara Lee
Member of Congress

Walter B. Jones
Member of Congress

[Read Congr. Barbara Lee's Press Release]

[See which Members of Congress co-signed the Lee-Jones letter]

Related Peace Pundit Posts

US Monthly Death Rate in Iraq Spikes

July 2, 2011

Last August 31, President Obama announced the withdrawal of “the last US combat brigade from Iraq”. That description of the withdrawal was highly misleading, since about 50,000 US Army troops stayed in Iraq, many of which are combat troops. That number does not count an even larger number of private military contractors (aka mercenaries) who also remain in Iraq.

Nonetheless, the Iraq war more-or-less faded from the news, replaced by reports from the Afghanistan war and, more recently, the US-led NATO attacks on Libya.

But the Iraq war is far from over. As was made clear by a recent Washington Post report, the Iraq war continues to cost US and Iraqi lives, not to mention vast sums of money and the US’s and Iraq’s economic health. According to the report, the US military death toll for June 2011 — fifteen troops — was the highest in two years — since before the so-called withdrawal of “combat troops”. This sad statistic brings the total US death toll in Iraq to 4466, and the total for all coalition forces to 4787 (source iCasualties.org).

The August 2010 “withdrawal of combat troops” was a lie, pure and simple. The Iraq war continues, and will continue to continue until every last US troop, regular or special forces, is out. According to the Obama administration’s stated plan, the remaining US troops are to leave Iraq by the end of 2011. However, neither US military commanders nor Iraqi government officials believe that deadline will be met.

US officials blame Iran for the recent spike in US troop deaths. They say Iranian Revolutionary Guard special forces are training Iraqi Shiite militias to be more effective in striking against coalition troops. If true, this development was entirely predictable eight years ago when the US launched the war. Iran and Iraq had been at war during the 1980s (with skirmishes continuing into the 1990s). The US then attacked and invaded Iraq twice: once in the early 1990s with Operation Desert Storm in response to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, and again in 2003 ostensibly to keep Saddam Hussein from using his “weapons of mass destruction” (which didn’t exist), but actually following a neocon plan to control Iraq’s oil reserves. By attacking Iraq twice, the US weakened it to the point where Iran can now freely exercise its influence among Iraq’s now dominant Shiite population. In short, the US won the Iran/Iraq war for Iran by defeating Iraq and leaving the Shiites in charge.

[SF Chronicle, July 1 2011: US death toll in June in Iraq hits 2-year high]

Related PeacePundit Posts

Photos from San Francisco Anti-war Rally 3.19.11

March 23, 2011

In San Francisco on March 19 2011, a large anti-war and worker-solidarity rally and march took place. Like the Interfaith Peace Vigil described in the previous post, the main purpose of the rally/march was to protest the continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars/occupations, as well as to show support for workers in San Francisco around the US who are fighting to retain hard-earned collective-bargaining rights. However, in light of the attacks by the US, France, and England on Libya that same day, the rally took on an additional purpose: to protest the launching of a third costly US-led war in the Middle East.

The rally began at noon at United Nations Plaza, in intermittent rainfall. Speakers from several sponsoring organizations spoke over the course of about an hour, then the crowd of 1500 – 2000 people headed down Market Street toward several large hotels where workers’ rights are currently being contested.

Here are some photos from the San Francisco rally. Click on photos to see them larger.

Related Previous Peace Pundit Posts

Photos from San Francisco Interfaith Peace Vigil 3.19.11

March 20, 2011

March 19, 2011, on the eighth anniversary of the start of the US-led Iraq War and the day when the US, France, and Britain launched attacks on Libya, about 200 people representing many different faith-traditions assembled in a light rain at 10:30 am in San Francisco’s Civic Center to express their opposition to the wars.

The vigil was organized by Rev. Israel Alvaran, a Methodist minister and Local 2 labor leader, and endorsed by a large number of churches, synagogues, and other houses of worship throughout SF.

Program

  • Gathering Music: Rick Phillips
  • Welcome: Dolores Perez-Priem, First Unitarian Universalist Society of SF
  • Centering Prayer: Rev. Jana Drakka, the Zenkei Sangha
  • Moment of Remembrance: Natasha Kanhai, Park Presidio United Methodist Church
  • Opening Song: “We Are a Gentle, Angry People”, Rick Phillips
  • An Invitation to Peace and Justice: Biship Otis Charles, Episcopal Church, Diocese of California
  • Passing Greetings of Peace
  • Centering Poem: Emerald O’Leary, City of Refuge, United Church of Christ, SF
  • A Responsive Litany for Peace: Rev. Donna Wood, Park Presidio United Methodist Church
  • Reflections on Peace and Justice: Rev. Jeremiah Kalandae, First Unitarian Universalist Society
  • The Word in Music: Ubi caritas et amor, Dues ibi est (Where charity and love are, God is present.)
  • Prayers for Peace and Justice:
    • Imam Khaled Hamoui, Occidentalists for the vicitims of the City of Hama
    • Peter Gabel, Network for Spiritual Progressives / Tikkun
    • Rev. Norman Fong, Minister, Presbyterian Church-USA
    • Tho Thi Do, St Boniface Roman Catholic Church
  • The Challenge of Peace and Justice: Rev. Fr. Kirk Ullery, Our Lady of Lourdes Roman Catholic Church
  • Closing Song: “Let There Be Peace on Earth”
  • Closing Prayer and Blessing: Rev. Dr. Dorsey Blake, The Church for the Fellowship of All Peoples
  • Sung Response: “Dona NobisPacem” (Grant us peace)

Below are photos from the vigil. Click on photos to see them larger.

Photos from the Anti-War rally and march that was held later the same day will be posted here in a few days.

Related Previous Peace Pundit Posts

Outstanding Book: War is a Lie

January 29, 2011

David Swanson, former Press Secretary for US presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich and author of Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union, has just published an amazing new book: War is a Lie. The book is so up-to-date that it discusses events that took place in September 2010.

It’s a point-by-point, historically rich, well-researched and well-documented expose’ of the lies that have been used to start and sustain humanity’s wars, including some that are usually considered “good wars” (a term that Swanson considers an oxymoron). The books provides the historical context and stated vs. actual motivation for most of our wars, as well as evaluating the results of wars against the goals.

Book Cover: War is a Lie

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Wars Are Not Fought Against Evil
  3. Wars Are Not Launched in Defense
  4. Wars Are Not Waged Out of Generosity
  5. Wars Are Not Unavoidable
  6. Warriors Are Not Heroes
  7. War Makers Do Not Have Noble Motives
  8. Wars Are Not Prolonged for the Good of Soldiers
  9. Wars Are Not Fought on Battlefields
  10. Wars Are Not Won, and Are Not Ended By Enlarging Them
  11. War News Does Not Come From Disinterested Observers
  12. War Does Not Bring Security and Is Not Sustainable
  13. Wars Are Not Legal
  14. Wars Cannot Be Both Planned and Avoided
  15. War Is Over If You Want It

Some interesting excerpts from the book:

“If WWII was a good war, why did 80 percent of the Americans who … made it into combat choose not to fire their weapons at the enemies? … There is good evidence that this was the norm in the ranks of the Germans, British, French, and so forth, and had been the norm in previous wars as well. The problem … was that about 98 percent of people are very resistant to killing other human beings. You can show them how to use a gun and tell them to go shoot it, but in the moment of combat many of them will aim for the sky, drop in the dirt, assist a buty with his weapon, or suddenly discover that an important message needs to be conveyed along the line. … They’re horrified of committing murder.” — Chapter 4

“One need not think about … wars solely in terms of winning or losing. If the US were to elect officials and compel them to heed the public’s wishes and retire from foreign military adventures, we would all be better off. Why … must that desired outcome be called ‘losing’?” — Chapter 9

Bottom Line: War is a Lie should be read by everyone in the peace movement, every political analyst, every student of political science, ever Congressional Representative and Senator, everyone in the Obama administration, every non-US leader… oh, the heck with it! This book should be read by everyone who can read. Seriously.

The author’s website for the book, including opportunities for readers to help get it distributed to elected representatives, peace groups, and anti-military-recruitment youth organizations, is: http://warisalie.org.

Related Previous PeacePundit posts

Democrats, Be the Change You Promised, NOW!

November 25, 2010

Due to the political emergency the US is in, this post departs from PeacePundit’s tight focus on war and peace (although war and peace are included).

———————

The popular interpretation of the Republican takeover of Congress is wrong. The reason is not that Obama/Pelosi/Reid were too liberal, driving swing voters toward the Republicans and the Tea Party.

The main reason is that Obama/Pelosi/Reid were not liberal enough. Millions of (mostly young) progressive citizens were energized by Obama in 2008 and not only voted, but actively worked to support him and other Democrats. The result: Obama was swept to victory and the Democrats won big majorities in the House and Senate.

The outcome of this year’s election reflected, in large part, those voters’ feeling of having been betrayed. They hoped for sweeping progressive changes — a total repudiation and reversal of the Bush regime’s policies.

Instead they got a centrist, compromising administration and a legislature that failed to take advantage of its mandate and majority. An administration and legislature that a) traded away single-payer healthcare and a public option before debate even started, b) rewarded greedy execs of banks and large corporations, and c) failed to end two unnecessary, immoral, and insanely costly wars.

The result: progressive voters stayed home by the millions. Those who bothered to vote didn’t campaign.

That’s why the Dems lost the House.

Therefore, the remedy is not for the Democrats to retreat to the center — which is actually the right, given where the Republicans and Tea Party have dragged us. The remedy is to use the majority the Democrats still have in the House and Senate (until February 2011) to pass forward-thinking legislation, including:

  • Ratifying the Strategic Arms Treaty with Russia (START)
  • Ending the Bush-era tax cuts for the rich
  • Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
  • Undermining the Supreme Court’s horrific “Citizens United” decision by legislatively changing the definition of a corporation to make clear that corporations are not people and do not have the rights of people, but rather have responsibilities to society.
  • Passing campaign finance disclosure laws that require that the true backers of any political campaign be identified.
  • Restricting the ability of lobbyists to move back and forth between regulatory agencies and the industries they regulate.
  • Adding a public option back into the healthcare bill.

Just do it. Now. There will not be another chance any time soon. The political reward will be great.

Related Previous PeacePundit Posts

US Military Likely to Remain in Iraq for Many Years

September 12, 2010

August 31 was the deadline for withdrawing US combat troops from Iraq. Although President Obama says he achieved that goal, over 50,000 regular troops remain there, nominally providing training and support. They are however, armed and will accompany the Iraqi military on some missions. About 5000 special forces troops also remain there, helping Iraqi forces find and capture or kill insurgents.

The 50,000 regular military forces are scheduled to return home by the end of 2011, but the Iraqi Defense Minister Abdul-Qadir al-Ubaidi does not believe that deadline. He argues that a US military presence in Iraq will be needed for several years — “maybe endlessly” (see article excerpted below).

Moreover, according to Antonia Julhasz, oil industry analyst for GlobalExchange.org and author of The Tyranny of Oil, in addition to the US military forces staying in Iraq, about twice as many private military companies (PMCs) also remain there. Many of these are essentially mercenaries who work for companies like Xe Services (formerly Blackwater), Titan Corporation, Pathfinder Security Services, DynCorp, and Aegis Defence Services (UK). There is no stated deadline for removal of PMCs from Iraq.

Iraq defense minister: U.S. help will be needed

by Liz Sly, Los Angeles Times, Thursday, September 9, 2010

(09-09) 04:00 PDT Baghdad — Some form of U.S. military presence will be needed in Iraq at least until 2016 to provide training, support and maintenance for the vast quantity of military equipment and weaponry that Iraq is buying from the United States, Iraqi Defense Minister Abdul-Qadir al-Ubaidi said.

In addition, Iraq will also continue to need help with intelligence gathering after 2011, and the fledgling Iraqi air force will require U.S. assistance at least until 2020, the date by which Iraq aims to achieve the capability to defend its own airspace, al-Ubaidi said.

“Maybe endlessly,” al-Ubaidi said when asked how long U.S. support may be necessary. “As long as I have an army and I’m a Third World country, and I can’t pretend that I’m better than that … I will need assistance.”

[It] is becoming increasingly clear that many in Iraq’s defense establishment, as well as within the U.S. military, believe that Iraq’s security forces will need U.S. military assistance for many years to come, despite Obama’s commitment to pull out all troops by 2012.

In an interview last month, the chief of staff of the Iraqi armed forces, Gen. Babakir Zebari, predicted the need for U.S. forces to remain in Iraq until 2020 and said he would like to see the United States maintain “three or four bases” to help deter possible threats from Iraq’s neighbors. U.S. officials have also said Iraq’s army will need assistance beyond the 2011 deadline.

[Read Entire Story]

Related PeacePundit Posts

Last US Combat Brigade Departs Iraq

August 19, 2010

August 31, 2010 is President Obama’s stated deadline for completing the withdrawal of US combat troops from Iraq. Some press reports issued today suggest that the withdrawal was completed yesterday, August 18, almost two weeks ahead of schedule.

A concerned US citizen might well ask: So are we out or not?

It depends on what you mean by “out”. Regular Marine troops left Iraq in January. Yesterday, the last US Army brigade — the 4th Stryker Brigade — pulled out. Rather than flying out like most departing US troops, the Stryker Brigade drove 500 miles across Iraq, crossing the border into Kuwait, reversing the path they took when they invaded Iraq in 2003.

The 4th Stryker Brigade was the last full US Army combat brigade in Iraq. So now the US has zero regular Army brigades there. If that’s what “out” means, we are out.

However, many smaller Army combat units — about 6000 troops total — remain in Iraq, and according to the Pentagon, will stay there until the Aug 31 deadline.

Concerned US citizen: So on September 1, when those remaining combat troops leave, will we then be really and truly out of Iraq?

Not exactly. About 50,000 US Army troops will stay there for at least a year, supposedly in non-combat peacekeeping, advisory, and training roles. They will have weapons and will use them to defend themselves. If invited by Iraqi forces, they will even participate in missions. Is that non-combatant? Your call.

Concerned US citizen: But aside from these peacekeepers, the US will have no combat forces in Iraq after August 31, correct?

Incorrect. The deadline is for withdrawal of regular combat troops. According to press reports, Special Forces troops will remain in Iraq to “help the Iraqis hunt terrorists”. Drones, helicopters, and planes supporting the Special Forces will probably continue to patrol — and attack — from the sky. So even after the deadline, some US combat troops will still be in Iraq.

Concerned US citizen: So how can anyone say the deadline is being met?

Dunno. You tell me.

By the way, even if we could really declare the Iraq War “over” now (which we can’t), let’s consider how long it has lasted: seven years. Longer than WWII lasted. Recall also that three months into the Iraq war, then-President Bush stood on an aircraft carrier and declared that “major combat operations had ended“. Before that, Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld — one of the main proponents of invading Iraq — estimated that the war would last “six days, six weeks, I doubt six months“. Seven years and over 4400 US troop deaths and at least 100000 Iraqi deaths laber, here we are.

News Reports of Troop Withdrawal

Related PeacePundit Posts


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.