The state of the Afghanistan occupation

Frank Rich sums it up at the New York Times, provoked by Michael Hastings excellent journalism at Rolling Stone:

The war, supported by a steadily declining minority of Americans, has no chance of regaining public favor unless President Obama can explain why American blood and treasure should be at the mercy of this napping Afghan president. Karzai stole an election, can’t provide a government in or out of a box, and has in recent months threatened to defect to the Taliban and accused American forces of staging rocket attacks on his national peace conference. Until last week, Obama’s only real ally in making his case was public apathy. Next to unemployment and the oil spill, Karzai and Afghanistan were but ticks on our body politic, even as the casualty toll passed 1,000. As a senior McChrystal adviser presciently told Hastings, “If Americans pulled back and started paying attention to this war, it would become even less popular.”
Why are we in Afghanistan? I haven't yet heard anything other than vague metaphors. According to the White House,
So make no mistake: We have a clear goal. We are going to break the Taliban’s momentum. We are going to build Afghan capacity. We are going to relentlessly apply pressure on al Qaeda and its leadership, strengthening the ability of both Afghanistan and Pakistan to do the same.
Apply pressure on al Qaeda? Give me a break. According to the CIA, there are fewer than 50 al Qaeda in Afghanistan. As far as "breaking the momentum" of the Taliban, consider this retort by Jon Stewart, beginning at minute 4:
The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Endless Bummers
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party
In more recent news, say goodbye to $3 billion of our tax dollars, freely walking out of Afghanistan. Not that you'll ever prosecute corruption under Hamid Karzai:
Top officials in President Hamid Karzai's government have repeatedly derailed corruption investigations of politically connected Afghans, according to U.S. officials who have provided Afghanistan's authorities with wiretapping technology and other assistance in efforts to crack down on endemic graft.

Continue ReadingThe state of the Afghanistan occupation

Most media outlooks ignore the real story regarding Afghanistan

In light of Rolling Stone's incredibly revealing article on the muddled and chaotic U.S. policy regarding Afghanistan, most media outlooks are focusing the demotion of General Stanley McChrystal but ignoring the real issue regarding Afghanistan. Joshua Holland of Alternet explains:

[T]he story by Rolling Stone reporter Matt Hastings also reveals just how narrow the discourse about our Afghanistan adventure really is. Because while we’ll be treated to tens of thousands of column inches and hours of cable news blather about McChrystal’s “insubordination,” or whether Obama looks “tough enough” in handling the situation, the most important part of Hastings’ article is largely being ignored by the corporate media. Hastings told a tale of a project with no hope for success. His story shows us that the U.S. presence in Afghanistan is all about tactics dressed up as a strategy. It’s a profile of a military establishment running on inertia -- unable to withdraw because withdrawing is an admission of defeat, but also unable to accomplish the wholly unrealistic tasks put before it.
Andrew Sullivan is another writer who is not getting distracted by false issues.
One suspects there is simply no stopping this war machine, just as there is no stopping the entitlement and spending machine. Perhaps McChrystal would have tried to wind things up by next year - but his frustration was clearly fueled by the growing recognition that he could not do so unless he surrendered much of the country to the Taliban again. So now we have the real kool-aid drinker, Petraeus, who will refuse to concede the impossibility of success in Afghanistan just as he still retains the absurd notion that the surge in Iraq somehow worked in reconciling the sectarian divides that still prevent Iraq from having a working government. I find this doubling down in Afghanistan as Iraq itself threatens to spiral out of control the kind of reasoning that only Washington can approve of.
In this earlier post, I wanted to know what we are getting for a billion dollars every 3 days. Where's the good news from our two long wars? We still haven't even heard any benchmark for success, either in Afghanistan or Iraq. These wars, which usually are all but invisible in the American media, are financially and morally bankruptcy our country.

Continue ReadingMost media outlooks ignore the real story regarding Afghanistan

Sheldon Whitehouse on government’s subservience to corporate money

Sheldon Whitehouse points out that recent government regulatory failures are merely symptoms of deep and insidious corruption. The problems go well beyond MMS, as Whitehouse documents in this video. Written excerpts of his speech are here. Along the way, he makes it clear that Citizens United allows the tentacles of industry to reach even further into government, until government is only serving monied interests and not the public interest. He gives many examples along the way, and demonstrates that he absolutely understands the process by which government is being corrupted by corporate money. It's a process that inevitably culminates with the surrender of meaningful government. Whitehouse names names and gives lost of examples. At the four minute mark, he makes clear that the references to "walruses" in oil company reports is not a laughing matter. It is powerful evidence that MMS was a corporate captive. This is a brave and direct statement. Whitehouse makes it clear that, given the extent of the problem, our entire Constitution and our way of life are both at risk.

Continue ReadingSheldon Whitehouse on government’s subservience to corporate money

I’ve located a hero

I'm creating a new post category called "heroes" in honor of high school student Keith Wagner, who obviously did some homework before handing this lying sack-of-shit politician his own head on a platter. This is unbelievable poise for a high school student. And then the politician, State Senator John Huppenthal of Arizona blessed the interview with a magnificent denouement: his unexplained absence. Or perhaps he had to leave because he was in the middle of a unanticipated panic-inspired bowel movement. I can only hope that mainstream journalists will note the successful formula used by Keith Wagner: Do your homework, go set up the interview, then don't let up. For full enjoyment, take a look at the comments regarding this video at Huffpo.

Continue ReadingI’ve located a hero

What is cool?

Back in 1973, the Mid-America Music Association sponsored its Seventeenth Annual Music Festival at the Omaha Hilton Hotel on August 3-5 (MAMA still exists). I was a 17-year old guitar teacher back then, and I participated in the contest as a "Virtuoso" (I was not really any sort of virtuoso, but there's nothing like a label to appeal to one's ego). About six of my students also participated. It all seems so long ago and hazy to me now, but it seemed like a big deal back then. I do know, however, that in addition to the guitarists, many accordion players participated in their own accordion contests. Hence, in the program that was handed out, one could spot many advertisements geared to accordion players, making it clear that it was "cool" to play the accordion. I didn't think so--I always thought that kids from the Midwest who liked the accordion were a bit odd. But the ads pushed the opposite message. Here's a sample (click for enlargement). accordian-advertisement-lo-res I'm in no way impugning the talents of these players. Many accordion players were extraordinarily talented. I find this ad interesting in that it made it clear that accordion playing was cool, yet here we are, 35 years later, and I would think that it would be extremely difficult to find music studios that even offer accordion lessons. Which brings me to this question. What is obviously an in-thing to do today--what is "cool"--that will be chuckled at 35 years from now? Will it be that we walk around with iPods plugged into our ears? Will it be that so many of us were obese? Will it be that people thought they could consider their online network members to be "friends"? Will it be that we dress up with corporate logos on our clothing? Will it be that we worked so hard to get jobs for the money rather than because the work was meaningful? Will it be the type of music was thought was impressive? Will it be that the average American watched more than four hours of television? Will it be that the citizens walked around, apathetic to the rampant corruption in their national government? In what ways will people 35 years from now shake their heads and chuckle at us?

Continue ReadingWhat is cool?