Archive

Posts Tagged ‘War On Terror’

Colonel Imam: ‘I have the Green Beret but the Taleban beret is better’

March 7th, 2010 No comments
Colonel Imam, 65

Colonel Imam, 65, is scathing about Britain's move to buy off biddable insurgents and the US surge, warning that the Taleban are "fighting addicts

Perhaps no man alive knows Mullah Omar, his Taleban insurgents and the American military quite so well as “Colonel Imam”, a battle-creased Pakistani officer who wears a faded British paratrooper’s jacket and a turban.

As a top agent for the Pakistani intelligence agency, the ISI, Colonel Imam recruited, trained and armed almost every one of Afghanistan’s prominent insurgents and warlords during the 1980s. Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Ahmed Shah Massoud and Jalaluddin Haqqani were all his charges or colleagues at one time.

“I have the Green Beret,” Colonel Imam smiled, recalling the US special forces qualification gained in Fort Bragg in 1973. “But I think this Taleban beret is better.”

He escorted Charlie Wilson, the Texan congressman who funnelled millions of dollars to the Mujahidin, into Afghanistan three times and once took the US Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, then the CIA’s Deputy Director, to a Mujahidin camp near the border. But his closest relationship was with Mullah Omar, the Taleban’s fugitive leader, whom he taught to fight and survive, and to bring down one superpower and tie down another, over 30 years of war. Read more…

Muslims Are Their Own Worst Enemy

March 3rd, 2010 No comments

Muslims are numerous but powerless. Divisions among Muslims, especially between Sunni and Shi’ites, have consigned the Muslim Middle East to almost a century of Western control. Muslims cannot even play together. The Islamic Solidarity Games, a regional version of the Olympics, which were to be held in April in Iran, have been cancelled, because the Iranians and the Arabs cannot agree on whether to call the body of water that separates Iran from the Arabian Peninsula the Persian Gulf or the Arabian Gulf.

Muslim disunity has made it possible for Israel to dispossess the Palestinians, for the U.S. to invade Iraq, and for the U.S. to rule much of the region through puppets. For example, in exchange for faithful service, Egypt receives $1.5 billion a year from Washington, which enables President Mubarak to buy off opposition. The opposition had rather have the money than support the Palestinians. Therefore, Egypt cooperates with Israel and the U.S. in the blockade of Gaza.

Another factor is the willingness of some Muslims to betray their own kind for U.S. dollars. Don’t take my word for it. Listen to neoconservative Kenneth Timmerman, head of the Foundation for Democracy, which describes itself as “a private, non-profit organization established in 1995 with grants from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to promote democracy and internationally-recognized standards of human rights in Iran.”

by Paul Craig Roberts

Read more…

A series of setbacks for the coalition in Afghanistan

February 25th, 2010 No comments

Less To Cheer

STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL, the famously self-controlled commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, could be forgiven if he let off an expletive when he heard that soldiers under his command had killed 27 civilians on Sunday February 21st. A missile strike on a three-vehicle convoy in an isolated area on the edge of the southern province of Uruzgan wrecked General McChrystal’s vigorous efforts to persuade Afghans that foreigners in their midst are striving to implement a counterinsurgency doctrine of “protecting the people”.

That is not how it looked to Saeed Zahir Zia, a local police chief, who said that he spent all day picking through the devastation to recover body parts and corpses, many of which were so badly mutilated that they were unrecognisable. The victims included women and children and were from the Hazara ethnic group, which is famously anti-Taliban. Read more…

US drones killed 123 civilians, three al-Qaeda men in January

February 3rd, 2010 No comments

Monday, February 01, 2010
By Amir Mir

LAHORE: Afghanistan-based US predators carried out a record number of 12 deadly missile strikes in the tribal areas of Pakistan in January 2010, of which 10 went wrong and failed to hit their targets, killing 123 innocent Pakistanis. The remaining two successful drone strikes killed three al-Qaeda leaders, wanted by the Americans.

The rapid increase in the US drone attacks in the Pakistani tribal areas bordering Afghanistan can be gauged from the fact that only two such strikes were carried out in January 2009, which killed 36 people. The highest number of drone attacks carried out in a single month in 2009 was six, which were conducted in December last year. But the dawn of the New Year has already seen a dozen such attacks. Read more…

War Begets War, Don’t Call it Terrorism

January 22nd, 2010 No comments

Slate | By William Saletan | 11 January 2010

Traitor, Bomber, Soldier, Spy

Stop crying “terrorism” every time we’re attacked.

Afghan police officers inspect the site of a blast in Khost province Photo: REUTERS

Two weeks ago, a Jordanian suicide bomber blew up seven CIA employees at a U.S. military base in Afghanistan. The CIA called it a “terrorist attack.” So did the Associated Press in a report published in dozens of news outlets. Other journalists, analysts, commentators, and TV news anchors followed suit. In a Washington Post op-ed published yesterday, CIA Director Leon Panetta said of the fallen officers, “When you are fighting terrorists, there will be risks.”

Terrorists? No, sir. The bombing of the CIA base, like the November massacre at Fort Hood, Texas, was an act of war. It was also espionage. But it wasn’t terrorism. Terrorism targets civilians. The CIA officers killed at the Afghan base, like the soldiers shot down at Fort Hood, were not civilians. They were running a war.

According to the U.S. Code (Title 22, Chapter 38, Section 2656f), “the term ‘terrorism’ means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.” That’s the definition we apply to other countries when we designate them as state sponsors of terrorism.

The Sept. 11 attacks, which used planes full of civilians to hit the World Trade Center, fit this definition. So did the attempt to blow up Northwest Flight 253 on Christmas Day. So did the Taliban’s 2008 bombing of a hotel in Islamabad, Pakistan. Read more…

Former CIA Analyst on How the American People are being Duped | America at War

January 15th, 2010 1 comment

Ray McGovern, former senior analyst at the CIA, discusses the rare outspoken exception to the subdued White House press corps, the Obama administration’s refusal to explain the motivations of terrorists, the lack of contextual explanation in US media where history begins anew with each terrorist attack and how the US is fighting battles that Israel started.

via Former CIA Analyst on How the American People are being Duped | America at War.

Bomb, Bomb Iran: Lessons From Iraq Unlearned | Foreign Policy Journal

January 4th, 2010 3 comments

In a New York Times op-ed this week that advocates bombing Iran, the author, Alan J. Kuperman, director of the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Program at the University of Texas at Austin, begins by suggesting that President Barack Obama should “sigh in relief that Iran has rejected his nuclear deal”.

In fact, Iran has said it is still open to discussion with the U.S. about its nuclear program, but that if meaningful dialogue is to continue, the threats of sanctions and military aggression must first cease.

The U.S., however, continues to threaten yet further sanctions, while also insisting that the threat of force must remain “on the table” — a threat of aggression that itself violates the U.N. Charter, which forbids member nations from threatening the use of force as a tool for leverage in international relations.

Kuperman’s reason for why Obama should be happy is that the deal, under which Iran would export uranium to Russia, which would enrich it to 20 percent (not the 90 percent required for weapons-grade uranium) and return it as fuel rods for use in Tehran’s research reactor, “was ill conceived from the start” since Iran would “thus be rewarded with much-coveted reactor fuel despite violating international law.”

His reference is to U.N. Security Council resolutions demanding that Iran halt its uranium enrichment activities. The problem with these resolutions, as Iran is not hesitant to point out, is that they themselves directly violate the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT), which clearly states that parties to the treaty have an “inalienable” right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, and that the international community may take no action prejudicial towards that right.

via Bomb, Bomb Iran: Lessons From Iraq Unlearned | Foreign Policy Journal.