I agree 09 can't come soon enough. At least they are starting to follow the terrorist money no matter what republican's door it leads to:
"A former congressman and delegate to the United Nations was indicted Wednesday as part of a terrorist fundraising ring that allegedly sent more than $130,000 to an al-Qaida and Taliban supporter who has threatened U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan.
The former Republican congressman from Michigan, Mark Deli Siljander, was charged with money laundering, conspiracy and obstructing justice for allegedly lying about lobbying senators on behalf of an Islamic charity that authorities said was secretly sending funds to terrorists."
(MSNBC.COM)
And a Saint Ronny appointee to boot! Tsk, tsk.
Posted by TIKI AL at January 16, 2008 01:10 PMI didn't go through all the links, but let's not forget that our fine "air strikes as occupation" policy has turned much of the Afghan population against their collaborationist government---and the "coalition", ooops Nato, gots to keep my "wars" straight!
When one remembers that the Afghans actually had some enthusiam for our toppling of the Taliban in 2001 (so long ago), and now have sympathy (or resignation) for the talibaners again, this is quite an "accomplishment". Bravo, Bushco!
People think it's hyperbole to call our Nero Worst President Ever. Things are simply objectively immeasurably worse now than when Bush began his "campaigns" and some messes can't be cleaned up, particularly military ones. Once guerilla/"peoples" wars turn this sour, this bad, that's it. Ask the Russians about regaining the "initiative" in Afghanistan, they've got a story to tell you.
And when one factors in that our military generally has very limited ground capacity (so vital in such "wars" of occupation), and that what capacity we had is now utterly blown as result of the Iraq Splurge (Iraq again!), the Afghan party is literally over, at least in the sense of achieving anything but more carnage.
But as you say, there seems to be a bipartisan corporate "market" out there for continuing our "plan for victory", no matter how fruitless.
Pour more resources down a rathole: Conservatism 101. While Dems studiously look the other way or clamor for more defense spending as well.
Posted by euzoius at January 16, 2008 02:22 PMGreat comments Turkana...I'll tell you Mr. Gates has caused a shitstorm in Canada over these comments he made (which you cited) in the Los Angeles Times.
Posted by Goyo at January 16, 2008 03:35 PMTurkana,
Thanks for this post and your persistance narrating these deceitful wars; a lot of work stands behind those links. It's clear, however, that this criminal butchery didn't begin with Wastral, won't end when he departs and is symptomatic of a chronic American political disease. A disease our candidates won't discuss.
As euzoius point out in comments, from "air strikes as occupation" to "bipartisan corporate market" to "fuitless" to "rathole" ending with "Dems...clamor for more defense spending..." these criminal wars are driven by narrow economic interests, not national security. No candidate will acknowledge that for fear of offending corporate patrons and its media.
No candidate can honestly answer the question, "What is the purpose of a $1 trillion+ p.a. military, larger than the rest of the world combined, that simultaneously loses at least four wars (Afghanistan,Iraq,Lebanon,Pakistan and counting) to irregulars armed with mostly company grade weapons?" No corporate media would dare to pose the question.
Thanks again for dogging this.
Posted by Pvt. Keepout at January 17, 2008 08:20 AM