US House Vote on Afghan War Funding a Disgrace

By Jason Ditz

July 27, 2010

In a 308-114 vote Tuesday the House of Representatives ignored a massive influx of new evidence underscoring the futility of the conflict in Afghanistan, approving a massive new appropriation of emergency war funding.

The vote came just two days after the world was treated to a massive leak of some 92,000 classified documents. The documents provided hundreds of incidents, in excruciating detail, showing just how poorly the war has been going, how many civilians have been killed, and how aware of both of these facts the military has been, despite its official claims to the contrary.

Though a number of the revelations that came to light were hardly secret to the analysts keeping a close eye on the Afghan War, the leaks have brought the grim realities of the war to the public in ways that nothing before ever could. Allegations of CIA assassination teams and massive, unreported civilian casualties are all well and good, but now having the actual documents detailing the events makes them impossible to ignore.

And while this is true for the media, it is doubly so for the House of Representatives, which after last Thursday’s rebuke from the Senate faced an all-or-nothing vote to provide some $33 billion in emergency war funds in order to maintain the conflict for the rest of the fiscal year.

Indeed, the most damning revelation of all may not be any of the particular incidents, disgraceful though they may be, but the fact that the military understands full well how poorly this conflict is going, even as it continues to tell Congress and the American public to expect blatantly unrealistic progress in the near term.

Those of us paying attention knew that the war was going disastrously, and the military has known that the war was going disastrously, but now we know that they know, and that makes all the rhetoric to the contrary seem absurd at best and downright offensive when it comes to shipping tens of thousands of additional soldiers to the windblown hills of Central Asia to kill and be killed. The goals were always ill defined and now it should be clear to everyone that they are unattainable at any rate.

Yet when it came down to it, with all excuses gone, and with no ability to credibly claim the war is anything but an unmitigated disaster, the hawkish members of Congress did what they always do; voted for the war and condemned the leaks on general principle.

And all excuses are gone; no one can claim that they went into this vote with blinders on, or that pledges of impending progress from the military brass overwhelmed common sense. The 308 Congressmen, roughly evenly split between both parties, did the American public, humanity, and common decency a great disservice.

With the war getting worse by the minute, Congress has shrugged off its responsibilities and chosen to defer the decision to pull the plug on this heedless endeavor largely to save face.

But this delay, though it may appeal to some, comes at a dear price, one far beyond the $33 billion price tag attached to the war segment of the bill. Prolonging the war will mean hundreds of additional troops slain in the next few months, and untold thousands of innocent civilians. With all alleged goals out of reach at any rate, can the American public really countenance the cowardice our lawmakers needed to keep this war going? Source

The war in Afghanistan is simply for Heroin, The Pipeline, More US Military Bases and Control over the region.
Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11 nor did anyone living there.
Bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11 and the US had and still have absolutely no proof he was involved in 9/11.
He is also dead and has been since December of 2001, the link to the information is in  US occupation not for “liberation of Iraqis
There are links to a few other interesting articles you may find interesting as well.
Can’t comment on how accurate or reliable Wikileaks are, but this is the story at any rate.

Afghanistan war logs: Massive leak of secret files exposes truth of occupation

• Hundreds of civilians killed by coalition troops
• Covert unit hunts leaders for ‘kill or capture’
• Steep rise in Taliban bomb attacks on Nato
• Read the Guardian’s full war logs investigation

By Nick Davies and David Leigh

July 25, 2010

A huge cache of secret US military files today provides a devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan, revealing how coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents, Taliban attacks have soared and Nato commanders fear neighbouring Pakistan and Iran are fuelling the insurgency.

The disclosures come from more than 90,000 records of incidents and intelligence reports about the conflict obtained by the whistleblowers’ website Wikileaks in one of the biggest leaks in US military history. The files, which were made available to the Guardian, the New York Times and the German weekly Der Spiegel, give a blow-by-blow account of the fighting over the last six years, which has so far cost the lives of more than 320 British and more than 1,000 US troops.

Their publication comes amid mounting concern that Barack Obama’s “surge” strategy is failing and as coalition troops hunt for two US naval personnel captured by the Taliban south of Kabul on Friday.

The war logs also detail:

• How a secret “black” unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for “kill or capture” without trial.

• How the US covered up evidence that the Taliban have acquired deadly surface-to-air missiles.

• How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

• How the Taliban have caused growing carnage with a massive escalation of their roadside bombing campaign, which has killed more than 2,000 civilians to date.

In a statement, the White House said the chaotic picture painted by the logs was the result of “under-resourcing” under Obama’s predecessor, saying: “It is important to note that the time period reflected in the documents is January 2004 to December 2009.”

The White House also criticised the publication of the files by Wikileaks: “We strongly condemn the disclosure of classified information by individuals and organisations, which puts the lives of the US and partner service members at risk and threatens our national security. Wikileaks made no effort to contact the US government about these documents, which may contain information that endanger the lives of Americans, our partners, and local populations who co-operate with us.”

The logs detail, in sometimes harrowing vignettes, the toll on civilians exacted by coalition forces: events termed “blue on white” in military jargon. The logs reveal 144 such incidents.

Some of these casualties come from the controversial air strikes that have led to Afghan government protests, but a large number of previously unknown incidents also appear to be the result of troops shooting unarmed drivers or motorcyclists out of a determination to protect themselves from suicide bombers.

At least 195 civilians are admitted to have been killed and 174 wounded in total, but this is likely to be an underestimate as many disputed incidents are omitted from the daily snapshots reported by troops on the ground and then collated, sometimes erratically, by military intelligence analysts.

Bloody errors at civilians’ expense, as recorded in the logs, include the day French troops strafed a bus full of children in 2008, wounding eight. A US patrol similarly machine-gunned a bus, wounding or killing 15 of its passengers, and in 2007 Polish troops mortared a village, killing a wedding party including a pregnant woman, in an apparent revenge attack.

Questionable shootings of civilians by UK troops also figure. The US compilers detail an unusual cluster of four British shootings in Kabul in the space of barely a month, in October/November 2007, culminating in the death of the son of an Afghan general. Of one shooting, they wrote: “Investigation controlled by the British. We are not able to get [sic] complete story.”

A second cluster of similar shootings, all involving Royal Marine commandos in Helmand province, took place in a six-month period at the end of 2008, according to the log entries. Asked by the Guardian about these allegations, the Ministry of Defence said: “We have been unable to corroborate these claims in the short time available and it would be inappropriate to speculate on specific cases without further verification of the alleged actions.”

Rachel Reid, who investigates civilian casualty incidents in Afghanistan for Human Rights Watch, said: “These files bring to light what’s been a consistent trend by US and Nato forces: the concealment of civilian casualties. Despite numerous tactical directives ordering transparent investigations when civilians are killed, there have been incidents I’ve investigated in recent months where this is still not happening.

Accountability is not just something you do when you are caught. It should be part of the way the US and Nato do business in Afghanistan every time they kill or harm civilians.” The reports, many of which the Guardian is publishing in full online, present an unvarnished and often compelling account of the reality of modern war.

Most of the material, though classified “secret” at the time, is no longer militarily sensitive. A small amount of information has been withheld from publication because it might endanger local informants or give away genuine military secrets. Wikileaks, whose founder, Julian Assange, obtained the material in circumstances he will not discuss, said it would redact harmful material before posting the bulk of the data on its “uncensorable” servers.

Wikileaks published in April this year a previously suppressed classified video of US Apache helicopters killing two Reuters cameramen on the streets of Baghdad, which gained international attention. A 22-year-old intelligence analyst, Bradley Manning, was arrested in Iraq and charged with leaking the video, but not with leaking the latest material. The Pentagon’s criminal investigations department continues to try to trace the leaks and recently unsuccessfully asked Assange, he says, to meet them outside the US to help them. Assange allowed the Guardian to examine the logs at our request. No fee was involved and Wikileaks was not involved in the preparation of the Guardian’s articles. Source

From February 2009 British officer leaked 8,000 Civilians killed in Afghanistan

I doubt that Pakistan or Iran are helping the insurgents, that is just another ploy to start yet more wars. Wars are for profits, resources and control over regions. The US and Israel both want Iran and Pakistan for Oil and Pipelines.

Keeping a war going is very profitable for many Corporations as well as those who invest in them. Many politicians in the US invest in such companies.

Be sure to also check this link. The CIA does some awful things War mongering for example. They may be responsible for starting a few wars and they also participate in wars as well.  A bit of history and information at the link below.

The CIA: Beyond Redemption and Should be Terminated


Fourteen Examples of Systemic Racism in the U.S. Criminal Justice System

Mental illness rising among US troops

Republicans in the US House of Representatives want Israel to attack Iran

Gaza Flotilla: Lawyers from 60 Countries to Sue Israel

Hospitals in Haiti to be shut down due to lack of funds

%d bloggers like this: