The decade-long US/NATO war on and occupation of Afghanistan is unrelentingly costly, in human terms, to US taxpayers and US debt, in Afghan and contractor corruption, in the fear and hatred generated by foreign occupation among ordinary Afghan people, and, to end this incomplete list, the squandering of money on this futile war when there is so much economic distress in Afghanistan and the US.
The Republicans in the US House and Senate want to reduce government spending on non-military discretionary programs by $100 billion in the next fiscal year. Tom Engelhardt demurs. The savings should more reasonably come from the military side of the budget proposals. Given the less-than-rational policies justifying the Afghanistan war/occupation, we should, Engelhardt argues, look at the military spending proposals on the budget. Here is just one of Engelhardt’s ideas. He writes in his Feb. 17, 2011, article on Antiwar.com that we could easily cut a $100 billion or more from the spending side of the government budget by bringing the troops home from Afghanistan.
---------------
Engelhardt - Ending the war in Afghanistan and save over $100 billion the first year
[….]
“Which reminds me: Didn’t I mention Afghanistan?
“If so, how fortunate, because there’s a perfectly obvious path toward that Republican goal of $100 billion. If we were to embark on it, there would be even more cuts to follow and — believe it or not — they wouldn’t be all that painful, provided we did one small thing: change our thinking about making war.
“After all, according to the Pentagon, the cost of the Afghan War in 2012 will be almost $300 million a day or, for all 365 of them, $107.3 billion. Like anything having to do with American war-fighting, however, such figures regularly turn out to be undercounts. Other estimates for our yearly war costs there go as high as $120-$160 billion.
“And let’s face it, it’s a war worth ending fast. Almost a decade after the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan, the U.S. military is still fruitlessly engaged in possibly the stupidest frontier war in our history, thousands of miles from home in the backlands of the planet.
[….]
There’s genuine money to be slashed simply by bringing the troops home….
[….]
URL to article: http://original.antiwar.com/engelhardt/2011/02/17/cutting-100-billion-easy/
---------------
Sadly the war is likely to continue beyond 2011 or 2014. There is no definitive end in sight for this fruitless endeavor. And it is likely to get worse by the violence it generates in the meantime.
---------------
Slobodan Lekic learns that the top US general in Afghanistan sees intensified fighting in 2011. Reporting for the Associated Press (2-9-11), Lekic writes that “General Patraeus predicts intensified fighting in 2011.” Lekic continues:
“ The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan warned [on NATO TV] that combat will likely escalate during the spring thaw as Taliban insurgents try to return to areas cleared by the international forces during the past several months.
[….]
“Last year's surge boosted the international force to about 150,000 troops. NATO and President Hamid Karzai hope to have more than 300,000 Afghan army and police in action by next autumn facing a much smaller organized insurgent force.
[….]
“Last year was the deadliest of the nearly decade-long war for international troops, with more than 700 killed. This compares to about 500 in 2009, previously the worst year of the war. Record numbers of insurgents and civilians also have been killed.
[….]
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110209/ap_re_eu/eu_nato_patraeus
---------------
Jason Ditz reports on on Antiwar.com (Feb 16, 2011) that Admiral Michael Mullen also anticipates increases violence in Afghanistan in 2011 – i.e., agreement among top brass that violence in Afghan will worsen in 2011
….today Admiral Michael Mullen informed Congress that 2011 will be an even more violent year in Afghanistan than the record 2010 was.
“’The fighting will be tough and often costly,’” Mullen informed the committee in a prepared statement, which added that the violence to come would be “’greater than last year,’” which may sound familiar, because violence in Afghanistan has gotten worse year after year, and record tolls always find a way to be topped.”
[….]
URL to article: http://news.antiwar.com/2011/02/16/mullen-informs-congress-afghan-violence-to-worsen-in-2011/
---------------
The anticipated increase in violence is predictably going to result in increase deaths and injuries, physical and psychological, both to civilians and to combatants. Derrick Crowe reports in the Huffington Post (Feb 2, 2011) that “2010 was the worst year for civilian deaths of the Afghanistan War.” Put it together. If last year was the worst year in this respect, and if the top military brass predicts that violence will rise in 2011, then 2011 will become the worst year for civilian deaths in this battered country of Afghanistan. The surge in carnage will continue to escalate, we are forewarned.
------------
Derrick Crowe:
“Last year was the worst year for civilian deaths in the war so far, and irregular armed groups backed by the U.S. and by the Afghan government are preying on the population while recruiting and abusing children. Go team.
[….]
“Here's the latest assessment from the Afghanistan Rights Monitor (.PDF):
“Almost everything related to the war surged in 2010: the combined numbers of Afghan and foreign forces surpassed 350,000; security incidents mounted to over 100 per week; more fighters from all warring side were killed; and the number of civilian people killed, wounded and displaced hit record levels.
“...From 1 January to 31 December 2010, at least 2,421 civilian Afghans were killed and over 3,270 were injured in conflict-related security incidents across Afghanistan. This means everyday 6-7 noncombatants were killed and 8-9 were wounded in the war.
“...In addition to civilian casualties, hundreds of thousands of people were affected in various ways by the intensified armed violence in Afghanistan in 2010. Tens of thousands of people were forced out of their homes or deprived of healthcare and education services and livelihood opportunities due to the continuation of war in their home areas.
“Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) are widely considered as the most lethal tools which killed over 690 civilians in 2010. However, as you will read in this report, there is virtually no information about the use of cluster munitions by US/NATO forces. Despite Afghanistan's accession to the international Anti-Cluster Bomb Treaty in 2008, the US military has allegedly maintained stockpiles of cluster munitions in Afghanistan.
“A second key issue highlighted in this report is the emergence of the irregular armed groups in parts of Afghanistan which are backed by the Afghan Government and its foreign allies. These groups have been deplored as criminal and predatory by many Afghans and have already been accused of severe human rights violations such as child recruitment and sexual abuse.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/derrick-crowe/2010-worst-year-for-civil_b_817308.html
---------------
There are alternatives to the US/NATO war on occupation of Afghanistan. Tom Engelhardt offers sound advice in his article cited earlier. The Afghanistan Study Group provides an authoritative and comprehensive report in “A New Way Forward: Rethinking US Strategy in Afghanistan.” Check it out at:
http://www.afghanistanstudygroup.org/
Also think about joining the anti-war demonstration in New York City on Saturday, April 9, 2011.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Afghanistan - cut funding, reduce violence
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment