So Who Won This War On Terrorism

Soon after the United States invaded Iraq, I wrote my feckless Senator expressing my opinion that the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts would ultimately end with nothing being accomplished other than destroying billions of dollars worth of property and infrastructure, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent lives and making crooks in our government and the MIC filthy rich in the process.

On a side note, don't bother emailing politicians. They only offer that option to deceive you into believing you have a voice, which you don't. They don't read email.

I can not recall my verbatim reasoning for denouncing the conflict in Iraq but I do remember telling this feckless politician that the war in Afghanistan was a hopeless and futile endeavor that would ultimately accomplish absolutely nothing to transform Afghanistan.

Another side note. This feckless Senator was a Captain in the Army and served as a platoon commander there. I'm sure it was a sincere call of duty to serve his country, NOT. His purely cosmetic smile doesn't convince me of his sincerity. Like Bill Clinton, he has starry visions of becoming President one of these days.

The Russians had sufficiently proved that the remoteness and inaccessibility of that region could not be overcome to the point of establishing ultimate control there. That in the end Afghanistan would shrug off the US aggression and ultimately revert back to the preexisting political state it had before we invaded.

It is reverting and I am being proven right.

Moon Of Alabama
Afghanistan - U.S. Sneaks Out At Night - Taliban Take Multiple Districts Per Day

The U.S. left Afghanistan’s Bagram Airfield after nearly 20 years by shutting off the electricity and slipping away in the night without notifying the base’s new Afghan commander, who discovered the Americans’ departure more than two hours after they left, Afghan military officials said.

Remarkably a lot of the districts the Taliban took were not in primarily Pashtun regions but in the north where the population is often Uzbek, Tajik or from other ethnic minorities. Before the U.S. invasion those populations were often anti-Taliban.
The Taliban have probably some 3-4,000 fighters in the north-eastern Badakhshan province but they managed to take 90% of it in just 4 days, 14 of its districts fell in the last 48 hours. Some 1,500 Afghan government soldiers stationed there have fled to Tajikistan. The province capital Faizabad is now isolated and the only place that is still under government control.

The mountainous province has 1 million inhabitants. But here are 4 Taliban showing up in a car in the remote Wakhan district. They are not opposed by local militia but are welcomed by the local (male) population.

This is good news as a fast Taliban victory in the north will make a new civil war less likely. The neoconservative Long War Journal is aghast as it explains:

Afghanistan is at risk of complete collapse after the Taliban has made dramatic gains in recent days, striking at the heart of the Afghan government’s base of power in the north while seizing control of large areas of the country – often unopposed by government forces.
...
Much of the Taliban gains have occurred in the north. The importance of the Taliban’s northern thrust cannot be understated. The Taliban is taking the fight directly to the home of Afghanistan’s elite power brokers and government officials.
If the Taliban can deny Afghanistan’s government and its backers their base of power, Afghanistan is effectively lost. The government could not possibly keep its tenuous footholds in the south, east, west, and even in central Afghanistan if the north is lost. If the Afghan government loses the north, the Taliban could take the population centers in the south, east, and west without a fight, and begin its siege of Kabul.

I currently do not think that there will be a long 'siege of Kabul' but a negotiated transfer of power.
...

So 20 years later, I was right.

a reply to: CharlesT


You're right, when Osama Bin Laden destroyed the twin towers and killed thousands of people we should have just let him get away with it.

If global government is imminently on the immanent horizon, then 'actual wars' will be replaced by superficial engagements predicated on the mutual agreement among all participants - i.e. formerly sovereign nation-states with significant regional power, resulting in Orwellian simulated hostilities. Indeed, conventional wars have already been effectively replaced (not in the least due to mutually assured destruction via nuclear armaments) not only by wars of proxy, yet with nonstate actors [entities which might be fabrications on the part of the properly extant State belligerents - so as to establish the pretext for a clandestine agenda with the only true opposition being the disempowered common folk drawn into the deception, plus the typically impoverished causalities mixed in with some IED martyrs].

Such an arrangement has at least 3 distinct advantages:

1. Fine-tuning predictable, quantifiable outcomes from an already overwhelming powerbase of operations.
2. Minimum necessary involvement or commitment, yielding maximum effectiveness & profitability
3. (perhaps most importantly) Mass psychological conditioning of general population into falsehoods - both simple and ideologically complex, wherein the truth is strictly contained and nigh-inaccessible to outside observers; heightening both suggestibility and hypnotizability.

Deep state.

Wasn't so much a 'war' on terrorism as a pretext for more societal and economic control.

Lots of money was made.

a reply to: CharlesT

The military has been an extension of corporations for the last 80 years. They destroy countries for resources and use the locals to experiment new weaponry. Every tactic used to oppress the US now has been in development in the ME for the last 20 years.

Veterans are 20% of all homeless. I hope Democrat’s and Republicans continue to unite to drive up that statistic. It’s what they deserve for destroying innocent lives.

There are no winners. It's just that some people end up rich, while many more end up with their lives & livelihood destroyed.

a reply to: CharlesT

So 20 years later, I was right.

Yes you were,

as were many many others. My own story on that was when those towers came down, that day at work the people I worked with all came to me wanting to know who I thought did it. They knew I paid attention to international stuffr whereas until that moment they had not.

Who did it Terry, who did it. My reply was constant. ''It doesn't matter WHO did it''' the only thing that matters at this point is ''Who is going to take advantage of it. No one liked that answer, they wanted to go after the villains, they needed someone to blame. So when the neo-cons said, ''Those guys'' and everyone replied, 'lets go get em'' we walked right into that neo-con trap and it has taken this long and all that money and all those lives for not a damn thing.

And just like after the Vietnam pull out, what we got was a heavy influx of Vietnamese refuges to work at barbering and manicuring and cleaning services and a whole bunch of that kind of stuff. Now we can look for an influx of refuges from Afghanistan fleeing the Talaban because they worked with the Americans. Biden made that promise to them, we will stand by you, just not there any more.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

''It doesn't matter WHO did it''' the only thing that matters at this point is ''Who is going to take advantage of it.

It certainly matters who did it unless you want to lay down like a coward and do nothing about it.

The assholes on our side that take advantage of the situation for greed should also be dealt with but that's a different situation.

If two robbers are in your house and one is raping your wife do you not try and stop him just because the other guy is stealing your cash?

a reply to: CharlesT

Same people that started it.

The alphabet agencies.

War Criminal George W. Bush is still free, so I'd call that a win for him. Bastard.

Terrorism won because we only added fuel to the fire

Why did 9/11 happen forget who and all that why did they want to attack America why they had nothing to gain

We where in the middle east killing people leaving orphans to grow up with the memory of there parents killed infront of them thats what gets people to be radicalized

Violence creates violence we lost the war on terror bye declaring war on it to begin with I wouldent call that a war id call that a campaign to create more terrorist because you will not get less terrorist bye killing that only makes more of them

The same people who won the war on drugs.

a reply to: CharlesT

To put it bluntly the winner at this point is Iran and the Shi'tes.

While America and the Sunnis, both Arabs and varied peoples of Afghanistan but largely Pathans have been battling it out, Iran has been taking over a large part of the Middle East.

a reply to: Alien Abduct

No, we should have sent the CIA and Mossad instead of the military.

I'm not so sure Osama did that. For starters, the buildings were full of asbestos and were requiring massive remediation to get rid of it all and it was far easier and far less costly to just bring them down. The person that made off like a bandit was the person that had just taken out new leases on the 2 buildings.

Saudi royals fled this nation like rats off of a sinking ship and George Bush held their hands as they were boarding the planes to get them out of here while there was a complete aviation lockdown across the nation. Most of the hijackers were Saudi nationals.

I'm not going to go back and rehash all of the coincidental evidence implicating Saudi Arabia but there are just too many coincidences surrounding their potential involvement. I have no idea how civil actions against their involvement is panning out.

Yada, yada, yada.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: CharlesT


You're right, when Osama Bin Laden destroyed the twin towers and killed thousands of people we should have just let him get away with it.

I heard he did it with flying pigs. What an infidel.

originally posted by: loam
Wasn't so much a 'war' on terrorism as a pretext for more societal and economic control.

Lots of money was made.

They had weapons of mass destruction!!

We had no choice

Lol...only sure business is war, drugs and sex

a reply to: MrEnergy

yachana.org...

It goes back even further than that. History of U.S. Interventions in Latin America
Location Period Type of Force Comments on U.S. Role
Argentina 1890 Troops Buenos Aires interests protected
Chile 1891 Troops Marines clash with nationalist rebels
Haiti 1891 Troops Black workers revolt on U.S.-claimed Navassa Island defeated
Nicaragua 1894 Troops Month-long occupation of Bluefields
Panama 1895 Naval, troops Marines land in Colombian province
Nicaragua 1896 Troops Marines land in port of Corinto
Cuba 1898- Naval, troops Seized from Spain, U.S. still holds Navy base at Guantanamo
Puerto Rico 1898- Naval, troops Seized from Spain, occupation continues
Nicaragua 1898 Troops Marines land at port of San Juan del Sur
Nicaragua 1899 Troops Marines land at port of Bluefields
Honduras 1903 Troops Marines intervene in revolution
Dominican Republic 1903-04 Troops U.S. interests protected in Revolution
Cuba 1906-09 Troops Marines land in democratic election
Nicaragua 1907 Troops "Dollar Diplomacy" protectorate set up
Honduras 1907 Troops Marines land during war with Nicaragua
Panama 1908 Troops Marines intervene in election contest
Nicaragua 1910 Troops Marines land in Bluefields and Corinto
Honduras 1911 Troops U.S. interests protected in civil war
Cuba 1912 Troops U.S. interests protected in Havana
Panama 1912 Troops Marines land during heated election
Honduras 1912 Troops Marines protect U.S. economic interests
Nicaragua 1912-33 Troops, bombing 20-year occupation, fought guerrillas
Mexico 1913 Naval Americans evacuated during revolution
Dominican Republic 1914 Naval Fight with rebels over Santo Domingo
Mexico 1914-18 Naval, troops Series of interventions against nationalists
Haiti 1914-34 Troops, bombing 19-year occupation after revolts
Dominican Republic 1916-24 Troops 8-year Marine occupation
Cuba 1917-33 Troops Military occupation, economic protectorate
Panama 1918-20 Troops "Police duty" during unrest after elections
Honduras 1919 Troops Marines land during election campaign
Guatemala 1920 Troops 2-week intervention against unionists
Costa Rica 1921 Troops
Panama 1921 Troops
Honduras 1924-25 Troops Landed twice during election strife
Panama 1925 Troops Marines suppress general strike
El Salvador 1932 Naval Warships sent during Faribundo Marti revolt
Uruguay 1947 Nuclear threat Bombers deployed as show of strength
Puerto Rico 1950 Command operation Independence rebellion crushed in Ponce
Guatemala 1954-? Command operation, bombing, nuclear threat CIA directs exile invasion and coup d'Etat after newly elected government nationalizes unused U.S.'s United Fruit Company lands; bombers based in Nicaragua; long-term result: 200,000 murdered
Panama 1958 Troops Flag protests erupt into confrontation
Cuba 1961 Command operation CIA-directed exile invasion fails
Cuba 1962 Nuclear threat, naval Blockade during missile crisis; near-war with Soviet Union
Panama 1964 Troops Panamanians shot for urging canal's return
Dominican Republic 1965-66 Troops, bombing Marines land during election campaign
Guatemala 1966-67 Command operation Green Berets intervene against rebels
Chile 1973 Command operation CIA-backed coup ousts democratically elected Marxist president
El Salvador 1981-92 Command operation, troops Advisors, overflights aid anti-rebel war, soldiers briefly involved in hostage clash; long-term result: 75,000 murdered and destruction of popular movement
Nicaragua 1981-90 Command operation, naval CIA directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against revolution; result: 50,000 murdered
Honduras 1982-90 Troops Maneuvers help build bases near borders
Grenada 1983-84 Troops, bombing Invasion four years after revolution
Bolivia 1987 Troops Army assists raids on coc aine region
Panama 1989 Troops, bombing Nationalist government ousted by 27,000 soldiers, leaders arrested, 2000+ killed
Haiti 1994-95 Troops, naval Blockade against military government; troops restore President Aristide to office three years after coup
Venezuela 2002 Command operation Failed coup attempt to remove left-populist president Hugo Chavez
Haiti 2004- Troops Removal of democratically elected President Aristide; troops occupy country
Honduras 2009 Command operation Support for coup that removed president Manuel Zelaya
Sources:

You seriously believe that's how it went down....smh. suppose you bought what they told you about the Vietnam conflict, JFK and UFOs too right?a reply to: Alien Abduct

Could have stayed 100 years. Afghanistan simply did not nor does not wish to engage the Taliban on their own. An example of one of the possibilities to Franklin’s reply of “A Republic, if you can keep it.” Billions wasted because they don’t want what was given. Lead a horse to water and all that.

And yet, what if the US just said “Kill em all and let God sort it out”? We would be the bad guys, yes. But we are the bad guys already for leaving them to be subjected to the Taliban.

A no win situation.

a reply to: CharlesT

I've lost too many friends to this god-damned war.

They and those who came home should be remembered and honored because they thought that they were doing it for honor and country.

Everyone else can rot in hell.