A Successful Policy ... For War Without End

Bush et al have said that troops will be drawn down in Iraq with the refrain "As Iraqi's stand up, we will stand down." They have further claimed the U.S. "won't cut and run." What about that other war? You know, the one we hardly ever hear about. It was in some little country that was "protecting" Osama bin Laden? That little place that we withdrew troops from to invade Iraq? Yeah, that one - Afghanistan. Well guess what? We aren't "winning" there either.

We recently heard the kudos over the supremacy of "democracy" in Afghanistan. The Afghans selected an opposition leader for Afghanistan's new parliament. Griff Witte of the Washington Post, says this may make the first government elected in more than 30 years a seriously divided one.

However, behind the news of a successful election lies the rising power of the Taliban. The Taliban have reportedly taken advantage of the resurgence of drug trade in Afghanistan to buy significant weaponry from the black market arms industry. Those weapons include surface to air missiles which significantly strengthening its fighting effectiveness (Armed and dangerous: Taliban gear up). While this just hit today's news, it certainly could not have been news for the Bush Administration and the Pentagon. That throws into question the decision (announced Monday) that the U.S. will cut troops in Afghanistan. NATO peacekeeping forces are expected to replace U.S. troops leaving the country. Since the peacekeeping forces have generally not engaged in combat, and are geared more towards policing, it seems likely that the Taliban will continue to gain strength - politically and militarily.

However, the war without end is not like to be ended with troop withdrawals from Afghanistan, or even Iraq. It has been reported in the ”Turkish Press that CIA Director Porter Goss warned Turkey of possible U.S. strikes on Iran and Syria. Reportedly, Iran has received 12 missiles with nuclear war heads and a range of 3,000 kilometers from the Ukraine (MosNews)>. If true, this puts Israel within range ... and on alert. But Israel has been making noises about preemptively attacking Iran for over a year now.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has banned western music. This is seen as the further proof of his religious "imbalance." Last night's news shows started painting and interesting picture of Ahmadinejad as a mentally unbalanced religious zealot, and a significant threat to the United States. The examples given of Ahmadinejad fundamentalism; his egomania, and his belief that he is "specially chosen" and "God speaks to him" were all trotted out as signs of the threat. Interestingly, the U.S. also has a President who claims to be a fundamentalist, specially chosen, who God speaks to. So the Iranian President is a nut who poses a global threat, but the U.S. President goes unchallenged. Regardless, it is clear that the beginning throws of painting Iran as a threat, and it's President as an even larger threat, might be used as justification for preemptive "regime change" by the United States.

The purported draw down of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Iraq may not last long. They may just be redeployed for the next domino in "democratizing" the oil rich regions of the Middle East and South Asia.