Death Toll in Afghanistan Mounting

Avatar:
Ben Cohen
Author:
Publish date:
Social count:
0

By Ben Cohen

Worrying figures from the U.K - the death toll stands at 184, now more than the losses the British army sustained in Iraq.

While the political rhetoric strengthens, the objectives for this war dissipate further. Why are we fighting in Afghanistan? To beat the Taliban, the group of lunatics we essentially created? Or is it another stage in the war for strategic control of their massive energy resources?

Writes Eric Margolis:

Soviet veterans of Afghanistan warn the U.S. and its allies that they
face defeat there. The Obama administration cannot even articulate a
coherent political strategy for Afghanistan. Its latest big idea is to
kick out the hapless Hamid Karzai and install a new 'asset,' one of the
CIA-groomed 'good' Afghans who the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar,
colorfully brands 'dog-washers.'

Washington hopes U.S. troop reinforcements will finally bludgeon the
Afghan national resistance into accepting American domination. Then the
long-planned pipeline from the Caspian Basin across Afghanistan to
Pakistan can finally be built.

No foreign army has conquered the rugged, brutal terrain, and empires
have been fighting over it for centuries. The Soviets left having
destroyed the country, and bankrupting their own, and the United States and Britain are having no better luck. There is no end in sight, no exit strategy, and seemingly a lot more death to look forward to for no apparent reason. The
war will devastate the region further (an amazing feat given it is
basically a medieval country), and drain the economies of the U.S and
U.K to the point where they don't function any more. We're travelling down a familiar route, but a complicit press, and foolhardy belief that we are 'doing the right thing' is stopping us from realizing the obvious: We can't win, and we shouldn't be there.