Oh dear! After 10 years occupation of Afghanistan, a middle ranking officer serving in the hyper-power JEWSA military has just realized the total disconnect of what the Israeli owned powers that be think in Capitol Hill and the Pentagon, with the reality on the ground in Afghanistan................AND has decided to share it with a wider audience within the sisterhood.
No shit Sherlock.
It is stated through culture that in the USA military ass licking sucker ups are near common from Brigadiers onwards. That in this subversively homosexual culture sucking up is the only way to get promoted. That these senior creatures inhabit only two worlds.....to promote militarism to solve ALL America's foreign "problems" or unquestioned obedience to rather poor policies formulated by compromised highly politicized civilians.
Promotion of war to solve especially political problems obviously is not good.
Blind obedience to poor policies involving war, formulated by the Executive for Wall Street, on the other hand is equally bad if not worse.
The colonels piece below, reminds one of all those documentaries about ex-Wehrmacht soldiers and officers doing their confession pieces about how bad Hitler was, and how they loathed carrying out his orders from 1939--45...........many decades after retirement, after the harm had been done.
This is worthless.
But let me inform the good colonel about a few falsities which created the greater falsities of Iraq and Afghanistan. Perhaps his rebellious, questioning, reflective condition will allow him to be more open and receptive to alternative views that circulate out there away from the tightly controlled monopolized Jewish run mass media in the USA.
1. The Taliban was created by the USA in 1994, through the services of the Punjab Pakistan military who subsequently trained it, armed it and directed it with embedded ISI personnel. To this day 2012, the Taliban remains a USA creation directed through the ISI which itself is funded by the USA, as "Controlled Opposition" to the USA occupation of their homeland. The Taliban thus is a carefully managed foil, which is popular to a certain extent in Afghanistan, but lacks the sophisticated weaponry that are available in the international market, but denied to them by the ISI.......they exist as a show, without having the capability to win out right, on their own. We should be able to guess from this .....reading between the lines.....that the Taliban/USA/NATO conflict is an artificially manufactured fight.....though clearly admitted that 2800 Western soldiers have perished as have an estimated 30,000 Taliban fighters.
2. The primary reason the USA is in Afghanistan is for the Afghan opium, whose funds are laundered by Wall Street and "the City" in London. If after one year of extensive tours in Afghanistan, the serving Colonel failed to notice this enterprise, then I must question his objectively. Other Western soldiers in Afghanistan have seen it and reported it, and subsequently written books about it that circulate in the margins (not best sellers). The Opium Plantation in Afghanistan, run by the Pentagon gives us an important explanation/other rational why the USA is in Afghanistan with such obvious conflicting ever changing narratives that don't add up. The $100 billion + annual war in Afghanistan makes a few people rich in the USA, at the expense of the average tax payer, and the overall viability of the USA economy.
Blaming hapless Afghans for failing to measure up to the superior standards of American servicemen simply won't do......its a fourth world country where 90% of the people live in villages, and linked to their particular tribe, not their country. AND is besides the point. The main point is that the USA is in Afghanistan illegally for 10 years harvesting Afghan opium and exporting it around the world.
US colonel: Don't believe US statements on progress in Afghanistan
Lt. Col. Daniel Davis just finished a year in Afghanistan and says don't believe claims of progress.By Dan Murphy, Staff writer at CS Monitor.
I spent five years covering the Iraq war, and at the end of it I was not inclined to believe anything official spokesmen had to say about Iraq anymore. I heard denials an insurgency was erupting in 2003, watched President Bush's "mission accomplished" moment after Saddam Hussein was captured, and was earnestly told Iraq's insurgency was on its last legs in 2005.
Again and again, the gap between observed reality and official rhetoric was wider than the ocean. I've only taken one reporting trip to Afghanistan, but follow the story from a distance and know many reporters who have lived there for years. Most of them believe, much as the Baghdad press corps did back in the day, that military spokesmen are running an information operation, not a clearing house for facts and honest opinion.
Now a colonel who just finished his tour in Afghanistan is backing that position up, in some of the most candid and critical comments you'll ever read from a serving officer. Many are certain to disagree with Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis' conclusions in Truth, lies, and Afghanistan. But his argument against continuing the war there is as straight and clear as a tracer bullet, particularly coming from a serving officer.
Davis spent most of last year in Afghanistan working with the Army's Rapid Equipping Force, a job he says took him "into every significant area where our soldiers engage the enemy. Over the course of 12 months, I covered more than 9,000 miles and talked, traveled and patrolled with troops in Kandahar, Kunar, Ghazni, Khost, Paktika, Kunduz, Balkh, Nangarhar and other provinces. What I saw bore no resemblance to rosy official statements by U.S. military leaders about conditions on the ground."
He writes: "I witnessed the absence of success on virtually every level." He also reports low moral among soldiers, doubtful the risks they're taking are doing much good, and incidents of Afghan soldiers trained and equipped by the US working with the Taliban.
The assessment differs sharply with the tone of progress emerging from the top brass. For instance, a press release from the end of January from the US Department of Defense information office begins:
"Almost a month into 2012 -- a year both Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Marine Corps Gen. John R. Allen, the top commander in Afghanistan, called pivotal to operations there -- International Security Assistance Force officials said last year’s accomplishments have set the stage for continued success."
But Colonel Davis provides a different assessment from those on the ground. He recounts a conversation in September he held with an Afghan official who serves as a cultural adviser to the US commander in Kunar Province. Davis asked him if Afghan security forces would be able to hold out against the Taliban when US troops withdraw from the province.
“No. They are definitely not capable," the adviser told him. "Already all across this region [many elements of] the security forces have made deals with the Taliban. [The ANSF] won’t shoot at the Taliban, and the Taliban won’t shoot them."
"How many more men must die in support of a mission that is not succeeding and behind an array of more than seven years of optimistic statements by US senior leaders in Afghanistan? No one expects our leaders to always have a successful plan. But we do expect — and the men who do the living, fighting and dying deserve — to have our leaders tell us the truth about what’s going on."
Colonel Davis, who did a previous combat tour in Afghanistan during 2005-2006 and in Iraq from 2008-2009 was clearly shaken by what he saw this go around. His public statements are unusual in the extreme for a serving officer. In case you missed the link to his piece in the Armed Forces Journal the first time, here it is again.