From this way onwards, it is no longer Bush’s Global War on Terror or the Long War. Hence forwards, this is President Barack Obam’as war. It is truly Obama’s Vietnam, and his name will be associated with the consequences of US defeat in West Asia.

Bluster before Exit: Obama’s last hurrah—30,000 troops “for 18 months” then withdrawal by 2011

International Council of Security and Development (ISOC): Taliban control “virtually all” of Afghanistan

Michael Moore to President Obama

Obama’s mini surge: Withdrawal in 2011! as predicted by Rupee News

Delhi’s worst nightmare: A “Taliban” (Pakhtun) government in Kabul

Obama’s new Grand bargain: More aid, intelligence cooperation & a few threats

On Sunday, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, Mr. Obama’s rival in last year’s presidential race, told NBC News’ “Meet the Press” that “the outlines of this proposal are good. The best way to get out of Afghanistan fast is (for) people to think we’re staying.” Wall Street Journal

The Obama Administration has finally announced more of the same in Afghanistan–war and occupation for the sake of some ephemeral unachievable, unrealistic, unmeasurable, “untargeted” goals. Justifying the Banality of a brutal Occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan: The Thinktanks attempt to complete the circle of complicity between a sycophantic press, and a non-inquisitive servile public. The nation is forced to accept the only argument that it is being repeatedly inundated with.

There is no dramatic difference in the rhetoric. Any continuation of the perpetual mimitic warfare does not spell strategy, it spells suicide. Sending Additional troops to Kabul in the American Charge of the Light Brigide is as much a folly now as it was hundreds of years ago. President Obama will continue to build the “Vietnam” type of security arrangement which did not work in Saigon.

The bad news for India, however, comes from the lack of a fundamental change in the operational dynamic of the US strategy towards Pakistan. Cut to the bone, Obama’s approach is no different from that of George W. Bush. Obama continues to rely on the Pakistan army to deliver on American and international goals in Afghanistan. Obama has simply offered a higher “hafta”, or rental, to the Pakistan army but has promised to tie it to specific benchmarks. Having seen the Pakistan army take the American security establishment on a ride so very often in the last six decades, India can’t be blamed for its scepticism. War on terror? Font Size The Indian Express, Posted: Mar 30, 2009 at 0051 hrs IST

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | ??????? ????? | ???? | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ??????? | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | ???????? ????? | RUPEE NEWS | March25th, 2009 | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | ????? ????? |

• Michael Moore to President Obama
• Obama’s mini surge: Withdrawal in 2011! as predicted by Rupee News 
• Delhi’s worst nightmare: A “Taliban” (Pakhtun) government in Kabul
• Obama’s new Grand bargain: More aid, intelligence cooperation & a few threats
• Perpetual Mimitic War: Strategy for continued Failure in Afghanistan 

The USA spent $605 Billion in Iraq. The Bush Administration has already wasted $134 Billion in Afghanistan and there has been no improvement in the infrastructure. The US has not helped Pakistan. Islamabad got $5 Billion in aid which is peanuts. The other five Billion was reimbursement and the US is delinquent in $1 Billion. Pakistan’s losses have been in excess of $35 Billion. Renegotiating the US-Pakistani alliance.Correcting the GWOT price tag . Seven counterpoints to USA

Former Finance Minister Sartaj Aziz summed up a general sense of disappointment, saying the Afghan side of the strategy was “not enough of a change”.

“It is mostly a continuation of Bush policy, the only difference being the addition of US civilian officials being brought in to help boost Afghanistan’s economic and social sectors.”

He added: “If the presidential elections in August go well, there may be some hope for a change, but Obama’s new strategy does not identify any new direction as such which could improve the situation.” Pakistan pessimism at Obama revamp by M. Ilyas Khan. BBC News. Islamabad.

Pakistanis were appalled at the rudeness of the Obama address which insulted the sacrifices of hunderds of Pakistanis who died fighitng by stating “there will be no blank checks“. Mr. Obama should be given a proper invoice for services rendered which are about $100 Billion per annum dated 1990.

• Pakistani Cheese for Western “whine”. Market Value real Invoices for services rendered.
• Invoice for Defeating terror, Securing Pakistani Nukes $150 Billion per annum

The President is once again violating international law by invading yet another nation which has not attacked the United States. Once again, he places our troops and our reputation at risk. Once again, he creates more enemies for America. Pakistan’s objections to the illegal US Predator strikes inside the country’s border should be a clear indication of how Pakistan would respond to another illegal attack upon their sovereign nation.

“Pakistan is a nuclear flash point on the Asian subcontinent. This situation requires intense diplomacy. The United States under George Bush is playing with fire, creating more instability, killing innocent Pakistanis, imperiling our troops in the region and weakening the hold our allies have on their democratic governments. Instead of limiting aggression, Bush expands it.

Congress must intervene legislatively and legally to block Bush from continuing down this dangerous path.US Congressman Dennis Kucinich. Sept 13th, 2008

The President is once again violating international law by invading yet another nation which has not attacked the United States. Once again, he places our troops and our reputation at risk. Once again, he creates more enemies for America. Pakistan’s objections to the illegal US Predator strikes inside the country’s border should be a clear indication of how Pakistan would respond to another illegal attack upon their sovereign nation.

“Pakistan is a nuclear flash point on the Asian subcontinent. This situation requires intense diplomacy. The United States under George Bush is playing with fire, creating more instability, killing innocent Pakistanis, imperiling our troops in the region and weakening the hold our allies have on their democratic governments. Instead of limiting aggression, Bush expands it.

Congress must intervene legislatively and legally to block Bush from continuing down this dangerous path.US Congressman Dennis Kucinich. Sept 13th, 2008

The Pakistani perspective: Peace deals only way to precipitate face saving for US & Obama’s smooth Exit strategy from Afghanistan. Carrying Kipling’s “While Man’s Burden”in Afghanistan will neither achieve peace nor end war. Charging at the windmill in the Khyber will not destroy the Al-Qaeda. Continued use of drones will increase the numbers of the militants. Most of the bombs fall on the innocent. The death of a few unknown names outweighs the exponential rise of Anti-Americanism in the area. Not using the term “Global War on Terror” or Crusades does not make the war less humane or less hated.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — The United States needs to improve its level of intelligence support for military operations in Afghanistan, the president’s chief intelligence adviser said Thursday. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair wants intel support in Afghanistan to be on a par with Iraq. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair told reporters the United States lacks a deep understanding of local power structures in Afghanistan and of the militants operating along that nation’s border with Pakistan. By Pam Benson, CNN National Security Producer

The new Obama policy continues to repeat the rhetoric of the previous administration on “safe havens“. At worst they could be considered hideouts for fleeing civilians. The Taliban control 80% of the Afghanistan. Why would they need to run to Pakistan for their operations. The US should eliminate the safe havens in Pakistan so that the Indian mercenaries cannot send terrorists across the border and blow up schools and hospitals and mosques in Pakistan.Empires don’t end with a bang or whimper: Their collapse exudes the sibilant hiss of financial deflation. The decline of US power

Former army man Lt Gen Talat Masood disagreed with the new regional US policy.

“Lumping Pakistan with Afghanistan means that Afghanistan’s problems have been heaped on Pakistan.”

Gen Masood said he believed that an increase of foreign troops in Afghanistan would only bring a matching Taleban response.

“So there will be a greater level of militant activity and it will affect both Afghanistan and the Pakistani tribal areas,” he told the BBC.

“This will apparently bring more American focus on Pakistan, with concomitant pressure to take actions which are only likely to increase terrorist activities.”  Pakistan pessimism at Obama revamp by M. Ilyas Khan. BBC News. Islamabad.

Former President Musharraf who really knew the Americans said it best. He informed the Pakistanis that the US policy would not change under the new administration. It has not. Many things were announced by the Bush Administration–they did not materialize. President Obama has now announced a sort of a continuation of the Bush policy. The Obama Administration now owns the quagmire and will be responsible for the defeat. He had the unique opportunity to end a bad war, but he did not. 

• When Freedom fighters turn terrorist
• Selective Amnesia of Americans: Pakistan is the most mistreated friend in the world
• Obama’s new strategy as confused as Bush’s was inept
• Will The Algeriafication of Pakistan, & the Egyptianization of Bangladesh yield an Iranian type of revolution?

Beyond US withdrawal from Afghanistan

The 4,000 Army trainers are in additional to the contingent of 17,000 Marines and Army personnel Obama already announced he would send into combat operations in Afghanistan.

President Obama will announce the deployment of 4,000 additional U.S. Army troops to Afghanistan on Friday, part of strategy senior officials say will merge increased military efforts with a massive diplomatic push there and in neighboring Pakistan.

“Our focus is first and foremost on those who threaten the United States of America,” a senior official said, referring to Al Qaeda and Taliban forces that now reside in unknown locations in Pakistan.

“That strategy is to disrupt, dismantle and defeat Al Qaeda, its associates and destroy their safe havens,” another senior official said during a White House briefing in advance of the president’s speech. “This strategy is a strategy, it’s not a straightjacket. It’s designed to be flexible. We will re-asses as we go along.”

The 4,000 Army trainers are in additional to the contingent of 17,000 Marines and Army personnel Obama already announced he would send into combat operations in Afghanistan. Those deployments will start this spring and continue through the summer. The Army trainers will focus their efforts on expanding the ranks and professionalism of the Afghanistan National Army (ANA).Obama Seeks ‘Strategy’ Not ‘Straightjacket’ in Afghanistan By Major Garrett, FOXNews.com, Thursday, March 26, 2009

Will The Algeriafication of Pakistan, & the Egyptianization of Bangladesh yield an Iranian type of revolution?. The focus of the war should be where the war is being fought. The US is not serious in this fight. At first it left Afghanistan and concentrated on Iraq. Now it is focusing on the periphery of the war. How deep will Obama go in chasing the ephemerals “Ho Chi Minh” trail. The American military ended up bombing all of Cambodia which destabilized the entire country. This flawed US policy led to the rise of the Khemer Rouge which ruled Cambodia for a decade brining untold misery on the population of Southeast Asia. President Obama’s policy in concentrating on the the “Khyber Pass trail” has been yielding the same type of results in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The Taliban are on the rise and threaten civilized life. US tells Delhi to back off Pakistan and lay low in Afghanistan

In Washington, in London and in Islamabad it is now accepted that the new focus of the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taleban needs to be Pakistan, and specifically its border areas with Afghanistan, says the BBC’s Damian Grammaticas.

“Washington is rethinking because Washington thinks that the strategy that they had adopted over the last seven to eight years has not worked,” Mr Qureshi said.

“To what extent have they succeeded in Afghanistan, that is the litmus test. Forget our weaknesses, what have you done there?” the minister added.

“They’re listening, they’re realising how important this challenge is for not just us, for this region but for the globe,” he said.

Pakistan’s top diplomat also said that the White House had told him that Pakistan and Afghanistan were now Washington’s top foreign policy priority.

Mr Qureshi also appealed for better equipment and training for Pakistan’s armed forces. BBC

Kabul: The Final assault begins. How long can NATO hang on? Will NATO buy the Obama Doctrine? What’s in between the lines? Does Obama have the courage to implement the real solutions to Obama’s Vietnam (AfPak)
Betrayels and Blackmail: Cloaking failure as success, Hiding the defeat, declaring Victory, Withdrawing from Afghanistan within 12 months

Russia, Germany and France refused to add troops to Afghanistan. The UK may send an additional token force. NATO is not fully committed to the fight. The Canadians, the Britishers and others will leave Kabul in 2011. The increase in 17000+4000 (plus what Bush had increased 10000). This increases the number of US troops to 90,000. The US needs 300,000 soldiers to calm down Pakistan. Therefore the US and Europe should have an exit strategy. The eloquent Obama speech failed to mention an Exit Strategy. Obama’s Exit strategy from Afghanistan- Can sanity overcome the war mongering hawks?

Separately, the administration has won an as-yet-unannounced commitment of forces from France to increase training of Afghan police forces.

“Ultimately the Afghan national forces need to take the lead in securing their country. This increase in number and intensity around the (training) mission will enable us to have them take that lead on a faster pace and reach the goals we have for what we think the necessary numbers are (for Afghan Army and police forces) on a quicker scale going forward.”

The administration has set a goal of 134,000 fully trained Afghan Army forces and 82,000 fully trained police forces by the end of 2011. Currently, the Afghan Army has a force of about 75,000 and the number of fully trained Afghan police is less than 40,000.

Obama will also send “hundreds” of civilian State Department and personnel from other US agencies to improve Afghanistan’s ability to govern itself — a tacit acknowledgement that the government led by President Hamid Karzai has failed to win Obama’s full confidence.

“It makes no sense to just send more soldiers to Afghanistan,” the official said. “You also have to send civilian specialists to help the Afghan authorities develop agriculture, develop governance, root out corruption, and beat the narcotics trade.”Obama Seeks ‘Strategy’ Not ‘Straightjacket’ in Afghanistan By Major Garrett, FOXNews.com, Thursday, March 26, 2009

Obama’s “Surgers” vs. “Exiters”: Exit strategy now or scrambled hasty retreat later
Fixing Afpak: Inability to define exit strategy spells inevitable US military catastrophy in Kabul
The emerging “Leave Afghanistan to Pakistan” strategy goes mainstream. Extricating the US from the Lost war in the Khyber
AfPak: Solutions beyond hubris, dictation, threats, sanctions, bombings, overt invasion, covert sabotage
Hindu Kush cul de sac: Why are we in Afghanistan?

Even advisors of the PPPP are saying that they disagree with the policy statement of President Barack Obma.

Former army man Lt Gen Talat Masood disagreed with the new regional US policy.

“Lumping Pakistan with Afghanistan means that Afghanistan’s problems have been heaped on Pakistan.”

Gen Masood said he believed that an increase of foreign troops in Afghanistan would only bring a matching Taleban response.

“So there will be a greater level of militant activity and it will affect both Afghanistan and the Pakistani tribal areas,” he told the BBC.

“This will apparently bring more American focus on Pakistan, with concomitant pressure to take actions which are only likely to increase terrorist activities.”

Afpak backstage: Bombing the ephemeral “Hindu Kush Ho Chi Minh trail” nurtures the Khemer Rouge of the Khyber– The Taliban
Obama’s Exit strategy: Negotiating with the “Taliban” (Pakhtuns)
80% of Afghanistan is under insurgent control. Taliban sanctuaries around Kabul thumb thier noses at ISAF, NATO & US forces. Why would Taliban need safe havens far away in Pakistan?
Imperial blindness: Another Empire stuck in Af-Pak quagmire unable to extricate itself out of Kipling’s hell
Getting out of Valhalla or new goals for war in AfPak: Can Obama’s “Neocon Lite” advisors sell old wine in new bottle
Fixing AfPak expedites the inevitable union between Pakistan and Afghanistan

The new US strategy is more of the same and this will yield the same results. The US does not have any serious policy to build bridges with the Afghan and the Pakistani people. The drone attacks are counterproductive.

Blair said that U.S. intelligence agencies have been analyzing Afghanistan “district-by-district,” but he conceded that the U.S. lacks the detailed intelligence on local power structures and other issues that will be needed to support civilian and military efforts to engage the local populations, support the central government and undermine the Taliban. “The tactical intelligence that’s needed to support operations needs to be ramped up,” he said.

He acknowledged that Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency has had strong ties to the Taliban in the past, but he added that three weeks ago a Pakistani delegation participated in the administration’s strategic review of U.S. policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Pakistani government of Zardari “is adjusting both its strategy and its knowledge” of Mullah Omar’s Taliban militants…By Nancy A. Youssef and Margaret Talev | McClatchy Newspapers

The focus on Pakistan is weak and ineffective. What was needed was a Free Trade Agreement with Pakistan. Pakistan needs access to the US markets. The US does not comprehend the simple economics of this. If the textile sector of Pakistan increases its exports to the US, the additional $15 Billion will be sent not to Swiss Bank accounts but the factory owners who will be forced to hire new employees. Those new employees will become consumers and send thier children to the best schools. Many of those kids will end in Western colleges and become assets to America. The Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZ) have languised in the drawing boards of the policy makers. The ROZ should encompass all of Pakistan and all of Afghanistan. This will also integrate the economies of the two countries. Integrated economies will not fight each other, but rather it will grow bonds of commerce, currency and comradery.

The reconstruction opportunity zones (ROZ) date back to the Bush era, but nothing was done about it. We’ll see if the Americans put it into practice.” Pakistan pessimism at Obama revamp by M. Ilyas Khan. BBC News. Islamabad

 

Fixing AfPak expedites the inevitable union between Pakistan and Afghanistan

2009: Obama’s South Asian policy: A Marshall Plan for AfPak
Will Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZ) make a difference in Pakistan?

The administration also intends to focus new efforts on Pakistan, principally involving regular diplomatic engagement led by special envoy Richard Holbrooke. The U.S. intends to conduct bi-lateral talks with Pakistan every six-to-eight weeks and U.S-Pakistan-Afghanistan meetings once every three months.

“That’s a fundamental shift,” one senior official said, describing the new strategy as one that defines the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban as a two-nation conflict that requires intensive military and diplomatic efforts. “We recognize Pakistan has a complex, complicated relationship with some of these terrorists groups. Some of these terrorists groups have grown up within the Pakistani system, but many of them have now become Frankensteins which threaten the freedom of Pakistan.”

The new strategy will also seek to increase U.S. economic aid to Pakistan’s new civilian government. Obama tomorrow will ask Congress to commit $1.5 billion a year for each of the next five years to economic development aid to Pakistan. The president will also seek to “increase Pakistan’s capabilities against insurgents, terrorists and militants.” As an example, one official said, Obama will try to increase Pakistan’s “air mobility capability to control their western border.” Obama Seeks ‘Strategy’ Not ‘Straightjacket’ in Afghanistan By Major Garrett, FOXNews.com, Thursday, March 26, 2009

Americans are good people, as neighbors, as employers and as friends. However as a nation we are gullible, unaware of world affairs and how others manipulate our good intentions. We want to believe in justice and fairplay, but are ignorant of the injustices perpetuated in the name of national interests. Whatever happened to humanity, kindness, and love for fellow man? Whatever happened to the global village? Today the press has given up its role as the 4th pillar of the state. Gone are the days when the major papers in America challenge the painting and shatter the paradigms. Dennis Kucinich made the statement that today’s American media is worse than Izvestia and Pravada which used to present only on side of the picture in the totalitarian USSR.  Ron Jacobs has written a prodigiously effulgent piece criticizing the hypocrisy, shallowness ruthlessness and inhumanity of the Rand Papers.

All other arguments fall on deaf ears.

Increasing Pakistani air power in the West could alleviate the need for U.S. forces to use drones to target Al Qaeda operatives. That could reduce domestic political pressure on the Pakistani government to protest such U.S. air-strikes. Even with these new initiatives, senior officials admitted they are still not completely comfortable that some elements of Pakistan’s military or intelligence forces are not aligned with or sympathetic toward Al Qaeda or the Taliban.

“All of this, of course, is going to have to be done in a way in which we are ensured that Pakistan will take the appropriate measures against militancy, terrorism, and insurgency,” one official said. “We’ve made that very clear in our conversations with the Pakistanis.”

The additional Army trainers will, when added to the 17,000 already scheduled, boost U.S. forces by 21,000 this year. That’s on top of the roughly 9,000 additional forces former President Bush deployed in late 2008.

That fits, Obama officials said, with the request submitted by Army Gen. David McKiernan, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, for a force increase this year. But it falls short of McKiernan’s overall request of Obama for 35,000 additional troops in by the end of 2010. Officials said Obama will decide whether to meet McKiernan’s full troop request later.

“This gives him (McKiernan) everything he has asked for at this time,” the official said. “It seems prudent to us to evaluate their impact in the fall and see what affect 30,000 more American Marines and soldiers had before we make any additional decisions on troop numbers. And Gen. McKiernan is in the same place. He’s going to want to see what’s the impact of having those forces on the ground.” Obama Seeks ‘Strategy’ Not ‘Straightjacket’ in Afghanistan By Major Garrett, FOXNews.com, Thursday, March 26, 2009

The way to avoid the straightjacket is to spend $100 Billion in Pakistan. 1000 new American hospitals, 5000 new US style of schools and 100 American Univeristies linked by American type of freeways will help the people and eliminate threats.

Revising Finance 101 for the Chinese Century: Political impact of Center of Gravity shift from New York to Beijing
China sets conditions for bailing out US and buying US T-Bills
US goes begging to Beijing: India feels the pain
The end of an era: The shrinking superpower-The emerging quad led by China
Hainan Naval incident: Beijing to USA-Back off–Can’t you read the sign “Sea of China is Chinese territory”?
Why the US gave up India as a strategic partner
India’s worst nightmares come true: Long term strategic malaise

U.S. policy in Pakistan, a major component of the new strategy, is largely unilateral. The European Union has an aid and trade relationship with the country, but few European governments outside of Britain have strong involvement there. CBS News

The policy should have included a huge component to build 6 new dams in Pakistan. 4000 more soldiers in Afghanistan achieve nothing.

Afghanistan defeat: British Failures of “the White Man’s burden”
Concerted Police Action, without a failed war, can solve Afghan terror
US AfPak policy review results mimic Chinese demads given to Hillary Force is all-conquering, but its victories are short-lived. ~Abraham Lincoln In 1821 The Taliban was a construct of the CIA and was armed by the CIA:–Congressman Dana RohrabacherObama’s Vietnam & Cambodiazation of the Afghan war Solutions to “Obama’s Vietnam” Kabul: The Final Spring Offensive? End of NATO? Afghanistan: The writing is on the wall. Can Obama read it? UK Brig. Smith: “We’re not going to win this [Afghan] war”
Failure and Defeat in Afghanistan: Inevitable Frustration & misdirected Payback for ally Pakistan US Charge of the Light Brigade into Pakistan is a US failure and has to stop
Pakistan’s do more list for the USA Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan & Swat run by Taliban Huge Migraine for India
Facing the Khyber poltergeist & Ganges hobgoblin NATO war: UK 1880 defeats in Afghanistan
The folly of the UKs “Charge of the Light Brigade” in Afghanistan AGAIN reminds us of Britian’s previous defeat in Afghainstan. Unfortunately the lessons of the unmitigated disaster of “Auckland’s Folly”, (First Anglo-Afghan War 1838–42) have not been taught to the Oxbridge students.
Bin Laden used Reagan’s USSR strategy to Destroy US Capitalism? Cambodiazation of the Afghan war Rescueing the Pashtuns of Afghania from Afghanistan
Unite! Erase the Durand LineSolution: Fixing “AfPak” expedites the inevitable union between Pakistan & Afghanistan The emerging “Leave Pakistan to Afghanistan” strategy goes mainstream–Extricating the US from the Lost in the Khyber