[R-G] Obama falls victim to propaganda

[Anthony Fenton]

Obama falls victim to propaganda
Before widening war in Afghanistan, there is much to consider
By ERIC MARGOLIS
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Margolis_Eric/2008/07/20/pf-6209056.html 
	

Barack Obama wants to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq and send them to  
Afghanistan, which he calls the real front on the "war on terror." He  
also has repeated threats to attack Pakistan "if necessary."

One understands Obama's need to sound macho. Rival John McCain has  
been beating his chest, proclaiming, "I know how to win wars." Polls  
show Americans trust McCain three to one over Obama as a war leader.  
Unfortunately, recent U.S. presidents seem to require small military  
conflicts to prove their political virility.

But Obama has long called the U.S.-led occupation of Afghanistan a  
"good war," a view most Americans and Canadians share. They see  
Afghanistan -- and now Pakistan -- as hotbeds of al-Qaida and Taliban  
terrorists that must be eradicated.

It is distressing to see Obama succumb to the blitz of war propaganda  
over Afghanistan and adopt George W. Bush's faux terminology of  
terrorism. Before Obama urges widening America's war there, he should  
consider:

- Al-Qaida never numbered more than 300 men. There are hardly any left  
in Afghanistan. Survivors scattered into Pakistan. Finding them is  
police and intelligence work, not a job for thousands more western  
troops.

- U.S. policy towards Afghanistan is driven by energy geopolitics.  
Pacification of rebellious Pashtun tribesmen is necessary in order to  
build energy pipelines south from the Caspian Basin. That is the  
primary strategic mission of U.S. and Canadian troops.

- Taliban fighters are not "terrorists." The Taliban was founded as a  
fundamentalist Muslim religious movement of Pashtun tribesmen to fight  
banditry, rape, drugs and Afghan Communists. The Taliban received  
millions in U.S. aid until four months before 9/11. It had no part in  
9/11 and knew nothing about it. The U.S. overthrow of the Taliban  
resulted in the Communists resuming control over half of Afghanistan.  
Under U.S. occupation, Afghanistan has become a narco state that  
supplies over 90% of the world's heroin.

PACIFICATION

- Pashtun tribes comprise half of Afghanistan's population, and 15% of  
neighbouring Pakistan's people. The western powers are involved in an  
old-fashioned, colonial-style pacification campaign against the  
Pashtun Taliban. Imperial Britain, the Soviets, and now the U.S. and  
its allies all employed the same colonial strategy: Using puppet  
rulers, local mercenary troops, and lavish bribes to enforce their  
will. Afghans who resist get bombed.

- Before urging expansion of the Afghan war, Obama should total up the  
bill for America's military misadventures. As of last January,  
according to the Pentagon and data revealed under the Freedom of  
Information Act, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars cost 72,043 American  
battlefield casualties. Veteran's Administration hospitals have  
treated 263,909 veterans from these wars and registered over 245,000  
disability claims.

No one knows how many Iraqis and Afghans have been killed. The number  
could be over one million. Just last week over 50 Afghans in a wedding  
party were killed by a U.S. air strike. But without the constant use  
of massive air power, including B1 bombers, the U.S. could not  
maintain its occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan.

- According to a Democratic congressional committee report, the two  
wars will cost $1.6 trillion by the end of 2008, or $16,500 per U.S.  
family of four -- not counting the cost of borrowing money to pay for  
the wars.

BOTH WRONG

Obama and McCain believe Afghan resistance can be crushed by more  
brute force. They are wrong. More western troops and more bombed  
villages will mean fiercer Afghan resistance.

The war is now seeping into Pakistan, a nation of 165 million. Obama's  
threats to attack Pakistan and go after its nuclear arsenal are  
reckless and extremely dangerous. He appears headed over the same  
cliff as those would-be "war presidents," Bush and McCain. As the head  
of NATO recently admitted, political settlement, not bombs, is the  
only way to end the unnecessary Afghan war.

Is Obama beginning to fall under the influence of the same military- 
petroleum complex that guided Bush's imperial-minded presidency?

Could Pakistan become a disaster for the Democrats as Iraq was for  
Republicans?