"The most suicide bombs since the US invasion, the greatest poppy yield in a decade, the highest level of attacks on NATO and Afghan forces since 2001, and proportional to the size of the force - Afghanistan now produces more US casualties than Iraq. But NATO which is known as ISAT here, the Pentagon, and even the Afghan government - they all believe the long term trends are good."There's the obvious problem of that "long term trend" wishful thinking...but what struck me about his list of negatives is that there is nothing about the horrid suffering of the Afghani civilians, which in 2007 was a problem: see this from HRW, this from IHT, and this from Marc Herold who has been documenting the Afghan slaughter since the invasion.
Since the beginning of "Operation Enduring Freedom" the US media has had a rather callous attitude toward the civilian suffering in Afghanistan as Marc Herold has pointed consistently
2 comments:
All these new kids on the block - that is, people who are professional know-nothings about Afghanistan, who are shamelessly fueled by the revisionist templates of Fukuyama'n Frumm, think that history is now irrelevant, and now, they naively think that Afghanistan is a place you can 'win'. That country is not, nor has it ever been, based on such a primitive polarity. Afghanistan is what it is, and it does not compute with these western media loser-types. Like Pakistan, they think that, just because the leaders speak English, they've got these troubled places all figured out. Armed with their little databases and access to 'specialists', NPR wastes our time with pontifications of bon-bon sized 'facts'. I couldn't be any more disgusted.
Minor typo; read: Fukuyama 'n Frumm
Post a Comment