|
The MoA Week In Review – OT 2021-072
Last week's posts at Moon of Alabama:
—
Other issues:
Covid-19:
Afghanistan:
- In Panjshir, Few Signs of an Active Resistance, or Any Fight at All – New York Times
- In Rural Afghanistan, War Remnants Everywhere, but no Shooting or Checkpoints – New York Times
> In this now-sleepy valley, the main landmark is a hospital founded in 1989 by a German woman, Karla Schefter. Today, the hospital is supported by the Committee for Medical and Humanitarian Aid in Afghanistan, which relies on private donations.
Faridullah Rahimi, a doctor at the facility, said that in his 22 years there, this was the first time there were no patients with conflict-related injuries. <
False Narratives:
- 20 Years On, the War on Terror Grinds Along, With No End in Sight – New York Times
The failures in Iraq and Afghanistan obscure what experts say is the striking success of a multilateral effort that extends to as many as 85 countries.
Stephanie Savell @stephsavell – 16:57 UTC · Sep 17, 2021
While I am glad that the New York Times used my research to show that the “War on Terror grinds on” in 85 countries, the argument that drives this article is misleading and is not based on evidence. Here’s why. [THREAD] 1/
- To the Editor – Stephanie Savell / NYT
> U.S. counterterrorism operations, especially drone strikes, cause blowback. Worldwide, there are more Islamist militant groups, and more recruits to those groups, than there were before 9/11. Historical research shows that a military approach has hardly ever been effective in addressing terrorist violence.
It is alarming that this article gives the impression that the United States should engage in these counterterrorism operations in many countries, just as the U.S. is drawing down in Afghanistan. <
Use as open thread …
@JackRabbit, previous thread-end.
Thanks for the clarifications. For the benefit of other readers, I was “playing back” what what I thought JR said in a previous exchange.
Tom : Fear is the major obstacle to understanding Empire
JR: I didn’t say that. Fear is an obstacle to acting, not understanding.
Guilt/self-interest is an obstacle to understanding though, as in the saying: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
========
Tom, again attempting to replay what he thought JR said: Empire doesn’t care about individual action – no threat
JackRabbit: I didn’t say that. I said they manage the “little people”.
Clearly, individuals like Assange and Snowden have been deemed threats.
===== Some rejoinder to JackRabbit:
Fear is indeed an obstacle to understanding, JR. Fear prevents people from looking in places where they think there’s danger.
Let’s take a closer look at the instances of Assange and Snowden. These guys did major beehive-kicking. They are extraordinary / extreme cases, and so are not great indices of the Empire’s response to a lowly “little people” like me trying to figure out if there’s truly an Empire entity, if it has discernible structure, components/function, inter-connect (supply and comm), and so forth.
Taking this subject a few steps further…there seems to be a few key questions I must ask myself:
a. If I knew Empires’ goals, architecture (structure, component-function) and interconnect, how would that affect my behavior? What would I do differently if I had that info?
b. Is fear keeping me stuck in a limbo-land of uncertainty? Is there a way to manage the fear? How does one “manage” fear? Well you scale it, ID the consequences of failure/reprisal, the likelihood of that reprisal, and the actions to _not_ take in order to invite that reprisal. That’s what I’m trying to suss out, JackRabbit. Trying to sketch out the morphology of this fear-thing.
Those are interesting questions. Over the course of the next few weeks, I’ll continue to mull them over, and see what comes of it.
Now, here’s another thought experiment. Instead of framing the situation as “I must avoid/fear/run from Empire et. al”, e.g. “what am I trying to avoid”…what if I frame the situation as:
“What am I trying to _get_?”
No doubt you’ll recall the 60s and the hippies, and the free love and wonderful nirvana that seemed so close at hand. The lesson I learned from the 60s is that being a protest movement isn’t all that effective _unless and until_ one can formulate _and then implement_ an alternative.
And this is where the wheels usually come off the wagon with a thud.
My general instinct is to focus on the alternatives, and opt _myself_ into them. There are many on the MOA board – Juliania, James, Karlof1, come immediately to mind..there are several others… who seem to be struggling mightily to define an alternative.
Remember Buckminster Fuller who said ““You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
I’ll stop there, on that subject for now, and invite yours or anyone else’s commentary.
======
And to PeterAU1, who said the Anglosphere is fighting a war of survival, and that econ was not relevant/not the main theater of operations…
I say that’s not so at all. It’s mighty tough to project force around the world when your economy is collapsing around you, Peter. The West, and the U.S. to a very significant degree is on thin economic ice. And they know it quite well.
Trump: You EC, you pay for your protection! Give us money!
Trump: You Saudis! you pay for your protection! Give us money!
Biden: We need to get out of these endless wars.
Shake-down, shake-down, cut-loss. Hmmm.
PeterAU1, why do you think the U.S. can continue to spend at current levels? I’m not seeing that as possible. We’re one big market correction, failed Treasury issue, currency exchange-rate correction, trade war with China away from “emperor has no clothes” moment. The world knows it, we know it. It’s out there.
The economy and the global faith in the U.S. financial system, and the buying-power that provides, is on thin ice. No money, no force projection. It’s wobbling.
Posted by: Tom Pfotzer | Sep 19 2021 22:00 utc | 82
Karlof, thanks for your comments at 88 and 92.
About the SCO summit: an interesting point for me, which you may be also aware of, is that of a meeting on the sidelines of the quartet, Russia, China, Iran and Pakistan on the Afghanistan issue. A joint statement was issued!
The Ministers emphasized that the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Afghanistan should be respected, the basic principle of “Afghan-led, Afghan-owned” should be implemented, and the rights to pursue peace, stability, development and prosperity by the Afghan people should be maintained.
[…]
The Ministers decided to continue coordination between Russia, China, Pakistan and Iran on Afghanistan and hold meetings at the ministerial, special envoy and the ambassadorial levels in due course.
I think this shows clearly who has taken the wheel on Afghanistan. As many of us commented in recent weeks, the main players are on the same page!
Bhadrakumar has his usual silly take on the summit, claiming that India played the spoiler in terms of group unanimity on Afghanistan, and this is true…but he wades firmly into clownworld territory by denigrating the SCO as somehow neutered by India’s proxy antics for the US.
This is quite stupid, and is one of the blinders of Bhadrakumar, who still imagines the US is some kind of big player in the region—which is completely DELUSIONAL.
The calibrated US strategy vis-a-vis the Taliban aims at American reentry into the Afghan theatre so that the Pentagon and the CIA can pursue the “strategic competition” with Russia and China and destabilise Iran.
Wow! Talk about a complete BONEHEAD. How does he imagine the US will ‘get back’ into the Afghan ‘theater’? Beam me up Scotty?
Not a single country bordering Afghanistan, a LAND-LOCKED country, is willing to give the US the time of day on Afghanistan. Much less roll out the red carpet, so the decrepit paper empire can bomb Afghanistan!
But fear not, Bhadrakumar, who apparently doesn’t know how to read a map, makes a big deal out of Blinken and Modi’s scheme to use India [which doesn’t border Afghanistan.
the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken disclosed this week in Congressional hearings in Washington that Biden Administration is engaged “deeply” in discussions with India for facilitating the US’ “over-the-horizon” attacks on Afghan targets that are being planned.
That kind of clinical-level delusion is simply pathetic. Over-the-horizon my ass. There is no way to get to Afghanistan from India, without overflying Pakistani-controlled territory. THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN!
Not now. Not anymore. Imran Khan has made that more than clear. And we see that this new quartet has come together with a purpose.
Btw, a good piece on the state of Pak-US relations in the journal NEO: The Gap between Washington and Islamabad is Widening
As is often the case with the clown Bhadrakumar, he does sometimes snap back to reality and provides some coherent and relevant info:
The Indian stance is contrary to the approach of not only Russia and China, but Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, the two biggest Central Asian states, as well.
He goes on to quote the Uzbek president, urging engagement with the Taliban, and the Kazakh president also, in even stronger terms.
Pakistani PM Imran Khan has had a “lengthy” meeting with Tajik president Emomali Rahmon and he subsequently told the Kremlin’s RT channel that he is working with Afghanistan’s neighbours to determine what the current setup in Kabul can do in order to gain the international community’s recognition.
Like I said, everyone on the same page. The idea that the US is going to play any role at all is nil. It is a huge defeat for the unraveling empire, and everyone is savoring it quite sweetly!
Posted by: Gordog | Sep 20 2021 0:00 utc | 99
|
