Henk Ruyssenaars + Kaiser Health News
March 28th 2010 - Of course this so-called 'healthcare bill' is a hoax, and 'Kaiser Health News' again describes the shortcomings. And of course the big pharmaceutical firms wrote the bill, giving them still more profit. It was, as I wrote, a victory for Big Pharma, and this so called healthcare bill still leaves 23 million people out in the cold with no coverage at all. But paying more and more to the 'haves'...
This is part of what I wrote last March 22nd 2010: "This so called 'health care' is a hoax. It's 'wealth care'! Because contrary to what is said by the propaganda-media, all citizens of the U.S. are now, som 200 years later, obliged to pay premiums to Big Pharma. And most of those - and in reality it's at least fifty million neglected people - even couldn't pay the sky-high premiums for so called 'health care' one way or the other. Now they must, or get a fine... Victory? For whom? Who profits?
So now, thanks to Obama who's the 'front man' for the criminal cartel and the rest of the collaborators in the US, everybody must pay or get a fine. What a 'victory'! How the hell can this the world over be 'sold' as 'an overhaul'? As 'a reform for the better'?
People must wake up more and more to the ugly reality. Know that they are ruled by psychopathic murderers, thieves and robbers. The pharmaceutical firms - which are, and always have been, part and parcel of the criminal cartel - are killing the people which they first make sick, and making a lot of money on it, that's what. And nothing else." - [end quote]
The rest - and more - you can read here at Url.: http://forpressfound.livejournal.com/#post-forpressfound-30848
WHAT DIDN'T GET INTO THE HEALTHCARE BILL:
The death of Sen. Edward Kennedy and the tenor of tea party protests resulted in significant reductions.
BY JORDAN RAU
KAISER HEALTH NEWS - 28 March 2010 - WASHINGTON - In the year it took Congress to write and pass a healthcare overhaul, turbulent political shifts - including the Democrats' loss of the seat long held by the late Sen. Edward Kennedy and the rise of the tea party movement - forced critical compromises on the scope of legislation.
The downsized ambitions of the final package mean that 32 million more people - not the 37 million in the original proposals - will end up insured by 2019. Others will face greater financial strain than lawmakers originally envisioned.
The political developments are well-known: A group of six Democratic and Republican senators, led by Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., failed to forge a bipartisan agreement. Concerns about the federal deficit swelled. Grass-roots conservatives filled congressional town hall meetings in August and helped to propel Republican Scott Brown to victory in Massachusetts. That deprived Democrats of a filibuster-proof Senate majority and transformed them from confident victors of the 2008 elections to nervous incumbents.
Less widely understood are the adjustments the healthcare overhaul legislation underwent from July 2009, when Democratic leaders of the House of Representatives first introduced their ambitious proposal, to this past week, as the House passed the Senate bill and a related package of changes.
Those modifications will have major effects on Americans in years to come:
• The final package will leave 23 million people without coverage, nearly six million more than originally intended.
• Low-income workers receiving subsidies will end up paying more in premiums than they would have under the original House proposal; they also may have to pay more out of pocket on deductibles and co-insurance. However, the final version offers people significant financial protections that they don't have now.
• The final package will experiment with dozens of ways to slow the growth of medical costs, but lacks the most aggressive measures proposed during a year of negotiations.
WHAT PEOPLE WILL PAY
Under the final package, people earning twice the poverty level will have to pay 6.3 percent of their income toward premiums -- 1.3 percentage points more than they would have had to pay under the original House bill. That means a family of four earning $44,100 a year will have to pay $2,778 a year in premiums, $573 more than they would have under the initial House bill.
``There was a political calculation that they could raise this much revenue and have it be palatable politically, but that raising more would be too difficult,'' said Linda Blumberg, a senior fellow at the center-left Urban Institute.
While the original House bill limited out-of-pocket costs to $5,000 for individuals and $10,000 for families, the final version uses the Senate thresholds of $5,950 for individuals and $11,900 for most families. Some families receiving subsidies could end up spending as much as 22 percent of their incomes on healthcare premiums and costs. These financial protections -- as well as the premium subsidies -- will become weaker in future years if medical costs continue to outpace inflation.
Older people who are too young for Medicare -- those in their 50s and early 60s -- will face higher costs than under the House's initial bill, which proposed prohibiting insurers from charging this group more than twice what younger people pay. The final package allows them to charge three times as much. Still, that's much better than the higher premiums some older people face now.
23 MILLION LEFT OUT
Overall, 23 million people will still lack health coverage in 2019, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Many are illegal immigrants who would not have been covered under any version of the legislation. Others will choose to pay a fine rather than buy insurance. The rest will be excused from the mandate because it would cost them more than 8 percent of their incomes.
At the same time that lawmakers scaled back the financial protections for Americans, they also jettisoned several major provisions to control the ever-rising costs of health insurance.
Back in May, when lawmakers were drafting the healthcare bill, economists of differing perspectives told the Senate Finance Committee they agreed on one idea: making employer-sponsored healthcare insurance taxable. Not only would that generate $226 billion a year, the economists argued, but it also would give employers and consumers great incentive to choose cheaper insurance plans, pressuring providers to bring their costs down.
``It is the one thing, if we had been able to get some bipartisanship around it, that could have had a significant effect on cost,'' said James Capretta, who was a top budget official in President George W. Bush's administration and is now at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, a center-right research organization.
Kaiser Health News, an editorially independent news service, is a program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan healthcare policy research organization that isn't affiliated with Kaiser Permanente." - [and end]
Source: Miami Herald - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/ygtvn3k
'HEALTHCARE' BILL: LIES AND PROPAGANDA
And then of course there was more propaganda, amongst others via the broadcasting company al Jazeera: Video: "US passes landmark healthcare reforms." - Via YouTube too. - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/ydu6suv
The totally unreliable propagandistic Washington Post, as all others, wrote last week on the front page: "Obama lauds House for passing health care bill." And to the shame of those involved, there's a lot more the world over about this bad hoax to force even those people - who can absolutely not pay the inhuman premiums - to 'give' 'health care insurance.'
Look at the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle - Kansas City Star - Philadelphia Inquirer - The Guardian - all 'news' articles concerning the killers and profiteers! Some 'victory'! - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/yeewf3c
THE QUACKS OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
Did you know, by the way, that the AMA, the so-called American Medical Association which also is part and parcel of the criminal cartel and Big Pharma, was funded by David Rockefeller? Who put the biggest and most rotten quacks in the USA up front? Sick, sicker and sickest? And then turned the whole AMA into a money-making machine? Have a look. - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/ygpqgxn
But it's all long-term planning, this 'health' and 'wealth' care too, and done on purpose. As the late excellent researcher Eustace Mullins decades ago showed also in his book "Murder by Injection" concerning those 'butchers in white coats' which screwed and keep screwing the US populace. - Eustace Mullins - Google - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/yghu5as
The 'presstitutes' in the propaganda-media know that also this so-called 'healthcare' bill is a hoax, but globally they just go on with their brainwashing and indoctrination. People the world over must think that - contrary to reality - the Führers and the rest of the criminal cartel is 'civilized.' That's why this scam and hoax is so exaggerated.
It's not true, it is all the usual deception and omissions, but this criminal cartel and its media collaborators don't care how many more human beings will suffer and die.
The cartel's robbing, killing and plundering thieves think they 'own' the world as some kind of jewelry shop, and those money madmen 'run' what they see as a world asylum.
Those 'humanoids' who try to control and rule the world only think of slaves, power and profit. That's all what is on their inhuman and feeble minds. And most of those criminals are clearly psychopathic. They are: 'Beyond Insanity' as Amos M. Gunsberg wrote. - Url.: http://www.serendipity.li/bush/beyond_insanity.htm
* Obama/ Soetoro - Or whatever his name is: "Hey! Look! The CIA 'emperor' has no clothes!" - 'emperor' (In translation: German 'emperor' is 'Kaiser') - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/o55tpv
* TIME Poll - The global and malignant criminal cartel which tries to realize its hegemonic pipe-dream of power and profit's war machine poses the greatest danger to world peace. - Url.: http://www.time.com/time/europe/gdml/peace2003.html
FPF-COPYRIGHT NOTICE - In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107 - any copyrighted work in this message is distributed by the Foreign Press Foundation under fair use, without profit or payment, to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the information. Url.: http://tinyurl.com/3z3r6
Blog - Url.: http://forpressfound.livejournal.com/
FOREIGN PRESS FOUNDATION
Editor: Henk Ruyssenaars
http://tinyurl.com/2wegpc
The Netherlands
fpf@chello.nl
-0-
Showing posts with label drugs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drugs. Show all posts
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
AFGHANISTAN CONFERENCE LONDON: NO DRUGS, JUST OCCUPATION?
Henk Ruyssenaars + Chris Marsden
January 29th - 2010 - During the London conference concerning the armed robbery of Afghanistan, not a word was said about the fact that the criminal global cartel - via the greatest drug dealer on earth, the CIA - now has more than 90% of the world market in heroin in the bloody paws.
If you read those items concerning Afghanistan - that the CIA's managers for instance have forbidden the use of the opium destroying fungus 'Lotus Eater' plus the fact that 'Big Pharma' and their collaborators make billions in profits - you'll understand more of the fake conference in London. It was just a matter of dividing the cake. Read and weep!
* AFGHANISTAN: OPIUM AND THE 'LOTUS EATER' - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/yd8vuc2
* THE CIA IS THE WORLD'S BIGGEST DRUG DEALER - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/p93vvt
OPIUM WAR CRIMES IN AFGHANISTAN + 8 CIA SPOOKS DEAD - U.S. Major General Smedley Butler: "For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it." - Url.: http://forpressfound.livejournal.com/13304.html
Have you ever thought about how it's possible to do this illegal but enormous business in a war torn occupied country? Look at the big deals criminal cartel firms like SHELL, the Chinese or BP does in those occupied countries. Oil and drugs, that's where the enormous profits come from.
As their propaganda bureau Reuters published on Sunday, January 17, 2010: "Iraq: Shell and Petronas sign final Majnoon oil deal." - * One of biggest oilfields in world - * Iraq could become a top three oil producer - * Shell and Petronas to invest tens of billions - Url.: http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE60G06320100117
CHINA & BP FURTHER RAPE IRAQ - Url.:http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?id=234999;article=3045
And they all know what for instance was said already in September 2004: "The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has told the BBC the US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter. - Iraq war illegal, says Annan." - BBC Url.: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3661134.stm
Logically, and seeing what the war criminals do, any decent human being on earth knows that what's going on in the name of this criminal cartel, paid by the tax payers nota bene, is absolutely illegal and makes war criminals of all those who support this. Whatever their nationality.
They are all war criminals and must be punished as such as soon as humane laws are valid again. HR & war criminals - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/ye2zyys
And the millions of people? The cartel's managers and their armed and killing 'gofers' never care for one nanosecond about them. NEVER! Only profit counts for those criminals: strategically and/or financially.
You know what our problem is? We have never learned nor thought that this cartel - doing it already for such a long time to humanity - could and can be so intensely bad, so immensely rotten to the core as they are. - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/ylk3x2t
Another warning and more insight was given by Chris Marsden who wrote an article on this for WSWS: "London conference on Afghanistan: Occupation will last for years to come.
World Socialist Web Site - 29 January 2010 - The London conference on Afghanistan laid down a scenario for the country’s military occupation stretching over at least 5 years and, according to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, as long as 15 years.
Gone was President Barack Obama’s claim that withdrawal of US troops would begin by 2011, replaced by a region-by-region transfer of responsibility that will take several years and will be dictated by “conditions on the ground,” as determined by the military.
There is to be a concerted effort to incorporate various Afghan warlords presently associated with the Taliban insurgency into a power-sharing government with Karzai and split off upwards of 12,000 Afghan fighters, using a slush fund of over $650 million provided by the US, Japan, Britain, Germany and others. (Only $147 million of this has been pledged.) There will be a major military offensive to “convince” the Taliban that resistance is not an option.
[HR: Remember 'Big Brother'?: "All resistance is futile!"]
WSWS: "Regarding the international trust fund, Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown stated that its purpose was “to provide an economic alternative to those who have none,” other than participation in the insurgency.
Afghan President Karzai said, “To make our program a success, we hope that His Majesty King Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz of Saudi Arabia will kindly play a prominent role to guide and assist the peace process.” He pleaded with “all our neighbours, particularly Pakistan,” to “support our peace and reconciliation endeavours.”
Karzai has said that the establishment of a national council for peace, reconciliation and re-integration will be followed by a “peace jirga,” an assembly of elders, with King Abdullah playing a “prominent role.”
The main thrust of the policy is directed to various warlords, who will be offered roles in government. The cynicism involved in this plan is extraordinary, given that the war against Afghanistan was launched in 2001 on the pretext that the Taliban regime had to be overthrown because it sheltered Osama Bin Laden and had ties to Al Qaeda.
Bin Laden is now barely ever mentioned, while the US has been in direct negotiations with representatives of Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar and others—forces whom US Defence Secretary Robert Gates now describes as part of the “political fabric” of Afghanistan.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan, told the Financial Times prior to the London conference, “I think any Afghans can play a role if they focus on the future, and not the past.”
Five former senior Taliban officials have already been removed from a United Nations sanctions list to facilitate these manoeuvres.
The long-term aim is to consolidate the transformation of Afghanistan into a US-controlled protectorate, ruling through a power-sharing client regime. In the next period, however, the emphasis is on an escalation of the US-led military offensive, using the 110,000 troops that will be stationed there after Obama’s surge. Brown threatened that “for those insurgents who refuse to accept the conditions for reintegration, we have no choice but to pursue them militarily.”
Major Gen. Nick Carter, the commander of 45,000 NATO troops in Helmand province, announced that a major offensive would be launched to “assert the control” of the Afghan government in areas currently controlled by the Taliban. The operation will involve elements of the 10,000 British troops in Helmand and 13,000 newly arrived US Marines.
An unnamed London diplomat described this as “a carrot-and-stick approach.” He elaborated: “On the ground, there will be up to 40,000 more troops this year making things uncomfortable for the Taliban. The carrot is the money and a place within the power structure of Afghanistan.”
In truth, the “carrot” is being offered to the warlords, while the stick will be applied to insurgents and Afghan civilians alike.
This effort to militarily demoralise the Taliban and incorporate sections into government is conceived of as spanning at least three years, with Afghan forces only “taking responsibility for physical security within five years.” Even so, Brown repeatedly refused to give a timetable for withdrawal, insisting that this depended on meeting conditions so that “security can be taken over by the Afghans in the provinces in which we operate.”
McChrystal also told the Financial Times, “I believe that it will be more conditions-based, there will be an agreement on certain conditions driving the transitions.”
In a BBC interview broadcast before the conference started, Karzai was even less optimistic, stating, “With regard to training and equipping the Afghan security forces, 5 to 10 years would be sufficient. With regard to sustaining them… the time period extends to 10 to 15 years.” - [ ]
HR: BBC - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/y9eye3n
WSWS: "The London conference was testimony to how anxious the world’s major powers are to demonstrate their readiness to lend support to the US intervention in Afghanistan. Despite growing concerns that the occupation is becoming a quagmire, sucking in troops and costing vast sums, no one wants to openly antagonise Washington or be excluded from establishing his own influence within strategic oil- and gas-rich regions neighbouring Afghanistan.
Sixty-plus nations attended the conference, as well as representatives from NATO, the United Nations, the European Union and the World Bank." - [ ]
HR - Google search: Web Results 1 - 10 of about 2,960 for Ruyssenaars +"World Bank" - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/ygzaase
WSWS: "Brown boasted that more than 8,000 extra NATO troops had been committed to Afghanistan since Obama announced the US surge last year. Four more countries have joined the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF)—Armenia, Mongolia, Montenegro and South Korea, which are all non-NATO members. They have pledged nearly 800 additional troops between them, with the majority coming from South Korea. This means that there are now 47 countries involved in Afghanistan. The day before the London conference, Germany pledged an additional 500 troops.
None of this in the long-term compensates for the mounting problems facing the US in Afghanistan. Washington remains to a large degree dependent on Karzai, whose corrupt regime is massively unpopular and remains in power only thanks to Western-sanctioned electoral fraud.
The Taliban are far from demonstrably losing the military struggle, and are a long way from accepting a role as a US proxy. A Taliban statement denounced the London conference as a “waste of time” aimed at justifying foreign occupation. It declared, “The recent attacks in Kabul were, in fact, a message for the London conference that the Taliban are not ready to negotiate and do not desire to set up a regime in collaboration with those who bear the marks of slavery to the occupiers.”
As to the regional powers, Iran, which is faced with growing threats from Washington and London, did not attend the conference, which it denounced for its focus on increasing military action in Afghanistan. Pakistan did attend, but its Inter Services Intelligence agency is tied to the Taliban, and Islamabad is also faced with growing hostility from the US.
Prior to the conference, the New York Times published two classified memos from Karl Eikenberry, the United States ambassador in Kabul, that gave a devastating verdict on the situation confronting America in Afghanistan. Eikenberry, a retired army lieutenant general, served three years in Afghanistan over the course of two separate tours of duty, and was responsible during 2002-2003 for rebuilding Afghan security forces. He then served 18 months (2005-2007) as commander of US forces in Afghanistan.
Written last November as an argument against McChrystal’s proposal for a surge, Eikenberry warned that deploying large American reinforcements would cost tens of billions of dollars and deepen the Karzai government’s dependence on the US, making it “difficult, if not impossible, to bring our people home on a reasonable timetable.”
He described Karzai as “not an adequate strategic partner,” who was incapable of taking responsibility and exerting sovereignty. “He and much of his circle do not want the US to leave and are only too happy to see us invest further,” he wrote. “They assume we covet their territory for a never-ending ‘war on terror’ and for military bases to use against surrounding powers.”
Tellingly, he warned, “Pakistan will remain the single greatest source of Afghan instability so long as the border sanctuaries remain.” He added, “As we contemplate greatly expanding our presence in Afghanistan, the better answer to our difficulties could well be to further ratchet up our engagement in Pakistan,” raising the clear possibility of an extension of military hostilities.
The most dangerous factors threatening the plans of Obama, Brown, et al are the broad opposition among the Afghan people to the occupation and the massive unpopularity of the war amongst the working people of the US and Europe."
[and end] - Source: WSWS - Url.: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jan2010/afgh-j29.shtml
HR: "War," as Gen. Butler said, "is a racket."
It's indeed a criminal cartel racket.
They'll kill for power and profit!
HR
Related:
* HR & the Islamic Community Net: The Golden Triangle, US/UK banks: record opium harvest in Afghanistan - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/5f4u5v
* Report finds Afghanistan is on the verge of becoming a narcotics state - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/fwycv
* Research concerning Gary Webb, one of many who was 'suicided' +CIA +drugs - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/oj97w
* Google search: Web Results 1 - 10 of about 6,180 for "World Health Organisation" +Afghanistan +opium - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/yhw8q58
HR
January 29th - 2010 - During the London conference concerning the armed robbery of Afghanistan, not a word was said about the fact that the criminal global cartel - via the greatest drug dealer on earth, the CIA - now has more than 90% of the world market in heroin in the bloody paws.
If you read those items concerning Afghanistan - that the CIA's managers for instance have forbidden the use of the opium destroying fungus 'Lotus Eater' plus the fact that 'Big Pharma' and their collaborators make billions in profits - you'll understand more of the fake conference in London. It was just a matter of dividing the cake. Read and weep!
* AFGHANISTAN: OPIUM AND THE 'LOTUS EATER' - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/yd8vuc2
* THE CIA IS THE WORLD'S BIGGEST DRUG DEALER - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/p93vvt
OPIUM WAR CRIMES IN AFGHANISTAN + 8 CIA SPOOKS DEAD - U.S. Major General Smedley Butler: "For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it." - Url.: http://forpressfound.livejournal.com/13304.html
Have you ever thought about how it's possible to do this illegal but enormous business in a war torn occupied country? Look at the big deals criminal cartel firms like SHELL, the Chinese or BP does in those occupied countries. Oil and drugs, that's where the enormous profits come from.
As their propaganda bureau Reuters published on Sunday, January 17, 2010: "Iraq: Shell and Petronas sign final Majnoon oil deal." - * One of biggest oilfields in world - * Iraq could become a top three oil producer - * Shell and Petronas to invest tens of billions - Url.: http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE60G06320100117
CHINA & BP FURTHER RAPE IRAQ - Url.:http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?id=234999;article=3045
And they all know what for instance was said already in September 2004: "The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has told the BBC the US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter. - Iraq war illegal, says Annan." - BBC Url.: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3661134.stm
Logically, and seeing what the war criminals do, any decent human being on earth knows that what's going on in the name of this criminal cartel, paid by the tax payers nota bene, is absolutely illegal and makes war criminals of all those who support this. Whatever their nationality.
They are all war criminals and must be punished as such as soon as humane laws are valid again. HR & war criminals - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/ye2zyys
And the millions of people? The cartel's managers and their armed and killing 'gofers' never care for one nanosecond about them. NEVER! Only profit counts for those criminals: strategically and/or financially.
You know what our problem is? We have never learned nor thought that this cartel - doing it already for such a long time to humanity - could and can be so intensely bad, so immensely rotten to the core as they are. - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/ylk3x2t
Another warning and more insight was given by Chris Marsden who wrote an article on this for WSWS: "London conference on Afghanistan: Occupation will last for years to come.
World Socialist Web Site - 29 January 2010 - The London conference on Afghanistan laid down a scenario for the country’s military occupation stretching over at least 5 years and, according to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, as long as 15 years.
Gone was President Barack Obama’s claim that withdrawal of US troops would begin by 2011, replaced by a region-by-region transfer of responsibility that will take several years and will be dictated by “conditions on the ground,” as determined by the military.
There is to be a concerted effort to incorporate various Afghan warlords presently associated with the Taliban insurgency into a power-sharing government with Karzai and split off upwards of 12,000 Afghan fighters, using a slush fund of over $650 million provided by the US, Japan, Britain, Germany and others. (Only $147 million of this has been pledged.) There will be a major military offensive to “convince” the Taliban that resistance is not an option.
[HR: Remember 'Big Brother'?: "All resistance is futile!"]
WSWS: "Regarding the international trust fund, Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown stated that its purpose was “to provide an economic alternative to those who have none,” other than participation in the insurgency.
Afghan President Karzai said, “To make our program a success, we hope that His Majesty King Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz of Saudi Arabia will kindly play a prominent role to guide and assist the peace process.” He pleaded with “all our neighbours, particularly Pakistan,” to “support our peace and reconciliation endeavours.”
Karzai has said that the establishment of a national council for peace, reconciliation and re-integration will be followed by a “peace jirga,” an assembly of elders, with King Abdullah playing a “prominent role.”
The main thrust of the policy is directed to various warlords, who will be offered roles in government. The cynicism involved in this plan is extraordinary, given that the war against Afghanistan was launched in 2001 on the pretext that the Taliban regime had to be overthrown because it sheltered Osama Bin Laden and had ties to Al Qaeda.
Bin Laden is now barely ever mentioned, while the US has been in direct negotiations with representatives of Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar and others—forces whom US Defence Secretary Robert Gates now describes as part of the “political fabric” of Afghanistan.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan, told the Financial Times prior to the London conference, “I think any Afghans can play a role if they focus on the future, and not the past.”
Five former senior Taliban officials have already been removed from a United Nations sanctions list to facilitate these manoeuvres.
The long-term aim is to consolidate the transformation of Afghanistan into a US-controlled protectorate, ruling through a power-sharing client regime. In the next period, however, the emphasis is on an escalation of the US-led military offensive, using the 110,000 troops that will be stationed there after Obama’s surge. Brown threatened that “for those insurgents who refuse to accept the conditions for reintegration, we have no choice but to pursue them militarily.”
Major Gen. Nick Carter, the commander of 45,000 NATO troops in Helmand province, announced that a major offensive would be launched to “assert the control” of the Afghan government in areas currently controlled by the Taliban. The operation will involve elements of the 10,000 British troops in Helmand and 13,000 newly arrived US Marines.
An unnamed London diplomat described this as “a carrot-and-stick approach.” He elaborated: “On the ground, there will be up to 40,000 more troops this year making things uncomfortable for the Taliban. The carrot is the money and a place within the power structure of Afghanistan.”
In truth, the “carrot” is being offered to the warlords, while the stick will be applied to insurgents and Afghan civilians alike.
This effort to militarily demoralise the Taliban and incorporate sections into government is conceived of as spanning at least three years, with Afghan forces only “taking responsibility for physical security within five years.” Even so, Brown repeatedly refused to give a timetable for withdrawal, insisting that this depended on meeting conditions so that “security can be taken over by the Afghans in the provinces in which we operate.”
McChrystal also told the Financial Times, “I believe that it will be more conditions-based, there will be an agreement on certain conditions driving the transitions.”
In a BBC interview broadcast before the conference started, Karzai was even less optimistic, stating, “With regard to training and equipping the Afghan security forces, 5 to 10 years would be sufficient. With regard to sustaining them… the time period extends to 10 to 15 years.” - [ ]
HR: BBC - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/y9eye3n
WSWS: "The London conference was testimony to how anxious the world’s major powers are to demonstrate their readiness to lend support to the US intervention in Afghanistan. Despite growing concerns that the occupation is becoming a quagmire, sucking in troops and costing vast sums, no one wants to openly antagonise Washington or be excluded from establishing his own influence within strategic oil- and gas-rich regions neighbouring Afghanistan.
Sixty-plus nations attended the conference, as well as representatives from NATO, the United Nations, the European Union and the World Bank." - [ ]
HR - Google search: Web Results 1 - 10 of about 2,960 for Ruyssenaars +"World Bank" - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/ygzaase
WSWS: "Brown boasted that more than 8,000 extra NATO troops had been committed to Afghanistan since Obama announced the US surge last year. Four more countries have joined the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF)—Armenia, Mongolia, Montenegro and South Korea, which are all non-NATO members. They have pledged nearly 800 additional troops between them, with the majority coming from South Korea. This means that there are now 47 countries involved in Afghanistan. The day before the London conference, Germany pledged an additional 500 troops.
None of this in the long-term compensates for the mounting problems facing the US in Afghanistan. Washington remains to a large degree dependent on Karzai, whose corrupt regime is massively unpopular and remains in power only thanks to Western-sanctioned electoral fraud.
The Taliban are far from demonstrably losing the military struggle, and are a long way from accepting a role as a US proxy. A Taliban statement denounced the London conference as a “waste of time” aimed at justifying foreign occupation. It declared, “The recent attacks in Kabul were, in fact, a message for the London conference that the Taliban are not ready to negotiate and do not desire to set up a regime in collaboration with those who bear the marks of slavery to the occupiers.”
As to the regional powers, Iran, which is faced with growing threats from Washington and London, did not attend the conference, which it denounced for its focus on increasing military action in Afghanistan. Pakistan did attend, but its Inter Services Intelligence agency is tied to the Taliban, and Islamabad is also faced with growing hostility from the US.
Prior to the conference, the New York Times published two classified memos from Karl Eikenberry, the United States ambassador in Kabul, that gave a devastating verdict on the situation confronting America in Afghanistan. Eikenberry, a retired army lieutenant general, served three years in Afghanistan over the course of two separate tours of duty, and was responsible during 2002-2003 for rebuilding Afghan security forces. He then served 18 months (2005-2007) as commander of US forces in Afghanistan.
Written last November as an argument against McChrystal’s proposal for a surge, Eikenberry warned that deploying large American reinforcements would cost tens of billions of dollars and deepen the Karzai government’s dependence on the US, making it “difficult, if not impossible, to bring our people home on a reasonable timetable.”
He described Karzai as “not an adequate strategic partner,” who was incapable of taking responsibility and exerting sovereignty. “He and much of his circle do not want the US to leave and are only too happy to see us invest further,” he wrote. “They assume we covet their territory for a never-ending ‘war on terror’ and for military bases to use against surrounding powers.”
Tellingly, he warned, “Pakistan will remain the single greatest source of Afghan instability so long as the border sanctuaries remain.” He added, “As we contemplate greatly expanding our presence in Afghanistan, the better answer to our difficulties could well be to further ratchet up our engagement in Pakistan,” raising the clear possibility of an extension of military hostilities.
The most dangerous factors threatening the plans of Obama, Brown, et al are the broad opposition among the Afghan people to the occupation and the massive unpopularity of the war amongst the working people of the US and Europe."
[and end] - Source: WSWS - Url.: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jan2010/afgh-j29.shtml
HR: "War," as Gen. Butler said, "is a racket."
It's indeed a criminal cartel racket.
They'll kill for power and profit!
HR
Related:
* HR & the Islamic Community Net: The Golden Triangle, US/UK banks: record opium harvest in Afghanistan - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/5f4u5v
* Report finds Afghanistan is on the verge of becoming a narcotics state - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/fwycv
* Research concerning Gary Webb, one of many who was 'suicided' +CIA +drugs - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/oj97w
* Google search: Web Results 1 - 10 of about 6,180 for "World Health Organisation" +Afghanistan +opium - Url.: http://tinyurl.com/yhw8q58
HR
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)