This is an encouraging article of good sense in the sea of foolishness that has overtaken the Howard and the Rudd/Gillard governments since Bush, Blair, Howard and others morphed the crime of 9/11 into a war. Eventually we will bring our soldiers home from the AfPac theater, and when we do, we will leave behind all the conditions needed for a civil war. That civil war will happen.
Could it be possible to misread a situation more thoroughly than we in the west have misread the Islamic world? Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. All in meltdown and none helped by our interference. Lebanon and Jordan are not far behind, and no one wants to talk with Iran, arguably the closest we have to a natural ally in that world.
Meanwhile, relations with our near neighbors Malaysia and Indonesia are being dragged through the mud over asylums seekers and live cattle exports respectively.
Does no one in Canberra realize the precarious position Australia is now in? The next time Hillary Clinton comes to town, ask her to pay for her own hotel room. She won't come back, and that will be a good thing.

Our contribution in Afganistan should be entirely projects that win hearts and minds. Leave military action to the Afghans. If we want to give military training, then provide it to their recruits in Australia.

If we want to help Afghanistanis and to be regarded as an honest and true friend in a time of great hardship, then shouldn't we be helping to equip our partners in peace by providing the resources in fighting corruption, exposing and punishing corruption, strengthening the rule of law, and helping local officials to tackle discrimination, building free speech into the media, establishing human rights protections and efforts to provide employment skills.

Why not provide business opportunities for the population and develop two way trade and a better cultural understanding between Australia and Afghanistan?

Gillard and Abbott don't get it. They think that by supporting the USA with our military participation and death toll, we have proved we are best of friends. Too bad that the best interests of Afghans don't figure highly in their moronic militaristic calculus.

Hi Bruce

A good article in line with my comment on Friday's article which highlighted "stay the course". See below:

"LETS HOPE OUR LEADERS CAN DROP SAD U.S. SAYINGS

I'm hoping that the new Chief of the Defence Force and Minister Smith will not insult all Australians with that brainless excuse for destroyed lives "stay the course". I've heard it before from several [recently] serving officers - probably 'all the way with the USA' [Jim] Molan?

Both Canada and the Netherlands (which left Afghanistan) have suffered years longer than Australian forces. Some Canadians (who have lost more than [150]) and Dutch pro-war advocates clutched for reasons to stay in Afghanistan. However no pro-war advocate can genuinely locate a reason for fighting Afghans other than being there because America wants our countries to be there - and we have to be loyal to the world's most powerful Army.

Our flags flying alongside America's are a diplomatic cover to disguise America's particular national strategic reasons for having us all in Afghanistan indefinitely. If counter-terrorism was the reason then America could easily run a counter-terrorism campaign on its own with just a few thousand troops rather than a full-fledged counter-insurgency with over 100,000 troops and us and NATO.

The political gamesmanship of the Afghan campaign is revealed in Obama's apparently prescient decision in 2009-10, that 2 years hence, that is next year (2012) 30,000 US troops could and will be 'de-surged' back to America. This return will symbolize Obama's sound leadership in war (essential for continuing US Presidents) just before the 2012 US Presidential Election. Funny forward thinking that.

We haven't heard "stay the course" from our new Defence Chief as each of our brave troops body's return. The Chief looks far too wise, and humane, to echo other leader's lies, I hope.

Peter Coates
http://gentleseas.blogspot.com/
Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 3 June 2011 5:44:28 PM"

It is impossible to challenge anything said on this subject, both in the article and (to date) every comment made.

If there was ever going to be a victory fighting anyone in Afghanistan it would have been the Russians who committed so many troops and armaments to their battle. In the end, a combination of high casualties, deteriorating morale and real money brought this to a "tail between the legs" withdrawal, just as we will see in just a matter of time when this US dalliance either loses its charm to the militarists, the demand for drugs dries up, (currently under the protection of the US Forces) or someone who has a level of financial credibility adds up the cost, not in lives, they're par for the course and therefore acceptable,(hardly get a mention these days), but in deteriorating dollars.
The US just has to stop spending sooner or later

Something else will soon take America's fancy. There are many theatres in which the US would love to play their destabilising games, yes, some with oil, and one of the "emerging" countries such as Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, and/or four or five others will make the mistake of accepting American "friendship" to fight their battles and they will be off again on another burst of Imperialism, as the UK was doing, 150 years ago, creating empires. We are still part of it, have been since 1788 now with an old Queen and all the same trimmings.

The sideshow funerals for our young men with the public speeches, respectable deep voice and serious countenance for Gillard as she waddles from one to the next , mouthing “staying the distance” yet again together with other puerile inanities, her personal trademark.

The reality is that we could be a force for good in our own little backyard instead of playing what started as the Howard sycophantic ‘man of steel’, morphing into a Gillard “America can do anything”, taking our place in history again as the tail on the US attack dog, shedding all our self-respect along the way

This is of course related to Fridays essay about how right-wing populist media functions.
Remembering that such media was, and still is, beating the never ending "war against terror" war drums. They were also describing those who opposed the war effort as being un or anti Australian and American. You know, the "self-loathing" cafe-latte and Chardonay swilling "elites".

Very much like Cate Blanchett has been vilified in recent days. As though being relatively rich, and successful disqualifies someone from participating in the politics of persuasion.

"those who opposed the war effort as being un or anti Australian and American"

Yes the old 'with us or against us' diatribe.

I had no problems supporting the original mission in Afghanistan to take out OBL and the taliban.

However the detour into Iraq stuffed it all up and we no longer have any business being there.

It's an insult for our troops to clean up after failed neocons.

This was a useful article but like sso many contributions to the issue fails to acknowledge the origins of the current war. It did not begin with the so-called terror attacks of 9/11. Rather American interference in Afghanistan's affairs really began in the 1970s when Brzezinski persuaded Carter to follow a plan that would give the Russians "their own Vietnam". The Americans teamed with fundamentalist Islamists to undermine the leftist government of Afghanistan which was pursuing such radical policies as education for women, trade union rights, minimum wages etc. Space precludes further analysis on this point, but those truly interested in how we got into this shambles should read Fitzgerald & Gould's Afghanistan's Untold Story and Peter Dale Scott's American War Machine.
The decision to attack Afghanistan was made before the events of 9/11 and had more to do with the politics of oil,drugs and geostrategic aims of the US than the nominal reason of the Taliban government allegedly sheltering the perpetrators of 9/11. That wasn't true, but even if it was there was no justification in international law for the attack much less the occupation and continued ravaging of that country.
Gillard neither knows nor cares about such issues and the Coalition is no better. Thus she is never challenged on the appalling triteness of her views and policies as other writers above have noted.

...All the points of this article state the obvious and it does not present any new approach, or new information, relevant to countries occupied by the USA. Using the death of the latest two Australian soldiers in Afghanistan to highlight a perceived conspiracy theory, which accuses the Australian Government of hiding the truth from public view, is weak.

...Whether Bruce Haige agrees to the ideology of the West or not, the Middle East presents the front line between communism and the West. This is a front line controlled by despot regimes knowing nothing but war. Including war on their own populations, as an acceptable vehicle for maintaining that power, and, of course, controlling the vital oil fields so vital to our existence in the West. The US maintains a war of Ideology which has raged since cessation of hostilities of WW2: A war in which America invested the lives of 450 thousand servicemen and women, towards the freedom of the West.

...Another 37 thousand Americans died in the Korean conflict; and in a continuation of holding the line of the Western Ideology, Vietnam conflict inflicted another 58 thousand deaths of Americans in that war. If we compare the losses in the Iraqi war, at five thousand, and the contribution to Western freedom in Afghanistan, another fifteen hundred deaths, They rate as small.

...Australia has an obligation, as a member of the Western allegance, to face the foes with the same courage and determination exhibited by our allies, the US. Where is the fault?

The Taliban offered to give up OBL if the US could offer evidence of his role in 9/11. No evidence was forthcoming.
There was no case for the invasion of Afghanistan in the first place, and there is no case for the continuing occupation.
If the West is concerned about the status of women, why did it foster the defeat of the Soviet presence which was a modernising force?
Meanwhile the father of the Taliban, Zbigniew Bzrezinski, sleeps soundly in his bed, while thousands of innocents die for this hangover from Cold War madness.

Here is a passage from today's release from Veterans Today in the US, which is clear enough.

Gordon Duff....

"President Obama is now exploring avenues for a faster withdrawal from Afghanistan. American is flat broke, busted and our allies in Afghanistan have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they are far worse than our enemies. Karzai can’t bring his army up to speed because he is an American kleptocrat and oil company stooge making presidential noises nobody wants to hear.

A bigger issue we wish the president would face is the farcical nature of the war itself. Notwithstanding that Osama bin Laden was never a terrorist leader, died in 2001 and never took credit for 9/11 despite Barak Obama's entire Pakistan charade. Overthrowing a government whose only crime was tough oil company negotiations isn’t a first for America. Neither is the corruption and drug dealing that followed the American occupation. Still going strong.

This isn’t a war, it was and is an occupation. There was no substantive enemy to fight, not until we occupied the country and put a usurper into office. Then the people rose against us, kicked our tail and here we are, years later doing the Vietnam thing again.
If Obama had done what was right, investigate 9/11, and talk facts instead of his “you can’t handle the truth” game, we could have cleaned our own house back here instead of losing thousands and killing countless innocents.
When you take over office from a pack of war criminals, (you can’t call Bush and gang anything else), you don’t do more of the same. Doing what war criminals do, imprison, torture, murder, wage aggressive war, this makes you a war criminal too.
How must it feel having a Nobel Peace Prize when you can read the papers every day and learn how many children you have killed?"

Anyone see the irony here?

Yet another Australian death today. Another sad indictment of Howard's ego and Gillard's personal agenda as a stupid US sycophant, both a disgrace, unworthy of being called patriotic Australians.

rexw:

...If you read the list of comparative war causalities in my post above, it may allay fears that the Afghanistan war is not, in anyway, resembling another Vietnam.

...I believe veterans certainly have a right to voice opinion, but not the right to a casting vote on the subject of “reasons” for war, as you imply: After all, joining the services both here and in the US is a voluntary choice.

...It appears to me a bit late to complain about a dislike of a war (as does this letter from the veterans), after freely volunteering. The time for protest in this case, is before the event wouldn’t you agree?

The Mindless Mantra: Peace Activism.

Terrorism is a product of power struggles within failed States. It is often exacerbated by the presence of foreign troops but only to the extent that we are getting in the way of “their” struggle for power. Terrorists are not willing to go to the ballot box as it is contrary to their interests.

Unfortunately for the “great causes”, the international activism industry is, at every level, miserably inept, emotionally dysfunctional, ill informed, manipulated and totally irrelevant, other than to the immense damage they inflict upon perfectly valid public concerns.

One of the great tragedies of modern times and one of the greatest evils perpetrated upon the peoples of the underdeveloped nations, is the notion that their pain, suffering and poverty is a direct result of the policies, oppression, domination and power of the developed world. This is the message that dictators, terrorists and our own activists chose to promote.

In truth, the absence of social justice and inequity in the third world is a direct result of the policies, oppression, domination and power of their own leadership, which is the primary cause. That is not to say that the actions of the developed world have no negative impact however, they are not the primary cause and it is quite malicious to suggest otherwise.

This is being confirmed as we write, by the rebellions of Arab peoples against their own leadership, not us.

Apologies for cutting and pasting from a previous post but quite frankly Bruce, it’s all your article deserves

This is a good article. It points out how the only rationale being given for being in Afghanistan is to "stay the course".
Since when did "staying the course" constitute a good reason for sending Australians to a foreign country to kill its citizens?
To those who so vehemently disagree, maybe you can enlighten us with a good justification for Australians killing Afghans.
Spindoc states "One of the great tragedies of modern times and one of the greatest evils perpetrated upon the peoples of the underdeveloped nations, is the notion that their pain, suffering and poverty is a direct result of the policies, oppression, domination and power of the developed world."
When that pain and suffering comes in the form of bombs dropped by Australian aircraft or bullets shot by Australian soldiers, then it would be pretty reasonable for people to blame Australia for that pain and suffering.
It would also be unsurprising for people to place some blame on the west when we give such unflinching support to the various various tyrants around the globe who torment their own people.
I can tell you that if there were Afghan troops on the streets of Perth and Afghan planes dropping bombs on our homes, I would be doing everything in my power to drive them out. Would that make me a terrorist?

Rhys,

<< When that pain and suffering comes in the form of bombs dropped by Australian aircraft or bullets shot by Australian soldiers, then it would be pretty reasonable for people to blame Australia for that pain and suffering.>>

Perhaps you would like to share your sentiments with Australian troops on the front line. Might I suggest you omit your name and address?

Like I said.

<< Unfortunately for the “great causes”, the international activism industry is, at every level, miserably inept, emotionally dysfunctional, ill informed, manipulated and totally irrelevant, other than to the immense damage they inflict upon perfectly valid public concerns.>>

I have long thought that Edward I was far too soft on the “war mongering savages” from the Welsh Marches. Not surprising that they have been the front line of the British Army for 300 years.

Bruce Haigh's piece, as usual, is puerile and staggeringly ignorant.

He says " The Taliban is a complex alliance of competing forces held together to rid themselves of a common enemy."

No Bruce. The Taliban have been around since well before 9/11 and the subsequent war in Afghanistan. They originally formed to combat the corruption and warlordism that is endemic in Afghan society, uniting under a common extremist religous philsophy. They are NOT a resistance movement at all. They are not held together to rid themselves of a common enenmy. They are held together by their fundamentalist religous beliefs and their commitment to its politial implementation.

Bruce indulges himself with speculation about the reasons behind the shooting of Lance Corporal Jones in Afghanistan without any evidence.
Then, with incisive logic, he tells us that heliopters don't crash by accident.

Good one Bruce. Firstly, helicopters obviously do crash by accident, like cars, planes, boats and most other moving things. Secondly, and funnily enough, investigations into crashes generally take time. Crazy I know. Is it possible that defence is waiting to find out how exactly the aircraf crashed before they start laying blame and making decisions? I know this would be hard for Bruce to undertand, since it obviously isn't how he does things.

Haigh tells us we're being lied to, but provides no evidence to suggest that this is the case. He can't even manage an hypothesis to explain WHY defence would be lying to the public about the deaths of these men.

The real mindless (and heartless) mantra is the attempts by the fringe left to score political points on the back of the deaths of our service people.

Thanks PaulL

For balance, at least one of us needs to push the American (um Molan?) line or all we Australian "Leftists" would become bored thinking for ourselves and for our diggers.

I wouldn't play your US version of Australia's patriotism card mate - its not convincing.

Pete

Enigmatic President Obama ( Dec.2009 ) unequivocally declared 30,000 troops would be added to Afghanistan for 6 months, and ALL US troops withdrawn by 2014.

In light of his announcement, has anything changed ?

Meanwhile, at a cost of $ 1.2 B each, notorious ( human rights violations ) Bagram & Kandaha AFB, are being enlarged to house the greatest Military War machine, History has ever known. Bigger then Ben Hur & Diego Garcia ! Presently 150,000 troops from 48 Nations are involved in NATO - ISAF contingent. Embedded, are 182,000 ANA servicemen & 118,000 Afghan National Policemen.
Even Blind Freddy, can see they are there for the long haul !

Presiding General Patraeus is ramping up operations, even as CIA Director Leon Panetta relieves his command. Ten years, 2 Presidents and 8 Generals later, the Afghan War costing $ 1 B a week, with civilian deaths exacerbating at an alarming rate ( Afghan War Diary Leak ) the coalition of the willing, is looking decidedly more like the killing fields of Pol Pot's Kampuchea ?

The grim reality - this interminable, asymptomatic and unwinnable War, is replicating what History has decreed, the " grave-yard of Empires " ( Alexander, Mongol, British, Soviets etc ) But then, with the burgeoning National debt of $ 14.7 trillion, and Moody's threat of downgrading it's precarious credit rating, why lose sleep over a lost cause and trifling War. Indeed.

The cynical training of the ANA ( Afghan National Army ) has been an unmitigated disaster. 300,000 strong, only 1:5 are literate.

cont..

Systemic corruption, desertions, drugs,bribery, tribal pay-backs etc totally undermines any credibility as a viable alternative. The ADF are fully committed to the Mentoring Programme, which so far,has cost military lives, among the 20 ISAF, committed to the scheme. Paradoxically, Karzai's own personal body-guard are all ( Blackwater Inc ) Foreigners. Afghanis follow simple axiomatic truths and values : Family, tribe, culture and Country.

Say's a lot about the occupation ?

OECD rates Afghanistan as one of the poorest. 91st in the World. GDP: $ 29.8 B. Per Capita $ 1000. 36% are unemployed and suffer chronic impoverishment. It is dependent on $ 5 B Foreign Aid, Petroleum, Gas etc and the insidious Opium Trade. 3.3 million Afghani's produce over $ 2.7 B worth of Opium, which kills and maims 100,000 world-wide. Particularly vulnerable are the Russians, who share border townships. Putin claims it's become an epidemic - like vodka !

Finally, in the modicum of hindsight, our 1550 servicemen are highly unlikely to be recalled in the short term. Defense Minister Smith, made it quite clear in this morning's ABC announcement.

Dalma,

Any comparison of Aghanistan's current predicament with Cambodias during the Pol Pot years is completely fatuous.
As is any claim that the literacy rates for Afgan soldiers has any bearing on the conflict. The Taleban, as you may know, are not big readers themselves.

The loony-left are always claiming that assymetric wars are unwinnable. Its their sop to the more rational among their supporters who might demand that the cost in lives of our service people requires us to win any war we are engaged in.

They said exactly the same thing about Iraq. Its unwinnable they said. They said it over and over in fact. And yet Iraq has an elected gov't and has not descended into anarchy. It might not be western style liberal democracy but its a far sight better than Saddam and his Bathists. In fact the left are championing an almost identical result in Egypt at the current time.

What they actually mean is that they don't want us to win it.

The graveyard of empires stuff is also WAY over the top. But don't let mere fact get in the way of a bit of drama.

Hear Ye. Hear ye All.
Subject: Truth
Distribution : OLO/Deniers/Misogynist etc.
Date : 10 Jun 2011.

" For those who seek the TRUTH,
there are those, too dense
They cannot see, the Forest for the Trees
in broad Daylight ".

Dalma Smithy
Marina Mirage.4212.QLD.