Home | About | Donate

Pentagon: American Public Doesn't Need to Know How Much Territory We've Lost in Afghanistan

Pentagon: American Public Doesn't Need to Know How Much Territory We've Lost in Afghanistan

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

The Pentagon will no longer inform the American public who has greater control of Afghan districts—the Afghan government or insurgents—the latest sign that the military is trying to obfuscate the failure of its 18-year war in Afghanistan

The revelation comes from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction's (SIGAR) quarterly report (pdf).

Per the report:

1 Like

The military industrial media infotainment complex (MIMIC) is the world’s largest recipient of taxpayer funded corporate welfare and needs to be more accountable with reduced funding to the extent that MIMIC needs to go to the back of the line so that Medicare For ALL is at the front of the line !

8 Likes

Let’s agree that the Pentagon should deliver what information it has, perhaps short the location of nuclear arms, troops in battle in a formally declared war engaged with permission of Congress, or a very few other items with similar concerns.

But what SIGAR’s report actually suggests here is not only that it will not reveal that information, but that it does not intend to track it. This might lead us to the fascinating if not reassuring conclusion that US military engagements are not undertaken primarily to hold land.

The US has invaded a fresh country roughly once every two years since its inception, with ongoing battles through the gradual invasion of the North American continent and over the last nearly 30 years, if we include regular bombings that would be obvious acts of war were the tables reversed. And that is still grossly understated, but it would take a multi-volume tome to describe the ways that this government messes with people.

Since WWII and increasingly, this business of “regime change” and economic controls has instituted a sort of caciqueismo of the mafia-state as the latter-day capitalist replacement for the early capitalist nation-state fascist dictators. It is this so-called “neoliberal” regime, more flexible and insidious but not kinder than its predecessors, that has to be rooted out and eliminated.

The Pentagon does not care how much territory it holds in Afghanistan because that is under the control of the Karzais and perhaps competing opium cartels. It is cheaper for them to let these people police each other and pay them by allowing them to penetrate Western markets. It only took the relative destruction of Afghan society to set this up, and the military stands ready not to hold Afghanistan, but to destroy it again at will.

Look to Britain’s Opium War in China. to Chiang-Kai Shek’s involvement in the 20th century, to the CIA trade in the Golden Triangle, to Ollie North. and so on. Look to the markets for human traffic, for drugs, for cheap foreign labor.

5 Likes

Problem is “we” have lost all control over the MIC. There exists no office, political or otherwise, that can force them to do anything. They could take over the country at whim if they felt like it, and the populace would probably even cheer them on.
The fact that they are allowed to gobble up the bulk of existing taxpayer money is probably the only reason the 1% has not been replaced by generals.

4 Likes

The occupation of Afghanistan is absurd, has been, and will be as long as we are there. When did we last hear that we were still there to build up security units. We must be supernatural people here in the U.S. because we can learn how to protect and serve in 16 weeks to a year. Apparently it takes 20 years in Afghanistan. The country that has defended itself for a thousand years. Anybody want to tell the U.S. trainers that they have our billions of dollars being whisked away into a deep dark hole, and we know it.
But we can pay for that while we cut back on the SNAP program and other sensible spending.

6 Likes

"USFOR-A continued to classify or restrict from public release, in accordance with classification guidelines or other restrictions placed by the Afghan government, the following data (mostly since October 2017): " emphasis added.

Dang, an entire report to slip that ‘normalizable’ assertion before the people - yet again. This time to be used as REASON.

1 Like

I don’t care whether the US thinks it has 100% control of Afghans land or 0%, or anything in between. I don’t care how well or badly our military thinks it is doing there. They lie. The only thing I care about is having 100% of the military, enlisted and otherwise, return home, and close their bases.

3 Likes

I would suggest that technically congress has the power to stop the MIC.
Stop the funding.
Only congress is supposed to declare war. Legally, we are not at war with any of these countries.
If congress had not abrogated it’s responsibility, if they had not sold out to the MIC, the powers of their office could stop it.

2 Likes

Only in theory. There is nothing that could stop them if actually they decided to take over, and if any legislator tried to stop the gravy train it is unlikely that the MIC would simply sit back and let it happen.

3 Likes

This war has been said to be about where the Taliban are going to live: in Afghanistan or Pakistan - we can’t have Afghanistan be a place where these people can hang out. If these people could hang out in Afghanistan and control politics there, they could breed terrorists who could come over here and kill us. They should breed their terrorists elsewhere: that way, we’d be safe.

That’s my policy and I’m sticking with it. You can stand me up at the Gates of Hell, and I won’t back down. So say our war leaders.

I

1 Like

There are no Taliban. There is resistance to America’s violent brazen occupation. The U.S. occupies Japan and Germany and other countries without the violence it uses in Afghanistan. The violence used by the U.S. in Afghanistan is for live weapons testing and officer and personnel training and testing.