Panic as the US finally leaves the Afghan War isn’t peace
by
RichardKanePA | 06.28.2011
We think of negotiations as helping lessen domestic conflict but people once used negotiations to end or smooth transition when a war ends.
The dying can end with temporary autonomy surrounding Kabul. Maybe Chinese peacekeepers, subsidized by the US. Maybe too late for the US to stop making up lies about Iran, Iranian peacekeepers with a vestige stake at preventing compulsory burkas until Kabul became a financial nest egg like Hong Kong to China. The exuberance when Britain returned Hong Kong to China without them destroying the Golden economic Goose should be remembered.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong
Vietnam toppled the Khmer Rough bloodbath tor less reason than the US did Saddam, who had tried to assassinate a president, otherwise the US is in civil wars.
Ngo Diem,a Catholic fanatic, fought commie atheist Ho Chí Minh at first without US help,
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/VNngo.htm
http://reformation.org/holoc23.html
His attacks on Buddhists led to several spontaneous coop attempts, the US ended up going along. The following South Vietnamese Governments consisted of yes men without much local support. Nevertheless many still fled when the North took charge.
USSR Afghan aid started in 192l,
http://english.pravda.ru/russia/history/12-05-2010/113353-arms_export-0/
Mostly Communists wanted girls in school or resisted burkas, eventually becoming allies with those who wanted the king to return ie Afghan President Karzai,
http://achievement.org/autodoc/page/kar0bio-1
As troops become fewer the Taliban may demand more and more such as that US supplies not leave with the troops. Gandhi or Martin Luther King would have gone to the Taliban with the suggestion that they appoint Karzai the Mayor of Kabul under their shadow government
PS When I saw the PhillyIMC headline Negotiating for Dummies I at first thought that someone finally woke up to the fact that negotiating used to involve foreign conflict as well as domestic
Richard Kane
.jpg)
Comments
This quote
Submitted by Rich Gardner on Tue, 06/28/2011 - 8:57amfrom your Spartacus link reads:
That doesn't support your assertion that Ngo Dinh Dien was fighting the North Vietnamese/Vietcong "at first without US help," it shows that not only was the US assisting Diem from the very start, heck, the US placed Diem into power to begin with.
Rich,
Submitted by Rich Gardner on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 12:18am[Apologies for the overactive spam filter. This is a response from Richard Kane]
Besides the Spartacus link, I enclosed a link about right-wing Catholics here and abroad lobbying in favor of Diem.
We think of lobbying only when it comes to the Israeli lobby. But lobbying goes back to United Fruit, and there so-called Banana Republics. Rich, you may remember something of the lobbying by both sides concerning Northern Ireland or Eastern European refugees lobbying for freeing Eastern Europe, and Cuban right-wingers demanding the US remove Castro. Iraqi Congress in Exile filled the US with lies about Saddam and weapons of mass distraction.
Afghans who fear the Taliban won't admit to themselves that they want permanent US presence, but when peace gets near we suddenly hear crying about "Throwing Afghan Women Under the Bus",
http://shirazsocialist.wordpress.com/2010/01/27/dont-betray-afghan-women...
http://old.news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110505/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan
http://www.fpif.org/articles/afghanistan_should_we_stay_or_should_we_go
Of course if one looks hard enough one can find almost anything on the Internet. But (FPIF) Foreign Policy in Focus, is Institute for Policy Studies, usually a peace research group.
Without US help and the help he got around the world, the grief he caused Ho Chí Minh might have not lasted for more than a month. However since Vietnam's major concern before the US somewhat distracted them was not becoming another Tibetan. I remember being amazed that North Vietnam was not mad at the US during the Vietnam War not realizing that all during the war their major concern was their backs.
Of course if a bloodbath happens and the US people don't notice we think it didn't happen. The biggest bloodbath in Iraq wasn't US bombing but Sunni and Shiites dividing into separate neighborhoods.
However, I can think of no way the US people won't notice if there is a lot of getting even locally after US leaves.
There are no such thing as a peace dividend unless the US quickly negotiates for temporary autonomy for the area around Kabul.
If the dollar collapses the US will be negotiating allowing US troops to leave without paying ransom. With goods not worthless dollars.
Richard Kane
Post new comment