On the day that we hear of another five soldiers paying with their lives and, possibly, five others seriously injured by Taliban partisans who had posed as 'Government' soldiers, do we deplore the tactics adopted by the killers as 'unfair, inhuman or cowardly', or do we project our anger at the politicians who expose the lives of our service people for reasons that fail to reach the level of rhetorical tripe.
Supposedly, according to the rhetoric, our troops are there to prevent the Taliban? - or is it Al Quaida - or just anybody Muslim - from visiting our green and pleasant democracy and showing their envy of our materialist idyll and god given right to patronise, by attempting to indiscriminately blow us up.
For our part, our involvement in their affairs is, of course, purely benign- with the exception of the troops that is. And their arsenal's with all the profits they bring to the suppliers.
As a coalition of UN, US and NATO we are there to drum into their thick medieval skulls the benefits of our democratic process with all the trials, tricks, troubles and tribulations that corrupt it daily, if not hourly. Those being swept to one side as euphemism's of the democracy package.
However we have set them a good example of western double standards by organising a corrupted election to elect a corrupt president in order to maintain a corrupt purpose. We call this 'pragmatism' - a step seemingly in the right direction; which means absolutely nothing when those that are doing the stepping don't know which direction they should be heading on.
A couple of weeks have passed since I started this article, and since then the death toll has risen relentlessly.
To the families and loved ones of the soldiers, I'm sorry for your loss and shamed by the lack of ability to prevent it.
But take no solace from the words of politicians, generals or the media, it's empty rhetoric that only grieves for the effect it has on their dusty statistics.
What is strange about the Afghan matter is that so many "Hawks" were against it at the start and have not changed their opinions. If the military minded has such doubts, how did it happen. Check General Sir William Nott in Wikipedia.
ReplyDeleteDemetrius welcome.
ReplyDeleteThat might be because it's not a military war, as such. More a commercial project for the conglomerates.
The Pentagon has awarded a $2.2 billion contract for logistical support most of which has gone to 'Afghan'companies headed by cousins of Karzai and sons of his generals.
Nepotism is rampant and at least 20% of that money will be paid out for 'protection'of the convoys to the tribal warlords.
239 lives wasted on political posturing and vanity