SnowMageddon Vets Storm Capital!

Paul Reickhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, explains why President Barack Obama’s pledge to bring the troops home is not enough and why more focus needs to be placed on how to help them after they’re back in the U.S.

Washington (CNN) -- The blizzard that hit Washington couldn't have come at a worse time for a leading veterans group -- but the name for its legislative push this week is certainly fitting.

Despite the monster snowstorm, the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America organization is taking its Storm the Hill campaign directly to members of Congress and administration officials to push for veterans' rights.

Because of a fresh round of snowfall Tuesday night -- and the federal government being closed much of this week -- many of their meetings have been canceled or postponed.

Group founder and Executive Director Paul Rieckhoff, an Army veteran, said that despite "snowmageddon," they've been cracking away at the meetings that are still on.

He added that members are beyond determined to show up.

"We have a guy who came in from Michigan, who took four different planes to get here," he said. "Most of our folks have been through much worse than a blizzard, so they're able to handle this and keep driving on."

Continue on CNN..

Veterans Day / US Indirectly Funding the Taliban - Afghanistan

First off I want to take a moment to recognize Veterans Day, a day to remember all of our Troops. To remember them for their heroics, and their bravery to support our country!

The American Hero always comes through
To capture our hearts with a spirit so true Some proudly are soldiers who march in harm’s way
Insuring our freedom, courageous they stay While others come forth as civilians so brave
Determined in purpose, so steadfast to save We should always keep clear a place in our heart
For each has a value beyond precious art Their duty to country will not be surpassed
Please honor their courage, for some it’s their last We live in a world which can be hard to bear
Thank God for these people, how greatly they care Do ponder new heroes and what they will face
And pray for their safety no matter their place Our heritage brings out the best, we all know
Our great book of heroes is destined to grow. ©2003Roger J. Robicheau

Now onto the question: Should we be sending our brave troops into a war that may not have a victory to attain?


As US Ambassador Casts Doubt on Troop Increase in Afghanistan, New Report Reveals US Indirectly Funding the Taliban

In a last-minute dissent ahead of a critical war cabinet meeting on escalating the Afghan war, US Ambassador Karl Eikenberry has cast doubt on a troop escalation until the Afghan government can address corruption and other internal problems. Meanwhile, a report reveals how the US government is financing the very same insurgent forces in Afghanistan that American and NATO soldiers are fighting. Investigative journalist Aram Roston traces how the Pentagon’s civilian contractors in Afghanistan end up paying insurgent groups to protect American supply routes from attack.


The U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan is warning against sending more troops to fight in the Afghan war. In a last-minute dissent, Ambassador Karl Eikenberry sent two cables this week casting doubt on a troop escalation until the Afghan government can address corruption and other internal problems.

Well today we turn to a new report that reveals how the US government is financing the very same insurgent forces in Afghanistan that American and NATO soldiers are fighting.
“How the US Funds the Taliban” is the cover story of the latest issue of the Nation magazine.

Investigative journalist Aram Roston traces how the Pentagon’s civilian contractors in Afghanistan end up paying insurgent groups to protect American supply routes from attack. The practice of buying the Taliban’s protection is not a secret. US military officials in Kabul told Roston that a minimum of 10 percent of the Pentagon"s logistics contracts consists of payments to the Taliban.

That translates into millions of dollars being funneled to the Taliban. This summer, anticipating a surge of US troops, the military expanded its trucking contracts in Afghanistan by 600 percent to a total of over two billion dollars.

Well, Aram Roston joins us now here in the firehouse studio. He"s the author of the book “The man who pushed America to War: The Life, Adventures, and Obsessions of Ahmad Chalabi.” His latest piece “How the US Funds the Taliban” was supported by the investigative fund at the Nation institute.

Aram Roston, Investigative journalist and author of The Man Who Pushed America to War: The Life, Adventures, and Obsessions of Ahmad Chalabi. He’s written the cover story in the latest issue of The Nation magazine, “How the US Funds the Taliban.”

CIA Paying off Afghan Drug Dealer....

WASHINGTON Ahmed Wali Karzai, the brother of the president of Afghanistan, gets regular payments from the CIA and has for much of the past eight years, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

The newspaper said that according to current and former American officials, the CIA pays Karzai for a variety of services, including helping to recruit an Afghan paramilitary force that operates at the CIA's direction in and around Kandahar.

The CIA's ties to Karzai, who is a suspected player in the country's illegal opium trade, have created deep divisions within the Obama administration, the Times said.

Allegations that Karzai is involved in the drug trade have circulated in Kabul for months. He denies them.

Critics say the ties with Karzai complicate the United States' increasingly tense relationship with his older brother, President Hamid Karzai. The CIA's practices also suggest that the United States is not doing everything in its power to stamp out the lucrative Afghan drug trade, a major source of revenue for the Taliban.

Some American officials argue that the reliance on Ahmed Wali Karzai, a central figure in the south of the country where the Taliban is dominant, undermines the U.S. push to develop an effective central government that can maintain law and order and eventually allow the United States to withdraw.

"If we are going to conduct a population-centric strategy in Afghanistan, and we are perceived as backing thugs, then we are just undermining ourselves," Maj. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, the senior American military intelligence official in Afghanistan, was quoted by the Times in an article published on its Web site.

Ahmed Wali Karzai told the Times that he cooperates with American civilian and military officials but does not engage in the drug trade and does not receive payments from the CIA.

Karzai helps the CIA operate a paramilitary group, the Kandahar Strike Force, that is used for raids against suspected insurgents and terrorists, according to several American officials. Karzai also is paid for allowing the CIA and American Special Operations troops to rent a large compound outside the city, which also is the base of the Kandahar Strike Force, the Times said.

Karzai also helps the CIA communicate with and sometimes meet with Afghans loyal to the Taliban, the newspaper reported.

CIA spokesman George Little declined to comment on the report.



Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/27/karzais-brother-on-cia-pa_n_336279.html

Bernie Sanders Keeps it Real on Afghanistan

Sen. Bernie Sanders: President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the non-Western world and stress diplomacy. Americans should be proud that we have a president who is restoring respect for our country around the globe. This well-deserved prize is an inspiration for the president and for rest of us to do some really hard thinking about how we create a more peaceful and just world -- including our role in Afghanistan. We are now in our ninth year in Afghanistan -- twice as long as were engaged in World War II. We have lost more than 800 troops. We have spent more than $200 billion. What do we hope to accomplish in Afghanistan? What is our exit strategy?

Support for Afghan war at all-time low

By Paul Steinhauser
CNN Deputy Political Director
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Support for the war in Afghanistan is at an all-time low, according to a new national poll.

A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Tuesday morning indicates that 39 percent of Americans favor the war in Afghanistan, with 58 percent opposed to the mission.

Support is down from 53 percent in April, marking the lowest level since the start of the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan soon after the September 11, 2001, attacks.

The poll suggests that 23 percent of Democrats support the war. That number rises to 39 percent for independents and 62 percent for Republicans.

"Most of the recent erosion in support has come from within the GOP," said Keating Holland, CNN's polling director. "Unlike Democrats and independents, Republicans still favor the war, but their support has slipped eight points in just two weeks."

How does Afghanistan compares with Iraq?

"The Afghan war is almost as unpopular as the Iraq war has been for the past four years," Holland said, noting that support for the war in Iraq first dropped to 39 percent in June 2005 and has generally remained in the low to mid-30s since.

The poll's release comes after the two deadliest months for the U.S. military in Afghanistan. In August, 48 U.S. troops were killed in the fighting, surpassing the previous high of 45 the month before.

President Obama has called Afghanistan a "war of necessity" and has placed great emphasis on defeating the Taliban and al Qaeda militants operating there and in Pakistan.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is expected to approve sending thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan to deal with the growing threat from roadside bombs, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said last week.

Gates has concluded there is not enough manpower or equipment in Afghanistan to protect U.S. troops from such bombs, Morrell said. Watch U.S. senators on the next U.S. moves in Afghanistan »

The CNN/Opinion Research poll was conducted Friday through Sunday, with 1,012 adult Americans questioned by telephone. The survey's overall sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

George Will calls for pull-out

George Will calls for pull-out
By: Mike Allen
August 31, 2009 04:46 PM EST

George F. Will, the elite conservative commentator, will call in his next column for U.S. ground troops to leave Afghanistan, according to publishing sources.

“[F]orces should be substantially reduced to serve a comprehensively revised policy: America should do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, airstrikes and small, potent special forces units, concentrating on the porous 1,500-mile border with Pakistan, a nation that actually matters,” Will writes in the column, scheduled for publication later this week.

President Obama ordered a total of 21,000 more U.S. troops into Afghanistan in February and March, and casualties have mounted as the forces began confronting the Taliban more aggressively. August saw the highest monthly death toll for the U.S. since the invasion in 2001, the second record month in a row.

Will’s prescription – in which he urges Obama to remember Bismarck’s decision to halt German forces short of Paris in 1870 - seems certain to split Republicans. He is a favorite of fiscal conservatives. The more hawkish right can be expected to attack his conclusion as foolhardy, short-sighted and naïve, potentially making the U.S. more vulnerable to terrorist attack.

The columnist’s startling recommendation surfaced on the same day that Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, sent an assessment up his chain of command recommending what he called “a revised implementation strategy.” In a statement, McChrystal also called for “commitment and resolve, and increased unity of effort.”

In the column, Will warns that any nation-building strategy could be impossible to execute given the Taliban’s ability to seemingly disappear into the rugged mountain terrain and the lack of economic development in the war-plagued nation.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates was asked Monday by Peter Cook of Bloomberg TV: “Are we winning in Afghanistan?”

“I think it's a mixed picture in Afghanistan,” Gates replied. “I think that there aren’t too many people with too rosy a view of what's going on in Afghanistan. I think there are many challenges. But I think some of the gloom and doom is somewhat overdrawn as well. … I think that there are some positive developments. But there is no question our casualties are up and there's no question we have a very tough fight in front of us, a lot of challenges.”

ReThink Afghanistan

It's time to rethink Afghanistan...






http://rethinkafghanistan.com/

Vets group slams McCain on voting record

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/10/military_vets_congress_reportcard_100708/

Vets group slams McCain on voting record

By Rick Maze - Staff writerPosted : Wednesday Oct 8, 2008 12:38:28 EDT

The nation’s most prestigious group for Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans released a congressional scorecard on Tuesday that ranks Republican presidential candidate John McCain as having one of the worst voting records when it comes to supporting troops and veterans.
The grade is due to his absence on several key votes on military and veterans’ issues over the last two years.

McCain, ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee and a decorated Navy fighter pilot who spent 5½ years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, received a D on the report card from Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. He is one of nine lawmakers — four senators and five members of the House of Representatives — who received a D or F from the nonprofit, nonpartisan group.

McCain’s presidential campaign staff did not respond to calls asking for comment on the report.
Two people — both Republicans — received an F: Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas.

For senators, scores were based on 10 votes involving increased funding for veterans’ programs, expansions of benefits, a vote to purchase Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles and four separate votes at various stages of consideration of the Post-9/11 GI Bill of Rights and co-sponsorship of the bill.

McCain’s Democratic challenger, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, received a B on the report card, the same grade received by Obama’s vice presidential running mate, Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del. Obama and Biden also missed key votes; Obama missed four and Biden three.
Fifty-five senators received an A on the report card.

In the House, grades were based on 13 votes and co-sponsorship of the full-tuition GI Bill benefits that became law earlier this year. Votes included increasing veterans’ funding and benefits, a veterans’ suicide prevention bill, a bill giving refugee status to translators who worked with U.S. troops in Iraq, expanded wounded warrior treatment programs and a bill ending the government’s policy of requiring repayment of bonuses for people who did not complete their military obligation because of death or disability. Five House members received a D, but 250 others received an A.

Vanessa Williamson of IAVA said the grades are based on items drawn from the association’s legislative agenda, which was provided to every congressional office.

Getting a good score was not that difficult because many of the votes on veterans’ issues were unanimous or nearly unanimous. In the Senate, only three votes on the Post-9/11 GI Bill made a significant difference in grades. In the House, two votes on the GI Bill and a 2007 vote about whether Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans should be given two years or five years of no-questions asked health care from the Department of Veterans Affairs made the difference.

One hundred fifty lawmakers received perfect scores.