Money from Saudi Arabia, ops in Germany, but for all we know command and control in Afghanistan and now Pakistan.
It should be obvious that henceforth any U.S. administration will be held accountable for another major attack and will strive mightily to reduce its likelihood. You're applying an old template to the current situation. You could be right. My view is the US is focused now on retrenching, not looking for new adventures. Unrest in Pakistan is the price the U.S. pays for harassing AQ. The campaign against 'political Islam' is economic and political, not primarily military. The military option is less likely because the U.S. is tapped out on troops and for the time being at least, on money too. Pardon my presumptuous re: "we." Henceforth I will resort to the term "You-all." -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Louis Proyect Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 10:55 AM To: Progressive Economics Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Somethin' happening here.... Max B. Sawicky wrote: > The major objective I believe is to prevent further attacks by Al > Queda. No, that's the major pretext. > Another priority is to keep Pakistan at no worse than a low boil. Generally, it is advisable to turn down the heat to keep things simmering. But sending drones over Pakistan that kill innocent civilians is turning up the heat, isn't it? > The purpose of U.S. & allied forces in Afgh is to keep AQ tied down > in Afgh and Pakistan, indefinitely, to minimize their ability to > conduct operations elsewhere. What relationship did the 9/11 conspiracy have to the relationship of forces in Afghanistan? Less than zero. The funding came from Saudi Arabia and the operations headquarters were in Germany. > It's not a campaign of conquest; there is nothing there worth taking. > (The pipeline stuff was always a pipe-dream.) The emerging US client- > cum-superpower in the region IMO is India. Who needs Afghanistan. Not everything can be reduced to dollars and cents. The US is committed to defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan because it prefers client states. By demonstrating its power over political Islam in this area, it hopes to sap its morale in other locales where the economic stakes are higher (Middle East, Indonesia, etc.) This in effect is the same domino theory that enabled Vietnam. Replace Communism with radical Islam and you end up with the same wretched foreign policy. > There are all sorts of ways to criticize this in its own terms. > For effective criticism, we should be aiming at the correct target. What do you mean by "we", white man. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
