Charlie Rose

KDane  07/12/2010 12:10 AM Report

The balance in war decisions is in economics and strategic long range development, and sometimes it is a choice, whether by proxy, expert advisory or direct participation; whether to simply disrupt or prohibit another from maintaining order, or inducing a defined favorable order.

War has evolved past the MI profitability impetus. This realm only lies in the Congressional constituency rewards game, ala BJ Clinton's massive depletion of the poorly aimed Cruise and Tomahawks that were about to expire due to Y2K chip problems(his supporters in the Carolinas were the main beneficiaries of the contracts for replacements, and the same states' munitions manufacturers for the small and medium caliber ammo being massively depleted in Iraq and Afghanistan generating plenty of employment and record profit for companies in which Hillary is heavily invested in(along with Walmart). The new economics of warfare lie in the reconstruction contracts as well as resource consult and development. Straight forward commandeering or rape and pillage don't fly in the PC sensitive stock market anymore,with all the bad publicity and call for divestiture, at least for Western powers. Thus, warfare actually does bring mitigation to casualty and civilian death, as some tattered structure of order is desireable to facilitate rebuilding from a more remnant skeletal structure with recruiting of the indiginous populations to participate in reconstruction(whether physically or in the "permissible customary bribe share" of the culture). It's all about the "sell" with spin ala Venice post Gothic invasion, where the fleeing Romans reached the marshes for safety and said in thankful praise- "we made it/ we're here kids! = Ven ici(sic). Convince them the worst is over and Florence Nightingale,Clara Barton and Rosie the Rivoter are here in construction boots with toys and candy and hostilities drop and profits roll. At least this was the big plan of the late 80's to 90's with Kuwait and Bosnia. The USA got the benefits for Kuwaiti oil and reconstruction, with the Brits getting a bone. However, Bosnia saw competition, and the US lost out to EU contracts due to heavy NATO involvement, and Kosova showed nothing for USA but prolonged monitoring and a dead lead industry without Yugo production. Iraq brought potential oil development for both US and Brits, but the new parliment switched negotiations to more favorable Chinese contract negotiations. Note, the Chinese are also sneaking in everywhere for oil-already in Sudan, Cuba, plying Gabon and negotiating with Brazil. The Brits were disappointed, and still are bidding for Basra, and the US awaits gratitude from the Kurds(remember the happy thankful commercials they made after the victory!?) while the Brits secretly continue their multi-billion $ Brit.Petrol. pipeline construction contracts in Iran, thanks to the embargo waiver signed by Bush and recently renewed by Obama(yes, that's right, the very same chastising omnipotence that forever publicly spanks Uncle Tony for dirtying the Gulf of Mexico with its all natural B.Pee that turns waters black like a magically treated swimming pool. Wars now write off the military expense as investment, with contituents gaining a profit rider, while big reconstr. and long term loans and resource contracts are the game. These contracts even rule while we saber rattle to the very same countries they are being performed(Britain and Russia are heavily vested in Iran projects, as France was in Iraq). In essence, though, the basic control of, or putting in negotiable order, the highways and byways is still a requisite need, and all the better if the order is controlled by a more diplomatically manageable friend. Back to the Platts and real estate and commodity speculations short term, and strategic resource planning longterm for an evolving transworld open market, or at least the facade of one.

NeilMacCallister  07/06/2010 10:10 PM Report

Nobody likes war, and I don't think anybody choses it over peace.

***

Yesterday, I believe I heard the "Restrepo" film director and war-journalist Sebastion Junger state that in Afghanistan from 1990-2000, there were 400,000 civilian killings.

I presume he meant by the Taliban.

And that from 2000-2010, there have been less than 10.000 civilian killings, ..from all sources.

Is that the truth?

Are the "War forces" there actually saving civilian lives?

robdverity  07/02/2010 04:22 PM Report

KDane - Plats? You've overloaded me. Guess I see a connection to exploiting mineral wealth (carbon or rare earth). But perhaps you give credit where none is due. Elst a withdrawal date would remain illusive. The goal of locals taking over would not be desirable. Antithetical to exploitation.

On the other hand maybe you're out in front of them. If they do catch up, your implied (I think) assertion that the associated infrastructure would be beneficial to the locals doesn't gee with other mineral exploitation - a la gold mines etc in Africa. We can steal from anyone without helping them in the process.

Why we are there hasn't evolved beyond mining the wealth from the US Treas. thru MI contracts, venality and corruption. Mineral exploitation vs war-for-profit is doubtless being thought about (now) by more than you. Give them time.

KDane  07/02/2010 03:27 AM Report

Addressing the why we are there, the root base has always been, since the 50's-60s, found on the "Platts". Anyone familiar with city/municipal/county planning is aware of development plats for 5,10, 20 yr expansion and development of roads, exits, utilities,housing and business. Somewhere along the lines, the Platts for the Afghan/Iran/Pakistan route development to the Indian Ocean had been sequestered, and its mechanism and history removed from public teaching. The nonsense of running out of future oil and gas in the time of considerations kept the controlled sales to the ecological minded public right were companies and strategic Western planners right where they wanted them. However, the reserves were already known or suspected from Siberia to Khazakstan and the Caspian basin, just getting it economically through a controlled territory to depots on the Indian Ocean was the concern, just as getting oil/gas from the Caspian to the Black Sea or Mediterranean coast was a concern later, leading to the Georgian Northern province cecessions to Russia today. Controlling the highways/byways has always been the name of the game for future insight in resource development, just as land grabs ruled the pathways in the American railroad growth. Nothing changes, its about profit, and to control the source of the profit, one must control the power over the byways. Thus, Russian tanks in the former Georgian north and west.

Afghanistan is no different, was alweays an option, and especially became a choice after the fall of the Shah of Iran. The USSR played its hand for the pathway control and we, as competitors, upset them. This was necessary with the developing plans for the Eastern Europe-Ural pipeline in planning that threatened undue control over the eastern European economies, and thus governance. That is seen to this day as presently Belareus, and previously the Ukraine suffer threatened gas curtailments. Now, add in the $Trillions estimated in revealed Lithium and other mineral reserves(which may have been secretly known for decades, and we see further cause for East/West interests and conflict. Recall, Kosova was not just people, but a conflict over the mineral production region it encompassed(lead) of much lesser value to us, but better than nothing for the Serbs.

In truth, if we simply offered legitimate employment in pipeline construction and security, with road development followed by schools, commerce driven by royalties, and power and fuel taps for light and utilities, a corridor of development may bring progress enough to have them abaqndon black marketing, drugs, mercenarism, or at least give enough citizenry the power to boot these elements out. Add mineral development with road logistics, more towns, schools, utilities from good wages, royalties and Afghanistan may have a chance to not only desire peace, but protect its resources and borders with national pride. However, the raw fundamentalism of the Taliban is the risk for any progress, education, and it is these, or the promise for the new generations that drives road, town and future building. These are the true considerations for why we are there. The rogue cultural destruction, aid to Al Qaida and threats to Iran, Pakistan are just icing and secondary flags to wave for better populace concerns.

Never forget international planning and the platts that, in the 60's-70s were freely available, somewhat. Most do not know that there were platts for the NW Passage above Canada, back in the 70s, with refueling and trade/port designs and estimates for bids all that time, before anyone heard of global Carbon overload Warming. Sediment studies, and other data long predicted a thaw. The question was duration, with estimates, then, from 7-22 years, and investment break even point determined then to require at least 12 years(see old NOVA and other documentaries). Why were these never revealed in the past 10-20 years or so? Perhaps the conclusion that a mini-Northern Hemisphere cool down was in the long range platt and has been an important consideration for all N.American and European defense and commerce concerns on their 50-70 year platts. It still is. Present Global Warming hype has it's own $$ drive for gain and power. Simply watch the Canadian strategies for naval construction and territorial waters claims evolving today, and international court briefings as well as the local northern coastal indigenous tribal suits arising for a piece of the economic action. Then pull out the 70s platts and strategies for comparison. There is so much hidden from the public, that those growing in the 70s had benefit to access as academia was an honorable and proud thing.

As things go, may we expect international contention with invasion of Greenland in the future after their first major inter-mining camp bar brawl? After all, the melting is about to reveal trilions in Platinum and other rare minerals newly revealed from assays. The World and History go on driven by the same prime impetus, progress- enticed by wealth and power.

robdverity  07/01/2010 03:24 PM Report

brc - well said.

brc  07/01/2010 09:18 AM Report

Al Qaeda is not the problem, in Afghanistan, anymore. It had been admitted that there are few foreign fighters that remain, in Afghanistan, while al Qaeda is known to be ramping up its efforts, in other countries. The issue must then be, the Taliban. So why don't we see a surge, in Afghanistan, a la Iraq? The answer is that they can still do traditional business, in Afghanistan.

I come to this conclusion, from an old episode of Foreign Exchange; one of the last ones that Fareed Zacaria hosted (the last time I searched for it, those shows had not been cataloged or organized). A middle eastern gentleman, that Fareed interviewed, reported that, from his perspective, the reasons for the success of the 'surge', were entirely wrong. He pointed out that the predictions had been that the violence, in Anbar, would rise, with the troop withdrawal from the region, and that the violence, in Baghdad, would decline, as those troops were added to the city. He pointed out that the exact opposite, of the predictions, had occurred. NOBODY SEEMS TO REMEMBER THIS, except for myself and a few others. This really makes me mad, when I see intelligent interviewers repeat the Bush & Co. version, as if it had some basis in reality. I submit that if your predictions do not unfold, in at least some semblance, of what the paradigm has foretold, then your paradigm is junk; to put it mildly.

His explanation, of what had happened, was that the ultra religious al Qeada fighters, had gotten in the way of business-- when I say business, what is meant is smuggling; a more power than $ oriented craft than what we're used to-- because they were too morally strict. The foreign jihadists had outstayed their welcome and I'm guessing that they were probably staring too luridly at the Iraqi's daughter's ankles, for the tastes of their menfolk.

I think that this explanation is spot on. It follows from cultural history, that getting in the way of earning a dishonest living, could easily get one exiled. The middle class youth, that made up the foreign volunteers, did not share the tribes sensibilities.

Afghanistan is a thousand times worse than Iraq. The whole country is so full of the graft and corruption, that goes hand in glove with an economy based on smuggling-- see the problems in Greece and they're mostly just tax cheats-- that there is little hope that a functioning government can be built: Unless you think you can spend 50 years (or much more) and trillions of dollars, on some roll of the dice. Oh, and don't forget that the pace of casualties is going up. Get out! Get out now! And don't let the helicopter door hit you in the backside, when you take off from the embassy roof. bc

robdverity  06/30/2010 07:04 PM Report

Some thoughtful comments below. Mine are simplistic by comparison.

Al Qaeda is an idea more than geography whether Afghanistan or Pakistan. Prob. more real anti-US strategic terrorism planning in Yemen, Somalia, etc. But facts wont deter the high school throw-backs from calling for a face-saving Friday night football-type victory in Af-Pak.

As in Vietnam and even (gasp, choke) on certain Fri. nites defeat happened. We are already defeated in Af-Pak but too obtuse to acknowledge it. The loss of life (both sides), the wounded, the brain-traumaed, the ongoing associated health care costs will affect generations in the future.

The 'withdrawal date' in my mind is a red-herring foil to keep the jingos (McCain, Palin et al?) from maneuvering an Obama impeachment campaign. The Military-Industrial oligarches lobbying powers are that influential imo. The cumulative trillions acquired by WAR-FOR-PROFIT is just as compelling as the financial exploitation just experienced. Venality and Congress are synonymous. Buying an impeachment couched in patriotism a la high-school football glory would be a piece-of-cake. With apologies to high school students. Venality and arrested development a lethal combination.

VENALITY > STATESMANSHIP!!

KDane  06/30/2010 04:51 PM Report

The cover up of the true situation of command requests for an Afghan surge seem to be a resultant cooperative effort by PBS and major broadcasters. The actual strategic calculations for an effective campaign determined the need for 120-150,000 troops and was slated for presentation, until word came that the newly elected Obama regime would never accept nor tolerate such publicly made determinations

by the military experts. This was revealed in a few relatively under reported interviews that quickly were suppressed from rebroadcast and mention. Perhaps they would have fared better in a Rolling Stones expose. The Command in the Afghanistan theater were politically advised to reduce their request. When this was made for 50,000 to start, they were rebuked again, and and forced to submit no more than 35,000 and to never mention the actual future necessity for further introductions to total approach the over 100,000 requirement. Obama's political advisors played on the belief that the other allied countries would responsibly contribute 30-50,000(still insufficient) more in total to alleviate the USA burden, however, that was never in the minds of any world leader except Obama. He not only lacked the purported persuasiveness to patch up diplomacies with our allies, but clearly proved impotent to be a charismatic leader over them with his interpretations and ideals.

Now that Gen. McChrystal is abandoned, and Congressional Democrats are refusing to pass funding for the Afghan campaign while the approved sparsity of surge troops have still not even arrived in full numbers as the season grows late, the reality of becoming an American Charge of the Light Brigade looms over the Horizon, and onlookers of the older schools await McChrystal or someone else to publish the realities soon enough in alert to replay the part of Gunga Din and save the royal column from disaster. Suppressing truth in media for political favor is a costly gambit with much more than American lives at stake.

KDane  06/30/2010 04:08 PM Report

The anology of Vietnam to Afghanistan was discussed, with reasoning that, though the Vietnamese were not intent to show at our door, the general communistic domino worldwide dominence intent was, as this compared to the Al Qaida/influenced Taliban threat to the USA directly. But major points were missed here.

.......First, the communism domino theory was valid, per USSR edicts, and was effectively dealt with for SE Asia, despite the Vietnamese war loss. The idea and Asian strategy was always, to at least, prevent the homogneous spread of a single communistic order in contiguity. This was the end result, when the philosophical "Chess Match" between East and West was converted to a "Checker Board" by producing blocks to contiguity, and changing the colors of the jump spaces. China split from the USSR over principles and idealistic interpretations, forming its own separate form of Communism with Nationalistic goals of solely retaining its old empire borders(that included Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet, Inner Mongolia). The early USSR approval for N.Korean invasion of the South endangered China's long patient plans on Taiwan, inducing frictional splitting, and though N.Korea operated under USSR auspices, China could never abandon its integrity as a buffer to Japan and Taiwan. The Vietnamese war, again under Russian auspices, endangered China from the south and its southern vicinity in future approach to Taiwan and Hong Kong. China had a USSR ally to the South, also, after its border skirmishes with USSR in the earlier 50s created persistent tension. China, bolstered Cambodia, supporting the Khmer Rouge as a defensive response to USSR support of N.Vietnam. As the USA retreated from Vietnam, two critical events occurred, as Vietnamese communism overran the coastal nation. Firstly, the Vietnamese waged an effective Cambodian campaign, annihilating the Kmer Rouge and facilitating the return of a moderate government. Secondly, this action induced a North Vietnamese-Chinese massive border war involving a million+ soldiers, playing on both long held cultural emnity, new nationalism and communistic ideologic differences that evolved beyond the original USSR parentage. The Vietnamese not only held, but gained ground in the actions, blunting China's weak resolve to put resources beyond its long term original unification plans. Thus, a separate communism developed in both China and Vietnam, each immiscible with each other or with USSR ideals and goals. The Checker Game halted contiguous spread, divided the "enemies" and left them with their own resource consumption in emnitable positions. Though the USA-Vietnam military conflict was abandoned to surrender, and higher plan of national democracy creation in SE Asia lost, the larger war on worldwide monolithic communism took a defeat to its progenator, the USSR. China's dabbling in support for Albania also gave probing interference in the Balkans monopoly by the USSR, enhanced by Tito's independence in Yugoslavia. So the bigger strategy deems closer scutiny in the interplays of varied cutural differences as well as comunistic varieties. Battles were lost,lesser evils were resultant, but the greater picture was secured.

Second, the Taliban and their pre-Al Qaida governance

has surprisingly fallen from analysis. After the Taliban's major victory in Khabul, and consolidation of >80% of the nation, leaving resistance enclaves in the north, it began to show its true colors and danger to the World Community as a whole. If it is to be believed that UN attempts to preserve cultural sites and historic structures are a just and rightful cause, and that no society/culture should be allowed oppression, let alone dissolution, then the actions of the Taliban outside of Al Qaida need redressing. Recall, the Taliban went on a cultural extinguishment campaign against all Hindu-Bhuddist elements, with its notable demolition of the huge Bhudda statue that was a World Heritage site, among much , much more. Additionally,

its followers began an intolerance campaign to non-Muslims with the headline capture of 3 Christian missionaries that were the subject of diplomatic complexities that everyone seems to have forgotten. The Taliban were also in design to export their tribal allegiances and philosophical bent across national lines and had express intent on attacking Shi'ite Iran before dissuaded by Bin Laden and turned toward the US and West. This potentially could draw a direct regional world war, or lead further to Pakistan and India involvement directly in civil upheaval or indirectly as bordering powers. So, respect must be addressed towards the Taliban themselves as a dangerous potential to regional stability and World involvement, which could have not only been an East/West conflict, but the long feared Sunni/Shi'a showdown which might polarize the entire Muslim world in conflict.

Hopefully, the idea that just keeping Al Qaida's heads down with assassinations and not completely dealing with the Taliban's long term philosophy will be reconsidered with these reminders. Otherwise, our children's futures are in jeopardy as we head towards codependence on the idea of an open door world community which will forever be our vulnerability.

KDane  06/30/2010 04:08 PM Report

The anology of Vietnam to Afghanistan was discussed, with reasoning that, though the Vietnamese were not intent to show at our door, the general communistic domino worldwide dominence intent was, as this compared to the Al Qaida/influenced Taliban threat to the USA directly. But major points were missed here.

.......First, the communism domino theory was valid, per USSR edicts, and was effectively dealt with for SE Asia, despite the Vietnamese war loss. The idea and Asian strategy was always, to at least, prevent the homogneous spread of a single communistic order in contiguity. This was the end result, when the philosophical "Chess Match" between East and West was converted to a "Checker Board" by producing blocks to contiguity, and changing the colors of the jump spaces. China split from the USSR over principles and idealistic interpretations, forming its own separate form of Communism with Nationalistic goals of solely retaining its old empire borders(that included Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet, Inner Mongolia). The early USSR approval for N.Korean invasion of the South endangered China's long patient plans on Taiwan, inducing frictional splitting, and though N.Korea operated under USSR auspices, China could never abandon its integrity as a buffer to Japan and Taiwan. The Vietnamese war, again under Russian auspices, endangered China from the south and its southern vicinity in future approach to Taiwan and Hong Kong. China had a USSR ally to the South, also, after its border skirmishes with USSR in the earlier 50s created persistent tension. China, bolstered Cambodia, supporting the Khmer Rouge as a defensive response to USSR support of N.Vietnam. As the USA retreated from Vietnam, two critical events occurred, as Vietnamese communism overran the coastal nation. Firstly, the Vietnamese waged an effective Cambodian campaign, annihilating the Kmer Rouge and facilitating the return of a moderate government. Secondly, this action induced a North Vietnamese-Chinese massive border war involving a million+ soldiers, playing on both long held cultural emnity, new nationalism and communistic ideologic differences that evolved beyond the original USSR parentage. The Vietnamese not only held, but gained ground in the actions, blunting China's weak resolve to put resources beyond its long term original unification plans. Thus, a separate communism developed in both China and Vietnam, each immiscible with each other or with USSR ideals and goals. The Checker Game halted contiguous spread, divided the "enemies" and left them with their own resource consumption in emnitable positions. Though the USA-Vietnam military conflict was abandoned to surrender, and higher plan of national democracy creation in SE Asia lost, the larger war on worldwide monolithic communism took a defeat to its progenator, the USSR. China's dabbling in support for Albania also gave probing interference in the Balkans monopoly by the USSR, enhanced by Tito's independence in Yugoslavia. So the bigger strategy deems closer scutiny in the interplays of varied cutural differences as well as comunistic varieties. Battles were lost,lesser evils were resultant, but the greater picture was secured.

Second, the Taliban and their pre-Al Qaida governance

has surprisingly fallen from analysis. After the Taliban's major victory in Khabul, and consolidation of >80% of the nation, leaving resistance enclaves in the north, it began to show its true colors and danger to the World Community as a whole. If it is to be believed that UN attempts to preserve cultural sites and historic structures are a just and rightful cause, and that no society/culture should be allowed oppression, let alone dissolution, then the actions of the Taliban outside of Al Qaida need redressing. Recall, the Taliban went on a cultural extinguishment campaign against all Hindu-Bhuddist elements, with its notable demolition of the huge Bhudda statue that was a World Heritage site, among much , much more. Additionally,

its followers began an intolerance campaign to non-Muslims with the headline capture of 3 Christian missionaries that were the subject of diplomatic complexities that everyone seems to have forgotten. The Taliban were also in design to export their tribal allegiances and philosophical bent across national lines and had express intent on attacking Shi'ite Iran before dissuaded by Bin Laden and turned toward the US and West. This potentially could draw a direct regional world war, or lead further to Pakistan and India involvement directly in civil upheaval or indirectly as bordering powers. So, respect must be addressed towards the Taliban themselves as a dangerous potential to regional stability and World involvement, which could have not only been an East/West conflict, but the long feared Sunni/Shi'a showdown which might polarize the entire Muslim world in conflict.

Hopefully, the idea that just keeping Al Qaida's heads down with assassinations and not completely dealing with the Taliban's long term philosophy will be reconsidered with these reminders. Otherwise, our children's futures are in jeopardy as we head towards codependence on the idea of an open door world community which will forever be our vulnerability.

mutex  06/30/2010 11:51 AM Report

It all reminds me of Fantasy Island...The surge, boss, the surge! If Iraq is our template for success could someone please explain what failure looks like?

Just because the mainstream media has stopped reporting on the violence, corruption and instability doesn't mean its not still there on a daily basis. Just because American troops are hiding out on their bases doesn't mean there aren't still close to 100,000 of them there. Just because they had an election doesn't mean they will be able to form a new government. Not that it matters but does anyone even know who the Prime Minister is?

When this country devolves into civil war over oil revenues, politics, religion and ethnic divisions what will have been accomplished by the huge expense, destruction and loss of lives?

Saddam was no peach but as this great example of nation building unravels history will have a hard time reconciling the costs of removing him and one day 'the surge' will only be referred to in terms of sarcasm and derision.

NeilMacCallister  06/30/2010 11:25 AM Report

Why are we in Afghanistan?

To protect America.

Against what?

There are about 200 nuclear warheads in neighboring Pakistan, and more to soon appear in Iran, another neighbor of Afghanistan.

Tightening in a circle around those nuclear weapons are violent gangs of Taliban, Al-Queda, and the Revolutionary Guard.

What will "success" in Afghanistan look like?

Those nuclear weapons (..nor any others) are never used.

***

I am behind you in that, Mr. President.

Good luck now and always.

REMant  06/30/2010 11:13 AM Report

Well, I don't think it's a step down. I'm sure Marshall would have liked to have had Ike's job or MacArthur's. But did anyone yesterday ask him if he really wanted to do this? This is tho the kind of discussion we should have been watching on the news last week. I am not sure the president knew or knows now exactly what he wants to do. Actually I think this decision-making process akin to the way health care was handled, and it looks, as that did, rather like the proverbial swing designed by a committee. In this case, however, it can't be blamed on the Congress, at least not directly. I agree with those who think domestic politics had a lot to do with it, but I believe Biden really has been the voice of restraint, fearful of the war alienating the party base as much as taking on more than we are equipped and prepared to do. Like Vietnam, too, there's the specter of LBJ's attempt to punish the enemy into making peace - the way Rev Wayland tried to convert his son - never understanding that, leaving aside the morality of it, it can't work unless the situation is totally controlled, not only there, but also probably throughout the region. I think the majority of those with Vietnam experience see things pretty much as Cohen and I.