Al-Jazeerah: Cross-Cultural Understanding

www.ccun.org
www.aljazeerah.info

Opinion Editorials, July 2010

 

Al-Jazeerah History

Archives 

Mission & Name  

Conflict Terminology  

Editorials

Gaza Holocaust  

Gulf War  

Isdood 

Islam  

News  

News Photos  

Opinion Editorials

US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)  

www.aljazeerah.info

 

 

 

 

After McChrystal, Who's Next On The Axing Row?

By Ali al-Hail

Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, July 12, 2010

 
 
"Stanley McChrystal, the Obama's top commander in Afghanistan, has seized control of the war by never taking his eye off the real enemies, the wimps in the White House" (The Rolling Stone Magazine).

 
The query, which should be earnestly, addressed, and pointedly, answered is, not: why did General Stanley McChrystal, the US 'axed' top commander in Afghanistan, and his aides disparage, criticize, and mock the Obama Administration, over its 'inhereted' policy in Afghanistan, from the Bush era? But, rather, why did he and his staff, have to put their career at such too great a risk, and courageously, unveiled the probably, 'unknown' face of the war, or its real 'hidden agenda', according to the "Runaway General" article, published in the Rolling Stone magazine, by Micheal Hastings, on June 22, 2010? That's the question, which should be thoroughly, dealt with (should someone, somewhere wishes to do so).
 
The 'fired' General, has evidently, found, since he came to command that, the US-Led- NATO's ISAF (international Security Assistance Force), had been falling apart, despite corporate media's propaganda of denial, concealing, confusion, and manipulation. Even long before he has become the new top commander nearly, a year ago, this pattern of lacking a degree or another of buoyancy, amongst allies, has noticeably, been persistent.
 
Basically, the war in Afghanistan has certainly, lost momentum by now, amongst ally countries' populations. Though, it has never ever been popular, initially, to a degree. Seemingly, the lingering rhythm of it, has made it even far much more unpopular, and observably, out of favor.
 
For; the lengthy and costly, US \ Anglo War on Afghanistan, which has emotionally, perhaps, been inflicted on US-Led-NATO's associate states, had led to a collapse of the Dutch government. Further, it has forced the departure of the German President. Yet, this senseless war, has ignited both Canada and the Netherlands, to announce withdrawing their 4, 500 troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2010.
 
Additionally, the reasons upon which the war was initiated by the US and Britain, had been related to sheer assertions, rather than a hard core evidence, about Al Qaeda's Osama Bin Laden's involvement in 9\11. The fraudulent theory was then, had they dislodged Taliban (the alleged harbor for Al Qaeda's) from power, Al Qaeda's and Taliban would have terminated, once and for all, and there would have been no threat to US security.
 
In later phases of the war, this perspective, has been somehow, altered. The target now, is to liberate Afghanistan from its own citizens i.e., Taliban. In the same way, has been the target, to liberate Iraqis from Iraqis. It looks, sounds, and it is actually, a very odd logic. Letís assume that, an external power, has proclaimed, it would invade the US to liberate the Native Americans from those in power now. Or else, to liberate the Hispanics, or other ethnic groups from other sections of US society. Will such a logic be acceptable?
 
Nevertheless, having said all of that, to make the task of the new commander, David Patreus, even more complex, Britain, the main ally to the US, has suddenly, announced withdrawing its 1000 strong force from Sangin, Southern Afghanistan, calling on the US to fill the vacuum. Apart from all of those obstacles to the war, demonstrations all over the USA, and NATO's countries, have frequently, erupted, protesting the destructive war, since as early, as 2001. Many in the war ally countries, argue as to how far could they tolerate wasting their taxed moneys on a war that, almost impossible to win.
 
During the month of June alone, the US-Led-NATO's ISAF Forces, lost 102 personnel, nearly, a half of them were Americans, and many more were wounded, most of them had been US personnel. This escalation has made June the most fatal, since October 7, 2001, when the invasion was launched, by the Bush Administration.
 
The current month of July, seems likely, to resemble June. Within the first week eight US personnel had been killed, and four troops from other NATO's forces. Others, US and NATO's soldiers had been injured. Moreover, the US-Led-NATO's ISAF's forces, have given the new General, Petreus another kind of perception. They bombed their own Afghan ally, killing more than six Afghan soldiers, and wounded many more. Such an accident which, its pattern has been quite an exclusive one, since 2001, it however, shows how confused they are in their fighting against Taliban.
 
Many US commanders have led the US-Led-NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, and have left the battlefield, and decided to quit, for one reason or another, since October 7th, 2001. On the contrary, Taliban has not, and they won't look to leave. Mohammed Omer, the Taliban leader still leads the war, while president Bush has gone, and so did a countless number of US top commanders.    
 
Professor, Dr. Ali Al-Hail, Media Consultant, Professor of Mass Communication, Twice Fulbright Award Winner, Fulbright Visiting Scholar, Vice-President Of Qatar Fulbright Group, CSR Award Judge, Psychosomatics writer, Management Trainer, and Board Member of AUSACE, ASC, IABD, NEBAA, BEA, IMDA and EAJMC American Associations.

 

 

 

 

 

Opinions expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors and they may not represent Al-Jazeerah & ccun.org.

editor@aljazeerah.info & editor@ccun.org