Afghanistan, August 2012: Return of the Fallen

Two months ago, I met a young man named Micheal. He had just come home from his 3rd tour of duty. This tour was served in Afghanistan.
It was supposed to be his last tour, but he'd only been home a week, and had already made the decision to re-up. Not because he missed it, or his buddies, but because he felt he had failed, and he needed to fix it.
To me he looked like he was just a child, all except his eyes. They held so much pain, that they could have been mistaken for someone very old, whose last days had been to much pain to bare.
Michael was a Medic, and one of the last things that he had to do before he shipped out to come home, was to work on a little two year old girl. She was very bad off, because of the blast from an IED. He needed to place an IV, but he couldn't get the needle to go though her skin. He told me it was like leather from the sun. He couldn't believe it because she was only a baby. He knew he had, to have, been hurting her, but she never made a sound. After 10 or 15 minutes of trying he finally called over another Medic to see if he could get an IV started. He couldn't, he did finally penetrate her skin with the needle but she was so little, he missed her vein. The little girl stared at Michael, the whole time he was stroking her cheek, while the other Medic was trying. Finally Michael said after another 15 minutes of trying the other Medic succeeded, and just as he did the little girl gave Michael the briefest of smiles,(or at least he thought/hoped she did) let out a last little breath of a sigh and died. He felt like, if only he could have gotten the IV in, she might have had a chance. If he hadn't failed, and it hadn't taken so long for him to call over the other Medic, she might have lived.
What this story hasn't told you, is that she was missing an arm, and bleeding profusely from a chest wound. But to Michael those didn't kill her, he did, all because he couldn't get that IV in. She was with him all the time in his mind and when he came home, nothing would take her place. So he chose to go back to try again.


These soldiers to, have a story, and even though I can't tell you what it is, I ask, would you please, honor them with your presence, and attention, like you did for Michael and the little girl. Your kindness would be appreciated.

In August, the 143rd month of the conflict, 53 coalition forces based in Afghanistan were killed -- the most in a single month since last September. Of these, five were from New Zealand, five from Australia, three from the UK, one from France, and the rest from the United States -- 50 men and 3 women ranging in age from 20 to 55. Collected below are images from the many ceremonies honoring the return of these 53 fallen soldiers. While the photographs may bear some similarities, keep in mind that each one represents a separate individual life lost in Afghanistan just last month. [41 photos]

CIA Report: Security Lapses Led to Afghanistan Bombing

http://politics.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/10/25/cia-report-security-lapses-led-to-afghanistan-bombing.html

How is it 9 years after 9/11, the same excuse can still be used for the reason an attack occurred?
Communication is still, after the poring of billions upon billions of dollars into the efforts to advance the technological uses of it, is still failing to make it up to the proper channels to be of any use in saving lives?
Who the hell is running this dog and pony show that this kind of ineptitude still continues to this day?
No documentation as well as management oversight?
Is this a contracted out position?
Dime to a dollar says it is.
And if it is, there can be no doubt about it, that people died directly due to the use of outsourcing by our government to pad the coffers of another Corporate favor fulfilled.


An internal review of the events leading up to the suicide attack against a CIA base in a remote part of Afghanistan last year has revealed a string of security and communications lapses in the weeks before the incident, which took the lives of seven agency employees. The bomber, Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi, was a Jordanian doctor who had convinced his CIA handlers that he could get close to top al Qaeda leaders.

Though al-Balawi had provided truthful and useful information in the past, that story was just a ruse to lull the Americans into a false sense of security. When al-Balawi arrived last year to meet with CIA officers for the first time in person at a remote base near Khost, he was not searched at the gate and proceeded to detonate an explosive vest near a group of officers assembled to greet him. "There wasn't a single point of failure that led to this incident," says a senior counterterrorism official who has read the report.

But in retrospect, some things could have been done differently. Three weeks prior to the attack, for example, a CIA officer in Amman had heard warnings that al-Balawi may be laying a trap, but those suspicions failed to pass far enough up his chain of command, the review found.

The review also confirmed what has long been known inside the CIA: that elementary security precautions, such as searching visitors to the base for weapons and explosives, were not followed. "These missteps occurred because of shortcomings across several agency components in areas including communications, documentation, and management oversight,"

Senate report slams Afghan security contractors

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101008/ap_on_bi_ge/us_us_afghanistan_contractors;_ylt=AsjWKMXUdBDhcejYHCoIp4SWwvIE;_ylu=X3oDMTNxbXZkdDJ2BGFzc2V0Ay9zL2FwLzIwMTAxMDA4L2FwX29uX2JpX2dlL3VzX3VzX2FmZ2hhbmlzdGFuX2NvbnRyYWN0b3JzBGNjb2RlA2dtcHIEY3BvcwMyBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDc2VuYXRlcmVwb3J0

Lol shut off the spigot of cash to the warlords that the mercenaries high.
Lets just shut off the mercenaries.
Afghanistan is kicking them out by the end of the year any way.
Where are "WE" gonna stick them next Pakistan?
It would seem we've extended the boundaries of the war again.
It just keep marching right along.
Kind of just like Germany did in world war II


Heavy U.S. reliance on private security in Afghanistan has helped to line the pockets of the Taliban and threatens the safety of coalition troops because contractors often don't vet local recruits and wind up hiring warlords and thugs, Senate investigators said Thursday.

The report by the Senate Armed Services Committee follows a separate congressional inquiry in June that concluded that trucking contractors pay tens of millions of dollars a year to local warlords for convoy protection.

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate panel, said he is worried the U.S. is unknowingly fostering the growth of Taliban-linked militias and endanger U.S. and coalition troops at a time when Kabul is struggling to recruit its own soldiers and police officers.

"Almost all are Afghans. Almost all are armed," Levin, a Michigan Democrat, said of the army of young men working under U.S. contracts.

"These contractors threaten the security of our troops and risk the success of our mission," he told reporters. "There is significant evidence that some security contractors even work against our coalition forces, creating the very threat that they are hired to combat

Photos show US soldiers posing with Afghan corpses

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20101001/D9IJ5OU80.html

Talk about having to much time on your hands.
This is called documented decadence.
The sick part is that others knew and shared these pictures.
And no one turned them in.
Now ask yourself, just exactly how many people are involved in this because it's no longer just the 3.
They shared the experience
And they wonder why the suicide rate for the military has sky rocketed .



Those who have seen the photos say they are grisly: soldiers beside newly killed bodies, decaying corpses and severed fingers.

The dozens of photos, described in interviews and in e-mails and military documents obtained by The Associated Press, were seized by Army investigators and are a crucial part of the case against five soldiers accused of killing three Afghan civilians earlier this year.

Troops allegedly shared the photos by e-mail and thumb drive like electronic trading cards. Now 60 to 70

Morlock's attorney, Michael Waddington, said the photos were not just shared among the defendants or even their platoon. He cited witnesses who told him that many at Forward Operating Base Ramrod in Kandahar Province kept such images, including one photograph of someone holding up a decapitated head blown off in an explosion.

That photo had nothing to do with Morlock, he said. It's not clear whether it's among the photos seized in the case.

Army to investigate claims about man portrayed as ringleader in Afghan war-crimes case

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013032321_warcrimes30m.html


The art of the "Thrill Kill".
How strange is it that about the time that the 'meat" of this story comes to the attention of the American public, Fort Hood has 4 suicides in the same week.
Is anybody really surprised that there is intentional murder occurring, when it's so widely known throught the military that this war was created for Corporate profit.
The message drilled home by a "War for Profit" is that the value of human life means nothing.


Other soldiers, in statements to Army criminal investigators, have portrayed Gibbs as the ringleader of the group that carried out the killings and other crimes, including beating one fellow soldier believed to be a drug informant. The investigation has resulted in charges against a dozen soldiers from the 5th Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, at Lewis-McChord.

More contractors than troops killed in war zones this year

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/me_iraq0953_09_29.asp

Sounds bizarre doesn't it, but it also tells the truth of the American war tale. The taxpayer is footing the bill not so much for our own troops but for the private payment of the corporate foot soldier.
It's definitely time to see a break down on where all the money is going for the DoD.
Never before have our troops received the maid service that corporate America has so kindly been contracted to provide.
The big what if: if the perks of having the security provided by the corporate foot soldier were rescinded, would our military still know how to function?

WASHINGTON — U.S. private contractors have been killed at a faster rate than American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.


A report said the deaths of private contractors in Afghanistan and Iraq have exceeded those of American soldiers in 2010. The report by ProPublica said this marked the first time in history that private employees have been dying at a faster rate than the soldiers of the U.S. military that contracted the civilians

The war logs

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/world/war-logs.html

A little light reading material for your perusal.

An archive of classified military documents offers an unvarnished view of the war in Afghanistan


The articles published today are based on thousands of United States military incident and intelligence reports — records of engagements, mishaps, intelligence on enemy activity and other events from the war in Afghanistan — that were made public on Sunday on the Internet. The New York Times, The Guardian newspaper in London, and the German magazine Der Spiegel were given access to the material several weeks ago. Read More »

U.S. withdraws ‘pain ray’ from Afghan war zone

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1297361/US-withdraws-pain-ray-Afghan-war-zone.html

Perhaps it left those that it was used upon a little well done.

A ‘pain ray’ that blasts the enemy with unbearable heat waves hasbeen pulled out of Afghanistan by the US military.
The Active Denial System (ADS), which cost about £42 million to develop, was on the brink of being deployed to disperse members of the Taliban as they attacked US forces.
The weapon, which causes immense pain to subjects but no lasting physical damage, was pulled from the war zone last week but US army chiefs in Afghanistan have stayed silent about the reason for the U-turn.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1297361/US-withdraws-pain-ray-Afghan-war-zone.html#ixzz0uigAqGut

US throws three billion dollars at Afghan bombs

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.fab5bc3bb366568ae2f62748180bf049.161&show_article=1

Oh look job creation

The United States is set to deliver three billion dollars worth of equipment to Afghanistan aimed at countering Taliban-made crude bombs used in the war, a US official said Thursday.
Improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, have become the main weapon used against international and Afghan forces fighting to end an insurgency increasingly seen as bogged down in favour of the Taliban.

The equipment was "at least doubling" current counter-IED capacity as forces did not have all they needed to take on an escalating threat, said Ashton Carter, US undersecretary of defence for acquisition, technology and logistics.

The new equipment, including tethered surveillance blimps, heavily armoured vehicles and detection machinery such as robots and mine detectors, would arrive in Afghanistan in the coming months, he told reporters.

Carter said the equipment would be accompanied by about 1,000 counter-IED experts, including laboratory technicians, intelligence analysts and law enforcement officials.

"This is an enormous plug of extra effort," he said, adding that the equipment would be shared with coalition and Afghan forces.

Report finds US tax money funding insurgents

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/21/96286/report-finds-us-tax-money-may.html

Looks like our government might be in a little trouble here.
The Supreme Court did actually just say that it is a crime to provide "material support" to foreign terrorist organizations, even if the help takes the form of training for peacefully resolving conflicts.
So that makes it not OK to bribe the Taliban for safe passage, no matter what it's for.
And actually the taxpayer is actually getting stuck paying for private security contractors who are committing illegal acts by funding the enemy?
Only in America folks
By the way I'd watch that first amendment stipulation, it's kinda dicey


WASHINGTON — Private security contractors protecting the convoys that supply U.S. military bases in Afghanistan are paying millions of dollars a week in "passage bribes" to the Taliban and other insurgent groups to travel along Afghan roads, a congressional investigation released Monday has found.

The payments, which are reimbursed by the U.S. government, help fund the very enemy the U.S. is attempting to defeat and renew questions about the U.S. dependence on private contractors, who outnumber American troops in Afghanistan, 130,000 to 93,000.

Court Affirms Ban on Aiding Groups Tied to Terror
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/us/politics/22scotus.html?hp

In a case pitting free speech against national security, the Supreme Court on Monday upheld a federal law that makes it a crime to provide “material support” to foreign terrorist organizations, even if the help takes the form of training for peacefully resolving conflicts.

What does the Supreme Court ruling on the federal terrorism law mean for free speech rights?

.Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority in the 6-to-3 decision, said the law’s prohibition of providing some types of intangible assistance to groups the State Department says engage in terrorism did not violate the First Amendment

Pentagon rethinking value of major counterinsurgencies

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/12/94058/pentagon-rethinking-value-of-major.html#storylink=omni_popular




Nearly a decade after the United States began to focus its military training and equipment purchases almost exclusively on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. military strategists are quietly shifting gears, saying that large-scale counterinsurgency efforts cost too much and last too long.

The domestic economic crisis and the Obama administration's commitment to withdraw from Iraq and begin drawing down in Afghanistan next year are factors in the change. The biggest spur, however, is a growing recognition that large-scale counterinsurgency battles have high casualty rates for troops and civilians, eat up equipment that must be replaced and rarely end in clear victory or defeat.
The economic downturn is driving much of the change within the Pentagon. Military spending has risen steadily since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

When former Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld arrived at the Pentagon in 2001, the Defense Department budget was $291.1 billion, or $357.72 billion in today's dollars. The current budget is $708 billion for defense costs and funding the wars.

Pentagon planners say budget cuts are inevitable, and that the change in strategy will help make them.

"We now have to figure out what works. We used to have a practically unlimited budget. Not anymore," said a senior military officer, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity in order to talk candidly. "There is no more room to experiment."

After most major conflicts in U.S. history, defense spending has dropped to prewar levels within two years, accounting for inflation, said James Quinlivan, a military analyst at the RAND Corp. The ends of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan aren't likely to make spending drop that quickly, Quinlivan said

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/12/94058/pentagon-rethinking-value-of-major.html#storylink=omni_popular#ixzz0nqSJ2kFe



Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/12/94058/pentagon-rethinking-value-of-major.html#storylink=omni_popular#ixzz0nqRxhbg0

U.S. Marine Walks Away From Shot to Helmet in Afghanistan .

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703562404575067550355712126.html?mod=WSJ-hpp-MIDDLETopStories

Why are we there? None of this makes sense anymore

[B]"He's alive for a reason," Tim Coderre, a North Carolina narcotics detective working with the Marines as a consultant, told one of the men. "From a spiritual point of view, that doesn't happen by accident."[/B]

Emanuel: Obama asking questions that have never been asked

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/18/emanuel-obama-asking-questions-that-have-never-been-asked/

Who are we to ask these kinds of questions of the Afghanistan government, as to whether they can provide peace and security for their own people?
The mission, as told to the American people, was to capture Osama Bin Laden, not to restructure Afghanistan's government into becoming a true partner of the United States.
If those parameters for invasion are considered just,then the only obvious question one can ask is who is next?

A top aide to President Barack Obama said Sunday that the administration’s thorough review of the U.S. military’s continued involvement in Afghanistan includes asking a number of questions about the Afghan government’s ability to function and provide peace and security on its own.

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said the White House is not only looking at the question of how many troops are necessary to accomplish the American mission in Afghanistan but also: “Do you have a credible Afghan partner for this process — that can provide the security and the type of services that the Afghan people need?”

“This is a much more complex decision” than just determining the appropriate level of troops, Emanuel told CNN Chief National Correspondent John King Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union.

“It’s clear that basically we had a war [in Afghanistan] for eight years that was going on, that’s adrift,” Emanuel also said, “that we’re beginning at scratch, just at the starting point, after eight years – and that there’s not an [Afghan] security force, an [Afghan] army, and the types of services that are important for the Afghans to become a true partner.”

Afghan mission falls short of expectations: Lawmakers

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

Clear direction, seems to be the root problem in quite a few different areas doesn't it.

The international military mission in Afghanistan has delivered "much less than it promised" due to the lack of a realistic strategy, an influential committee of lawmakers said Sunday.
In a report, the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee said without a clear strategy stabilising Afghanistan had become "considerably more difficult than might otherwise have been the case."

Lawmakers criticised US policies in Afghanistan and Pakistan and warned the "considerable cultural insensitivity" of some coalition troops had caused serious damage to Afghans' perceptions that will be "difficult to undo".


"We conclude that the international effort in Afghanistan since 2001 has delivered much less than it promised and that its impact has been significantly diluted by the absence of a unified vision and strategy grounded in the realities of Afghanistan's history, culture and politics," the report said.

"Although Afghanistan's current situation is not solely the legacy of the West's failures since 2001, avoidable mistakes, including knee-jerk responses, policy fragmentation and overlap, now make the task of stabilising the country considerably more difficult than might otherwise have been the case."

As for Britain's roughly 9,000 troops in Afghanistan -- who in July suffered their worst month since the 2001 invasion with 22 deaths -- the members of parliament (MPs) said their role has seen "significant mission creep".

They were initially sent to counter international terrorism and are now working on areas like fighting the drugs trade and counter-insurgency, it said, adding the military had not been given "clear direction".

U.S. General Sees Afghan Army, Police Insufficient Obama Strategy May Need More Funds,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071002975.html

Another Bush era revist. Can we do it? Hell no! We won't accept it this time.

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the newly arrived top commander in Afghanistan, has concluded that the Afghan security forces will have to be far larger than currently planned if President Obama's strategy for winning the war is to succeed, according to senior military officials.

Such an expansion would require spending billions more than the $7.5 billion the administration has budgeted annually to build up the Afghan army and police over the next several years, and the likely deployment of thousands more U.S. troops as trainers and advisers, officials said.

Obama has voiced strong commitment to the ongoing Afghan conflict but has been cautious about making any additional military resources available beyond the 17,000 combat troops and 4,000 military trainers he agreed to in February. That will bring the total U.S. force to 68,000 by fall.

Instead, Obama has emphasized the need to pay equal attention to other aspects of the U.S. effort, including bolstering Afghanistan's economy and governance. Announcement of any additional military resources this year would raise questions from Congress and the American public about whether his overall strategy is working as intended.

McChrystal has not yet completed a 60-day assessment of the war due next month. But Defense Department officials here and in Kabul, the Afghan capital, said he has informed Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, in weekly updates, of the need to increase the Afghan force substantially, as was first reported yesterday on washingtonpost.com. Officials spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss findings that have not yet been made public