By: Prof. Mahfuz Chowdhury
America has often fought the wrong war, at the wrong time, and against the wrong people. The wars in Vietnam, Iraq, and now Afghanistan would seem to fall into such categories. Although, apart from the human tragedy, the enormous economic fallout of the Vietnam War might be imagined, the full outcome of the Iraq war must be awaited as it is not over yet. However, the debate on the launch of the Afghan war has only begun and it would take many more years to assess the damage, assuming the war is not going to end anytime soon. This war is also affecting neighboring Pakistan and creating a great controversy in terms of its economic cost and more importantly about whether it is winnable. Opinions vary, but those who doubt that the war could be won seem to be gaining ground.

Here are some of their arguments. Afghanistan was such a sectarian and unmanageable country that super powers like the Soviets and earlier the British failed to control it. This country has not changed much since those days. The enemy that America is fighting in Afghanistan is elusive and the situation on the battleground itself is very erratic and unpredictable. The daily news of horrors such as the recent killings of the chief CIA operative including 6 other colleagues in Afghanistan, and the unprecedented and ever increasing human carnage in neighboring Pakistan should provide some important clues. In fact, the escalating conflict and mayhem in Pakistan, a nuclear country, is now adding to the genuine fear that its nuclear weapons are not safe in the hands of its government.

Is America’s goal to contain terrorism or to oppose organized Islamic fundamentalism in Afghanistan? If the fight is to contain fundamentalism, winning this war in Afghanistan alone is not likely to achieve it. The skeptics should only look at the unrelenting and vicious terrorist activities as well as the outright defiance that is spreading not only in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but also in Yemen, Somalia, Iran, Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and many other countries, including America itself. (Note the recent shooting rampage by an American army psychiatrist in Fort Hood, Texas, that claimed 13 lives plus many more injuries). Clearly, there are innumerable signs that the conflict is spreading. Indeed, after the failed 2009 Christmas Day bombing plot on a flight from Amsterdam, the U.S. government imposed intense screening of passengers at airports worldwide from 14 terror suspect nations. America had thought that it had found a willing partner in the Yemeni government that would support the deployment of American troops to fight the rising Islamic militants there. But it has been reported that the government of Yemen has rebuffed the idea for fear of losing popular support.

Religious fundamentalism is nothing new as it has been in existence since the birth of religion itself. The main theme of every religion was supposed to guide people to lead a noble life. Yet human society has experienced enormous oppression, suppression, violence, crime, brutality, fatality, and war in the name of religion. No religion is immune from the appeal of fundamentalism, and fundamentalist practices are still very much in existence, though subtly in some cases and violently in others. Without a doubt, Muslims have had their share of religious violence, and the present situation is no different. But to blame only Muslims for what is happening now would be morally wrong. How could one justify what Jews are doing to Muslims in the Middle East? Does not anyone see how Israel is provoking the Muslims?

Every heinous act of terrorism is a serious crime, and it must never be condoned under any circumstance, be it individual or collective. But, instead of looking or treating every terrorist act equally, if society condones or overlooks one and tries to punish the other, it only intensifies violence. This is precisely what seems to be the case with Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.

Islam is a world religion with a great following, and it certainly deserves respect. Yet the Muslim community always felt that they were being treated unjustly by the affluent west. The Arab-Israeli conflict has kept that feeling alive and very intense. The Muslims believe that the creation of Israel and the continued atrocities that are being perpetrated by Israel is nothing but a big conspiracy by the west to suppress them. They also believe that the Iraq and Afghan wars initiated by the United States are all part of the same conspiracy. And the religious fundamentalists are taking full advantage of public sentiment to create havoc and spread terrorism everywhere.

America claims itself to be the promoter of human rights and preaches self determination of all people. But it utterly fails to help the Palestinian cause. Why? The most difficult and painful situation for Muslims and other rational people, is to see and accept the sufferings of their fellow brethren in Palestine. The Muslims squarely blame America for the present tragedy because of its unequivocal support of Israel. After many years of armed struggle, the Palestinians have agreed to live peacefully with Israel in the internationally recognized pre 1967 border of Palestine. But Israel steadfastly refuses to compromise and continues to thumb its nose against world opinion by brutally suppressing the Palestinians, using American weaponry.

The best case for the Palestinians has probably been made by none other than the former U.S. President and a Nobel laureate Jimmy Carter, who argues in his book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid” that Israel’s continued control and colonization of Palestinian land have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Middle East. The Israeli blockade of Gaza’s 1.5 million residents for the past year?as a collective punishment, which has drawn many international condemnations including allegations of war crimes?is a glaring example of actions that openly provoke Muslims to resent America, which refuses to intervene and stop such Israeli atrocities.

There are other issues of contention for Muslims. America supports Saudi Arabia, an autocratic country with no democratic rights, while it refuses to recognize the democratically elected Palestinian representatives of Hamas in Gaza. By the way, America along with Israel once supported the Hamas in Gaza as a counter to the Fatah movement. On the other hand, many believe that Saudi Arabia is sponsoring fundamentalism by providing financial help to religious schools in Pakistan and other Muslim countries.

Additionally, America went to war in Iraq under false pretexts and different agendas, though it now claims that the purpose was to save the Iraqis from the brutality of Saddam Hussein. Muslims believe that the main purpose for invading Iraq was to protect America’s oil supply. And they have plenty of facts to justify their claim that America is driven by its economic greed. They look at the situation in Darfur, Congo, Myanmar and other countries where America failed to prevent atrocities or promote democratic rights.

Muslims even question the American policy of allowing Israel to hide its nuclear weapons and maintaining its own nuclear stockpile, while it rallies its western allies to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Ironically, America’s success against Iran would depend entirely on the co-operation of China and Russia, which might not be forthcoming as they too have their own world agendas to pursue.

The above exemplifies the ways that America has alienated Muslims over the years. Now the new generation of educated Muslims is getting impatient with American prejudices, and is effectively using the internet to communicate with and receive feedback from each other. The fundamentalists are successfully indoctrinating these young people to resort to violent tactics in the name of “Jihad“, a religious word for martyrdom. America and the rest of the world have already witnessed some of their brutal suicidal acts during and since 9/11. If the core issues are not addressed, even if America wins the war in Afghanistan, it might not dampen the spirit of young Muslims around the world to pursue their resistance. American suppression is likely to embolden the fundamentalists to embrace new or more dangerous tactics of terrorism. Violence begets violence, and it would be impossible for America to monitor, invade, occupy or control every Muslim militant country in the world.

Although it is the sole remaining super power, America seems to be losing its grip on its economic power. The country has yet to recover from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. The unemployment rate is hovering around 10 per cent, the federal debt has already surpassed $7.5 trillion, and the federal budget deficit was $1.4 trillion in fiscal year 2009. There are other emerging economic powers now, who are preparing to compete and check American hegemony in the world. In fact, America can no longer continue to impose its will on the world community. Nor can it suppress Islamic fundamentalism or its spread by its military power alone. It clearly needs to reassess its overall foreign policies if it wishes to rein in the fundamentalists and remain an important international player.

The rise of Islamic fundamentalism with its current ferocity is a problem for the Muslim populace as well. But they will be reluctant to join the fight with true conviction unless America is willing to change its attitude towards Muslims and correct its past mistakes. A speedy and just settlement of the Palestinian crisis would be a good start. It should then be followed by a quick withdrawal of American troops from Iraq and a winding down of the Afghan war as fast as possible. Unless America plays its cards right, the consequence of its military exercise in Afghanistan will be just as futile as the war in Vietnam.

About The Author: Professor Mahfuz R. Chowdhury teaches Economics at C.W. Post Campus of Long Island University, New York, USA. He has published articles on various issues of Bangladesh and other economic issues, which are posted on numerous web sites. He has wide ranging experience in international business and commerce, and has written on failure of communism & problem with developing countries. His book, “Economic Exploitation of Bangladesh“, addresses the economics of developing countries, using Bangladesh as a case study. | More Articles By Mahfuz R. Chowdhury |

———————————————————————————————————————————————-

———————————————————————————————————————————————-

   Columnist – John Sammon
I call for an immediate attack on Saudi Arabia to take over their oil and to install an American-backed regime in Riyadh friendlier to the United States. It’s been eight whole years, and we haven’t attacked a third country yet. We only attack countries weaker and smaller than ourselves. It was Saudi Arabia remember that supplied the hijackers that carried out 9-11.

Why do we love Saudi Arabia? We hate Moslems. Because of 9-11, we hate all Muslims, even those poor slobs in Indonesia, right?

We could make Saudi Arabia first an exploited colony garrisoned by American troops and ruled by an American viceroy who looks like John Wayne. He could saunter around with a pair of pistols and say to all the turban-heads, get out of my way, Pilgrim!

Eventually, we would annex Saudi Arabia and make it the 51st state in the union.

We would call it, Saudi America.

We would flood the country with right wing duck hunters from Minnesota who still believe in Dick Cheney, and white power skin heads with confederate flags on their trucks from the Deep South. They would take to it because Saudi Arabia, (excuse me), Saudi America, is a sandy, ugly, God-forsaken country just like Texas, home for the rednecks. The new arrivals would establish grease-laden junk fast food takeout shops, tequila growing farms, tattoo parlors, condom dispensers, factories that make specially designed lingerie for transvestite congressmen, motorcycle parts stores, laminated fruit used as sex aids, DVD adult movie rental outlets, and back-yard cottage industries making affordable reproduction World War 2 German helmets for Republican tea-baggers complete with swastikas.

We could build the very first adult-and-selected-minors-only X-rated Disney theme park and call it Stud Mickey on the Dunes (as in Mickey Mouse with a huge phallus riding a dune buggy across the Saudi sands). The center piece of the park would be the largest reality roller coaster in the world, specifically built to eject randomly chosen senselessly singled out certain unsuspecting riders engaged in the act of intercourse at high speed headfirst into a tiled lagoon, the possibility of potential un-rehearsed home movie-style entertainment to be televised for the cruel enjoyment of ignorant and easily impressed visitors, and those who enjoy listening to Sarah Palin.

This could all be funded by raising the price of gasoline.

Think what we could do with that oil money. We could turn Mecca into a glittering casino city to rival Las Vegas or even Branson Missouri with Arabic symbols on the slot machines to help fleece native sucker common-as-dirt potential slaves and hook them hopelessly on gambling, diverting them from their current occupations, sheep herding and wife beating.

A new industry, the sales of genetically-engineered gnats, would be developed, as hotter global warming sand dunes are prefect breeding grounds for the pesky insects. A rapidly multiplying growth bio-organic type of farming, gnats would be exported from Saudi America all over the world as a way to, after introducing them into the mouth, cleaning (by the insects eating away) decaying food between the teeth, eliminating the need for floss. A black market illegal trade could also be set up to infest the homes and cars of ex-wives and disagreeable bosses, the product to be titled, “Revenge with a Buzz.” We could hire Glenn Beck as a spokesman.

A special tax will be set up levied on the families of American serial killers back home based on household income to fund the first non-interrupted, elevated freeway running from the coast of Florida to the new state of Saudi America. This will allow the free movement between continents of hordes of Social Security grabbing, leech-like-freebie-sucking salary-less elderly retired loafers, who think the world owes them for the simple act of living, a bunch of non-contributing, seasonal immigrant vagabonds who will flock to a newly-constructed upscale gated condominium development along the Red Sea to be titled, Moses Slept Here, Phase One.

The Saudi royal family will be moved out and given property in the fashionable Hamptons of New York State, and posh flats in London, the only things they ever really wanted in the first place. They can thus be rich and drive Rolls Royces and pretend they are successful Englishmen wearing robes.

The surrounding ocean would be denuded of all its sea life by over-fishing and the All-Sex Porno Channel cable TV station introduced all across the country to take the place of the native religion, which will be abolished. Every citizen who currently practices any form of religion including Islam, Catholic and Mormon, will be required to convert instead to the selling of Mary Kay Cosmetics, a religion all its own.

Solar powered computerized micro chip mechanical camels will be created to run on the world’s first water-gravity-flow-fed pneumatic tube monorail system, the water to be shipped by means of a specially constructed overhead pipeline from the Central Valley of California as that state totally falls apart and no longer needs it. Governor Arnold will attempt to avoid presiding over the California debacle and will seek office in Saudi America, but will be stripped of steroids and escorted to the border where he will be told to go visit long-neglected relatives in Austria who highly doubt his even minimal acting ability.

Arnold will find it hard not to put on one of the cottage industry teabag reproduction German helmets.

————————————————————————————————————————————————-

————————————————————————————————————————————————-

   Columnist – John Sammon
Did you see where NASA (stands for, no a-hole bigger than a scientist a-hole), the spaced-out agency that wastes your tax dollars, crashed a rocket into the moon? It reminds me of an old racist slogan about Latino immigrants.

If they (immigrants) can’t eat it or steal it, they paint it (graffiti).

The statement for NASA ought to be, if they can’t control it or exploit it, they bomb it.

The military industrial colossus and its technocrat lackeys, not content with attacking impoverished countries for their oil in the Middle East under the guise of bringing to justice a Saudi Arabian (Bin Laden) by attacking other countries other than Saudi Arabia because we love the Saudi royal family. No. Not content with that, they are now bombing holes in celestial bodies, ostensibly to explore the possibility of water on the moon.

The United States has attacked more countries since 1900 than any other country. The United States has the biggest arms budget and is the biggest arms merchant in the world, all the while professing peace and nobility. The United States views other countries who threaten to attack as outlaw states and labels them as “rogue” nations.

But it’s okay for the United States to launch wars because the United States is always in the right. Now, as if that isn’t enough, the United States, in its infinite corporate fascist wisdom, has decided to attack the F..’ckin’ poor helpless moon.

I have this message for NASA. You bunch of white-coated cowards. You can’t even get it up, or grow hair on your chest. You won’t spend a nickel on a decent second-hand computer for a run down inner-city school, but you spend billions to punch a hole in the moon. I bet if angry people came down there to your windowless bunker where you plan your operations, you’d hide under your desk shaking with a slide rule in your hand.

What’s the moon ever done to you?

Oh I know. If we can somehow guess that there was once water on the moon, we’ll be able to say, hey! There was once water on the moon. That will really help us down here. Nearly half of every ten Americans are now living in poverty. We don’t want to focus any effort on doing anything about it.

Just remember the extreme right wing credo, if it’s money spent on bombing someone, anyone, no matter how many billions, then it’s patriotism, but if it’s money spent on helping people, it’s disloyal communism and subversion. Thus, a right wing extremist knows the cost of some things, and the value of nothing.

So what if we blow a hole in the moon? That was a hole that wasn’t there before. All the right wingers claim they know God personally. God created the moon, didn’t he? Then we come along, and defaced it.

We’re proud of ourselves. We love nothing better than gadgets, things. We don’t care about people, just gizmos. If we can punch a hole in the moon, we’re tough, we’re better than others. We dominate. If we can do it to the moon, anybody we don’t like down here better watch out.

Is there any way we can now pollute the moon like we’ve done our oceans? NASA will find a way. We can store our garbage on the moon. Then, we can pound our chest like apes and say, there was once water on the moon, and now our garbage is on the moon. We conquered the moon.

Just let it go. You’re too busy bombing the moon. The United States is also engaged in bombing two other countries under the guise of installing freedom.

Based on its use of bombing as an instrument of foreign policy and its hypocritical pandering to the arrogant philosophy that the United States is infallible and thus incapable of error, and the fact that the United States has in the last century out-bombed everybody else, but doesn’t want other countries to copy our lead and develop bombs. And to now include in the bombing extra-terrestrial bodies such as the moon.

Based on this display of arrogant, sonofabitch, craven cowardly, dishonest, ivory-tower, holier-than-thou, ruthless corporate, chauvinistic, values-twisted, greedy, lying, Roman-Empire-style act of pillage and hooliganism, defacing the moon.

I would like to see the United Nations (UN) formerly declare the United States to be a dangerous aggressor nation.

The United States, if it didn’t rule the world, would be forced to pay a fine and to repair the damage it has done to the moon, and to formally admit that this was an act of simple vandalism, as well as twisted, misdirected values.

————————————————————————————————————————————————-

————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Before the September 11 attacks, Washington’s Neo-cons had waited in frustrated hope for an event that would serve as the excuse needed to enable them to rouse public support for a war against Iraq and other “rogue states” where they were sure American power could easily dispatch. Their project for the New American century proposed to remake the oil-rich-Middle-East in America’s image. Vice President Dick Cheney was also dreaming to restore the imperial presidency that had been lost with Richard Nixon’s Watergate.

In 1999, when George W. Bush was considering for the Presidency, he contracted with Houston Journalist Micky Herskowitz for a ghost-written autobiography. No more than two months passed before Bush’s team of advisors dismissed Herskowitz. The gregarious governor was telling Mickey too much. What’s interesting about the Russ Baker interview with Mickey Herskowitz is the reasons Bush gave for wanting to attack a small country: he wanted to emerge from his father’s shadow and become more popular.

From a strategic point of view the most effective way to fight terrorism is by intelligence operations and police work. However, for all the above reasons, militarizing the fight into a perpetual state of “war” would most easily facilitate the expansion of presidential powers.

On the other side of the world, the extremist Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda were also making their plans. The people and government of Muslim nations from Algeria and Egypt, to Saudi Arabia and the Sudan, wanted to run the extremists out of their country, because they were inflicting violence to those they considered “not Muslim enough.” In Algeria the radicals had began eliminating each other over perceptions that many of their own members were not “pure enough.” For these reasons extremist Osama bin Laden had been chased from Saudi Arabia to the Sudan and then back to the caves of Afghanistan. Even in Afghanistan, Mullah Omar, concerned for the well-being of his Taliban government, had ordered bin Laden to quit giving interviews to the western press declaring jihad against Israel and the U.S.A.

Rudyard Kipling had described “Afghanistan” as the “place where empires go to die.” Bin Laden knew that, and believing that Israel and its supporter, the United States, were instruments of oppression for the muslim people, was looking for an opportunity to drag the United States into a long and costly war similar to that they had engaged the Soviet Union in the 1980s. They hoped to slowly wear Americans down as they had already succeeded with the Soviet forces. Their goal was to provoke such a heavy military response from the Americans that would offend the Muslim world, destabilize the region, and increase the oil prices (which were cheap through the previous two decades) bringing further damage to the American economy while the Middle East was prospering.

Of course Bin Laden was taking the risk that Americans would strike and destroy al-Qaeda in a way it would not alienate U.S. from the rest of the Muslims. But that did not happen. The Bush administration was not focusing its attention on bin-Laden, because they were planning to attack Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Instead of using U.S. troops to seal the border, President Bush relied on hired Pakistanis, who were receiving money also from Al-Qaeda! In the battle of Tora Bora the local “allies” who had mixed sympathies towards al-Qaeda, let many of them escapeâ?¦ Marine officials, who foresaw Al-Qaeda’s strategic withdrawal from Tora Bora were not allowed to patrol the border and seal off bin Laden’s caves. Some reports suggest that bin-Laden had escaped by the end of November, 2001. A witness present in the Tora Bora claims that Osama escaped around December 10, 2001.

“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.” George W. Bush, Washington, D.C. March 13, 2002. Six months after September 11.

President Bush should be grateful to Osama Bin Laden for his re-election in 2004, when the race for presidency was neck-to-neck with Democrat Kerry. While the Neo-con political adviser Karl Rove was orchestrating Bush’s image as “resolute” and Kerry’s as “weak flip-flopper,” Osama bin Laden released a tape saying “Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or Al-Qaeda. Your security is in your hands. Any nation that does not attack us will not be attacked.” Bin Laden knew that by demanding the Americans to surrender, they would proudly want to fight back and consequently vote for the “resolute” presidential candidate Bush instead of the “weak” Kerry. Bin Laden knew that Bush would continue his clumsy war in Iraq that depleted our economy and deteriorated diplomatic relations with Middle East.

The war on Iraq was not as easy as Americans had expected. Sad to admit, the “war on terror” made Americans fall in bin Laden’s trap, resulting to all the things that Bin Laden had wanted. One of the things that bin Laden demanded years ago was the oil should cost $144 barrel, Charles Edmund writes in “W got his war” of The Coyote Report.

—————————————————————————-
About The Author: Coddie Adwar writes exclusively for THE COYOTE REPORT, a POLITICAL NEWS BLOG, the home of “GOOD RIDDANCE BUSH, THE END OF AN ERROR“ bumper stickers. and “W GOT HIS WAR” e-book written by Charles Edmund Coyote Get a FREE CHAPTER on how we let bin LADEN escape from Tora Bora.
—————————————————————————-

…..Actually, it’s more sophisticated than that: Get Saudi Arabia, our chief oil pusher, to up our dosage for a little while and bring down the oil price just enough so the renewable energy alternatives can’t totally take off. Then try to strong arm Congress into lifting the ban on drilling offshore and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

It’s as if our addict-in-chief is saying to us: “C’mon guys, you know you want a little more of the good stuff. One more hit, baby. Just one more toke on the ole oil pipe. I promise, next year, we’ll all go straight. I’ll even put a wind turbine on my presidential library. But for now, give me one more pop from that drill, please, baby. Just one more transfusion of that sweet offshore crude.”

It is hard to find the words to express what a fraudulent, pathetic excuse for an energy policy President Bush’s new plan is…..[MORE]