For Your Consideration: Afghanistan, America’s Longest War

(noon. – promoted by ek hornbeck)

This being Memorial Day Weekend, while we are all celebrating, we need a reminder of what this “holiday” is really about.

Grim statistic: 1000th American Military Death in Afghanistan. Blessed Be.

US death toll in Afghanistan reaches 1000 as Americans weary of war

Arlington NAtional Cemetary,  Afghanistan War Dead

   The toll of American soldiers killed in Afghanistan reached 1,000 on Friday, a grim milestone that came as Americans back home prepared to commemorate their war dead.

   News that the body count had ticked into four figures came with the death in a roadside bombing of an American serviceman, yet to be named, who was the 32nd US soldier to die in the past month. He is the 430th to be killed in Afghanistan since President Obama took office in January 2009.

Reflections of war

The Vietnam War’s length can be measured in many ways. The formal beginning of U.S. involvement often is dated to Aug. 7, 1964, when Congress passed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, giving the president a virtual carte blanche to wage war. By the time the last U.S. ground combat troops were withdrawn in March 1973, the war had lasted 103 months.

U.S. forces attacked Afghanistan on Oct. 7, 2001. On June 7, the war will complete its 104th month. President Obama on Thursday reaffirmed his commitment to the war, saying “it is absolutely critical that we dismantle that network of extremists that are willing to attack us.”

This longest war is far from America’s bloodiest. It has drifted in and out of focus and, for much of its life, been obscured by another war, in Iraq.

When will we ever learn?

h/t Jim White at FDL


Skip to comment form

    • TMC on May 29, 2010 at 5:53 am

    May the Goddess Guide them on their Journey to the Summerlands. May their families and all the world find Peace. Blessed Be.

  1.  the Woodstock soundtrack and heard this song. Sometimes I wonder if war isn’t our legacy. Sadly, nothing really changes.

  2. reserves. At first a coalition of interested nations, now at  20 years (very short historically), it  has simply evolved into a larger, amorphous, geoeconomically driven “action” (for lack of a better term), an exclusive American foreign policy quagmire that is a financial windfall for the MIC.

    The anti-war sentiment that ironically sparked Obama’s campaign died with Obama himself. Those who have given their lives receive our prayers and deserve our blessings, those who have sent them to die our scorn.

    When will we ever learn? Good Question

    Best Wishes to You TMC

    • RUKind on May 29, 2010 at 6:34 pm

    It’s that simple.


    • banger on May 30, 2010 at 1:19 am

    The beauty, from the oligarchy’s point of view of this war is that it can never be over so that it echoes the GWOT — it keeps us in a state of “war” which is very effective from a propaganda POV. But there are also strong strategic ground for this war that were missing from Vietnam, though that war did have some strategic merit in keeping SE Asia from charting to independent a path (had nothing to do with “communism.”

    The clear strategic objective is as follows: 1) it is a war that cannot be won even theoretically–Iraq was “won” because it was a modern state and by destroying it you win, not so in Afghanistan–the Afghans will fight as they have done since Alexander’s troops settled there; 2) this puts U.S. forces near the Central Asian republics of the former SU–this keeps pressure on the Russians to not be too confident of their power in the region; 3) the real power-objective is Pakistan–keeping Pakistan on the verge of chaos destroys any chance of there being a cohesive state in Pakistan that would threaten U.S. intentions in the region which are 4) aimed at China, Pakistan’s natural ally–much of U.S. policy in the Persian Gulf is aimed at China because controlling the oil supply gives the U.S. strong political leverage on the Chinese, namely insures that China will not challenge the dollar or ask the U.S. to ever fully repay the debt they hold–China is financing our spending; and 4) and perhaps less important–it keeps troops near to India in case India has any plans to adopt an independent course since it is now, practically speaking, a satellite of the global empire. Any lessening of U.S. power in the region might give India other ideas–at present it sees its interest in siding with the Empire for which the U.S. is the military wing. My sense, being somewhat familiar with India, is that some Indians believe they can have one of the dominant voices in the Empire if they play their cards right.

    Thus from the strictly Machiavellian foreign policy standpoint the War in Afghanistan, regardless of 1,000 or 100,000 troop losses is a requirement for the oligarchy. The war will not end. If it does then I can’t imagine the consequences.

  3. that’s the risk they take, for a comfortable life.

    I get much more excited about civilians killed BY military people, for no reason whatsoever.  

Comments have been disabled.