The New 'Forgotten War'

For Obama and McCain, the debate is all about Iraq and Afghanistan. But the bigger problem is Pakistan.

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: nawawimohamad @ 07/27/2008 4:33:32 AM

    It???s like in the movies or Television drama series where CIA death squads are in operation to eliminate ???enemies??? of the United States. In Afghanistan, this movie is being played in real time with real people being killed and at times entire villages razed by an angry mob called the CIA paramilitaries.
    A United Nations investigator released a preliminary report citing widespread civilian deaths in Afghanistan, often at the hands of unaccountable units led by the CIA or other foreign intelligence agencies, including the Mossad ??? or Israel???s secret service.

    The British Intel is also involved in the secret battle in which the target is mostly civilians who knows too much about the Taliban and Taliban close allies in villages and cities.

    These ops ??? illegal according to the rules of wars ??? were condemned by Philip Alston who is the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Professor Philip Alston.

    ???My focus is on extrajudicial executions or what might be called unlawful killings. The principal actors whose conduct I have been examining include the Government, particularly the police, the international military forces and the anti-government elements, including the Taliban. The bottom line of my report is that there are many killings which are avoidable,??? he said after delivering a devastating report that showed the CIA were killing civilians with impunity in Afghanistan.

  • Posted By: myersbill2001 @ 07/27/2008 3:09:33 AM

    Is Mr Hirsh being naïve, or disingenuous, when he refers to unilateral action in Pakistan by the US in the conditional.
    Even if we dismiss the reports of covert actions by US special forces in the Pakistani tribal areas along the Afghan border how are we suppose to sweep under the carpet the aerial bombardments by Predators? It's been only six weeks since the US killed eleven Pakistani border police.
    It's ludicrous to suggest, as Mr Hirsh does, that unilateral US intervention in Pakistan is a highly controversial proposal dreamed up by Obama, when in fact it is actual, current US policy.
    William Myers, Madrid, Spain

  • Posted By: SikandereAzam @ 07/25/2008 12:14:30 PM

    We all should visualize the solving of the world's 2 most serious conflicts today (Israeli-Palestinian & Kashmir) much like the past battles in efforts for:
    The discovery of Penicillin (1942)
    Finding a vaccine to conquering the scourge of Polio (1955)

    • Posted By: John_Toradze @ 07/25/2008 12:30:59 PM

      Kid, you really need to learn how to think and be critical of what is rolling around in your head.

      First. always start by asking, "Is this true?" Start with Israeli-Palestinian & Kashmir bing the so most serious conflicts today. Are they? What other conflicts are going on? For instance, did you know that the largest land battle in the history of the world took place during the US bombing of Kosovo?

      Second, when you use parallels, ask yourself, "Does this make any sense?" After that, ask yourself, "Does this support my position?" and if it doesn't, then ask yourself, "Should I change my position now?"

      In this case, you have equated two conflicts based on Muslim ideology and culture with non-Muslims with battle against disease. Essentially what you did was tell me that the root cause is a disease. That means that there is a common thread. Aha! It's Islam and its culture! So you just told me that Islam is the disease that must be cured for there to be resolution of these conflicts. I must say that I have to agree.

      • Posted By: the-commish @ 07/27/2008 1:02:10 AM

        The largest land battle in the history of the world took place during WWIi; it was callet the Battle of Stalingrad!

      • Posted By: raddave @ 07/25/2008 1:25:22 PM

        Kosovo, the largest land battle in history? Kosovo is about 10,000 square Km with a population of about 2 million. Kosovo is smaller than New Jersey and has a population about the size of Sofia, Bg. Definately NOT the largest land battle in history. Palistine and kashmir are not conflicts based on Muslim Ideology and culture, but about land. Islam is not a disease, the disease is HATRED on BOTH sides.

        BTW I feel that us getting involved in Kosovo was a HUGE mistake because Kosovo was a part of Serbia and Kosovo should have never been allowed independance because it cause instability in all of the Balkans.

    • Posted By: 2cents @ 07/25/2008 12:43:39 PM

      Also the discovery of penicillin was an accident not a battle like the supposed "war on cancer". Bad analogy.

  • Posted By: newkid1 @ 07/25/2008 12:33:12 PM

    There is a subtilly annoying little fact that everyone seems to forget. It is the fact that neither the President or The Vice President can start a war before consulting Congress. Congress is and where we need to concentrate our efforts for re-election, not the President. All these comments are cicumstantial until we have conformation from Congress.

    • Posted By: raddave @ 07/25/2008 1:38:23 PM

      Neither the president or vice president can start a war. Declaring war is falls under the constitutional authority of the congress.

      • Posted By: the-commish @ 07/27/2008 12:58:17 AM


        That is true only for a "declared" war. The president can start an "undeclared" war (which is war just the same), but Congress would have to fund it, or it would soon end.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 07/25/2008 2:45:18 PM

    Not so fast Hirsh.

    The Associated Press July 25,2008: ''Iran May End Cooperation With Nuclear Investigations''.

    Among the details observed as presented by IAEA Deputy Director Olli Heinonen in Geneva yesterday are drawings ''of uranium shaped to fit a warhead'', ''explosives tests that could be used to develop a nuclear detonator'',and ''Iranian draft plans to refit missles with nuclear warheads''. A worried British Foriegn Office has released this statement:

    ''The IAEA has raised serious concerns over Irans activities with a military dimension''.

    Irans Vice President has concluded that these talks are over. Replied other diplomats,''The IAEA is at a dead end''. Theres your ''diplomacy''in action Obama. [And there is the worth of your NIE you so blindly embraced less than a year ago Hirsh].

    • Posted By: the-commish @ 07/27/2008 12:48:50 AM

      That does not change the fact that the Mullahs are not stupid. They may indeed be seeking nuclear weapons, but that does not mean they will use them. Let me point out that the Soviet Union (RIP) had nukes from 1946 on, and did not use them once. MAD is still a valid concept, even though the Soviet Union no longer exists. Iran knows that an attack on Israel, for instance, would be suicide for them. As I say, they are neither stupid or suicidal.

    • Posted By: oldguru @ 07/25/2008 7:12:48 PM

      Well, the threats from our cowboy president sure haven't done any good. Perhaps if he had not bullied them we could have gotten somewhere with diplomacy.

    • Posted By: basedrum777 @ 07/25/2008 2:54:41 PM

      So you agree that we should've handled them before Iraq then huh?

      • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 07/25/2008 3:56:38 PM

        Or at the same time. Regardless,Obamas plea [which is elsewhere covered here on NEWSWEAK],has fallen on deaf ears. We will expect fully,that ,in the circular,going-nowhere round of ''diplomacy'',now that the truculent Iranians are packing up their show,that a UN Security Council meeting and another of these ''resolutions'' that you could use to wallpaper the Houston Astrodome,will be in the offing...While Iran furthers its plans. The ball is out of Obama and even McCains hands. Look to Israel to see what will soon be coming upon a complete breakdown in ''diplomacy''[which is already occurring],and the IAEA inspections regimen,which is being defied by Tehran.

  • Posted By: SikandereAzam @ 07/25/2008 5:49:19 PM

    I agree with Michael Hirsh that Pakistan, along with Afghanistan, is the center of gravity for the focus of the fight against international terrorism. Of course, it is my firm conviction that this scourge can be defeated through helping to end two very serious conflicts in the world today and I will comment on of the conflicts-Kashmir.
    Some contributers to this forum have very balanced, insightful and informed opinions. But I am aghast at the extreme and uninformed opinions that inhabit this forum also.
    For instance, it is my experience that most people from both India and Pakistan are good and reasonable people. Not everyone in Pakistan is a jihadist or a terrorist, most people are not. Not everyone in India is against negotiations on Kashmir; many people there would like to see better realtions between India and Pakistan and have Kashmir solved.

    The world community needs to do some prodding of these two countries, both with beautiful cultures and talented people, to help with the resolution of the Kashmir dispute if the world is to have some semblance of peace in that part of the world.
    I have been a fortunate person to have visited both countries and have many friends from both India and Pakistan and I also am fortunate to be able see the beauty in the people from both countries.

    • Posted By: the-commish @ 07/27/2008 12:40:41 AM


      Friend, there is another problem in Kashmir, one which only a few people know about: China actually occupies a small portion of Northeast Kashmir. It's not just India and Pakistan duking it out, they have to be careful of China, another armed nuclear power!

      Not that the Chinese need any more landmass; they have already usurped Tibet!

  • Posted By: a brighter America 08 @ 07/26/2008 3:15:57 AM

    Read all the comments. Very interesting and enlightening. Aren't we fortunate to speak our minds without fear of being beheaded or having my hands chopped off because my opinions are conveyed via the internet, letting my fingers do the walking on my keyboard while i do the talking. We are blessed to live in this country of ours, even with all our problems. i believe we need a president who can step out of the proverbial "box" and look at it from all angles and beyond. I don't McCain is capable of doing that. Right now he is centered on the surge, what he calls "my surge". By the wway,. McCain has been claming, lately, that he KNOWS how to win wars!!! He was in VietNam as a pilot, got shot down , ane was taken prisoner; JUST HOW did THOSE experiences tach him how to WIN wars?? McCain is not very bright, the highest grade in make in his 20 years in the Navy was CAPTAIN!! YES, CAPTAIN!! He was STILL a JUNIOR OFFICER when he retired from the U.S. Navy!! He graduated 395th out of his graduating class of 399 students in the Naval Academy!! I would say McCain is not very intelligent or even smart; however, like a common criminal, he is a con artist.

    • Posted By: the-commish @ 07/27/2008 12:24:50 AM

      I agree with almost everything you said, except one thing:

      CAPTAIN in the Navy is the equivalent of COLONEL in the Army or Air Force; hardly a "junior" officer.

  • Posted By: PacificGatePost @ 07/27/2008 12:18:54 AM


    POPPY FIELDS OF MASS DESTRUCTION ---- TIME TO AWAKEN

    The beautiful and delicate poppy that now paints the landscapes of Afghanistan with vibrant colors, has long been the symbol for sacrifice. The aesthetic is as soothing to the sense of sight, as it is exasperating to the conscience.

    http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/04/poppy-fields-of-mass-destruction.html

    Drastic action is required.

  • Posted By: herbo21k @ 07/26/2008 2:53:52 PM

    No Pakistani govt could survive for very long if it embraced a serious military move against the tribal areas, a string of petty emirates each with thousands of fundamentalist, basically illiterate "subjects" most all of whom live in 14th century poverty. Therefore only occasional feints, a few brief firefights and many more years of feckless "negotiations" will ensue as "The Taliban" consolidates its position of authority within these strange societies. These areas are not only remote geographically but remote in every other sense of the word. A military campaign in the Waziristans, for instance would be next to impossible due to the extraordinary , costly logistics alone. The terrain is very rugged with hills higher than most US mountains, mountains that make the Rockies look like termite mounds. This terrain entirely favors the defense and is a major reason why neither the Pakistani Army, nor NATO forces want to launch any major offensives to "seek and destroy" Islamic militants in their own neighborhood. So far, anytime the Taliban has come out of these protected zones and gone on the attack, they have suffered serious defeats and major losses of life and weaponry. A "tit for tat" situation exists and is likely to remain so.

  • Posted By: Trooper101st @ 07/26/2008 10:35:11 AM

    P-stan only appears to be a US ally. Thier ISI, military, have been either helping them directly or cutting deals that appease the jihadi's. If its a case of logistics, better find another route coz the only way to slow the T-ban/AQ down is hit them where they live-PAKISTAN. Selling them Block 50 F-16's to a gov. that is betraying us is more lunacy from Bush and friends. If we are to make A-stan stable, then a massive strike across the border is essential. The P-stani's have no authority in these tribal areas, and they are NOT the entity that governs these lands. Strike them out of the blue, tell the P-stani's to stay outta the way, or your actions will be dealt with in a hostile manner. P-stan 's Army Corps commanders are T-ban sympathysers, maybe even members. They have no intention of helping us. I been there 3 times, a total of 37 months, saw the camps in N. Waziristan, Baluchistan, and they operate with impunity. P-STAN IS THE ENEMY.

    • Posted By: SikandereAzam @ 07/26/2008 2:06:32 PM

      Trooper101st: It is very essential that we keep Pakistan as an ally, even if they are far from perfect. They have had some success in capturing al Qaeda figures and even a few Taliban.

      I respect your military experience there, but please remember some history:

      Cambodia, 1970. The Taliban would like nothing better than to have the U.S. start bombing Pakistan. It would be like Cambodia all over again with the Taliban (like the Kmer Rouge) taking control of the country.
      We could see a U.S. defeat (again) and all hell break loose on innocent Pakistani people reeling from the crazy doings of the Taliban...Agree or disagree, Sir?

  • Posted By: chamsticks @ 07/26/2008 1:46:53 PM

    My comment got cut off so I'll finish it here. Bush had his chance and blew it. Now it's time to rethink this whole thing. I can't see how anyone in Pakistan right now is a threat to us. If there's any threat at all, they're in Europe or they're already here. Pakistan may be no friend of ours and if so, why are we sending them billions that Pakistani government sympathizers can use to finance the Taliban.

  • Posted By: chamsticks @ 07/26/2008 1:37:42 PM

    Why do we consider a bunch of tribals in mud huts to be threats to the biggest superpower in the world. I mean they got lucky once and might even get lucky again. Knocking down some buildings is pretty bad but throwing trillions of dollars down the drain is even worse. You contain them, keep an eye on them, just like we should have done with Saddam. Invading a nuclear power, on the other hand, is quite a hell of a risk. Bush had

  • Posted By: ragnar30066 @ 07/26/2008 12:28:54 PM

    Please, Obama can only learn so fast. Can this wait until he is comfortable with Iraq and Afghanistan?

  • Posted By: JTatEHT @ 07/26/2008 11:07:00 AM

    It seems to me that Obama has discussed, or at least touched on, these issues with Pakistan. He certainly includes Pakistan when discussing the need for more troops in Afghanistan. He clearly realizes that there is no way to defeat the Taliban and to destroy Al Quaida without engaging Pakistan in a more productive way.

  • Posted By: Fernadez @ 07/26/2008 9:50:46 AM

    John MCCain doesnt know Shiite and Sunni are Bitter enemy since saddam days,Also this spring, McCain twice appeared to mistake again twice Sunnis and Shiites, two branches of Islam that split violently

    John MMcain doesnt know where is Pakistan ,McCain responded: ???I'm afraid it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq/Pakistan border." The ABC posting added: ???Iraq and Pakistan do
    not share a border.

    ???Somalia??? for ???Sudan???: As recounted in a reporter???s pool report from McCain???s Straight Talk Express bus on June 30, the senator said while discussing Darfur, a region of Sudan: "How can we bring pressure on the government of Somalia?"
    Senior adviser Mark Salter corrected him: ???Sudan

    ???Germany??? for ???Russia??? memorializes McCain referring to President Vladimir Putin of Russia ??? following a trip to Germany ??? as ???President Putin of Germany.

    This spring, McCain said troops in Iraq were ???down to pre-surge levels??? when in fact there were 20,000 more troops than when the surge policy began.

    In perhaps the most curious incident, McCain said earlier this month that as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, he had tried to confuse his captors by giving the names of Pittsburgh Steelers starting players when asked to identify his squadron mates. McCain has told the story many times over the years ??? but always correctly referred to the names he gave as members of the Green Bay Packers

    ""Wakakaka"""' This the Guy going to Be President of United?..........I laugh my Ass off.

    In Phoenix earlier this month, McCain referred to Czechoslovakia, which has been divided since Jan. 1, 1993, into the Czech Republic and Slovakia. He also referred to Czechoslovakia during a debate in November and a radio show in April.

  • Posted By: Anju Chandel @ 07/26/2008 8:06:53 AM

    You are right about Pakistan being the real crucible of terror in the world. However, it would be unfair to say that Barack Obama has also missed it. Rather, he has already spoken about bombing Pakistan's north-west frontier borders in order to eradicate al-Qaeda terrorists, if need be. I think he should emphasize upon this plan more emphatically.

  • Posted By: a brighter America 08 @ 07/26/2008 2:05:32 AM

    Perhaps someone whould interview McCain about this since he is the self-proclaimed expert at knowing how to win wars. What puzzles me about his claim is if he really knows how to win wars, howcome we are still in both Afghanistan and Iraq?? If he is such an expert WHY didn't he SHARE HIS UNLIMITED EXPERTNESS AT WINNING WARS with President Bush and the military commanders?? Please, I am not trying to be funny, I WANT AND DESEVE answers from McCain; I believe we ALL do!! Since he absolutely KNOWS how to win wars and did not share his UNLIMITED KNOWLEDGE with our President and the Military generals, then it is CLEAR he wanted these wars to go on for years to come! WHY?? Does he derive pleasure from all the killing that goes on in these wars?? Dos he have some sick reasoning to punish the Iraqis, especially, to get back at the Viet Cong?? What kind of sick thinking is McCain all about?? The truth of the matter is McCain knows NOTHING about winning war. He was shot down and taken prisoner, what did THAT teach of about winning wars?? ZILCH!! WHAT WARS has McCain WON to give him the experience of winning wars, especially when he was NEVER IN COMMAND DURING WAR?? TRUTH: McCain is feeding America's citizenry with a pack of self-serving lies to benefit him!! Come on, fellow citizens, think! McCain's claims are delusional at best! Lately he has proven he is very short on foreign affairs.

  • Posted By: Wisconsin Voter @ 07/26/2008 1:33:12 AM

    Obama knows where Pakistan is.


    More then I can say for McSame!

  • Posted By: PacificGatePost @ 07/26/2008 1:29:07 AM


    POPPY FIELDS OF MASS DESTRUCTION ---- TIME TO AWAKEN

    The beautiful and delicate poppy that now paints the landscapes of Afghanistan with vibrant colors, has long been the symbol for sacrifice. The aesthetic is as soothing to the sense of sight, as it is exasperating to the conscience.

    http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/04/poppy-fields-of-mass-destruction.html

    Drastic action is required.

  • Posted By: Driver of wagons @ 07/25/2008 10:50:24 PM



    And today, the word of the day in the corporate press is... "presumptuous." Used in a sentence: Senator Obama is being presumptuous during his trip -- acting all presidential and dignified. How dare he be presidential while running for, you know, president. Presumptuous. During the live CNN web feed of the Berlin address, an anchor used it to describe the event. Joe Klein used it in a blog post today. Of course Joe attributed it to racist voters rather than very serious reporters -- racist because it's presumably a synonym for 'uppity' and we can't accuse the press of such awfulness. And Candy Crowley used it in her post-address analysis on CNN. That's a lot of coincidences. "Presumptuous" must really be a popular word. Odd that it's being used so often by people who want Senator Obama to win.

    AP: "In a speech that risked being seen as presumptuous..."

    TIME Magazine: "capable to become the Commander in Chief of a superpower -- without seeming presumptuous..."

    The National Journal: "He is well aware voters here at home might see that as presumptuous..."

    Washington Post: "Whether by the end of this week he will be seen as presumptuous or overly cocky..."

    Chicago Tribune: "That means walking the fine line between looking presidential and appearing arrogant and presumptuous..."

    Boston Globe: "plus the growing sense in some quarters that the presumptive Democratic nominee is getting a little presumptuous..."

    Can you feel the wanting-Obama-to-win love radiating off your computer screen? No?

    The reality is that positive coverage of any Democrat is limited and temporary for fear of networks and newspapers either being accused of liberal bias or being tossed out of the very serious barbeque loop. Regardless of whether the Democrat, in this case Senator Obama, is having a good day, it's somehow unethical to report on such good news for too long without deliberately concocting an antidote to appease the far-right. So rather than standing up as the only industry explicitly named in the Constitution and defending the very basic idea of journalistic integrity, the corporate media is all too quick to capitulate to these specious Republican attacks -- that is, when they're not tossing their ethics aside and taking bribes in the form of barbeque and McBusch beer from a candidate whom they're supposed to be covering objectively.



    • Posted By: Medge @ 07/26/2008 12:26:33 AM

      I think that for a wagon driver, you presume too much.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse