Why Afghanistan?
Email This Post
- 
Print This Post
-
How long have we been in Afghanistan now? Six years? Seven years? Ten maybe. I forget it’s been so long. What are we there for? Do we want to get into the poppy business? Maybe we want to stem the flow of heroin and hashish from coming into our country and the world. Wouldn’t that be the job of the DEA though?
Hmmm, and here I thought all along it was to get even with the evil Bin Laden, the mastermind behind 911. Haven’t we done that? I mean after all, he’s been vanquished, canceled, swimming with the fishes, (literally) ¾ hasn’t he? So why are we still there?
We spend billions in a war that has no end. We are having our men and women die for a Godforsaken country that doesn’t want us, doesn’t want freedom, and will go back to whence they came the minute we leave. We are fools, played by the Muslim nations to get our money as they try to destroy our way of life and our lives themselves.
Take Pakistan for instance. Here we have a country, a government, and a people, that has clandestinely hidden our number one enemy for at least five years. And what do we do? Give them billions to be our friends. What have they done with the money? (I refer to the anti-terrorist fund we provide them.) Who really knows. I know they’ve built up their military along the Indian border. They have built another military nuclear reactor. But really, who knows what all they have done with it. What we do know is they didn’t do what they were suppose to do with it. They sure didn’t help us get ol’ Bin.
From what I gather now we must continue giving them money or we won’t be able to secure 70% of our supply lines into Afghanistan for our military. That’s according to John Kerry. Who, by the way, is another fine, upstanding example of political buffoonery. Yes, it seems the Pakistanis control 70% of our supply lines. How did we let that happen? And what’s more important, it makes for another good reason to get out of Afghanistan. We are wasting billions and being made fools of while we do it. The world is laughing at us.
But let me tell you why we’re really there. War drives a country to dependency on others. Such as the IMF, the World Bank, the likes of Morgan, Rockefeller, Rothschild and many others of their ilk. I have said in the past that this is Obama’s war, and it is to a degree. However, those behind him pull the strings, all he does is keep us in the game. The game of war. And why? Because it adds to the decline of the US dollar, and that is the end game.
No, I’m not saying that war alone will create a bankrupt nation, but it certainly helps when the nation has no production, more debt than they can pay, entitlement programs that cannot be sustained, and borrows money to give away to other countries. Our own government is crushing the American dollar, all at the behest of plutocrats behind the scenes.
Let me ask you this. If you wanted a new world order, a one world currency, how would you go about getting it? Wouldn’t you undermine the most powerful, most dominate currency currently in use? I know I certainly would. Look around, it’s been going on for a long time. I’d say since Wilson’s reign and the indoctrination of the Federal Reserve in 1913. If memory serves me, Morgan was behind the “panic of 1907” bailout, along with some of his plutocratic friends such as John D. Rockefeller. Are today’s times any different? We better all pay a little more attention, before it’s too late. Or is it already too late?
Comment by Chief Hypocrite on 18 May 2011:
No it is not too late. While I am not so sure about the long term connections to topple the dollar, I am certain that at all times there are those with different intentions and preservation of a strong and independent US is not always at the top of the list of the powerful. It is of course, on the tip of their lying tongues.
Given the givens, we are not getting our dollars worth anymore, if we ever did, not sure frankly, in our overseas adventurism. I like the China model, buy assets you need, stay friends with the government if you can, but be sure to look out unabashedly for our own best interests in all dealings and make sure everyone really knows what that is.
All countries should look out unabashedly for their own best interests. If it is in their best interest to grow poppies and sell to the US that is their choice. If Americans think it is in the best interest of their country to buy poppy derivatives, then they should do it. But really, no user thinks it is for anything other than their own personal best interests, whether that is accurate or not. Misjudgement and hypocrisy reign.
So in it’s own best interests, the US should legalize many drugs and educate the population better. After all leaving that to the glamorizing of drugs by Hollywood celebrities and athletes who we over empower, has not worked so well,.
Her’s the best part, tax drugs to the hilt so only rich people can afford them. A great way to soak the rich that I heartily approve of because it is based in choice and ability and progressivity (although everyone should pay some tax, just to keep it real and them in tune with reality). Just like buying Ferrari’s only the rich can do that and if they consumed the majority of durgs, those who can sleep in without being fired is who I am speaking of, society might be better off. And I am all about progressive ideas that really work for society.
Of course a black market will supply the rest with inferior products but not everything can be controlled so in may cases we just have to accept some flies at the picnic and using the black market is also a choice. The government could write laws to keep the poor from doing that, but have you looked at all the speeders on the highways playing the catch me if you can lottery? Laws can be good, but they also create crimes and criminals so we must also be careful and realistic about laws we make.
Afghanistan? Sure, time to leave. We have done all the good and all the damage we can afford.
Continue to spend to prepare and protect our homeland society with more self defense of the clever, cheaper kind (not sure what that is, but let’s invent something), improve our manufacturing climate, go forward to the past and re-separate Consumer Banking and the also important Wall Street Investment Banking businesses, find ways to reduce the size and ubiquity of government and learn a new secular national “Come by Yah” song or as you may know it better, kumbaya. Really. I could not be more serious.
Have it sung after the pledge of Allegiance in all schools. Have Pete Seegar do public service announcements. How can you not like Pete Seeger, he is after all a capitalist.
Pingback by And Then There Were Three | Hypocrisy Reigns Supreme on 19 May 2011:
[...] The Dollar, if it follows this sage advice contained in a comment to a post; [...]
Comment by proletarian on 21 May 2011:
One thing I did glean out of your post Chief, is your penchant for taxing the rich. And that being the case, let’s say we vote for instituting a national sales tax. That is if it replaces the progressive income tax. That way when the rich buy expensive items they get taxed expensively. Everything, and I mean everything, other than food should be taxed on a national level, and then drop the IRS and federal income tax. If you buy a Pinto, you don’t get taxed as the CEO who buys a Mercedes.
Comment by Chief Hypocrite on 23 May 2011:
I do believe in taxing the rich, somewhat progressively since they more than others benefit from infrastructure, the choice of others to work for salaries and provide services rather than seek wealth etc. I also believe in taxing the middle class because that is where the real money is and hopefully will remain. I also believe in TAXING THE POOR. Everyone should understand what taxation looks and feels like.
Thus, I would vote to tax the poor even if the government sends them a taxable income check (not a credit) for their tax due so they are cash neutral. I believe in everyone understanding taxes and that taxes should be kept as low as possible for the benefit of everyone, including the poor, for whatever reason they suffer poverty or low income.
I could support a national sale tax as you described - a very progressive tax which could have the benefits you describe.
Problem is what you and I both probably suspect, that it would tick so many people off, scare them with so much change including your average proletarian, most advisers, many politicians, and too many consultants etc. So it would showcase more drama than a presidential election, be as unproductively costly and likely would be an additive tax in the end, so think maybe launching that effort is really a false choice or at least an unpleasant one.