Discussion: Pentagon Orders Restrictions On Release Of Afghanistan War Data

The Empire strikes back against Truth, Justice, and the American Way. War profiteers rejoice. Cadet Bone Spur is just anybody’s puppet. Drop a quarter in his slot and watch him dance.

Does anybody by now not know someone who was killed in or subsequently died after a tour or four in Afghanistan?

2 Likes

I don’t even want to read this article because by prime time tonight, if I watch the Goombah-in-Chief I’ll be so disgusted I’ll want to binge on something that probably isn’t good for me just to take my mind off of the shitstorm this man has created.

Basically from the headline, we’re supposed to accept that the military knows best, the one we keep paying for with our tax dollars to an ever increasing amount, which promises to give us no objective reporting on how we’re doing, what we’re doing, or why we’re doing the basic mechanics of war-making in Afghanistan after 16 years in country. Got it. Just trust the Authoritarian-in-Chief to make the decisions. Have I got it about right?

The way I see the takeover already underway:
First to go…Freedom of the press. Shut down access, and call anything you don’t like that puts you in a bad light, “fake”. Classify anything that also puts the Dear Leader in a bad light.
Next up…Find disrepute in our premiere law enforcement agencies and inform the public they can’t be trusted but must be made over to suit The Dear Leader. Also, stack the courts with toadies, sycophants and ideologues that will protect The Dear Leader’s interests. Of course, pardon anyone that upheld their loyalty oath…say, like Devin Numbnuts Nunes et al, for instance.
Finally…Control the military, with no public input or awareness as to what’s going on in our name. Just soldier up for the new Fascist leadership in charge. If you’re a hammer, expect to be nailed…because first they came for the (fill in your favorite bugaboo) and I did nothing, then they came for…

It’s like a coup in slow-motion.

(You do the hokey-pokey and you turn yourself around…That’s what its all about.)

1 Like

I foresee litigation.

Pentagon Papers

2 Likes

It’s not like a coup in slow-motion, it is a coup in slow motion.

2 Likes

The Defense Department report said the Afghan government has control or influence over 60 percent of the population, while insurgents had control or influence over approximately 10 percent of the population, with the remainder contested.

Hmmm, sounds like Afghanistan is in better shape than we are. In this country, more than 30 percent of the populace is under the influence of the American Trumpiban. And all of them really, really like it, too.

1 Like

My bad. I do that a lot. I try not to let myself get too hyperbolic or hyperventilate in writing if I can…which honestly, most of the time I struggle with these days. I guess I don’t want to give away my gently increasing panic with what’s going on. All of it really does freak me out, i just can’t figure out what or who is going to stop the train wreck we’re already experiencing.

2 Likes

You have a stronger stomach than I do if you’re actually going to watch Benito Trumpolini tonight. I can’t stand more than 2 seconds of the man.

1 Like

Watching The Post on Sunday, it was easy to draw parallels between Vietnam and Iraq/Afghanistan. I’d bet we’d see similar assessments on achieving any kind of victory.

(TIME, June 28, 1971) – “To see the conflict and our part in it as a tragedy without villains, war crimes without criminals, lies without liars, espouses and promulgates a view of process, roles and motives that is not only grossly mistaken but which underwrites deceits that have served a succession of Presidents.” – Daniel Ellsberg
…
WAR AIMS. Both publicly and in a National Security memorandum in March 1964, President Johnson insisted that the central U.S. aim was to secure an “independent, non-Communist South Vietnam.” McNamara used identical wording in a memo to L.B.J. the same month, but fuzzed the goal by adding the far broader view of Vietnam as a “test case of U.S. capacity to help a nation meet a Communist war of liberation—not only in Asia, but in the rest of the world.” Then, in January 1965, McNamara penciled his approval on a statement by his assistant, McNaughton, that the real U.S. goal was “not to help friend, but to contain China.” A month later, McNaughton, demonstrating the McNamara team’s fondness for figures, put the U.S. aims in a far different order: “70% – to avoid a humiliating U.S. defeat. 20% – to keep SVN (South Vietnam) territory from Chinese hands. 10% – to permit the people of SVN to enjoy a better, freer way of life. Also – to emerge from crisis without unacceptable taint from methods used.” That was hardly an idealistic statement of U.S. purposes.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/analysis/back.time/9606/28/index.shtml

The difference here is money. We have oil and opium production to add to this mess.

Without drugs, the war in Afghanistan “would have been long over,” the Afghan president has said.

3 Likes

I just could never figure out what they were doing there in the first place.

So when did chelsea decide to go all anti-war?

The auditing agency, established by Congress and known as the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, or SIGAR

C’mon people. Sometimes a SIGAR is just a SIGAR. As now, when SIGAR exists on its own with no context for what it’s finding or way to get that information out. My question is, is this a initiative by SecDef Mattis, or are anonymous Pentagon staff people promulgating this policy?

The Defense Department report said the Afghan government has control or influence over 60 percent of the population, while insurgents had control or influence over approximately 10 percent of the population, with the remainder contested.

That sounds almost exactly like then SecDef McNamara’s interview as portrayed in The Post. Eerie parallel.

And finally, there was a quote on the front page of the online NYT this morning from a Marine Lance Corporal who said that we literally are sending soldiers who were in diapers when we first went into Afghanistan. That can’t be victory or even progress by any definition. We’ve been there almost twice as long as the Soviet Union was, with as little to show for it.

Honestly, I haven’t decided. I don’t think I can make it through the whole thing if I tried though. And good lord, MSNBC after-game spectacular will have dumbfuck Tweety and G-d knows who else I can’t stand. So I may go back to binging on “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel”. I kinda like that show so far…but I’m only 3 episodes in. The only thing that would bring total joy for me is to see some Democratic Congressperson scream out “YOU LIE, PATHOLOGICALLY”…just for shits and giggles if nothing else.

So much for the “transparency” they tout as the reason behind the Nunes memo.

There is not enough time in the day to point out the level of corruption and hypocrisy in this administration and it’s minions. And the public is either ignorant or exhausted, so there you have the formula for a takeover.

2 Likes

Giving Dubya special powers as a wartime Prez.
It has only been 16 years; I’m pretty sure they will give us a reason in the next 16.

1 Like

Sooooooooooooooooooooo, the House Intelligence Committee can release classified information that will imperil ongoing counterintelligence investigations BUT the Defense Department will not release unclassified information that marks progress (or lack of same) in Afghanistan because of ‘reasons’?

2 Likes

Because it makes Little Donnie Boo Boo look ineffective and feckless after all his big talk.

If he could, he would restrict information about Carrier exporting all those jobs to Mexico and laying off hundreds in Indiana for exactly the same reason.

1 Like

the U.S. has invested about $120 billion in reconstructing Afghanistan since 2002

Thanks, Bush/Cheney/Rehnquist/Thomas/Scalia/Kennedy/O’Connor.

But, not to worry. There’s always room for more cuts to Medicaid .

The Pentagon has ordered an independent federal auditor to stop providing the public with key information about U.S. war efforts in Afghanistan…

Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary, January 23, 2018: “We certainly support full transparency.”