Home› A Moving Train

anti-empire report

CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
edited December 2009 in A Moving Train
http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer76.html


Bill blum
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    its been said the best way to fight the taliban is to cut their funding.

    ie, buy all the fucking poppy in afghanistan so the warlords don't kick back that 10%, which translates into hundreds of millions for the taliban.


    war is business. contractors get paid, the taliban even gets paid, the military gets paid, according to kabong's link, everyone is getting paid, and we're the suckers paying for it. meanwhile innocent people get slaughtered, a country is destroyed. nice little way of doing things we've built for ourselves.



    the guilty don't feel guilty they learn not to.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    we are not hitting them inthe pocketbook because that would only make sense. it would be a helluva lot cheeper to do that than to pay to have our soldiers/weapons/equipment over there. i could see the uproar from the skeptics if we withdrew and did something like this...."but what good is a military when you are not using it???"

    someone said obama is a liberal. if he were a liberal he would realize that the taliban are paying people $5 a day to show up and fight us. that is alot of money per year when the average afghan makes less than $500 in a year. would it not be cheeper and less deadly for us to pay all of them $10 a day to stay the hell out of the fight instead of risking more of our people in a war that we can not win?? that is what a real liberal would do.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • OffHeGoes29OffHeGoes29 Posts: 1,240
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    we are not hitting them inthe pocketbook because that would only make sense. it would be a helluva lot cheeper to do that than to pay to have our soldiers/weapons/equipment over there. i could see the uproar from the skeptics if we withdrew and did something like this...."but what good is a military when you are not using it???"

    someone said obama is a liberal. if he were a liberal he would realize that the taliban are paying people $5 a day to show up and fight us. that is alot of money per year when the average afghan makes less than $500 in a year. would it not be cheeper and less deadly for us to pay all of them $10 a day to stay the hell out of the fight instead of risking more of our people in a war that we can not win?? that is what a real liberal would do.

    Throwing money at the locals was a big part on cooling down the situation in Iraq, it would work in A-stan as well. But to quote someone who knows the place well..."An Afghan can't be bought, only rented".
    BRING BACK THE WHALE
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    OffHeGoes29 wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    we are not hitting them inthe pocketbook because that would only make sense. it would be a helluva lot cheeper to do that than to pay to have our soldiers/weapons/equipment over there. i could see the uproar from the skeptics if we withdrew and did something like this...."but what good is a military when you are not using it???"

    someone said obama is a liberal. if he were a liberal he would realize that the taliban are paying people $5 a day to show up and fight us. that is alot of money per year when the average afghan makes less than $500 in a year. would it not be cheeper and less deadly for us to pay all of them $10 a day to stay the hell out of the fight instead of risking more of our people in a war that we can not win?? that is what a real liberal would do.

    Throwing money at the locals was a big part on cooling down the situation in Iraq, it would work in A-stan as well. But to quote someone who knows the place well..."An Afghan can't be bought, only rented".
    excepting the racist remark from offhegoes, how is the taliban paying this $5 a day salary, as you're claiming gimmiesome? form US contractors paying htem to not fight htat day, or from warlords kicking back poppy sales? its significant, because therein lies the problem.


    i've read, i think it was in 03, that the illegal drug industry is hte most profitable industry in the world. what percentage of the heroine industry afghansitan is involved in is hard to tell....but it use to be something like %90. and 10% of that money ends up in the hands of the taliban. seriously, it would be cheaper to cut off the funding by buying the poppy then it would be to continue the war, and probably much more effective. unless mercenaries are paying htem more to not fight that day, then we have another problem.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    Commy wrote:
    OffHeGoes29 wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    we are not hitting them inthe pocketbook because that would only make sense. it would be a helluva lot cheeper to do that than to pay to have our soldiers/weapons/equipment over there. i could see the uproar from the skeptics if we withdrew and did something like this...."but what good is a military when you are not using it???"

    someone said obama is a liberal. if he were a liberal he would realize that the taliban are paying people $5 a day to show up and fight us. that is alot of money per year when the average afghan makes less than $500 in a year. would it not be cheeper and less deadly for us to pay all of them $10 a day to stay the hell out of the fight instead of risking more of our people in a war that we can not win?? that is what a real liberal would do.

    Throwing money at the locals was a big part on cooling down the situation in Iraq, it would work in A-stan as well. But to quote someone who knows the place well..."An Afghan can't be bought, only rented".
    excepting the racist remark from offhegoes, how is the taliban paying this $5 a day salary, as you're claiming gimmiesome? form US contractors paying htem to not fight htat day, or from warlords kicking back poppy sales? its significant, because therein lies the problem.


    i've read, i think it was in 03, that the illegal drug industry is hte most profitable industry in the world. what percentage of the heroine industry afghansitan is involved in is hard to tell....but it use to be something like %90. and 10% of that money ends up in the hands of the taliban. seriously, it would be cheaper to cut off the funding by buying the poppy then it would be to continue the war, and probably much more effective. unless mercenaries are paying htem more to not fight that day, then we have another problem.

    i am not looking for a link to that right now. i have been in bed sick the last 2 days and do not feel like researching anything this late. thom hartmann had a guest on last week that was talking about this issue. he said what paper he was with and plugged a website but i forgot what it was. he essentially said it worked in iraq, and either buying up the poppy and selling it to companies that make opioid medications like morphine would cripple the taliban. OR he said we could pay those on taliban payroll to stay out of the fight like we did in iraq.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    edited December 2009
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    i am not looking for a link to that right now. i have been in bed sick the last 2 days and do not feel like researching anything this late. thom hartmann had a guest on last week that was talking about this issue. he said what paper he was with and plugged a website but i forgot what it was. he essentially said it worked in iraq, and either buying up the poppy and selling it to companies that make opioid medications like morphine would cripple the taliban. OR he said we could pay those on taliban payroll to stay out of the fight like we did in iraq.


    i didn't mean to call you out on your sources...i was just curious if you knew where the taliban was getting their funding/


    probably poppy sale kickbaclks, but i thought what the mercenaries paid might compete. i have no idea.
    Post edited by Commy on
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    thing is....if defeating the taliban were the goal, this would have been done along time ago.


    that isn't the case, so this has to be about something else. conquest, expanding empire maybe. conventional and sane means have been abandoned long ago, which tells us something else is going on in afghanistan.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    Commy wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    i am not looking for a link to that right now. i have been in bed sick the last 2 days and do not feel like researching anything this late. thom hartmann had a guest on last week that was talking about this issue. he said what paper he was with and plugged a website but i forgot what it was. he essentially said it worked in iraq, and either buying up the poppy and selling it to companies that make opioid medications like morphine would cripple the taliban. OR he said we could pay those on taliban payroll to stay out of the fight like we did in iraq.


    i didn't mean to call you out on your sources...i was just curious if you knew where the taliban was getting their funding/


    probably poppy sale kickbaclks, but i thought what the mercenaries paid might compete. i have no idea.

    i know you were not calling me out on a source, its cool man. i looked on thom hartmann's website today for the podcast or highlights of his shows last week but it wanted me to sign up and i was not prepared to do that, mostly because i think one political message board is enough for me lol....

    that guest was saying that the taliban gets its funding from growing and selling, or confiscating property of people that grow the poppy and selling it. the heroin and morphine trade keeps them very well funded. they also have wealthy religous extremists in other countries in the region (i forgot which ones,but for some reason UAE is ringing a bell) that are helping bankroll them. this way they can pay their soldiers to stay loyal to the taliban. he made it sound like those people will follow whoever purchases their services.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Drowned OutDrowned Out Posts: 6,056
    Commy wrote:
    thing is....if defeating the taliban were the goal, this would have been done along time ago.


    that isn't the case, so this has to be about something else. conquest, expanding empire maybe. conventional and sane means have been abandoned long ago, which tells us something else is going on in afghanistan.
    The question is: how much of a cut are the americans taking from the poppy trade?
    I'd be willing to bet that they're making more than the Taliban...or else they would stop it.
    Why would they do anything to stop it if they're cashing in too? No, i don't have proof of this...but if history is an indicator, they are elbow deep in this cookie jar.
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    Drowned Out wrote:
    Commy wrote:
    thing is....if defeating the taliban were the goal, this would have been done along time ago.


    that isn't the case, so this has to be about something else. conquest, expanding empire maybe. conventional and sane means have been abandoned long ago, which tells us something else is going on in afghanistan.
    The question is: how much of a cut are the americans taking from the poppy trade?
    I'd be willing to bet that they're making more than the Taliban...or else they would stop it.
    Why would they do anything to stop it if they're cashing in too? No, i don't have proof of this...but if history is an indicator, they are elbow deep in this cookie jar.
    good point. maybe the latest take in this empire game is about heroine profit. could be.

    they already have the oil from the middle east through iraq, now maybe its about the drugs from afghanistan. it wouldn't surprise me at all. Iran/Contra anyone?
Sign In or Register to comment.