[b-antinato] Digest Number 5943 (Fwd)

[glry at ngi.it]

Mando questo digest integrale poiché completamente riguardante l'attuale situazione 
militar-politica mondiale. 

Jure Ellero

------- Segue messaggio inoltrato -------
There are 5 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. Exceeding Cold War Levels: U.S. Pushes New Phase Of Arms Race    
    From: Rick Rozoff

2. France Echoes U.S. In Demanding Libyan Scenario For Syria    
    From: Rick Rozoff

3. U.S. Uses Contractors To Bypass International Humanitarian Laws    
    From: Rick Rozoff

4. Syria And Formation Of Multi-Polar, Post-American World    
    From: Rick Rozoff

5. U.S. In Afghanistan: Who Is The Real Savage?    
    From: Rick Rozoff

============ 

Messages


______________________________________________________________________
__ 1. Exceeding Cold War Levels: U.S. Pushes New Phase Of Arms Race
    Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff at yahoo.com rwrozoff
    Date: Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:06 am ((PDT))

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_08_28/US-pushes-for-a-new-phase-of-arms-ra
ce/


Voice of Russia
August 28, 2012


US pushes for a new phase of arms race 


After Russia refused to support the UN Security Council resolution on
Syria the US Congress forbade the Pentagon to deal with Russia´s
arms export monopoly Rosoboronexport until Moscow stops supplying
weapons to Damascus. Russia was quickly tagged as a country which
supplies weapons to evil dictatorial regimes.

In reality, however, it´s the United States that is the largest
supplier of weapons on the global marketplace, including countries
with authoritarian rule. 

Of course, some of the deliveries are made indirectly, through a large
network of intermediaries. Curiously enough, in the Lord of War movie
the main hero who illegally sells arms to dictatorial regimes plainly
states that he deals with those regimes which the US government would
like to deal with but must avoid in order to keep their hands clean.
So at present it is the United States that stands behind the ongoing
arms race, being the leading death merchant in the global marketplace.
On the average, the US earns $25 billion in annual arms sales. Over
the last five years the US accounted for nearly 30% of the world´s
arms deals.

Legally and illegally, arms are delivered to countries engulfed in
civil war. For instance, in July 2012 US President Barak Obama
declared Afghanistan a major non-NATO ally, which means that the Arms
Export Control Act no longer applies there. It means a sharp growth in
US arms deliveries to that country. The US is a leading exporter to
developing countries: in 2010 alone it earned $14.9 billion in arms
sales, and this is just the official figure.

It should be kept in mind that enormous money is spent on weapons
production for the US military; the Army then actively uses those
weapons in a large number of military conflicts. According to Yearbook
2012 by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, SIPRI,
the US share in the world´s arms spending is 41%. In 2011 US arms
spending was US$ 711 billion (4,7% of GDP), which is 5 times greater
than in China, which is the second largest arms spender (US$ 143
billion).

According to the US Department of Defense, military spending in 2001
was $ 687 billion, slightly less than indicated by SIPRI. Even this
figure, however, is incredible. It should be compared to Russia´s
military spending ($71.9 billion) in order to realize who is really
behind the world´s bloodiest conflicts. Even the budgets of four of
the world's five leading countries taken together ($340,1 billion) are
shy of half the US budget. Over nearly the last ten years (2002 to
2011) US military spending went up 59%.

The US spends enormous wealth on developing cutting edge weapons such
as F-35 fighters and a number of other expensive programs. Over the
last ten years a total of $66 billion has been spent on the F-35
fifth-generation jet fighter. For 2013 alone the Pentagon requested
$179 billion for weapons upgrades. The US has 11 nuclear-powered
aircraft carriers and can conduct naval operations throughout the
world.

The February 2011 budget request sent by the Department of Defense to
the US Congress also asked for $118 billion to conduct military
operations abroad: $110 billion to wage the war in Afghanistan and $16
billion to maintain the US presence in Iraq. In financial years 2010
and 2011 war costs were estimated at $130 billion and $160 billion,
respectively. During the presidency of George Bush Jr. as much as $180
billion was spent on those wars annually.

US-based companies retain top rankings on SIPRI´s Top-100 and are
responsible for more than 60% of the world´s arms sales. 44 out of
the 100 top arms dealers are US-based companies. 30 companies are
based throughout Western Europe, 12 are based in other OECD countries
and only 8 are in Russia.

The US has the highest ranking among nuclear states. The total number
of nuclear warheads is approximately 8,500.

According to the US Department of Defense, current arms spending in
"peaceful" times is even greater than during the Cold War era.

================================================== 

Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages

Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com

To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe,
and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com

==================================================





Messages in this topic (1)
______________________________________________________________________
__
______________________________________________________________________
__ 2. France Echoes U.S. In Demanding Libyan Scenario For Syria
    Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff at yahoo.com rwrozoff
    Date: Tue Aug 28, 2012 3:39 pm ((PDT))

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_08_28/Hollande-repeats-after-Obama-or-Liby
an-scenario-for-Syria/


Voice of Russia
August 28, 2012


Hollande repeats after Obama, or Libyan scenario for Syria
Oleg Severgin 
Edited by RR


====

It has been said many times that the rebels are guided by secret
service professionals primarily from Great Britain, as well as from
Germany and other NATO countries. It seems that authorities in those
countries are willing to use in Syria the Libyan pattern, only on a
larger scale. During her recent visit to Turkey, US Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton brought up the subject of creating a no-fly zone over
Syria. Other NATO partners, who also use direct appeals to Bashar
al-Assad to voluntarily give up his position, support that idea. It
all looks familiar. 


====


In his annual address to the national diplomatic corps, French
president Francois Hollande announced that his country together with
its partners is "closely watching" the situation in Syria in regards
to al-Assad's use of chemical weapons. "For the international
community the fact of use of the weapons of mass destruction would be
a legitimate reason for a direct military intervention," he said.

The announcement made by the French leader is remarkable not only in
its content and its tone of an ultimatum. In fact Francois Hollande
repeated word for word a similar threat made by the head of the White
House, Barack Obama, shortly before that. France's senior partner in
NATO threatened to strike against al-Assad even if chemical weapons
are simply moved from one place to another. And still, Hollande's and
Obama's statements are remarkable not in their tone as much as in
their readiness for military interference as well as in the lack of
any mention of the UN's role in the event of a potential military
intervention by the West in Syria.

Naturally, experts could not fail to notice that detail. Also notable
is the fact that lately the European mass media have openly voiced
calls for a direct military intervention in the conflict in Syria.
"Intervention in Syria is inevitable," stated the German weekly Die
Zeit. "Will the UN Security Council lean to this or that side, will it
take the risk,"  writes the weekly, "in any event the international
community will be forced to intervene in the foreseeable future."

A verdict also peremptory in a similar way was made by the
Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung. "Syria will become yet another
country in the Middle East that awaits a change of regime," says the
publication. "Of all the Arab dictators, only Gaddafi fought for
preserving his power as frantically as does Bashar al-Assad."

It is hard to tell whether it is a forecast or an obscure hint to
those who are empowered to make decisions about the use of military
force. The comparison of al-Assad to Gaddafi is quite demonstrative.
The Austrian Die Presse has recently published an interesting article.
It is called "A gunman from Dublin." The main character in the article
is Najjair, an Irishman of Libyan origin. First he fought in Libya,
and then he illegally moved to Syria where he joined the rebels. He
crossed the border along with hundreds of other hired guns that go
there through the borders with Turkey, Iraq and Lebanon. Najjair
received military training in Libya with the so-called Tripoli
brigade. The newspaper writes that the training was conducted by
"commandos" from Great Britain and Qatar. According to the
publication, the "veterans" from Libya are passing their experience
onto the rebels from the so-called Free Syrian Army.

It has been said many times that the rebels are guided by secret
service professionals primarily from Great Britain, as well as from
Germany and other NATO countries. It seems that authorities in those
countries are willing to use in Syria the Libyan pattern, only on a
larger scale. During her recent visit to Turkey, US Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton brought up the subject of creating a no-fly zone over
Syria. Other NATO partners, who also use direct appeals to Bashar
al-Assad to voluntarily give up his position, support that idea. It
all looks familiar. 

But Vladimir Anokhin, vice-president of the Russian Academy of
Geopolitical Issues is skeptical.

"It would be fine and good for NATO to conduct this arrogant operation
according to the Libyan scenario," says the expert. "However, the
situation is absolutely different. It is like in the saying 'All cats
love fish but fear to wet their paws.' Why is Europe so cautious?
Because there has been a precedent set. It seemed that all was set up
in Libya for the oil to start pouring. But no, nothing like that
happened."

Nevertheless, the Die Zeit forecast about an imminent intervention in
Syria gave out a warning: "Everybody has to be clear that what the
world community is facing will be a lot more large-scale, long-term
and expensive than the 7,587 air strikes made by NATO against Libya."
Nothing else need be added here.

==================================================
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages

Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com

To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe,
and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
================================================





Messages in this topic (1)
______________________________________________________________________
__
______________________________________________________________________
__ 3. U.S. Uses Contractors To Bypass International Humanitarian Laws
    Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff at yahoo.com rwrozoff
    Date: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:26 pm ((PDT))

http://rt.com/politics/us-contractors-international-blackwater-754/


RT
August 28, 2012


US uses contractors to bypass international humanitarian laws



The use of private contractors allows the US to evade responsibility
for violations of international humanitarian legislation, a top
Russian diplomat for human rights and democracy said.

The comment came from Foreign Ministry Commissioner Konstantin Dolgov
as the US Justice Department halted an investigation into the
attempted bribing of Iraqi police officials by employees of the
Blackwater security company (re-branded as `Academi´ in late
2011).

Blackwater attempted to pay $1 million in bribes for new contracts in
Iraq, and also to block an investigation into the 2007 murder of 17
Iraqi civilians, including several children, by Blackwater operatives,
a statement published on the Russian Foreign Ministry´s website
said.

The US State Department didn´t end its relationship with Blackwater
for two years after the tragedy, Dolgov said.

"Despite the scandalous experience with the Blackwater company, the
US military and foreign policy agencies continue to attract
contractors for doing the `dirty work´ in the zone of armed
conflicts," Dolgov said. "Such outsourcing of state functions to
private firms allows the US government to evade the responsibility for
violation of international humanitarian norms.

"The Blackwater case is a vivid example of impunity enjoyed by the
employees of private security companies, despite blatant violations of
international Human Rights standards. The current situation is a
result of the inconsistent and selective actions of the US
authorities, who ignore the rights of Iraqis who fall victim to the
employees of private security companies. We expect that the US
authorities will at last take some measures to punish the responsible
contractors of the company formerly known as Blackwater," the
statement read.

Dolgov added that a US court had sentenced Russian citizen Viktor Bout
to 25 years in prison for his alleged intention to sell weapons to
Colombian rebels, while the "company that succeeded Blackwater"
received no punishment after confessing to illegally supplying weapons
to Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan. "Is not it a very visual
demonstration of double standards used by the US justice?" he said.

===================================================
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages

Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com

To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe,
and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
=================================================





Messages in this topic (1)
______________________________________________________________________
__
______________________________________________________________________
__ 4. Syria And Formation Of Multi-Polar, Post-American World
    Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff at yahoo.com rwrozoff
    Date: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:54 pm ((PDT))

http://indrus.in/articles/2012/08/23/the_syrian_crisis_and_the_future_
of_the_global_economy_17177.html


Russia & India Report
August 23, 2012



The Syrian crisis and the future of the global economy
Andrei Volodin


====

[China] realises that an attack on Damascus is a blow to the positions
of Tehran, a strategic ally to Syria, and an attempt to cut off
Iranian oil from China. Such a scenario would help the U.S. meet its
primary objective - to contain 'Chinese expansion´ in the
Asia-Pacific. The U.S. has to work in several directions at once. One
of them is countering the `expansion´ of China in the
Asia-Pacific. America´s `anti-terrorist´ mission in Afghanistan
is far from being over. Some Western analysts suggest that
participation of the U.S. in overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi´s regime
indicates the new strand in Washington´s policy: the `fight for
Africa´, supposedly against China again.

The aggravation of tension in the Middle East has an apparent
political agenda: to distract people from helplessness of the Western
European elite against the progressing economic and financial crisis.


====



We are witnessing in real-time the formation of the polycentric,
post-American world. Naturally, this process is non-linear, and its
trajectory, as forecasted back in the 1990s by one of the most
outstanding economists of our time, Charles Kindleberger, will
inevitably run through conflicts of varying intensity.

The Middle East has the largest amount of conflicts in the world
today, hosting several groups of dramatically developing disputes:
historic, confessional/denominational, national/ethnic. And while
until recently these disputes remained latent under local
authoritarian regimes, today, following the Arab revolutions of 2011,
they have become overt. Logically, these disputes and problems require
a systematic approach and a solution that would help preserve the
unity and territorial integrity of the various countries in the Middle
East. Otherwise the historical Pandora´s box (an image we could use
to describe the societies in the region), once opened, will be
impossible to close. This could bring about clear destabilisation not
just in Syria, but also to other countries in the region.

It is obvious that the U.S. and its junior partners are trying to use
the Syrian crisis to maintain their positions in the global system and
simultaneously to weaken their primary rival and principal creditor,
China. Beijing, however, realises that an attack on Damascus is a blow
to the positions of Tehran, a strategic ally to Syria, and an attempt
to cut off Iranian oil from China. Such a scenario would help the U.S.
meet its primary objective - to contain 'Chinese expansion´ in the
Asia-Pacific. The U.S. has to work in several directions at once. One
of them is countering the `expansion´ of China in the
Asia-Pacific. America´s `anti-terrorist´ mission in Afghanistan
is far from being over. Some Western analysts suggest that
participation of the U.S. in overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi´s regime
indicates the new strand in Washington´s policy: the `fight for
Africa´, supposedly against China again.

All of this leads to an obvious overload - in financial, economic
and physical terms. American experts warn the acting administration
that direct participation in the Syrian conflict can be very costly in
case it proves to be lengthy.

Fueled by the continuing Syrian conflict, anxiety is building up in
the West, placed in the wider context of the role played by the North
Atlantic civilization in the global economy and politics. Driven by
its most discerning representatives, a part of the American foreign
policy establishment is questioning what the current Washington
administration is looking for in a faraway land? And what consequences
of this `experimentation´ could follow for America and its role in
the transforming global system? These questions are, clearly,
rhetorical, and the answers to them are exhaustively practical.

Henry Kissinger suggests articulating America´s new strategy in the
Arab world in place of the fierce desire to remove Bashar al-Assad
from his position. This idea found new momentum in the maestro´s
American diplomacy address to his less experienced colleagues where he
urged them to keep in mind the `unfinished mission´ in Afghanistan
and the essential role of the economy in the development of the
American foreign strategy.

The uncertainty concerning the resolution of the `Syrian riddle´
and the inevitable historic parallels cannot but influence America´s
actions in the region. In the past, the imprisonment of Americans and
the failed rescue attempt worked, among other factors, in favour of
the Republicans during the 1980 elections (when Ronald Reagan was
elected as president). Which gives rise to the question of what will
happen today if the U.S. gets involved in the Syrian crisis directly?
It bears noting that the hasty, ill-considered actions of the West can
result in further strengthening of Iran (and Egypt, recovering from
revolutionary unrest). We can´t forget that in 2003, George Bush
Junior, obsessed with the idea of destroying Iraq´s weapons of mass
destruction, has conferred a truly fantastic favour to Tehran by
solving the problem of the `accursed´ Saddam Hussein for Iran. And
today there is a new question of a Hamletian proportion; can it happen
 that Iran will benefit from demolition of the decrepit political
 system of the `petroleum monarchies´ in the Persian Gulf?

Henry Kissinger and Brent Scowcroft are clearly pondering over such a
prospect. It would be interesting to know what Barack Obama and Mitt
Romney have to say about this scenario. One of the most distinguished
social economists of our days John Kenneth Galbraith once said:
"Politics... consists in choosing between the disastrous and the
unpalatable". I believe that today the West is facing the problem in
exactly this perspective.

Today the biggest problem the West is facing is not the removal of
Bashar al-Assad from his position (amid total uncertainty regarding
Syria´s future), but restarting economic growth in America and
Western Europe. The splendid ideas of the `economic growth pact´
require that domestic efforts must be focused on nothing but economic
growth. Growth that predominantly results from domestic factors and
the strategy of economic development in this area cannot focus
exclusively on support of the most viable economy in the EU, i.e.
Germany. A joint effort to restore the economies of Western Europe
will lead to the reduced relevance of the Syrian crisis to the
citizens of the West. The aggravation of tension in the Middle East
has an apparent political agenda: to distract people from helplessness
of the Western European elite against the progressing economic and
financial crisis.

The Indian Equation

Naturally, this gives rise to a question: what role could be assigned
to India in resolution of the Syrian crisis? I would say a potentially
significant one. With Pranab Mukherjee, one of the country´s most
experienced and distinguished political figures, elected as President
of India, its foreign policy seems to be developing coherence and
genuine independence from the interests and the agendas of foreign
forces. This independence is assuming the shape of specific
foreign-policy initiatives. I believe that India realizes that the
situation is not about a crisis in a remote country, but about the
principles of modern politics that are sacred for Indians - the
unity and territorial integrity of modern states.

The Libyan model of crisis resolution has proven to be utterly
nonviable. That is why there is a need for new mechanism and new
initiatives for the global system. The West is no longer the hub of
the universe. The new global order will form through the development
of horizontal cooperation between countries and regions. Also in store
is the establishment of new regional and trans-regional economic and
political institutions and development of their networks. Any attempt
to reshape the global map by a group of states provokes a response
from institutions, such as the Nonaligned Movement and BRICS.

The Indian strategic elite recognises the importance of close
cooperation with Iran in economics and geopolitics. Globalization as
it was at the time of the Washington Consensus has fallen into
oblivion. Protracted globalization (B.R. Nayar) is being replaced by
global regionalization, opening new and inviting opportunities to
India.

Speculation about the possible economic union of four countries, Iran,
Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, has been doing the rounds for years. This
refers to the future of a common market with the tendency towards
compression of economic space. I think that India, Russia and Pakistan
are displaying ever-growing interest in economic diplomacy. This
mutually beneficial strengthening of relations holds one of the keys
to resolution of conflicts and transition to the multi-polar,
post-American world.

Andrei Volodin, Dr. Sc. (History), is Chief Research Fellow with the
Russian Academy of Sciences´ (RAS) Institute of World Economy and
International Relations.

===================================================
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages

Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com

To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe,
and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
====================================================





Messages in this topic (1)
______________________________________________________________________
__
______________________________________________________________________
__ 5. U.S. In Afghanistan: Who Is The Real Savage?
    Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff at yahoo.com rwrozoff
    Date: Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:00 pm ((PDT))

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_08_28/US-in-Afghanistan-who-s-the-savage/


Voice of Russia
August 28, 2012


US in Afghanistan: who´s the "savage"?
John Robles


====

These are facts the West would rather we did not know because in
Afghanistan as in Iraq every move against the citizenry and every bomb
dropped has been done illegally. Both of these countries were attacked
in illegal acts of military aggression for involvement in events they
had nothing to do with, namely the events of 9-11; both of the
countries never threatened or even posed a threat to the US, yet they
have paid the price and have been illegally occupied, so it is not
surprising that the people are fighting back.

====



Another case of US forces desecrating human remains ends with a slap
on the wrist for some of the perpetrators while others received no
disciplinary action and on the same day the burning of Korans was also
brushed off with those guilty also escaping serious punishment.
Against the backdrop of increased Afghan-on-NATO violence and the
beheading of 17 partygoers by Islamists, the question as to who really
are the "savages" in Afghanistan begs to be asked.

Once again, as with almost every case involving egregious misconduct
by US troops who have committed what can only be characterized as war
crimes, those involved have received nothing more than the proverbial
slap on the wrist, and the cases are in the hundreds if not thousands.
We do not know the accurate figures because most such events are
hidden and not reported.

This time the events in question could be called benign by US
standards. For some reason, probably to minimize the backlash, both
judgments came at the same time, namely rulings on cases of soldiers
urinating on Taliban corpses and the burning of Korans.

In the case of the urinating Marines some of them received unspecified
administrative "discipline," it was reported on Monday, despite
the US claiming that it was a "huge" embarrassment and caused a
Naval Criminal Investigative Service investigation, as well as
condemnation and an apology from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and
even US Secretary of State Clinton, who vowed that the culprits would
be found and punished.

The other judgment also released on Monday, involved the burning of
Korans by US troops, an event which caused widespread riots, multiple
deaths and calls from the Taliban and Islamists to kill foreign troops
in Afghanistan and Americans in order to defend Islam´s Holy Book.

Despite the outrage and deaths caused by their actions, nothing
"criminal" really occurred, according to the US.

Like I said, these were benign events by US standards, after Abu
Ghraib and similar events in Iraq, the mass murders of almost 20
civilians while they slept in their homes earlier this year by a
"deranged" sergeant, cases of cutting off body parts as trophies
(including the cutting off of fingers, noses, ears and even the
peeling off of faces), families being set on fire, denial of medical
care to mass numbers of civilians leading to their deaths, snipers
posing with Nazi symbols, multiple cases of rape, sodomy and massacre
after massacre after massacre, sure Marines simply urinating on
corpses seems almost comic.

The Taliban are almost no better, however they trail far behind
compared to the overall creativity and level of atrocity of NATO´s
finest. Their savagery is just as brutal as that committed by some of
the NATO forces but less widespread and frequent. The latest event
attributed to the Taliban but denied by them and quite possibly
carried out by "insurgents," was the beheading of 15 men and 2
women for having a party with dancing and music, something they view
as immoral and un-Islamic.

Afghan authorities have launched an investigation with President Hamid
Karzai saying,"the attack shows that there are irresponsible members
among the Taliban."

The beheading of the partygoers occurred in an area of Musa Qala
district which is almost totally under Taliban control. The governor
of Musa Qala, Nematullah Khan, said, "They were having a music party
and the Taliban came and killed them and cut off their heads."

On the same day, to the south, ten Afghan soldiers were killed at a
checkpoint and two NATO soldiers were killed by an Afghan soldier
while they were on joint patrol, bringing the number of victims of
Afghan soldier on NATO soldier violence to 42 this year alone. Now
called "green-on-blue-killings," a further sign of the utter
failure of almost 12 years of "coalition" occupation.

These are facts the West would rather we did not know because in
Afghanistan as in Iraq every move against the citizenry and every bomb
dropped has been done illegally. Both of these countries were attacked
in illegal acts of military aggression for involvement in events they
had nothing to do with, namely the events of 9-11; both of the
countries never threatened or even posed a threat to the US, yet they
have paid the price and have been illegally occupied, so it is not
surprising that the people are fighting back.

Going back to the subject of slaps on the wrists for those committing
atrocities, for me the reason they never pay the price for their
illegal behavior has been clear for a long time. How on earth could
the US judicial system or the US military deem anything their own
killing machines do to be illegal if the whole war and occupation of
Afghanistan is in and of itself illegal to begin with?

The truth is an extremely dangerous thing, especially when it is
something that might end plans for world domination, and that is what
it is all about, but it looks like they may be failing.

In Afghanistan, a country decimated by close to 12 years of war, the
truths are hidden on a daily basis and as sites such as Wikileaks have
found out (the hard way), reporting on the facts is something the US
Empire will not allow.

The destruction and atrocities that the US has unleashed on the Afghan
people continue on a daily basis and have been something the US has
attempted time and time again to hide. As they continue, so will the
response from the Afghan side.

In Afghanistan the US obfuscates, hides and doctors the facts at every
turn so that even finding an accurate count of the number of civilian
deaths in the country is almost an impossibility, with numbers ranging
from the tens of thousands to the millions. Yet one thing is crystal
clear: the US has failed in Afghanistan and there is little likelihood
that there is a way out.

One question that I feel truly begs to be answered is quite a simple
one: who in fact are the real "savages" in Afghanistan?

=================================================
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages

Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com

To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe,
and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
=================================================





Messages in this topic (1)





----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/b-antinato/

<*> Your email settings:
    Digest Email  | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/b-antinato/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    b-antinato-normal at yahoogroups.com 
    b-antinato-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    b-antinato-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

---------------------------------------------------------------------


------- Fine del messaggio inoltrato -------