THE AFGHAN WAR IS LOST ALREADY - PRESIDENT OBAMA, BRING THE TROOPS HOME

It is an irony that the Afghan war was won within the first three months and yet it has been lost over ten years.

After the 9/11 attacks in New York, U.S. had a genuine reason to go after Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Within the first two weeks of invasion, Taliban were on the run and after Tora Bora, Al-Qaeda too was substantially decimated.

The war should have ended then. Taliban were weakened and had no hope of coming back to power, they melted away and became part of mainstream Afghan society. A massive development effort for Afghanistan (like the Marshall Plan) should have been initiated to rebuild that war torn country. That would have diverted attention from war to peacetime activities, created jobs, opened schools, markets and built the much lacking infrastructure. Afghanistan could have been brought out of the 15th century into the 20th century (if not the 21st).

History will record that continuation of war beyond the first few months and shift of focus from Al-Qaeda to Taliban was a major policy disaster of the Bush Administration. Fighting Arab and other foreign terrorists in Afghanistan is one thing, but fighting the local populace and that too, the majority Pashtuns (all Taliban are Pashtuns) is another thing altogether.

Afghan history is littered with ruins of foreign armies and so far none of the invaders have succeed. The breakup of Soviet Union following their retreat from Afghanistan is still fresh in our minds.

In foreign policy and war management terms, Bush Administration's early decision to impose rule by minority Northern Alliance over the majority Pashtun would prove to be a fateful decision that would prolong the war for more than ten years. President Obama's folly of owning a lost war and troop increases would only make matters worse. Also, the substantial increase in night raid activities under President Obama involving killing of Afghans, many of whom turn out to be innocent civilians is making matters worse. It is causing anger and providing impetus to Taliban in their recruitment. It is time that these raids stop and stop immediately.

Once it was clear that U.S. had no desire to bring the war to an end and Northern Alliance would continue to hold a lion's share of power, it became a Pashtun v non Pashtun war. America's continued alignment with Northern Alliance and its failure to bring aboard all stakeholders, especially the majority Pashtuns, gave them a reason to consider foreign troops as occupiers rather than as friends who may rid them of Taliban forever. Gradually, Taliban started to resurface, supported and financed by Pashtun leaders, many of whom play a double game - break bread with Americans and finance Taliban at the same time. Even General Petraeus admits that Taliban have an upper hand at this point. It has also been reported that US has taken more casualties in the last month alone than any other month since the war began. If this war is not brought to an end soon, Taliban will be emboldened even more and the outcome could be even worse.

One of the most disastrous policy decisions ever made by some brilliant minds in Washington, D.C. was to encourage Afghans to grow poppy again, the production of which had previously been eradicated under Taliban regime. Large sums of money started to flow in the hands of drug lords and barons once again and Taliban too found a stream of perpetual cash headed their way. Taliban, who by then were almost extinct started to rise from ruins like the Phoenix from the ashes. The increased revenue improved their morale and strengthen their resolve. They started to re-equip themselves and could even afford to recruit daily wage soldiers to bolster their ranks. While a number of factors have contributed to the outcome of war in Afghanistan, this decision alone has perhaps gone a long way in converting victory into defeat.

The strange thing is that even after ten years, U.S. and NATO have not understood the Afghan Society. Afghans have been warriors for centuries, they do not need military training. By now we all know that Taliban with their minimal training can give a fair fight to U.S. and NATO troops. If anything, Afghans need to be weaned off their weapons. To accomplish this, a major development effort is required. The Afghans have had nothing to do except fight for the last several years. They need to be put to work in factories, road & bridge building, school and market building etc., so they can begin to provide a decent living for their families without fighting wars.

US has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on this war and there is nothing to show for it. Afghanistan is still a war ravaged backward country. Rebuilding that country would have cost a great deal less and not so many lives would have been lost.

This war has already been lost and it is time to put an end to it and bring all soldiers home. Let the Afghans decide their own fate. They did it before the Soviet invasion and they will do so again after the withdrawal.

The Tea Party Movement - Is It A Genuine Conservative Movement Against Big Spending or Just An Assembley of Power Hungry Racists?

The Tea Party Movement's protests against big Government and big spending make absolute sense. After all the U.S. is deep in debt and each year, Budget deficits have increased since Bill Clinton left office. It is no brainer that U.S. must bring down its budget deficits and start paying down its debt to curtail it to a more acceptable level of 30 to 40% of GDP compared to the current level of 80 to 90% of GDP.

The amount of money spent on saving the big banks, the auto industry, AIG and such like, have increased national debt enormously. So, protesting about big spending is quite appropriate. But where was the Tea Party Movement when George W. Bush was busy launching an illegal invasion of Iraq costing the U.S. taxpayer nearly a trillion dollars and giving tax cuts to the wealthy at the time of war adding another one and a half trillion dollars to deficit? Where was the Tea Party Movement when Bush merrily turned Bill Clinton's budget surpluses to deficits year after year. If the Tea Party Movement really stands for fiscal conservatism, then why did they not have rowdy gatherings like they do now or organize big rallies on the Mall in Washington D.C. to protest against Bush Administration's disastrous economic policies. The huge budget deficits that now face the nation and the financial crisis that ensued in 2008 are a direct result of those policies.

The Tea Partiers did not raise their voice during Bush era because this movement is not for fiscal conservatism - that is just a facade. They are (at least most of them) a group of nut job racists who malign and blame Barrack Obama for everything as they find it hard to accept an African American occupying the White House. So, when they talk about taking America back, who are they taking America back from?

The Tea Party Movement has won some primary races within the Republican party and no doubt will win some elections too. Momentarily, it may appear a setback for the Democrats, but in reality, it is the Republicans who will lose. Having these crazies in their midst is going to be a major headache for the Republican leadership in the House and Senate.

Some examples of the Tea Party craziness:

Carl Paladino running for New York Governor admits to fathering an illegitimate child, but blames his Democrat opponent for immorality.

Sharon Angle in a race against Harry Reid in Arizona sees ghosts of thousands of terrorists crossing the border from Canada.

Rand Paul wants restaurant owners to decide who comes into their restaurants - in other words racial segregation all over again.

Christine O'Donnell is having to put out ads saying, she is not a witch!

Joe Miller, the Senate candidate from Alaska has a journalist handcuffed for asking questions by his thugs aka private security.

And finally, Sarah Palin wants Muslims to "RUFUDIATE" the mosque in New York.

It will be fun watching some of these jokers occupy the House and Senate seats.

Al-Maliki's Visit to Iran, US May Have Unknowingly Handed Iraq on a Platter to Iran

Nouri Al-Maliki's visit to Iran is supposedly an effort to shore up support to form a Government in Iraq. But, there seems a great deal more than meets the eye.

The more moderate and secular Ayad Allawi has a slight lead in the Iraqi elections and he should form a Government, but Al-Maliki has gone to pledge his unflinching loyalty to the Ayatollahs in Iran. If he is successful in forming a Government, the Iranians will have an enormous influence over Iraq.

After his recent triumphant visit to Lebanon, someone said that Ahmedinajad has the game, set, but not quite the match, but with these developments, he may even have the match. The rousing reception he received in Lebanon not just from Hezbollah, but also from the Lebanese people, their President and Prime Minister speaks volumes of U.S. policy failure in Lebanon. The Bush Administration played a dangerous game in Lebanon. Blaming Syria for Rafik Hariri's murder was a clever ploy and for a while it played well with the Lebanese people and it even got Syrian troops out of Lebanon. But now that the U.N. inquiry commission appears to have exonerated Syria, the U.S. intentions are viewed rather suspiciously in Lebanon.

It appears that U.S. has been played again and again in The Middle East by Israel. First in Iraq by providing it bogus intelligence on WMDs and egging it on to invade Iraq and then in Lebanon by falsely framing Syrians for Hariri's murder.

The net result of it all is that today, Iran has a huge influence in Lebanon and it will also end up with enormous influence over Iraq. This is exactly what Iran wanted and the U.S. may have unknowingly handed Iraq on a platter to Iran.

General McChrystal - Good Riddance, Now it is time to bring in a new Defense Secretary

General McChrystal's insubordination and inappropriate comments about his superiors and especially the Commander-in-Chief earned him a well deserved sack. Anything less would have been perceived as a weakness on President Obama's part.

Letting McChrystal off the hook would have opened doors to insubordination from other military officers. What is surprising however, is the rumor that Defense Secretary Robert Gates pleaded for a lesser punishment. If this is true, then it is a matter of great concern. How can the Defense Secretary not ask for full and proper punishment. In fact, it is President Obama's open mindedness to invite the General to the Oval office to explain his conduct, otherwise he could have just asked the Defense Secretary to relieve him of his command.

Robert Gates has served many a President, but he may have too much baggage from the past. In these changed times, President Obama needs to appoint a new Defense Secretary to implement his policies, someone whose thinking is completely aligned with the President.

The war in Iraq may be winding down, though the after effects of a total withdrawal are yet to emerge. However, things are not going well in Afghanistan. McChrystal may have befriended the Afghans, but his surge is not working. Taliban are a different breed altogether, each time NATO forces launch a major attack, they simply melt away and regroup to start the fight elsewhere another day. Instead of reducing, their numbers are increasing.

It is time to rethink the Afghan strategy entirely. No foreign force has ever defeated the Afghan people, and this war IS against the Afghan people, be they under the garb of Taliban. It is time to wind down the war and implement an exit strategy based on a political settlement. For that, the President needs to put on his thinking cap and he also needs new leadership at Pentagon.

US Capitualtes to Israel Again - Who runs the US Foreign Policy: AIPAC or the White House?

The Israeli attack on unarmed ships carrying relief goods for Gaza has been squarely condemned by Governments around the world, except the US Government, which has not had the courage to call a spade a spade.

Attacking ships in international waters is piracy under the international law. After this incidence, there is no difference between Somali pirates and Israeli forces attacking ships in international waters - except that Somali pirates don't usually kill.

It is appalling that US has blocked and watered down the UN Security Council resolution in a most shameful manner. Instead of a resolution condemning Israel's actions, it has tabled a watered down resolution that is utterly meaningless.

US also blocked efforts to call for an international investigation, instead it insisted on Israel holding the investigation. This is akin to asking a shooter who has just killed several people to head an investigation into his own actions!

Who controls the US foreign policy, the White House or Israel i.e. AIPAC. It is unfortunate that US has surrendered its sovereignty to Israel. Being the largest super power in the world, it has a moral duty to do the right thing - condemn what is wrong and applaud what is right. By taking a one sided position, it is lowering its stature in the world. Such actions are only likely to strengthen the hands of hate mongering terrorists, who propagate that US is not an honest broker.

Great nations do not surrender their sovereignty to other countries, history has shown us that nations who take unjust actions ultimately lose their power in the world.

Hillary Clinton, being in charge of US foreign policy should show grit and resign to demonstrate her unhappiness at the US foreign policy being hijacked from under her feet.