U.S forces pay the "enemy"
In this grotesque carnival, the US military’s contractors are forced to pay suspected insurgents to protect American supply routes. It is an accepted fact of the military logistics operation in Afghanistan that the US government funds the very forces American troops are fighting. And it is a deadly irony, because these funds add up to a huge amount of money for the Taliban.
“It’s a big part of their income,” one of the top Afghan government security officials admits. In fact, US military officials in Kabul estimate that a minimum of 10% of the Pentagon’s logistics contracts – hundreds of millions of dollars – consists of payments to insurgents.
Perhaps I am naive, but Afghanistan has worn down every invader that has ever tried to “secure” it. Somehow we are different though and continue under the illusion that once our forces capture/kill that one mastermind, our citizens will all be safer. Pardon me if I’m having trouble buying this logic: every day more soldiers get maimed and killed- on both sides. It’s a sad joke- a sad commentary on our priorities as a nation. These are bright young people, with technical skills that could be put to use in life giving enterprises such as communication, health care and energy. Should we take the absence of a terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11, as evidence that this whole policy is sound? What if tomorrow a terrorist blew up a major bridge here in the U.S? Would we consider the policy a failure- and hence all of the life and capital lost a waste? Doubtful. You see, there’s no provable answer to these questions. You either choose peace or you choose aggression and you live with the consequences. We continue to choose aggression and justify our actions accordingly. Military aggression is the front show to soothe us into feeling that we are somehow safer. At what point do we retreat from perpetual war?
The “insurgents” may know that they can’t win. But they also know that they can’t lose. Like Nepolean’s army drawn into a Russian winter, the Americans are being foolishly drawn into a forbidding terrain and political morass that no amount of technological prowess can overcome. Meanwhile vast sums of human and monetary capital continue to be dumped down this black hole in the name of security at a time when it is critically needed on the home front.
The discerning know that there is no such thing as ultimate security: the world is a treacherous place, riddled with unforeseen risk. The Fort Hood incident is poignant in this regard: what could be more secure than a military base itself? To placate ourselves into believing we are “doing something” about security, we wage wars and pretend to solidify “rogue” nations. These illusions don’t come cheap. And it’s about time we pull our attention away from John and Kate, and Levy Johnston and every other carnival act du jour and ask some real philosophical questions about all of this.
