You really have to wonder whether history teaches politicians anything at all. Actually, perhaps that’s the wrong statement. Whether they do or don’t, I don’t think they really care. They don’t have to. Not while they can collect taxes at gunpoint, brainwash a couple of million people into donning uniforms and carrying weapons, and then do whatever they want with the whole cookie jar like a bunch of irresponsible spoiled little brats.
In a recent ABC News article, “Is Afghanistan Impossible for Obama?”, it states:
“In an ABC News/Washington Post poll released today, just 31 percent of Americans believe President Obama has a clear plan for dealing with the situation in Afghanistan, while 63 percent think he does not.”
It’s those 63 percent who actually have a handle on things. Never before, from the time of Alexander the Great, has a nation or empire emerged victorious from Afghanistan. In fact, Afghanistan may serve as a kind of object lesson when it comes to challenging the notion of “nationhood” altogether: It is nothing more than a loosely knit amalgam of various tribes, ethnicities, and religious sects all occupying one broad geographical region at any given time. And since there is of yet no dominant central force for U.S. and NATO troops to overwhelm, this effectively reduces the entire equation to strictly guerilla warfare.
Let’s set all the moral issues about invading other societies with military force in order to affect a desireable outcome for the invader aside for a moment. As for highly centralized government militaries engaging guerilla fighters on the battlefield, the track record isn’t good. There are numerous examples of this from history, but let’s keep it simple: The American Revolution showed that redcoats marching in formation in hugely overwhelming numbers and with a far greater source of supplies were no match for hit-and-run militiamen wearing plain clothes that blended in with the surroundings and local population. True, England was at war with France over in Europe at the time (of which the New World was but one front), but the tide probably still might not have been turned at all, had the colonists not employed unorthodox tactics.
An example nearer in time is Vietnam, where once again, forces less heavily armed and more poorly equipped still ground the American goliath down to a humiliating defeat. And there’s the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan itself in the 1980s – a situation where a direct land campaign was possible, entirely without having to move millions of pieces of equipment, and tens of thousands of men halfway around the world; such as in both Vietnam and the current U.S./NATO effort.
This never seems to daunt the statists, however, and anyone who truly understands the nature of government should not be surprised. Equally unremarkable to anarchists should be this additional statent from the ABC News article aforementioned:
“White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Wednesday that the administration is not concerned by the poll results showing sliding public approval of the President’s handling of Afghanistan.”
No, of course not. The people forced to pay for all this at the hands of the IRS’s guns be damned. Be damned as well, in spite of the haughty nomenclature, all those who die: Americans, Afghans, Europeans, Canadians – any and all human beings. They don’t matter. Just stop scrutinizing the situation and hand me my Nobel Peace Prize, thank you very much.
More from ABC News:
“Nearly half of Americans surveyed, 47 percent, now say the war has not been worth fighting, according to the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll. And the question of sending more troops to Afghanistan brings the same stark divide: 47 percent of Americans favor a surge, while a sliver more – 49 percent — say no.
“Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has denied a rift between the Pentagon and the White House on the troops issue, but there is reason for the White House to be concerned.
“With the insurgency in Afghanistan continuing to rage, U.S. service members are dying every day. One U.S. soldier was killed by an IED in southern Afghanistan overnight, bringing the total U.S. casualties in October to 30.
“Obama is also facing more pressure from Republicans to send the additional forces that the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanely McChrystal, and other military leaders have said they need.
“Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., an advocate for fulfilling McChrystal’s request for more U.S. troops, told ABC News, ‘The longer we delay in sending the necessary additional troops, the longer it will be that our troops are unnecessarily in danger, in my view.’”
The troops are “unnecessarily in danger” right now, have been all along on this insane wonderland quest, and McCain and others want to send in more; the poll numbers mean nothing.
This is government: An engine unto itself, accountable to no one. Your vote is not only irrelevant, it is damaging. It implicitly – if not explicitly – endorses this. And all the while you’ll pay “your” damned taxes, all right; or you’ll end up either in a cage or dead.
The situation is not entirely hopeless. Let Obama, McCain, and all of the rest of these insane parasites play their deadly, hateful games. Just don’t you and I support them any longer. Don’t feed them the awe and respect they need to continue using you as a pawn and a slave. One day, after countless more corpses are produced; after even more still are maimed, wounded, and broken; after immeasurable suffering, pain and loss has been endured; this war, along with Iraq, will end. Then you and I, clear thinkers, can survey the wreckage, assess the damage – and know precisely who is responsible. We can also see that all of it was for naught – for it will have changed nothing.
Except perhaps the hearts and minds of a few more like us who will refuse to go along any more. Those who will have seen through the State entire, and will come to realize that its machinations are nothing but lies through and through, all the way, in every solitary part.
And this, good friends and neighbors, is precisely where the real battle lies
