John Mearsheimer on the Afghan quagmire

Hollow Victory

According to the Republicans, the United States is once again at the crossroads of losing another critical war because of feckless Democrats. Only this time it’s Afghanistan.


Why They Hate Us (I): on military occupation

by Stephen Walt

The bottom line (to the Afghan quagmire):


Civil War(s) in Iraq/Afghanistan: Back Door to War on Iran

Ron Paul was excellent about the Iraq/Afghan quagmires and the coming war with Iran in the following youtube:

Ron Paul vs. Michael Moore on Larry King CNN 10/29/2009

“Matthew Hoh, a former marine captain who fought in Iraq and was posted to Afghanistan’s Zabul province where the Taliban is strong, questioned the purpose of the war and said that many Afghans were fighting only because foreign troops are in their country.”

First US official resigns in protest at Afghan war 

U.S. official resigns over Afghan war
US-led war in Afghanistan ‘unwinnable’

Afghanistan: A War of Lies:DEBORCHGRAVE Commentary: Bridges too far (in Afghan quagmire):

Afghanistan: A War of Lies:

So one can clearly argue that 9/11 happened because of Israel and that the US invaded Afghanistan because of 9/11 and therefore because of Israel (look up ‘Israel as a terrorist’s motivation’ in Bamford’s ‘A Pretext for War’ book as the paperback version of ‘A Pretext for War’ includes an additional section about the AIPAC espionage case):

11 Responses to “John Mearsheimer on the Afghan quagmire”

  • Patriot says:


    By Charles Kupchan and Steven Simon

    Published: November 3 2009 22:22 | Last updated: November 3 2009 22:22

    Although the aborted electoral run-off in Afghanistan has further weakened the country’s already troubled government, the Obama administration has little choice but to work with President Hamid Karzai. Indeed, the electoral mess paradoxically makes it easier for President Obama to decide on America’s next steps in the war. The turmoil in Kabul should convince the White House that General Stanley McChrystal’s plan to pursue counterinsurgency in the countryside is a bridge too far.
    The US commander in Afghanistan would have coalition forces adopt a “population-centric” strategy in which they address “the needs and grievances of the people in their local environment”. In Iraq, a similar strategy did succeed in undercutting the Sunni insurgency. But Iraq’s central government was in the midst of stabilising and increasing its effectiveness, enabling it to rebuild the institutional infrastructure of a functioning state. With an Afghan government of questionable legitimacy and limited efficacy in control of only 30 per cent of the country – and much of the rest under the sway of local warlords – surging thousands of fresh troops into lawless rural areas is a recipe for chasing after unattainable ends with insufficient means.

    This article can be found at:,_i_email=y.html

  • khz says:

    The REAL reason USA is occupying Afghanistan. Miles and miles and miles of gas and oil pipelines:

Leave a Reply