Afghanistan - What's Really Going On There?
Inside Afghanistan with Ben Anderson: Part 1
Afghanistan - What's Really Going On There?
Inside Afghanistan with Ben Anderson: Part 1
Fighting Alongside Stoned Afghan Soldiers
Not Your Father's Army
by Chuck Baldwin
February 5, 2010
Most of us Americans have a deep and abiding respect and admiration for our country‚€™s fighting men who have served‚€“and are serving‚€“within the US Armed Forces. We appreciate their willingness to put themselves in harm‚€™s way for the preservation of our nation‚€™s liberty and independence. We honor their sacrifice. Indeed, many of us share that sacrifice with the deaths, dismemberments, and paralysis of our most cherished loved ones who were killed or injured in the line of duty.
It is time, however, that we awaken to the reality of what our military is becoming and where it is heading. Suffice it to say, this is not your father‚€™s army.
On December 8, 1941, my father, Ed Baldwin‚€“along with his two brothers, Bud and Gene‚€“marched down to a recruiting office in Little Rock, Arkansas, to enlist. The Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor the day before, and no branch of service had to beg people to enlist that day. Bud joined the Navy. Gene joined the Marines. When government officials saw Dad‚€™s resum�, they selected him to help construct the atomic bomb. All three brothers served their country with distinction throughout the war.
But what all of us need to realize is, World War II was the last constitutionally fought war in which America has been engaged. The United Nations was created at the end of WWII, and ever since then, our military forces have increasingly become the ‚€œpeacekeeping‚€Ě arm of that evil institution.
Since WWII, American forces have fought major wars in South Korea, South Vietnam (including Laos and Cambodia), Kosovo, the Persian Gulf (Kuwait), Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Pakistan‚€“all for the benefit of the United Nations. Add to these major wars lesser conflicts (except to those Americans killed or wounded in them) such as Lebanon, Dominican Republic, Congo (Zaire), Iran, El Salvador, Libya, Grenada, Honduras, Chad, Panama, Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Macedonia, Bosnia, Sierra Leone, Kenya, Tanzania, and Somalia. And this does not take into account the countless CIA-sponsored Black Ops missions that have taken place all over the world.
Yes, American forces have been used to both put people in power and take people out of power all over the world. And as often as not, the people we put in power were counted among the ‚€œbad guys,‚€Ě while the people we removed from power were ‚€œgood guys.‚€Ě Remember, our own CIA was the organization most responsible for the rise to power of Osama Bin Laden. And it was the US government that surreptitiously set up the murder of Dr. Jonas Savimbi, who was one of the best friends the United States had overseas. Plus, does anyone remember how the US treated our friend, the Shah of Iran? Yes, some of us are old enough to remember when Iran was one of the best friends we had in that region of the world.
But mind you, not one single war in which American forces have been engaged since WWII has been constitutionally fought. Not one!
Ever since the United Nations was created, its interests have dominated the usage of US forces. In fact, our military today is quickly morphing into the tip of the spear for a burgeoning, global New World Order. To those with eyes to see, the evidence is everywhere. It‚€™s not even being hidden anymore. Have you seen that new US Navy television commercial? It boldly proclaims, ‚€œThe US Navy: A GLOBAL FORCE For Good.‚€Ě (Emphasis added.)
This politically correct, UN-dominated New World Order has changed (and is changing) our US military right before our eyes. It has taken the greatest and proudest independent fighting force in the world‚€“one created to defend the people and property of the United States‚€“and turned it into a global military policeman for the evil Machiavellians at the UN.
In order to convert the US military into a true ‚€œGlobal Force,‚€Ě several changes are being forced upon our fighting men.
First, more and more women are entering the US military.
Currently, women comprise about 20% of military personnel. And for the first time in US history, women are actively engaged in combat units in the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The massive integration of women in combat may serve the interests of political correctness, but it does not serve the interests of combat effectiveness. Neither does it serve the interests of family and child rearing. And I don‚€™t care how old fashioned that sounds!
Wives and mothers are the backbone of family nurturing. To willingly take mothers away from their children‚€“and subject both mother and child to the separation and suffering that military life demands‚€“is both unnatural and cruel.
And there is another stark reality that few people want to discuss: the fact that 30% of all women in the US military are raped. Yes, you read it right: 30%.
According to NPR, ‚€œIn 2003, a survey of female veterans found that 30 percent said they were raped in the military. A 2004 study of veterans who were seeking help for post-traumatic stress disorder found that 71 percent of the women said they were sexually assaulted or raped while serving. And a 1995 study of female veterans of the Gulf and earlier wars, found that 90 percent had been sexually harassed.‚€Ě
See the report at:
The Nation: The Plight of Women Soldiers : NPR
Government and military brass know that the introduction of women into the military environment (especially the combat environment) is reaping problems of epidemic proportions, but they are deliberately ignoring and even covering them up.
For example, does anyone recall the name Jamie Leigh Jones? According to ABC News, ‚€œA Houston, Texas woman says she was gang-raped by Halliburton/KBR coworkers in Baghdad, and the company and the U.S. government are covering up the incident.
‚€œJamie Leigh Jones, now 22, says that after she was raped by multiple men at a KBR camp in the Green Zone, the company put her under guard in a shipping container with a bed and warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she‚€™d be out of a job.‚€Ě
See the report at:
Victim: Gang-Rape Cover-Up by U.S., Halliburton/KBR - ABC News
And this story leads into another phenomenon being created within this New World Order army: the way our government and military are increasing their use of ‚€œprivate‚€Ě or ‚€œindependent‚€Ě contractors. In the past, these people were always known simply as mercenaries. Call them what you will, mercenaries are now a major component of the way our government wages war.
According to Global Research, ‚€œThe growing use of private armies not only subjects target populations to savage warfare but makes it easier for the White House to subvert domestic public opinion and wage wars.
‚€œAmericans are less inclined to oppose a war that is being fought by hired foreign mercenaries, even when their own tax dollars are being squandered to fund it.
‚€œ‚€˜The increasing use of contractors, private forces, or, as some would say, ‚€œmercenaries,‚€Ě makes wars easier to begin and to fight‚€“it just takes money and not the citizenry,‚€™ said Michael Ratner, of New York‚€™s Center for Constitutional Rights. ‚€˜To the extent a population is called upon to go to war, there is resistance, a necessary resistance to prevent wars of self-aggrandizement, foolish wars, and, in the case of the United States, hegemonic imperialist wars.‚€™‚€Ě
See the report at:
The Rise of Mercenary Armies: A Threat to Global Security
Remember, at any given moment, there might be as many‚€“if not more‚€“mercenaries fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as there are US military forces. For example, according to the Christian Science Monitor, in early 2008, the number of mercenaries fighting in Iraq numbered more than 190,000. Remember, in addition to the benefit of not drafting US citizens to fight these perpetual wars (and thus avoid incurring the wrath and resistance of the American public), mercenaries enjoy the luxury of not having to comply with the military rules of engagement. And the stories of atrocities committed by US-employed mercenaries in Iraq and Afghanistan are too numerous to list.
In addition to the Jamie Jones case mentioned above, consider the case where Blackwater (now called Xe) mercenaries mowed down 17 Iraqi citizens in an unprovoked attack. And, of course, no one at Blackwater was held accountable for these murders. Reports of abuse, cruelty, and savagery by mercenaries in Iraq are commonplace. According to the Global Research report, ‚€œMany soldiers of fortune on private payrolls previously served dictators in South Africa, Chile, and elsewhere.‚€Ě
The Washington Post quotes Brigadier General Karl Horst, an advisor to the U.S. Joint Force Command as saying, ‚€œThese guys [mercenaries] run loose in this country [Iraq] and do stupid stuff. There‚€™s no authority over them, so you can‚€™t come down on them hard when they escalate force . . . They shoot people, and someone else has to deal with the aftermath. It happens all over the place.‚€Ě
And you wonder why the United States is viewed so negatively around the world?
Granted, there is a place and proper use for mercenaries. Fred E. Foldvary, Senior Editor of The Progress Report, rightly observes, ‚€œOne alternative to U.S. military action against terrorists who have attacked the U.S. and other countries, and are threatening further attacks, is to enact Letters of Marque and Reprisal. Article I, Section 8, paragraph 11 of the U.S. Constitution authorizes Congress to ‚€˜grant letters of Marque and Reprisal and make rules concerning captures on land and water.‚€™ A ‚€˜reprisal‚€™ means an action taken in return for some injury. A reprisal could be a seizing of property or guilty persons in retaliation for an attack and injury. It could include forces used against the perpetrators for the redress of grievances. A reprisal could even involve killing a terrorist who is threatening further harm and cannot be captured.
‚€œ‚€˜Marque‚€™ is related to ‚€˜marching‚€™ and means crossing or marching across a border in order to do a reprisal. So a letter of Marque and Reprisal would authorize a private person, not in the U.S. armed forces, to conduct reprisal operations outside the borders of the U.S.A.
‚€œSuch Letters are grantable not just by the U.S. Constitution, but also by international law, which is why it was able to be included in the Constitution. The Letters are grantable whenever the citizens or subjects of one country are injured by those in another country and justice is denied by the government of that country, as happened with the attack by persons who were in Afghanistan.‚€Ě
See Foldvary‚€™s column at:
Letters of Marque and Reprisal
And that is exactly what Congressman Ron Paul attempted to do. He proposed H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001, to authorize the U.S. State Department to issue such Letters. See Dr. Paul‚€™s Press Release at:
PRESS RELEASE: Paul Offers President New Tool in the War on Terrorism
However, neither the Congress nor the White House‚€“Democrat or Republican‚€“has any intention of following the Constitution; therefore, Letters of Marque and Reprisal were never authorized. As a result, no authority has been granted to these mercenaries to wage war on behalf of anyone, especially not the people of the United States.
But what unauthorized mercenaries do accomplish is to fulfill the demands of internationalists and globalists to use unaccountable and uncontrolled (at least by normal military protocols) private armies for their own personal and nefarious purposes.
The next step for our politically correct ‚€œGlobal Force‚€Ě is the authorization for homosexuals to serve openly in the US military. This has long been the goal of globalists, and it is now about to happen.
It was globalist President Bill Clinton who introduced the current ‚€œDon‚€™t Ask, Don‚€™t Tell‚€Ě policy that allows homosexuals to serve in the US armed forces‚€“but not openly. Of course, this was a major departure from US military history. From George Washington‚€™s Continental army until the Clinton administration, homosexuality was deemed ‚€œincompatible‚€Ě with military service. And now globalist Barack Obama is leading Congress to change the policy even further by allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the US military.
However, please consider this: if our governmental and military leaders would cover up the raping of American servicewomen by servicemen, don‚€™t you know that they will cover up the raping of American servicemen by homosexual servicemen? Mark this down: mixing sex (heterosexual or homosexual) and military service is a recipe for disaster. And the potential damage inflicted upon military units (especially combat units) is exacerbated exponentially by the introduction of large numbers of homosexuals and women into those units. (This is the universal sentiment of virtually every active duty or retired serviceman I have ever spoken with.) But it does fit perfectly into the plans of the New World Order architects, who want to use the US military as much for the advancement of their politically correct agenda as they do for any actual military purpose.
Plus, dare I mention how that many violent gangs in North America are encouraging their members to join the US military in order to learn tactics and skills, which enable them to more effectively inflict their criminality upon the American people? Well, it‚€™s true. And our military brass knows it‚€™s true, and yet they still allow these thugs to enter our military. Hispanic gang members, especially, are entering the US military in droves.
According to a report in The American Conservative magazine, ‚€œ[R]ecent figures indicate that gang membership in the Armed Forces significantly surpasses civilian levels. Stars and Stripes reported that 1 to 2 percent of the military are gang members, compared to 0.02 percent of the general population.‚€Ě
See the report at:
The American Conservative -- Gang Warfare
No, ladies and gentlemen, it is not your father‚€™s army. And, sadly, while many of our fine military leaders (not to mention many of our active duty soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines) see all of this taking place, they are practically powerless to stop it, because political correctness and globalism run rampant in Washington, D.C., including at the Pentagon.
More Prey Means More to Hunt!
The Washington Government's Military claims to be there defending the Afghan People, while they are fighting against and killing the Afghan People.
Who is Gaining Ground in Afghanistan?
Plaid Cast - Afghanistan, the Land part 1
So Afghans will not submit, and they love to fight; is that who you would pick to go to war against? Especially a war with no clear goal, and no reward for the victor?"The Afghans are a brave, hardy, and independent race; they follow pastoral or agricultural occupations only ... With them, war is an excitement and relief from the monotonous occupation of industrial pursuits."
─Engels, On Afghanistan (1857)
Plaid Cast - Afghanistan, the Land part 2
Plaid Cast - Afghanistan, the Peoples part 1
Plaid Cast - Afghanistan, the Peoples part 2
Sometimes I wish we would leave emotions behind and just stick with the facts when trying to educate people.
About 75% of the Iraq war casualties were White men.
About 80% of the Afghan war casualties were White men.
These numbers are as of March 2009.
COSTOFWAR.COM - The Cost of War
YouTube- Is this what we're fighting for?
Demographics of Afghanistan
No Arabs besides some foreigners like Bin Laden.
The Washington Government ordered its Military to invade Afghanistan because a few Saudi Citizens might have been in Afghanistan or Pakistan, and might have been involved with a terrorist attack in America, though no solid evidence has ever been found of that.
The invasion has murdered many innocent Afghanis, and turned many neutral Afghanis against the Washington Government's Global Empire.
There is no clear reason for being in Afghanistan, no clear goal to accomplish, no clear achievement that would mark a victory.
Even after all the innocent Afghanis the Washington Government's Military has murdered so far (especially children) the Afghanis still do not love the Military Invaders.
How many more brutally murdered children will it take to force the Afghanis to love the Washington Government's Global Empire and the Military Invaders?
Are a couple hundred Saudi Citizens, that may or may not be in Afghanistan, more of a threat to American Security than the MILLIONS of CRIMINAL ALIEN INVADERS who are here in America causing tremendous costs to our Citizens and our Economy?
Dutch government collapses over Afghan mission
Will the Washington Government fall next?AMSTERDAM ‚Äď The Dutch coalition government collapsed Saturday over irreconcilable differences on whether to extend the Netherlands' military mission in Afghanistan.
The political outcome also left uncertainty over the fate of the 1,600 Dutch soldiers in the southern Afghan province of Uruzgan...
Dutch government collapses over Afghan mission - Yahoo! News
Ron Paul - Five Minutes on Afghanistan Policy Dec 2, 2009
Afghanistan - Land of Tribes
Australian Soldiers in Afghanistan
Yankee Company in Afghanistan