War and Geo-Political Status 21st Century – The Ultimate Resolution

October 8, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

In the twenty first century, the war is interestingly waged in Islamic nations around the world.

Beginning with Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Palestinian Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem, Yemen, Chechnya, Somalia and Sudan with skirmishes in Central Asia as seen in the recent Kyrgyzstan with Uzbek Muslims largely massacred in ethnic violence –

Terrorism and insurgencies are the by-product of relentless warfare and foreign policies fostering political instability in turn exacerbating economic and social development.

The trend is prevalent to date.

Afghanistan – The former President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney started the war in 2001 declaring the terror mastermind Osama Bin Laden will be captured “dead or alive.”

Even the message resonated in the 2008 Presidential campaign with Senator John McCain as the Republican Presidential candidate pledging –

“I will follow Osama Bin Laden to the gates of hell.”

The Democratic Presidential candidate, the then Senator Barack Obama essentially repeated his predecessor’s rhetoric –

“Bush had earlier vowed to catch bin Laden “Dead or Alive,” and … “My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him. …”

We are in 2010 and the war is a decade old with tremendous loss of lives on all sides.

U.S and allies economy drained with the superfluous troops and financial investment, the troops’ low morale after continuous deployment and the public war fatigue at its peak,

Afghanistan today is still in the medieval age under the U.S. and NATO appointed Karzai administration that has been unanimously criticized for massive corruption and lack of direction in governance.

Meanwhile, Taliban leaders in Afghanistan are reportedly held hostage by the Pakistani military and ISI prohibiting them from initiating negotiations with the Afghan government to demonstrate Pakistani officials’ clout in the crisis.

Superseding these issues is the Al-Qaeda ring leader; Osama Bin Laden neither captured alive nor pronounced dead, a convenient situation to prolong the unsustainable war strategy.

If Osama Bin Laden is alive as it is claimed by the authorities, it raises the following questions:

Given the formidable U.S. and NATO forces in operation and the significant troops involvement since the war began in 2001, the severely incapacitated Osama Bin Laden remains at large according to the political and military high command.

Further, the White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel prior to his departure last week is quoted to have questioned the administration on this issue with a statement in sheer amazement.

“We are spending about $50 billion on intelligence and we still don’t know where Osama Bin Laden is?”

Despite CIA overt operation through para-military in Pakistan and the Pakistani intelligence provided with U.S. intelligence assistance, the mastermind Osama Bin Laden cannot be found in the all too familiar territories Afghanistan where the U.S. trained the Mujahedeen, prominently Osama Bin Laden who later created the terror network ‘Al-Qaeda,’ is;

Remarkably similar to the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq that could never be found because it did not exist.

Any re-creation or resurrection accentuates the flaws due to the unauthentic replay leading to the fact that the scenario is ‘weapons of mass deception’ in the public eye.

Besides the former President George W. Bush family’s close ties with Osama Bin Laden’s immediate family is common knowledge and such relation enabled the Bin Laden family departure from the United States when all flights were grounded soon after 9/11.

Another compelling factor being Osama Bin Laden was not apprehended in Tora Bora even though the armed personnel requested for the former President George W. Bush, the Supreme Commander- in- Chief’s order for action.

These events were legitimized by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the terror experts, the media reports and cited by Senator John McCain during his Presidential bid.

The strange predicament being Osama Bin Laden is wanted “dead or alive,” and when there were opportunities to capture the terror leader, the executive order was not delivered to the armed forces to attain the goal.

Terror warnings are being issued claiming that Osama Bin Laden is preparing to wreak havoc in Europe like he did in Mumbai that took place on November 26, 2008, even though this particular terror activity was directly linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba and acknowledged by the assassin;

“Ajmal Kasab, the only attacker who was captured alive, disclosed that the attackers were members of Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Pakistan-based militant organization. He said the attackers came from Pakistan, and their controllers were in Pakistan.”

Osama Bin Laden is continually used in the possible terror attacks and claimed as the primary target in the war on terror with no news regarding his whereabouts and sources except during the terror alerts surfacing upon Osama Bin Laden reference by the peace activists.

It’s crucial to resolve this issue once and for all considering the brave young men and women in uniform are deployed to supposedly eliminate Al-Qaeda and find Osama Bin Laden in the mission that began in 2001.

Many service men and women are serving for nearly a decade with some redeployed after having been in Iraq for four to five years. Most of these courageous frontline soldiers sacrificed in the on-going war are in the age group between 19 – 21 years old and have barely experienced life.

If a 29 year old private sergeant is killed in action after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan for twelve straight years and survived by his young pregnant spouse and a toddler and the war agenda is still a mystery then it becomes necessary to find out,

What exactly are we doing in these battle grounds?

As per the latest CIA report, along the Pakistan-Afghan border – Waziristan, there are fewer than one hundred Al-Qaeda members and negligible Taliban forces compared to U.S representation around 120,000 troops with NATO alliance.

Regardless the world’s most powerful by far the sophisticated U.S. and NATO contingency with all the imaginable resources at their disposal are experiencing difficulty over nine years in seizing the fractional terror members with inferior ammunition is astonishing for it defies logic.

Therefore, if the military commanders in the best interest of the troops, the nation and the international community could unequivocally clarify on the precise mission in Afghanistan and particularly, present the facts on Osama Bin Laden it would be enormously helpful in the decisions related to ongoing wars and defense spending during legislation and election.

Above all, the Afghan population deserves the truth for they are severely dispensed with their family generations wiped out in the ceaseless conflict.

If the Al-Qaeda leader is alive, it shouldn’t be harder to locate with the intelligence dragnet across the globe perhaps within twenty four to forty eight hours and brought to justice.

Alternatively, it would be honorable to declassify the classified public information and submit the verifiable facts on the Al-Qaeda leaders’ death.

As for all issues concerning the military operation, the President of the United States being the Supreme Commander-in-Chief bears complete responsibility.

The defense and the national security team are accountable to the President – responsible for the troop level authorization, withdrawal timeline and final approval on war strategies.

In the Afghan war, the information on the ultimate authority in the decision-making process is not clear.

While it is being maintained that there is disconnect and discord between the military and the civilian exchange on operational matter and that the President is not briefed on vital military positions such as the actual troop numbers by the top security adviser and military command,

It is suggested that any dissatisfaction in the Afghan war status quo should be attributed to the military command and not the civilian authority, the President of the United States who is also incidentally, the Commander-in-Chief.

This is contradictory to the latest occurrence that involved the military’s top ranking official
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, removed by the President of the United States for ‘off-the’ record comment about the administration,revealing the authority in control.

Now in the expansive military role especially in Afghanistan and Pakistan taking horrendous toll on human lives and economic costs, the ambiguity in management as to,

“Who is calling the shots,” is rather disturbing and,

Require clarification to the armed forces and their families including the taxpayers footing the expense for the extravagant and uncertain adventure.

In that context, the exclusive secret meetings held for the selective members belonging to nexus organization apparently to discuss global economic health and the general humanitarian issues with the press and public debarred from participation is unsettling based on the discussions being related to the world population and not any private individual matter.

In fact, the nature of such gathering by the privileged members – selective heads of the state, corporate leaders and military command, a majority representing democratic societies alienating the voice of democracy – the communication media and the public is undemocratic not to mention the forum failing to meet transparency and accountability.

These meetings where the Presidential candidates as the future leader of the ‘free world’ prior to being approved by the electorate are summoned inconspicuously defying the press and denying access to the democratic process in itself is a serious credibility factor and beckons legitimate reasons on the definitive purpose.

It’s imperative to highlight the security measures taken during these sessions reflecting the twentieth century pre-world war II characteristics in the twenty first century causing frustration among the members in the society from various discipline gravely concerned about the abnormal clandestine consortium.

The public opinion upon revelation on the political, economic, corporate media and military institutional assembly behind closed doors to map out global direction is;

If it is conducted to benefit humanity then it is commendable and praiseworthy.

But then, why not hold them in public view and elaborate on the objectives to the republics’ complete satisfaction eliminating any doubts on the validity of the futuristic aspirations.

In conclusion, the fulcrum power has two immediate priorities to stabilize the deteriorating global environment predominantly due to incessant warfare and undemocratic principles adopted in the universal policies targeting humanity.

Disclosure on Osama Bin Laden and dismantling secret organizations – the deafening silence thus far proved detrimental to human progress in every frontier.

Any reluctance to conform or evasion through false propaganda and negative attacks would categorically confirm the “Who is Who” and the intrinsic aspects of –

‘The New World Order’ inevitably setting itself for a disastrous end.

Humanity thrives with consolidated contributions benefiting all and not a ‘specific society’ in the globalization concept.

Peace and perseverance to make this world a better place for all inhabitants is the natural path to prosperity.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under National and Global Security | Leave a Comment 

War and Geo-Political Status 20th Century

October 7, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The global economy is still far from recovery and most nations are dealing with austerity, Europe in particular much against their population will.

Meanwhile, among them an overwhelming majority have disproportionate defense budget that is not targeted in the spending cuts. United States has an exceptionally higher defense expenditure that is invariably passed with bipartisan approval regardless of the political party in power.

Whereas, the other life threatening issues concerning jobs, health care, social security, housing…are usually subjective to filibuster and marginalization at the worst resulting in a meaningless final product.

The contemporary society is currently confronted with the so-called war on terror. Although terrorism took birth in the twentieth century predominantly through Middle East conflicts, it escalated in the twenty first century with 9/11 becoming the premise for relentless warfare fomenting terrorism seeing no end in sight.

After two world wars to contain imperialism, fascism and ‘Great Depression,’ the expectation among the international community was long lasting peaceful environment with the governments focused on alleviating poverty, hunger and disease contributing to a healthy habitat for all living beings.

Subsequently the United Nations Charter was created with the U.N. Security Council formation comprising the five nations – United States, United Kingdom, Russia, China and France maintaining the status quo until now, despite the titanic shift in the economic realm over the latter part of the twentieth century leading till date.

The authorities then in power with the responsibility to establish peace and harness diplomatic relations, instead steered in the opposite direction with communism rising in the former Soviet Union, Germany in the West and the entire Eastern Europe as well as China influencing South East Asia.

It’s noteworthy that the arms race proliferated rather than being terminated at the end of world wars with the United States and the then Soviet union followed by the remaining Security Council members successfully conducting their nuclear test that empowered them as the largest nuclear arsenal holders and continue to remain so.

Further, the U.N. Security Council members’ illegal invasions and occupations in the aftermath of the world wars proceeded throughout the twentieth and now into the twenty first century with certain occupied territories annexed as the regional state again at the prevailing horrendous humanitarian plight such as Tibet, Palestinian territories and the disputed regions in the Middle East and elsewhere.

The cold war between the two major powers – the United States and the Soviet Union vying for ‘Super Power’ status caused the ‘United Nations’ to split with the two contenders choosing partners conciliatory to their respective political positions at that time.

In the sixties, it is also well known that the cold war brought the two major powers on the brink of nuclear confrontation with the Cuban Missile crisis.

Notwithstanding the Korean War notably the significant armed Cold War conflict with the reunification negotiations eventually evolved into a proxy war sponsored by the three U.N. Security Council members – the U.S., Soviet Union and China.

The infamous Vietnam War spreading to the neighboring Cambodia and Laos certainly aroused the anti-war sentiments in the United States and around the world at its peak but it did not necessarily deter the wars in Africa, Latin America, Central Asia and the Middle East with the United States and the other permanent U.N. Security Council members involved in almost all of them either directly or indirectly as the arms supplier including the combat forces viz. Afghanistan on the ground.

Increased military aid to Indonesia in 1977 at the height of the East Timorese massacre produced more than one-third i.e. around 200,000 East Timor population deaths in war related starvation, disease and atrocities.

Likewise in 1978 the military aid to Central America against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and similar assistance to El Salvador compounded the regional turmoil with incredible loss of lives from brutal killings.

In 1979, the U.S. tax payers’ approximately $40 billion dollars investment to train Mujahedeen in Afghanistan generated Osama Bin Laden.

Arguably, the United States footprints in Latin America and Middle East are comparatively prominent with the other members concentrating in their region, Central Asia and Africa.

However, the genocide from the civil wars in Africa through the permanent U.N. Security Council members’ arms trade and distribution was entirely ignored since 1991 and up until now – such as the Democratic Republic of Congo referred to as ‘African World War,’ Burundi, Rwanda earlier on, and Darfur, Sudan.

It’s imperative to mention Haiti during the Democratic and Republican administrations’ at the White House going back to 1977 when agreements were made to decline Haitian refugees asylum claims and between 1990 and up until now – the Democratically elected popular leader Jean Bertrand Aristide indefinitely exiled in South Africa.

The combined powerful U.S.and NATO forces delayed intervention in Bosnia, Herzegovina or for that matter regrettable deliberation on Rwanda rescue operation could be regarded worthwhile, leaving other missions a territorial conquest and/or an economic interest.

It’s obvious that the military industrial complex war strategy is the same with the players alternated between the two major political parties in the United States and the trend replicated in other western democracies as the permanent U.N. Security council members.

Twentieth century wars fought in the regions desperately seeking economic and social development were categorically denied the opportunities to merge with the rest of the world converting those nations into a fertile ground for terror recruitment.

Therefore, the cyclical violence is a revenue source for the conventional and the nuclear weapons industry at the horrendous loss of lives and economic cost.

That raises many questions surrounding the wars and the global community priority in the tough economic times. They are evaded with no logical explanation often confirming the doubts in the public mind.

The war architects owe the domestic and international citizenry evidence based legitimate reason for the decade old conflicts severely affecting the weak and the vulnerable in the so-called war on terror.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, National and Global Security | Leave a Comment 

The 65th U.N. General Assembly on Multilateral Disarmament Treaty

September 29, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

On September 24, 2010, the United Nations held a “High-level Meeting on Revitalizing Disarmament Conference” attended by 65 nations’ dignitaries in Geneva, Switzerland.

The Conference objectives were to initiate discussions on the –

Biological and Chemical weapons,

The Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) and,

The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) including,

START – Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms,

PAROS – Prevention of Arms Race in Outer Space and,

Last but not the least – Nuclear States threats against non-nuclear nations.

Although the statements from these organizations’ representatives and U.N. members defined the international community role and the urgency to begin nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament discourse, the session ended in an impasse.

The reason behind the unsuccessful outcome is attributed to the Multifaceted Treaty’s one aspect and that being,

The FMCT – Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty reportedly blocked by Nuclear Pakistan insisting on the Fissile Material Treaty fairness and effectiveness on the whole, an identical position shared with its Nuclear neighbor India.

The fissile material related to the plutonium and uranium enrichment for nuclear weapons capability is crucial in the disarmament dialogue to implement a Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

In fact, Pakistan’s position in this regard is absolutely legitimate and worth examining.

Pakistan’s claim that FMT mandate be internationally incorporated and multilaterally verified to accommodate the majority nuclear and non-nuclear states’ national security concerns comparable to “equal security for all,” principles is in direct alignment with India’s request.

India has raised the legitimacy and credibility factor surrounding all treaties i.e.

Non-Proliferation, Nuclear disarmament focused on FMT, PAROS, START and negative security assurances for they are all at present severely lacking in accountability and transparency among the NPT-5,

The U.S and Russia in particular as the pioneers currently in possession of over 95 percent world’s nuclear arsenal.

Poignantly, the very first nuclear disarmament and permanent ban on nuclear testing was set forth by the First Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru in 1954 – the nuclear era with conspicuous disdain for nuclear ban proposals that is evidently prevalent until now into the twenty first century.

Subsequently, India remained persistent and called for an international convention in 1978 prohibiting the nuclear weapons use or threats against any nation followed by,

A daring initiative in 1982 submitting to the United Nations – a “Nuclear Freeze,” on fissile material production facilitating nuclear weapons and related delivery systems.

Further, in 1998 India put forward an Action Plan comprising phased elimination for all nuclear weapons and WMD within a specified timeframe setting the cornerstone in the nuclear doctrine.

None of the nuclear weapon states with far more nuclear potential responded to the cause then or for that matter now in the CD conference.

Pakistan and India share the sentiments in the non-cooperation and disingenuous display by the real players the NPT-5 with a burden of responsibility to exemplify their verbal commitments through actions that is being demonstrably evaded as the privileged Security Council members.

All the more reason for the imperativeness to expand the U.N. Security Council permanent membership with broad representation by nations such as Japan, Brazil, India, South Africa, Germany, Norway, Turkey and UAE besides the extensive diversification called for in the recent CD Summit only to be ignored denying global interest.

Had the powerful nuclear weapon states engaged in earnest participation with appropriate and definitive content mutually agreeable to third party verification in the nuclear treaty throughout the twentieth and twenty first century, the world would not be dealing with nuclear proliferation or terrorism.

Even the new START agreement between U.S and Russia signed in 2010 is subjective to ambivalence on both sides based on past experience specifically –

The exchanges with Kremlin during the former President Ronald Reagan START introduction referred to as SALT III at that time and evaluated by the American arms control advocates as;

“A deceptively equal-looking, deliberately nonnegotiable proposal that is part of what some suspect is the hardliners’ secret agenda of sabotaging disarmament so that the U.S. can get on with the business of rearmament.”

Similarly, the then Soviet Union had not disclosed the ICBM (Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles) data accurately in the submission.

Such inconclusiveness in the international security matter since the nuclear age precipitated the nuclear and conventional arms race to an unprecedented and unsustainable level.

The repetitive failed attempt to invigorate meaningful disarmament talks is a cliché in the contentious yet easily resolvable issue.

Moreover, the notion that U.S, Russia, China… are responsible nuclear states while disqualifying others from the league is a misnomer considering the status quo and proved detrimental to the nuclear deterrent policy for it encouraged defiance against compliance.

The unanimous frustration and disappointment among the non-elite nuclear states and the vulnerable non-nuclear NPT nations leads to a concrete decision in enforcing;

The universal CTBT – Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty ‘entry into force’ rule effective immediately beginning at the fissile material ban targeting both supply and production in the present and the future.

Pursuant to NPT article VI, CTBT entry by force would have a profound impact on the NPT obligations binding the NPT and non-NPT nuclear states along with non-nuclear NPT countries.

Forced entry CTBT statute would reveal the observance or the lack there of by the respective nuclear and non-nuclear States.

It would also determine the Treaty viability and the multilateral apparatus adherence to NPT apart from restricting the sophisticated nuclear weapon upgrade or new development by any or all.

A worldwide Monitoring System and a neutral committee dedicated to NPT and WMD elimination would concurrently phase out the nuclear weapon prospects and systematically retrieve the stockpiles from all parties commencing with the major stock holders i.e. United States, Russia, France, U.K. China and others.

The grievances expressed by the scapegoats earlier India and now Pakistan in the CD failure,

Arguably found in the consistent setbacks on all treaties pertaining to conventional, WMD and nuclear weapons suggesting the so-called summits frame work designed to weaken rather than strengthen the nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation institutional policies aimed at the regional and international peace and security.

Given the facts on the ground with the relentless and widespread violence through warfare, the agenda do not match the false exhibits in the previous summits.

Therefore, the United Nations General Assembly members consolidated commitment to global peace and security could be made possible by –

Forging the U.N. Security Council permanent membership expansion and,

Implementing the CTBT to accomplish the non-violation and irreversible NPT complemented by strategic and general weapons substantive and complete disarmament.

The U.N. members at the general assembly could essentially review and restructure the umbrella organization policies to conform to the twenty first century in every respect.

Non-nuclear NPT and nuclear states have a unique opportunity to change the dynamics with a paradigm shift by being inclusive not exclusive in the nuclear negotiations eventually resulting in pervasive nuclear disarmament.

The ICBL (the International Campaign to Ban Landmines) treaty is also vital in the disarmament process with certain key powers not having ratified the protocol despite the staggering toll on the children and economically disadvantaged population across the globe.

Again, the collective pledge to safeguard life and the planet is guaranteed to produce the desirable result –

A peaceful, prosperous and unified world.

Good Luck and Best Wishes to the United Nations and nexus organizations for phenomenal success in the humanitarian goals.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under National and Global Security | Leave a Comment 

Secret War Ramifications – U.S. Military Espionage and Directive for Global Operation

May 30, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

With reference to the preceding article May 30, 2010 titled U.S. Military Espionage – Directive for Global Operation:

It’s clear from the reports that the signed directive promoting espionage through troops deployment around the world would be an invasion of sovereign nations apart from undermining the intelligence agencies in the U.S. and the rest of the world.

The U.S. is officially engaged in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Yemen that has claimed millions of lives with the Afghan war surpassing Iraq in the U.S. troop casualty reaching 1000 mark.

Notwithstanding death toll of service members reportedly as part of “Operation Enduring Freedom,” in the Philippines, the Horn of Africa and the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
————————————————————————————————–

Per AP report on May 29, 2010, titled U.S. records 1000th death in Afghan war by Robert H. Reid

“More have died in past 10 months than in first 5 years, the death toll for this month alone being 32 in 29 days with more expected in the aggressive campaign this summer.

In the past 10 months, at least 313 U.S. service members have been killed in the war – more than the 295 who died in the first five years of the conflict.

More than 430 of the U.S. dead were killed since January 2009.

The number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan has now surpassed the total in Iraq – roughly, 94,000 in Afghanistan compared with 92,000 in Iraq.

In 2008, the U.S. force in Afghanistan numbered about 30,000.”
————————————————————————————————–

Secret War Ramifications Continued – By Padmini Arhant

That being the grim reality, the elaborate scheme to accentuate the military role throughout the world in the mission against “war on terror,”

Despite the ongoing conflict spanning nine years in Afghanistan and eight years in Iraq including the escalation in Pakistan via drone attacks, missile strikes from Navy ships in Yemen producing immense loss of lives and economic liability is tragic if not outrageously ambitious.

Sadly, the universal dissent for the invasion and occupation in Iraq and the prolonged war in Afghanistan is ignored with a false presumption of winning the wars that has contributed to political instability, scores of deaths, alarming national deficits and anti-Americanism.

Now with a new strategy involving troops regardless of size on clandestine military activity would be provocative creating opportunities for militancy to continue their resistance by plotting against innocent civilians in the United States and their domicile.

Such offensive plan with utter disregard for the individual national security measures maintained and coordinated by the majority in global terrorism is likely to generate more adversaries than allies.

Again, the recent terror plots have been thwarted by the courageous unarmed civilians on flights and ground level as witnessed in the Christmas bomber or The Times Square conspiracy.

The terror suspects and offenders invariably use the invasion and occupation as the reason for their participation in the violent attacks when they try to win the local population support.

Peace and diplomacy to resolve disputes is no longer an option in the aggressive military action setting the world stage for a dangerous outcome in the nuclear era.

Unfortunately, the military command’s secret war across the globe appear to have little or no concern for the troops’ safety as shared by the military officials revealing the truth about the risks upon the brave service men and women being captured as spies and denied Geneva Convention protection,

Thus, allowing the rivals to justify their treatment of the captives similar to the detainees’ experience in Bagram Air base and the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

In addition, the crisis is worsened by the private contractors’ apparent sportive shooting incidents of civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan fomenting deep resentment against the hiring authorities for their failure to investigate these crimes.

Continuation of torture, prisoner abuse, denial of Habeas Corpus and federal trials as opposed to military tribunals are few of the many human rights violation attributed to the citizens’ protest in the nearly decade old battles.

The cyclical violence through suicide bombings and explosives used by the militants is counteracted with drones and improvised explosive devices by the military in the perpetual warfare, leaving the victims – the civilians, the troops and their families endure the indefinite combative environment.

Terrorism is being redefined by the frustrated population of the war zones and the potential targets as the one involving the insurgents and the other ‘state sponsored,’ displaying the sophisticated artillery in their possession, with neither willing to ceasefire.

Understanding the population plight due to the lack of freedom, political stability, economic prospects and social justice is not a priority for the warring factions.

If it were to be the case, the leadership in Afghanistan, Honduras, Haiti…would represent the electorates’ choice and not be the external political power nominees.

Usually, the U.S. legislative process is gruelling on pertinent issues viz. the economy, health care, energy and environment with the exception of overwhelming bipartisan support for war funding.

Poignantly, per the current report – the Senate passed the $58.8 billion war funding 67 – 28, a dozen Republicans, including GOP leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky voted for the 30,000 troop increase in Afghanistan against the jobless benefits before Memorial Day, suggesting that the Senate will not hold any more votes until senators return from their holiday break June 7.

The legislators in favor of deficit reduction have approved the Afghanistan troop surge funding while declining their votes for the average Americans’ interest forcing the House Democratic leaders to drop the following provisions in response to the deficit concerns:

$24 billion for states to help cover Medicaid costs.

$6.8 billion to provide health insurance subsidies to the jobless under the COBRA program.

$22 billion to provide a 19 month reprieve from a scheduled 21 percent cut in Medicare payments to doctors.

Further it’s reported that “Spending cuts demanded by Democratic moderates unhappy about voting to increase the deficit will mean layoffs next year by state governments and no health insurance subsidies for people laid off after Memorial Day.”

Evidently, the spending cuts required for deficit contraction is directed at the population’s nerve center – jobs and health care over the insatiable appetite for redundant warfare resulting in the loss of precious lives sacrificed by the valiant troops and the vulnerable civilians.

The misplaced priority in the two conflicting options – lifesaver and fatalities is attention worthy.

Contemporary policy embracing war and aggression on all sides defies the conventional wisdom that violence begets violence leading the world to go blind in the revengeful act.

Non-violence means empowered with empathy for one another is far more powerful in attaining global peace and harmony.

On the Memorial Day weekend, our nation salutes the fallen heroes for their patriotism and commemorates those serving at present as well as the members in the past.

Fresh beginning awaits humanity celebrating life through peace.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under National and Global Security | Leave a Comment 

U.S. Military Espionage – Directive for Global Operation

May 30, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

According to the latest news reports obtained from the defense officials and military documents, an extensive clandestine military operation is ordered by the Middle East top U.S. commander to intercept militant groups or threats in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and other African countries.

Courtesy – The New York Times report, May 25, 2010 – By Mark Mazzetti titled:

“U.S. Oks secret war on terror by military – Iran among likely targets of special operations order”

Washington -“The secret directive, signed in September by Gen.David Petraeus authorizes the sending of U.S. special operations troops to both friendly and hostile nations in the Middle East, Central Asia and the Horn of Africa to gather intelligence and build ties with local forces.

Officials said the order also permits reconnaissance that could pave the way for possible military strikes in Iran if tensions over its nuclear ambitions escalate.

While the Bush administration had approved some clandestine military activities far from designated war zones, the new order is intended to make such efforts more systematic and long term, officials said.

Its goals are to build networks that could “penetrate, disrupt, defeat or destroy” al-Qaida and other militant groups, as well as to “prepare the environment” for future attacks by U.S. or local military forces, the document said. The order, however, does not appear to authorize offensive strikes in any specific countries..

In broadening its secret activities, the U.S. military also has sought in recent years to break its dependence on the CIA and other spy agencies for information in countries without a significant U.S. troop presence.

Petraeus’ order is meant for use of small teams of U.S. troops to fill intelligence gaps about terror organizations and other threats in the Middle East and beyond, especially emerging groups plotting attacks against the United States.

But some Pentagon officials worry that the expanded role carries risks.

The authorized activities could strain relationships with friendly governments like Saudi Arabia or Yemen, or incite the anger of hostile countries like Iran and Syria.

Many in the military also are concerned that as U.S. troops assume roles far from traditional combat, they would be at risk of being treated as spies if captured and denied the Geneva Convention protections afforded military detainees.

The precise operations that the directive authorizes are unclear, and what the military has done to follow through on the order is uncertain.

The document, a copy of which was viewed by The New York Times, provides few details about continuing missions or intelligence-gathering operations.

Several government officials who described the impetus for the order would speak only on condition of anonymity because the document is classified.

Spokesmen for the White House and Pentagon declined to comment.

The Times, responding to concerns about troop safety raised by an official at U.S. Central Command, the military headquarters run by Petraeus, withheld some details about how troops could be deployed in certain countries.

The seven-page directive appears to authorize specific operations in Iran, most likely to gather intelligence about the country’s nuclear program or identify dissident groups that might be useful for a future military offensive.

The Obama administration insists that, for the moment, it is committed to penalizing Iran for its nuclear activities only with diplomatic and economic sanctions.

Nevertheless, the Pentagon has to draw up detailed war plans to be prepared in advance, in the event that, Obama authorized a strike.

“The Defense Department can’t be caught flat-footed,” said one Pentagon official with knowledge of Petraeus’ order.

The directive, the Joint Unconventional Warfare Task Force Execute Order, signed Sept. 30, also may have helped lay a foundation for the surge of U.S. military activity in Yemen that began three months later.

Special operations troops began working with Yemen’s military to try to dismantle al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, an affiliate of Osama bin Laden’s terror network based in Yemen.

The Pentagon has carried out missile strikes from Navy ships into suspected militant hideouts and plans to spend more than $155 million equipping Yemeni troops with armored vehicles, helicopters and small arms.

Officials said that many top commanders, Petraeus among them, have advocated an expansive interpretation of the military’s role around the world, arguing that troops need to operate beyond Iraq and Afghanistan to better fight militant groups.”

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under National and Global Security | Leave a Comment 

Afghan War after Troops Increase

April 1, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The latest on Afghan war after adding more troops to the nine-year-old battle, a contentious debate that was dominant last year.

Associated Press – Sunday, March 28, 2010.

By Sebastian Abbot – Thank you.

“Troop deaths rise in Afghanistan – Numbers soaring as U.S. adds soldiers

Kabul – The number of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan has roughly doubled in the first three months of 2010 compared to the same period last year as Washington has added tens of thousands of additional soldiers to reverse the Taliban’s momentum.

Those deaths have been accompanied by a dramatic spike in the number of wounded, with injuries more than tripling in the first two months of the year and trending in the same direction based on the latest available data for March.

U.S. officials have warned that casualties are likely to rise further as the Pentagon completes its deployment of 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and sets its sight on the Taliban’s home base of Kandahar province, where a major operation is expected in the coming months.

“We must steel ourselves, no matter how successful we are on any given day, for harder days yet to come,” Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a briefing last month.

In total, 57 U.S. soldiers were killed here during the first two months of 2010 compared with 28 in January and February of last year, an increase of more than 100 percent, according to Pentagon figures compiled by the Associated Press.

At least 20 American service members have been killed so far in March.

The steady rise in combat deaths has generated less public reaction in the United States than the spike in casualties in the summer and fall, which undermined public support in the United States for the mission here.

Fighting typically tapers off in Afghanistan during the winter but peaks in the summer.”

————————————————————————————————–

War Strategy Assessment – By Padmini Arhant

The troops increase to Afghanistan was a national debate last year with mixed reaction from all sources.

It’s important to emphasize that there wasn’t an overwhelming public support to the additional troops deployment in Afghanistan.

There were many reasons for the lack luster response.

Among them, the most relevant ones being:

The U.S. and allies’ nomination of President Hamid Karzai as the head of the government for second term defied the Afghan people’s will.

Notwithstanding, the international outrage on the fraudulent general election that led to the opponent, DR. Abdullah Abdullah’s withdrawal from the election.

Another factor is the U.S. occupancy in Afghanistan approaching a decade and the constantly changing ‘purpose’ behind the mission remains intriguing until now.

After much deliberation, President Barack Obama decided to approve the request from the defense high command and argued, “It’s not an easy decision to do so.”

Indeed, pledging the troops’ lives to succeed in the targeted goals is never a simple action.

However, a prolonged war provides enough evidence to consider winding up the operation or at least minimize the troop level by supplementing with diplomacy and peaceful negotiations.

Peace and diplomacy could have prevailed with a democratically elected government. It was thwarted by the U.S. endorsement of an unpopular candidate.

Further, the explanation for more troops involved the U.S and NATO efforts to restore political stability in Afghanistan and terminate the Taliban/Al-Qaida activities.

The irony is, the Afghanistan political situation under the U.S. backed Karzai government shows no improvement in governance, despite the incumbent Afghan President being the U.S. foreign policy designates’ choice.

Similarly, the shift in the U.S. and Afghan government’s strategy towards Taliban insurgents appears to be a new approach to win the militants on their side with cash payments and abandoning the poppy fields eradication – the main source of income for the Taliban forces.

An action that is widely criticized by the human rights groups against narcotics in Afghanistan.

As predicted, the tension between the Karzai government and the U.S. administration has surfaced confirming the mistrust in the relationship.

While the political stalemate between the authorities in Kabul and Washington persists, the mounting U.S. casualties in the Afghan war cannot be ignored.

Troop withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq is no longer a choice but an immediate requirement to end the procrastinated occupation in foreign lands.

Divestment from wars to social and economic development in these regions must begin to reflect the sincere commitment to bring hope and opportunity in a society deprived of normal existence for decades.

Substituting the combat troops with Peace Corps eliminates the tragic loss of lives on all sides.

In addition, the peaceful atmosphere would deter terror recruitment and foster an environment for the youth as well as others to build their nations towards a positive direction.

Now is the time for the U.S. authorities in the White House, Pentagon and the State department to relinquish failed policies that is proved a liability claiming precious lives and contributing to the rising deficit.

War leads to grief, revenge and destruction.

Whereas, peace is an eternal bliss.

I convey my condolences to the families of the fallen heroes and pray for the early recovery of the wounded brave hearts.

Your sacrifice makes freedom possible for all.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, National and Global Security | Leave a Comment 

Moscow Subway Bombing

March 30, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

On Monday, March 29, 2010, grief engulfed the commuters in the Russian capital, Moscow.

Terrorism against the metropolitan residents is the latest trend in the threat to global security.

According to the reports, two female suicide bombers strapped with explosives detonated the bombs killing 39 people and leaving many seriously injured.

The authorities in Kremlin have vowed to investigate the terrorist act and bring the perpetrators to justice.

Terror mastermind have not claimed responsibility but the officials have not ruled out the suspects’ connection to the separatist groups in the northern Caucasus region that includes the main rival Chechnya.

National security is a great concern for the governments dealing with terrorism related to autonomy, political freedom, and socio-economic issues in certain incidents, while others instigated by major organization for personal ideology.

Regardless, negotiating for freedom and equality through violence is a path to self-destruction as demonstrated by the suicide bombers.

Targeting innocent lives to bargain with the power is a cowardly act that only prolongs the situation behind the motive and benefits none.

Terrorism is a modern warfare adopted to deliver political messages without considering the ramifications from it.

Those who orchestrate terror against unarmed civilians are false representatives of justice. If they were to be true, they would value life and disavow violence against all.

Violence begets violence. It only leads to perpetual mourning and revenge.

Similarly, pursuing drastic measures in reaction to the terror activities affects the victims more than the assailants.

Tightening security to protect citizens is necessary.

However, implementing rules that would infringe upon civil liberties causing fear and frustration among the elected opposition leaders not excluding the local population is a victory to the terror networks in their realization of constricting the society movement, besides hurting the economy.

The permanent solution to terrorism is to address the problem by identifying the source.

In this instance, the contentious dispute between Kremlin and Chechnya / regional adversaries could be resolved through communication and dialogue.

A sincere attempt to end the political standoff and retaliation is the best approach to a peaceful resolution.

It comes from deep understanding for the suffering population, the real victims on both sides.

Aggression is not the remedy to the political crisis.

Often engagement with empathy along with self-recognition of wrong doings contributing to the turmoil yields success in the difficult political conditions.

I hope that Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev will seek peaceful options with the separatist leaders in the northern region, particularly Chechnya and resume political discussions to arrive at a meaningful decision comprising democratic values for all citizens in Russia.

Meanwhile, the rebel groups will have nothing but failures if they persist with violence as the means to achieve their political goals.

Now is the time to renounce violence and harsh tactics by all.

It’s important for the sparring factions to commit towards peace and build a relationship based on trust and mutual respect, the pragmatic principles in dealing with the ceaseless conflict.

I convey my heartfelt condolences to the victims’ families and the Russian leaderships in the moment of sorrow brought upon by senseless violence.

I wish them courage to emerge from the tragic event and pray for the speedy recovery of the wounded.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, National and Global Security, Politics | Leave a Comment 

U.S. and Russia Nuclear Arms Reduction Treaty

March 27, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The world’s nuclear prolific nations, U.S and Russia agreed to sign a long overdue nuclear weapons treaty or the strategic arms reduction treaty (S.T.A.R.T) reportedly to reduce the warhead arsenals by one-third with the possibility to lead the international community towards a complete nuclear disarmament.

It’s a phenomenal step towards peace and a path to a nuclear free environment.

The U.S. President Barack Obama and the Russian President Dmitry Medvedev deserve praise for the courage reflected in their action against the potent threat to global security in the twenty first century.

Without a shadow of doubt, the leaderships’ initiative is a cornerstone for the NPT (Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty) conferences in the immediate future.

I hope that other nuclear nations would follow suit with their rivals and earnestly strive to depart from the nuclear era.

There is also an urgent need to address the conventional arms race alongside the nuclear proliferation.

If the industrialized and the developed nations prioritize the defense budget divestment to socio-economic development in the domestic and foreign policy,

It would not only expedite the economic recovery but also spearhead the necessity to alleviate hunger, poverty and disease among the poorest nations.

War spending and national security against terrorism consumes enormous proportion in the fiscal budget and the peace efforts in every possible dimension could promote the required economic, social and political progress in the vulnerable regions of the world.

Besides, the volatility experienced globally could be eliminated with the troops withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the U.S. military base overseas.

In addition, transforming the military aid to an economic assistance in Yemen and countries alike is guaranteed to detract the potential recruits targeted by the terror networks.

Further, the improvement in economic conditions is directly related to renunciation of violence.

The global terrorism is attributed to economic plight, social injustice and political instability.

Therefore, any incremental positive measures in the nuclear front and traditional warfare is immensely beneficial to humanity.

Bilateral approach between the nuclear powers, U.S and Russia and their perseverance in the denuclearization including the civilian nuclear program abandonment would deter the controversial Iranian nuclear crisis from worsening.

Moreover, it would set precedence for other nuclear states to adopt similar strategies – resulting in a multilateral decision for a peaceful future.

Another poignant element being, the foreseeable consensus in the nuclear matter removes the obstacles for the clean renewable energy resources desirable to resolve the climate change issue confronting the earth population.

In fact, the U.S. – Russian pact is a great new beginning for a better world.

On that optimistic note, I look forward to the world leaders reaching more milestones in the global affairs.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics, National and Global Security, Politics | Leave a Comment 

The Mighty Deception – War and Politics

December 9, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The West Point address delivered by President Barack Obama on the troops surge resonate the message from the former President George W. Bush then amassing support for troop expansion in Iraq. Therefore, it is no surprise and not hard to figure out the source providing the material.

Since invasion, Afghan war is presented as the war of ‘necessity’ against the Iraq war of ‘choice.’ Indisputably, on September 11, 2001 there were over three thousand lives mercilessly and willfully murdered through pre-meditated, callous act apparently by the terror organization Al-Qaida but seemingly masterminded by the alleged real terror, the Cabal wreaking havoc on the planet thus far.

What has not been acknowledged until date is the deliberate negligence of the forewarnings and intelligence reports raising red flag on the imminent threat in American soil prior to the September 11 attack with no one being brought to justice including Osama Bin Laden. Any trials that have been conducted up until now are focused on the terrorists carrying out the heinous crime without even considering probing the conspirators in the modus operandi signifying the entire show is nothing but a charade.

Let the world not forget that the White House under President George W. Bush personally ensured the safe departure of Osama Bin Laden’s immediate and extended family members upon the terror striking the WTC and other U.S. interests during 9/11. It’s well documented and available on the video.

Despite numerous testimonials and facts presented ‘in your face’ manner, the powerful entities reining in on democracy through mass media, columnists representing the ‘reputable’ news organizations and the legislative body continue to suppress the truth behind the worst atrocity ever to take place on this planet. Plainly spoken, the justice system hijacked presumably by the secret society, the illuminati.

In fact, what these spokespersons and the silent spectators do not realize is, masquerading sinister depicts complicity to the diabolicalness evidenced in the September 11 attack. Furthermore, the cynical majority against the concerned minority share the moral and ethical degradation of the criminal epicenter.

Regardless, justice will be served in the ‘Land of the Free, Home of the Brave,’ the United States, by bringing all the perpetrators responsible for the cold blooded murder of their own citizens and scores of other innocent lives in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The predecessors of this nation, President Dwight Eisenhower and President John F. Kennedy have courageously exposed the secret society activities and alerted the American public to come forward and challenge the unconstitutional dominance in all affairs particularly the perpetual warfare. Both Presidents have expressed their serious concerns against the undemocratic events clichéd in the past eight years with simultaneous wars, economic and energy crises eventually contributing to the unsustainable environmental disaster.

The operators’ strategy explicitly detailed by the various reliable sources viz. “the insiders,” is indeed an artful masterpiece. It’s based on creating a monumental catastrophe such as September 11,2001 followed by a reaction in the form of ‘Islamaphobia’ and solutions derived through waging endless wars in regions unconquerable leading to random imprisonments at Guantanamo Bay, Bagram and Abu Ghraib prisons,

Notwithstanding the abhorrent techniques such as water boarding, torture, extraordinary renditions, kidnapping of targeted civilians exclusively of Muslim descent from foreign locations as potential suspects, denial of Habeas corpus cited in the case U.S. vs. Sami Al Arian…

The Virginia federal prosecutor along with the U.S. Justice department under Atty. General John Ashcroft relentlessly pursued the South Florida University Professor Sam Al Arian, the Islamophobia victim after being acquitted by the jury on all twenty accounts clawed back into the vicious dragnet during the dark ages of the notorious Bush–Cheney administration.

The American professor is still a political prisoner having been subject to the draconian policies and the family put through a horrendous ordeal from the blatant discriminatory practices against the Muslim population to conceal the organizational vile activities in the name of democracy.

If the United States judicial system is based upon the constitution protecting every citizen whether native or naturalized, then the Professor Sam Al Arian deemed not guilty by the jury in the first trial should be acquitted of all politically motivated false charges including the deportation order and released immediately for reunion with his family.

Other extremes such as hiring private contractors like the infamous ‘Blackwater,’aka Xe Services LLC not only abusing our own service members especially the female personnel but also the civilian population in the occupied regions as noted in Iraq, Afghanistan and other war zones around the world.

In terms of constitutional breach against the citizens of the United States, the hyperbolic color-coded security threat constantly surfaced throughout the Bush-Cheney era and helped the administration win the second term in the national elections to pursue extended global terror.

The ‘war on terror’ enabled the establishment of the Patriot Act that led to the unlawful apprehension, humiliation and harassment of South East Asians and Middle Eastern travelers at the U.S. airports and most notably FISA, the illegal wiretapping otherwise eavesdropping on private citizens’ personal communications under the pretext of national security which essentially is the ‘Cabals’ insecurity.

Under the Obama administration, the Bush-Cheney Patriot Act is followed through to confirm the legitimacy of the tactically implemented ‘war on terror,’ in spite of the imminent ‘change’ promised on the campaign trail.

Unfortunately, again similar policy embraced now to prolong the military occupation in Afghanistan with a possibility to strike Iran under the exaggerated nuclear threat from the Islamic Republic incapable of producing the nuclear weapons required to challenge the nuclear-armed Israel and the strongest ally, the United States.

Given the pre-existing propaganda about “Iran positioned to attack Israel resulting in a nuclear holocaust anytime now,” the alarming information circulated to substantiate the devious plans behind the World War III.

It’s vital for the American and the international community to realize that Afghanistan is the preferred location for the military industrial complex, even though they reaffirmed the terror networks convergence in Pakistan. The reason being, the MIC true intention for the massive troop buildup is to utilize Afghanistan as the strategic base to launch attack against Iran that would conclusively pre-empt the World War III. Another factor is the MIC denied access by Iraq, the initial location selected as the launching base against another Islamic, poignantly the Shiite dominant Iran.

More dangerously, the war counsel represented by the U.S. Secretary of State and the Defense Secretary visibly promoting Afghan troops increase will soon exert pressure on the Obama administration and the Congress into participating in the brewing grand worldwide conflict.

Since the unveiling of the military industrial complex and the oligarchs ‘dubious scheme likely to be scorned by the ‘veteran’ pundits and experts in the respective fields,

I would like to remind the world that, prior to the swearing in of the Obama Presidency, the Vice President Joe Biden dropped the ball during the political fund raising event in Seattle, WA,on October 2008:

Biden to Supporters: “Gird Your Loins”, For the Next President …

“20 Oct 2008 … “Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the …
Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the
mettle of this guy. …. Vice president Joe Biden asks can humans be microchipped
. …. They are just waiting for chaos to bring order, their NWO. … Test
Obama’s mettle?”

Interestingly, some columnists laud the President’s leadership mettle for standing up against the anti-war democratic base rather than the supreme force dictating the world with a cleverly camouflaged stagecraft that is designed for profitable war games at the expense of death and destruction of countless innocent lives, case in evidence being the September 11, 2001.

How difficult is it to comprehend that it ‘s politically astute to represent the ‘Powerful’ than the ‘Powerless?’

Afghanistan mission is sometimes portrayed as nation building and other times a specific task to eliminate Al-Qaida about 100 or less members against the combined U.S., NATO & Afghan forces estimated around 150,000 possessing modern artillery, aerial raids via drones and every conceivable intelligence resources at their disposal. With Afghan Taliban, re-negotiation is claimed to be considered by letting them join the foreign troops in fighting against the rebels opposed to the corrupt Karzai government reinstated by none other than the illicit foreign power through intrusion.

To gain domestic support for the bizarre yet calculated war expedition, some journalists and certain media are being used for verbal and visual hypnosis to brainwash the American taxpayers footing the military extravaganza.

Nuclear threat is the new wave fear mongering to orchestrate aggressions in the vulnerable regions like the Middle East, Central Asia and the Indian sub-continent clearly mindful of the dire consequences from the nuclear confrontation. Pakistan developed into a terror haven by the architects of the global terrorism that serves the interest of the conglomerate to maneuver political upheavals in the Islamic nation with an overwhelming population in abject poverty.

Widespread terrorism is beneficial to perennial military incursion in the Islamic countries, the nerve center of the geopolitics. The successful hate campaign against Islam as the religion and the systemic abuse of the Muslim population in the wake of ‘global terror’ cannot be underestimated.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5346480.stm

Pope’s speech stirs Muslim anger

Muslim religious leaders have accused Pope Benedict XVI of quoting anti-Islamic remarks during a speech at a German university this week.

Questioning the concept of holy war, he quoted a 14th-Century Christian emperor who said Muhammad had brought the world only “evil and inhuman” things.”

Afghan War – Troop Surge in Comparison with Iraq War – Troop Increase

Another explanation provided in President Obama’s speech for the prolonged Afghan war was the distraction by the Iraq war in 2003 suggesting it diminished the progress made from 2001 to 2003. For the war proponents, the phenomenal casualties suffered by the Afghan civilians and the U.S./NATO combats deaths are a consequential warfare tragedy cowardly described by the former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as a ‘collateral damage.’

Simultaneously, the Iraq adventure launched through immense manipulation and contrived theories while ignoring the worldwide dissent proclaimed as a victory. When in reality, the Iraq war is still in progress with bombings and explosions taking place at the present time and the Iraqi parliament struggling to gain support to hold national elections in January and reportedly postponed to March 2010.

The Iraq war conducted in a Machiavellian approach has produced the world’s largest war widows, orphans and significant number of combat veterans wounded with both physiological and psychological damage, not to mention the tarnished image of the United States from the Guantanamo Bay, Bagram prison and Abu Ghraib images flashed around the world.

According to recent reports, Taliban is the shadow government easily undermining the beleaguered Karzai administration riddled with corruption charges from the beginning leaving the only option for the Afghan people – ‘Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t know.’ Hence, they are more inclined to accept the Taliban as the lesser of the two evils.

The illuminati agenda for the NWO progresses while Afghanistan regresses to the stone age under Taliban.

At the end of the day, if corruption is synonymous to Karzai government,

What do we call Washington?

In light of the hard core facts and evidences, it’s clear the cataclysmic terror attack on September 11,2001 ought to be investigated and the criminals regardless of hierarchy and affiliations brought to justice in due respect for the 9/11 victims and the innocent lives lost in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.

During the Presidential campaign in 2008, the candidates from both parties laid out their precise plan to capture the world’s most wanted ‘Osama Bin Laden.’ Senator John McCain stated that

“I will follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell” ….

Perhaps, that fallacy is now the prophecy for the cohort behind the September 11, 2001 horror and the despicable humanitarian crime ever to be committed in the modern civilization. It would be a matter for the Supreme Court as the highest order and legal authority in the land of justice to preside over the judicial process to honor and safeguard the United States Constitution grossly violated since the dawn of the twenty first century.

This would be the real test for the legal guardians obligatory to the great nation, the United States founded on the fundamentally sacred principles that guarantees freedom, civil liberties and justice for all.

Please remember that silence and abstinence embolden injustice and violence.

The topic discussion will continue with special attention on the political aspect.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under National and Global Security, Politics, United States | Leave a Comment 

The Reality of the Afghan and Iraq War – Myth Behind the Troop Surge

December 4, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

I urge every reader of this article to view the contents of the preceding article published under the title ‘Global Terrorism – 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden Revelations,’ International Politics, on this website www.padminiarhant.com,

The adapted articles and segments substantiates the fact that 9/11 attack could have been prevented at all costs and the terror leader Osama Bin Laden apprehended during many opportunities presented time and again.

Further, the recent statement from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirming that the former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Gen. Tommy Franks failure to execute the order to capture Osama Bin Laden within the armed forces grasp is conveniently evaded by the authorities.

Even though many credible sources have come forward and testified before Congress to this effect, neither 9/11 commission nor the members of Congress pursued any investigation against those responsible for the neglect up until now.

Subsequent to 9/11, the Afghan war was waged with the unanimous support from all around. It’s been nine years since the incursion and the conservative death toll in this war alone as per:
————————————————————————————————–
1. SOURCE: WIKIPEDIA.ORG

List of civilian casualties of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present)

The War in Afghanistan (2001–present) has caused the deaths of thousands of Afghan civilians directly from insurgent and foreign military action, as well as the deaths of possibly tens of thousands of Afghan civilians indirectly as a consequence of displacement, starvation, disease, exposure, lack of medical treatment, crime and lawlessness resulting from the war.

The war, launched by the United States as “Operation Enduring Freedom” in 2001, began with an initial air campaign that almost immediately prompted concerns over the number of Afghan civilians being killed[1] as well as international protests.

————————————————————————————–

2. Source: http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

About 251 times as many people have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq than in the ghastly attacks of September 11, 2001. More than 108 times as many people have been killed in these wars and occupations than in all terrorist attacks in the world from 1993-2004. The 2004 report showed terrorism at an all-time high, and after numerous experts suggested that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were fueling the increase, subsequent reports have remained classified.
——————————————————————————————
3. Source: http://cursor.org/stories/civilian_deaths.htm

Professor Marc W. Herold, Ph.D., M.B.A., B.Sc. Departments of Economics and Women’s Studies, McConnell Hall, Whittemore School of Business & Economics, University of New Hampshire.

A Dossier on Civilian Victims of United States’ Aerial Bombing of Afghanistan:

“What causes the documented high level of civilian casualties — 3,000 – 3,400 [October 7, 2001 thru March 2002] civilian deaths — in the U.S. air war upon Afghanistan? The explanation is the apparent willingness of U.S. military strategists to fire missiles into and drop bombs upon, heavily populated areas of Afghanistan.

But, the critical element remains the very low value put upon Afghan civilian lives by U.S. military planners and the political elite, as clearly revealed by U.S. willingness to bomb heavily populated regions. Current Afghan civilian lives must and will be sacrificed in order to [possibly] protect future American lives.”
————————————————————————————————–
Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics, National and Global Security, Politics, United States | Leave a Comment 

« Previous Page — Next Page »