Lindsey Graham: Permanent U.S. Presence In Afghanistan Would Be 'Enormously Beneficial'

[Purveyor]

Source: Huffington Post

NEW HAVEN -- There was, with really no notable exception, an absence of discussion of the Afghanistan war during the course of the 2010 campaign. But that may have been more a product of the electoral landscape (congressional races often don't lend themselves to foreign policy debates) and strategic timelines (the start date for withdrawal begins in July 2011) than anything else.

And, indeed, during an interview Sunday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) provided some indication that Republicans would push U.S. permanency in Afghanistan in the years ahead, insisting that it would be "enormously beneficial" to show that type of force "in perpetuity."

"I think it would be enormously beneficial to the region as well as Afghanistan," Graham said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "We have had air bases all over the world and a couple of air bases in Afghanistan would allow the Afghan security forces an edge against the Taliban in perpetuity. It would be a signal to Pakistan that the Taliban are never going to come back. In Afghanistan they could change their behavior. It would be a signal to the whole region that Afghanistan is going to be a different place.

"And if the Afghan people want this relationship, they are going to have to earn it. But I hope that they will seek a relationship with the United States so we can have an enduring relationship, economic and militarily and politically, and a couple of air bases in Afghanistan will give us an edge military, give the Afghan security forces an edge militarily to ensure that the country never goes back into the hands of the Taliban, which would be a stabilizing event throughout the whole region."

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/02/lindsey-graham-afghanistan-permanent-presence_n_803318.html

[tabatha]

1. to whom?

only the US

[bhikkhu]

4. and how that benefits the US is pretty hard to see

We can spend billions building bases there, then station part of our military there, for what? As in many other parts of the world, our military presence serves no purpose other than as a big siphon sucking up our taxes. It never comes back, there is no current or future real economic relationship between Afghanistan and the US. Nothing against them at all, but short of strip mining the country they have nothing we need.

[No Elephants]

11. To the military industrial complex.

[Zorra]

16. Not beneficial to the people of US. Just giant multinational corporations

that market here and the rest of the planet.

We're just the police agency that makes the world safe for multi-national corporations to plunder the resources and rob and kill the people of other nations.

[newspeak]

21. Bingo!

The government can use our money to keep a foothold in Afghanistan for corporate interest, but the American people who are footing the bill won't see a dime. And meanwhile, repukes like Graham, will keep spouting to the American people how we can't afford to help the american people who are suffering, the entitlements must go bye-bye.

[Zorra]

23. Yeh. That's what it really is.

:hi:
And the only way we are going to change things is for enough people to understand what is really going on and unite. Like the people of India did in Gandhi's day.

[Angry Dragon]

2. How can this man see anything with his head up his ass??

The only thing he can see is assholes and shit.............

[bongbong]

3. Today is Dec 31, 1983

We've always been at war with Oceania (AKA, countries with natural resources the USA wants to steal).

[Lint Head]

5. Then move there you lying prick and run the damn show your

frigging way!

[molly77]

8. WE still have not been given a decent reason for even being at war

in Afghanistan. State media..what can you expect? Sun morning political shows only have third rate yahoos on who will repeat the company line. No wonder their ratings are down. Dumb beyond words.

Wars of aggression for the spoils. WE are a terrorist rogue state.

[BeyondGeography]

6. Jesus H.

Fucking loon.

[Betty]

7. not a word about how to fund it

since the repugs have no problem printing money for endless wars.

[No Elephants]

14. Except Dems have had the power of the purse since 2006 and were also voting

to fund before that.

[comtec]

9. IF we had a chance i afghanistan it was 10 years ago

when we first invaded after 9-11.
we got rid of the taliban, and were starting to improve things.
then we left to iraq.
we lost any chance we had at being welcomed to stay.
we need to cut our losses and leave
perhaps leaving a present of napalm on the poppy fields.

[No Elephants]

15. When was the last time Afghanistan welcomed a nation that bombed and occupied it to stay?

[napi21]

10. As long as Lindsey is permanently deployed there fo the duration!

I find it quite interesting that so many congress critters tink war & occupation of foreign lands are great ideas but THEY never served in any war themselves. Yes, I know Lindsey is amember of the NG but he's a JAG officer which means all he ever sees is the inside of a court!

[sulphurdunn]

12. Looks like Ole' Lindsey

has let the cat out of the bag. You always know where the trend line in ruling class policy is heading when conservatives finally decide to tell the truth. After that the sale begins through corporate media. Since 20% of the electorate are always on board for any regressive and destructive political policy they now constitutes the new "mandate" from the people. The rest can be rigged through invalid polling, fake populism and fraudulent elections.

[newspeak]

22. like fekkin leeches or vampires

they think nothing of draining Americans dry for their global corporate friends. It's too bad they don't allow us to choose where we want to put our tax money (the little we earn now), because my money would go to help out our brothers and sisters in need and our infrastructure. Graham and his ilk can fund these never ending corporate profit wars.

[mbperrin]

13. There's a reason this country is called the graveyard of empires.

Thanks for the suicide note, Lindsey, you dumb fuck.

[Zhade]

17. Expanding a dying empire. Madness!

NT!

[provis99]

18. whaddaya know: Lenin was right.

Imperialism is the final stage of dying capitalism.

[JDPriestly]

19. And who does Lindsay Graham think will be willing to pay for

a permanent U.S. presence in Afghanistan?

[Jefferson23]

20. "..in perpetuity." At least he is straight forward and honest about it.

SNIP: But soon anyway a "new" narrative will be taking over - the snail-pace North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) "drawdown" from 2011 to 2014. But does that mean the beginning of the endgame - no more war? Rather it's back to the beginning, as in "abandon all hope those who enter (the doors of misperception)". To (literally) thunderous applause by a coterie of neophyte neo-jihadi bombers, the Obama White House has explicitly emphasized "NATO's enduring commitment beyond 2014".

A key feature of this "enduring commitment" is that the Afghan army soldiers and cops NATO is training (supplemented by US private contractors of the Dyncorp/Blackwater mould) will need no less than US$6 billion a year, every year, till probably eternity, from the usually euphemistic "international donors", key among them US taxpayers.

in full: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LL23Df03.html

[GeorgeGist]

24. Afghanistan suggests ...

you ask the Soviet Union how that worked out for them.