SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: 10K a day who wrote (67863)8/22/2006 4:54:59 PM
From: Skywatcher  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93284
 
the ONLY thing Bush ever did that was right....is now A TOTAL MESS...like everything else he touches
Return to Kandahar: The Taliban Threat
By Nelofer Pazira
The Belfast Telegraph UK

Monday 21 August 2006

Nelofer Pazira, the journalist who starred in the film 'Kandahar', has gone back to the southern Afghan city for the first time in four years. There she found residents living in fear as Islamic insurgents extend their deadly reach still deeper into the country.
Fear permeates Kandahar. Eyes watch every passer-by, every car. Everyone is suspect. People shrink away from me when I ask to interview them. They run when they see a camera. The few brave souls who agree to talk do so either anonymously or because they are desperate.

There is no war, no shooting, no rockets. At least not yet, although the Taliban wave is reconquering Afghanistan, and fighting is spreading through Kandahar province.

Only a few months ago, the city of Kandahar was on the road to prosperity. Newly-paved streets with proper signs - one even named after Queen Soraya, wife of the 1920s reformer King Amanullah Khan - a park with a playground for children and several smart guesthouses were part of the new image. Near the Kandahar market, the foundations of many new modern buildings and houses had been laid.

Mohammad Hikmat and his younger brother bought land here - £27,000 for 400 sq m - to build a home. Over the past five years they made good money working with foreign reporters and aid agencies. But six months ago it all came to an end. The Taliban were coming back. All construction stopped. Fear spread like a fire. Then came a series of suicide attacks and printed decrees, often hung on the walls of local mosques, ordering the people to stop supporting the government.

Mr Hikmat decided to shelve his dream of owning a house and took his family to safety, across the Afghan-Pakistan border to Quetta. The construction company where he worked as an engineer fired most of its staff.

Mr Hikmat destroyed the press cards and letters of recommendation he and his brother had collected from journalists. His brother, who worked as a cameraman, erased all footage from his tapes, all film of the city, interviews and pictures of American troops, for fear of punishment by the Taliban. An Indian company that built the road between Kandahar and Spinboldak fled when news spread that the Pakistani army was helping the Taliban to reach Kandahar. Most foreigners left.

"The Americans abandoned Afghanistan," says Mr Hikmat. "When they were around, people were making money. The Taliban had run away but they were not defeated and the Americans knew that too. Yet the US decreased the number of its troops."
Then it was announced Nato would replace the US forces, a decision which encouraged the Taliban. People in Kandahar talk about a power vacuum of which the Taliban took full advantage. They had five years to organise and returned in force.

"Now the Taliban are everywhere," says Alia, a nurse in Kandahar's Polyclinic Hospital.
She returned from Pakistan four years ago in the hope of living and working in Kandahar and made her home in the Khoshal Mena neighbourhood, a short distance from the city centre.

"There was a doctor called Aziz in this building" she says. "The Taliban hung a leaflet on his door, telling him if he didn't stop working for the government and didn't take his children out of school, he would be killed." He and his family escaped overnight.

Now Alia says she is scared for her own family's life. She has taken down the sign on her door which carried her name and occupation. "My children are also in school and I'm worried that I may face a similar threat," she says. Najeeba has her own mocking reaction. "At least they give you a warning," she remarks, although this might be a compliment by Afghan standards.

But Alia has another reason to worry. In recent months she engaged her 16-year-old daughter to a young Afghan who works for the Western military forces. He paid the family a bride price of about £7,000. But now Alia is fearful that her daughter and her new family will also become a Taliban target. For the Taliban control most of Helmand province, where some 4,000 British troops are stationed.

In the Panjwai district of Kandahar province, the Taliban have even been using loudspeakers, taunting Canadian troops to attack them. In the past week, Canadian soldiers travelled to Panjwai but can only hold the city centre.

In Panjwai, 30km west of Kandahar, where fighting began two weeks ago, 71 Taliban fighters died during the weekend in running battles with Nato and Afghan forces after an attack on government headquarters, according to officials.

Maiwand, the site of a great British military defeat during the Second Afghan War in 1778-1880, is now the seat of resistance to the government, and Nato.

A Maiwand resident who is hiding in Kandahar tells me he was threatened by the Taliban. He works in one of Kandahar's hospitals. "I can't go home because I know the Taliban will kill me," he says. "From our entire village there are only two educated people. It's not hard for the Taliban to find us there.

"They have continued to issue decrees announcing that the killing of all those working with the current government or any of the foreign agencies - especially the military - is an "Islamic duty". In neighbouring Helmand province, a leaflet pinned to the wall of a mosque says the Taliban will give $1,000 (£680) to anyone who brings them the head of a government worker or a foreigner.

Where is all this power and money coming from? A member of a religious group, Wakil Sahib, accuses neigbouring Pakistan. "They don't want Afghanistan to be free and economically independent," he says. "They want to keep Afghanistan as their market. They want us to continue to go to their doctors, buy their medicine, use their products. To serve their own interests, the Pakistani intelligence service funds the Taliban."

Saifullah, who is too frightened to identify his job, says everyone in Kandahar knows who created and supported the Taliban. "Pakistan, with the help of the US, originally created them - and to this day they are providing them with weapons and money," he says.

Saifullah is one of those who suspect that the Americans directly help the Taliban. "They could control the Pakistani border and stop the Taliban crossing. So why don't they?" he asks.

The educated classes in Kandahar also tend to blame the United States. "The Americans realised that Afghanistan held no economic benefit for them so they decided to ignore the country despite all their promises," says Rafi, an unemployed engineer. "After the US, the responsibility lies on our own government, which has also failed.

"But I wonder if the war in Afghanistan is less about the Taliban and Pakistan, and more about the rivalry between America and Europe. Afghanistan has become a victim once again, just like it was during the Cold War."

But there is another reality which also helps the Taliban. When the Americans arrived in Kandahar, they also brought money, rebuilding projects, jobs and the hope of stability. Power was restored and the city had electricity, especially during the summer, when temperatures reach 55C. But the Americans also left the drug mafia and warlords intact. The former Kandahar governor, General Gulagha Shirzai, and the President's brother, Wali Karzai, who now heads the Provincial Council, have been accused of drug trafficking. They, and others like them, were America's allies.

Under the American administration, "warlordism" and poppy cultivation soared.
Kandahar owed its new wealth in part to drug money. But with the shift from US to Nato forces, there came a "War on drugs" and Nato launched a relentless campaign to stop poppy cultivation. Using Afghan National Police and Afghan National Army, the Canadians and the British started to destroy the poppy fields, a policy which faced opposition from both the traffickers and the farmers. The first casualty was the power supply.

"When Nato took over, the electricity disappeared," says Ahmedallah. The Americans had apparently donated 14 powerful generators to the city, seven of them operational at any one time. But the Kandaharis are paying the price for the oil-operating machines, which provide the city with a few hours of electricity every other day. "We only had power for four days, if you counted all the hours together. And the bill for the month was $40," says Ahmedallah of his own home. An average government employee makes about $50 a month.

To continue the drug production, the traffickers as well as the farmers welcomed the Taliban. Poppy cultivation was allowed by the Taliban. "Farmers now let the Taliban stay in their homes," says Wali, who works part-time for the ROSHAN mobile phone company. "Wherever you find the Taliban, the Brits and Canadians can't go."

Two weeks ago, Wali was driving from Helmand to Kandahar when he saw a gun battle between the Taliban and Nato forces. He abandoned his car and ran to safety. A few days later he returned to find his car. The Taliban had burned it, he says, because they found papers from his work and his mobile phone inside. He'd paid $3,500 for the car and sold the burned wreck for less than $100. "If tomorrow the British and Canadians announced that the growing of poppies was allowed, the people wouldn't let the Taliban stay in the country," says Wali.

"It would certainly help if they also restore power," adds Ahmedallah. And if they established better control over the Pakistan-Afghan border, and paid the Afghan army better salaries, and used the old commanders who are now unemployed, and, above all, cleansed the current Afghan administration of corruption. The list goes on.

In Kandahar, they make a distinction between the old Pakistani-supported Taliban and the new forces of Gulbudin Hekmatyar. Hekmatyar was a well-paid CIA man during the Cold War, the much-feared leader of the Hizb-i-Islami (party of God) which brutalised the Kabul population before the Taliban. Some suspect that the CIA has called again on his services.

Of course, there are more conspiracy theories than facts. But the reality is that fear dominates every aspect of life here. "It would be easier to live under the full control of one or another government, be it the Taliban or a US-supported Afghan government," says Rafi. "But this is like living in purgatory."

If the Americans leave, Kandahar will fall in a week. That's what people in the city's bazaar say - and they are the ones who know the Taliban and al-Qa'ida.


In the crowded streets, where shops are filled with goods imported from Pakistan, Iran and China, where young boys sell large square blocks of ice and bottled water, foreigners are no longer welcome.

No Nato patrol can pass through here. "They are too scared to come to this area," says my guide Ahmedallah. So the Taliban don't attack the market because there are no foreigners - or perhaps, as the Kandaharis claim, because this place is their nest. Kandahar is lost.



To: 10K a day who wrote (67863)8/22/2006 10:53:12 PM
From: puborectalis  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 93284
 
August 23, 2006
Poll Shows a Shift in Opinion on Iraq War
By CARL HULSE and MARJORIE CONNELLY
WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 — Americans increasingly see the war in Iraq as distinct from the fight against terrorism, and nearly half believe President Bush has focused too much on Iraq to the exclusion of other threats, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

The poll found that 51 percent of those surveyed saw no link between the war in Iraq and the broader antiterror effort, a jump of 10 percentage points since June. That increase comes despite the regular insistence of Mr. Bush and Congressional Republicans that the two are intertwined and should be seen as complementary elements of a strategy to prevent domestic terrorism.

Should the trend hold, the rising skepticism could present a political obstacle for Mr. Bush and his allies on Capitol Hill, who are making their record on terrorism a central element of the midterm election campaign. The Republicans hope that by expressing a desire for forceful action against terrorists, they can offset unease with the Iraq war and blunt the political appeal of Democratic calls to establish a timeline to withdraw American troops.

Public sentiment about the war remains negative, threatening to erode a Republican advantage on national security. Fifty-three percent said going to war was a mistake, up from 48 percent in July; 62 percent said events were going “somewhat or very badly” in the effort to bring order and stability to Iraq.

Mr. Bush recorded a gain of four percentage points in how the public views his handling of terrorism, rising to 55 percent approval from 51 percent a week earlier. This was his highest approval rating on the issue since last summer and followed the arrests in Britain in a suspected terror plot to blow up airliners.

Mr. Bush’s overall standing was nevertheless unchanged from the previous week, with 57 percent disapproving and 36 percent approving, far below the level Republicans in Congress would like to see as they prepare for elections in November.

Compounding the Republicans’ political problems, the survey reflected significant dissatisfaction with the way Congress was doing its job. Voters in the poll indicated a strong preference for Democratic candidates this fall.

The Times/CBS News poll differed somewhat from other recent surveys showing higher approval ratings for the president. In surveys for USA Today and CNN conducted Friday through Sunday, 42 percent approved of how Mr. Bush was doing his job and gave Democratic Congressional candidates less of an edge. The Times/CBS News poll was conducted by telephone Thursday through Monday with 1,206 adults nationwide and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

According to the poll, terrorism and the war in Iraq hold about equal importance in the minds of Americans. Forty-six percent said the administration had concentrated too much on Iraq and not enough on terrorists elsewhere, while 42 percent said the balance was about right.

The opinion of 51 percent that the war in Iraq was separate from the war on terror was a considerable shift from polls taken in 2002 and the first half of 2003, when a majority regarded Iraq as a major antiterror front. As recently as June, opinion was split: 41 percent said the war in Iraq was a major part of the fight against terror, and 41 percent said it was not a part at all. Now only 32 percent consider it a major part of the terror fight, while 12 percent rate it a minor part.

“I’m just not sure there’s a connection between terrorism and the war in Iraq,” Ann Davis, a Republican homemaker in Lima, Ohio, said in a follow-up interview to the survey. She said that she supported United States troops but that “we should not be over there, they should be able to figure it out on their own.”

Another Republican, Marty Woll, 56, a retired accountant from Los Angeles, said he saw a clear link between the war and efforts to combat terrorism.

“Iraq was obviously not the precipitating location for the 9/11 attacks,” Mr. Woll said, “but if you look at the Middle East as a whole, you see it has been spawning the most violent and the most desperate of the attacks. Saddam Hussein killed almost a million of his own people. That magnitude indicated that someone had to do something about it.”

Mr. Bush’s inability to improve his overall rating despite gains on the terror issue could be traced to people like Lucia Figueroa, 23, an independent from Fort Drum, N.Y., who supports the president on terrorism but faults him elsewhere.

“Even though I approve of the way Bush is handling terrorism,” Ms. Figueroa said, “he isn’t putting enough focus on other issues, like health care and Katrina, and those things need more attention.”

As recently as Monday, Mr. Bush, in a news conference, defended the invasion of Iraq as essential to preventing domestic terror attacks and said he expected troops to stay there through the rest of his presidency.

“If you believe that the job of the federal government is to secure this country,” he said, “it’s really important for you to understand that success in Iraq is part of securing the country.”

Democrats in recent weeks have tried to portray the war in Iraq as a distraction from essential antiterror initiatives, and the poll indicates that the message may be working. Democrats say the war has sapped resources from tracking terrorists and bolstering domestic security.

“We took our eye off the real war, the war on terror,” Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, said in a conference call with reporters on Tuesday.

Democrats have said the Bush administration should have kept its focus on Al Qaeda instead of moving against Mr. Hussein and suspected weapons of mass destruction.

The public’s judgment on the job Congress is doing remains largely negative, with 60 percent disapproving. Forty-seven percent of the registered voters surveyed said they expected to vote for a Democrat for the House in November; 32 percent said they would vote for a Republican. The poll could not measure the races in individual Congressional districts, but the findings were indicative of the two parties’ relative strengths.

Those surveyed said that after terrorism and the war in Iraq, the economy was the third most crucial issue for leaders to concentrate on, followed by health care costs and gas prices. The White House has sought more credit for what it considers a strong economy, and there has been an improvement in how the public views Mr. Bush on this issue. But the overall impression is still negative.

Thirty-five percent said they approved of how Mr. Bush was dealing with the economy, up five percentage points from a CBS News poll conducted last week; 58 percent disapproved. Over all, 52 percent of those surveyed said the national economy was in good condition, and 47 percent said it was in bad condition.

With the recent fighting in Lebanon, the public is more pessimistic about the possibility of peace between Israel and its neighbors. Only 26 percent of those surveyed could envision Israel and the Arab countries settling their differences, while 70 percent could not — a figure up six percentage points from last month.

Most of those surveyed, 56 percent, said they did not believe that the country had a responsibility to help resolve the conflicts between Israel and other Middle Eastern countries, while 39 percent said it did.

Carl Hulse reported from Washington for this article, and Marjorie Connelly from New York. Megan Thee and Marina Stefan contributed reporting from New York.