For Public Consumption: NATO ‘Pullout’ Won’t Actually Remove Troops From Afghanistan
Officials Hype 'Transition' to Skeptical Public
Following in the rich history of fake endings to wars during the Obama Administration’s first term, the US and other NATO member nations are loudly hyping their endorsement of a transition pact, which is being presented as an “irreversible pullout” of occupation forces.
“We are now unified to responsibly wind down the war in Afghanistan,” insisted President Obama. The pact pledges to see a transition to Afghanistan taking a “leading role” by summer of 2013. This is a great way to brand the war, since polls show massive majorities of voters in virtually every NATO notion overwhelmingly opposed to the conflict.
But despite the hype, the pact is materially no different from the one that came out of the Lisbon summit, which seeks to declare the war “over” at the end of 2014 but keep large but unspecified numbers of NATO troops occupying the nation in the nation long beyond that “end.”
But if the Lisbon language was misleading, the Chicago language is a deliberate scam, as President Obama was in Afghanistan earlier this month signing a deal to keep US ground troops in the nation through 2024.
NATO has already been throwing out bogus claims of Afghanistan taking a “leading role” in operations for months, even when Afghan forces aren’t even informed of a NATO operation, as a way of claiming some cover when the attacks go wrong.
The claim of ending combat operations is also disingenuous, with officials openly talking about the post-2014 “non-combat” troops continuing to launch “anti-terror” raids, which is materially all they’re doing to begin with.
Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz
- Poll Shows Overwhelming Opposition to US Attacking Syria - May 22nd, 2013
- Kerry Confident Syria Counter-Offensive Will Fail - May 22nd, 2013
- Karzai Gives India 'Wish List' of Military Gear - May 22nd, 2013
- Report: Obama May Restart Gitmo Transfers - May 22nd, 2013
- Ten Dead in Latest Round of North Lebanon Fighting - May 22nd, 2013





Dog
May 23rd, 2012 at 4:15 am
Obama Lied! …. Now there's a "Dog Bites Man" headline if I've ever seen one.
Nathan
May 23rd, 2012 at 6:11 am
Ever wonder what rights do these supposedly civilized-nation assholes have to occupy other countries? The answer is none. It's the same old colonization under a different cloak.
MichaelKenny
May 23rd, 2012 at 6:12 am
I would guess that talk of a general "pullout" is designed simply to put a "pretty face" on the pullout by NATO's European members, itself driven by the immense unpopularity of the war in Europe. That, of course, in itself, illustrates the slow but steady disenchantment with an organisation which, after 40 years of successful peacekeeping, has been turned into a war machine operating in places about which Europeans know little and care even less.
Truth lover
May 23rd, 2012 at 6:17 am
No it isn't. We'll point that out until the truth made its way out.
Strider55
May 23rd, 2012 at 8:04 am
Suddenly I'm reminded of a "Weekend Update" item on SNL way back when Chevy Chase was the "news" reader:
"Our top story tonight: Cuban ruler Fidel Castro announced he is pulling out of Angola. A frustrated Angola could not be reached for comment."
Will Afghanistan be equally frustrated with Obama?
Johnny_Warbucks
May 23rd, 2012 at 10:55 am
I've said it once and I'll say it again: the USan Empire doesn't invade any country with the intent of leaving it. The pull-out/withdrawal whatever is nothing but bread and circus. The sleuth of military bases and mercenaries that are left behind are the ones that tell the true story. Ask the Japanese and the Filipinos about how that works, they're the experts on the subject.