Messages In This Digest (5 Messages)
- 1.
- NATO Chief: Missile Shield No Substitute For Nuclear Weapons From: Rick Rozoff
- 2.
- Afghan War: NATO Deaths Soaring As 45 Killed In October From: Rick Rozoff
- 3.
- Albright To Give Lecture On 21st Century NATO From: Rick Rozoff
- 4.
- Petraeus Intensifies Air Attacks In Afghanistan And Pakistan From: Rick Rozoff
- 5.
- Afghanistan-Pakistan: Woodward's Ominous Narrative From: Rick Rozoff
Messages
- 1.
-
NATO Chief: Missile Shield No Substitute For Nuclear Weapons
Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff
Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:52 am (PDT)
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1591767.php/NATO-head-Missile-shield-no-substitute-for-deterrence
Deutsche Presse-Agentur
October 15, 2010
NATO head: Missile shield no substitute for deterrence
Paris: NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen sided with France when he said Friday in Paris that an anti-missile defence system was no substitute for nuclear deterrence.
He was reacting to a disagreement between France and Germany that erupted Thursday in Brussels, during a meeting of NATO foreign and defence ministers.
The Germans had suggested that the missile shield could be used as a pretext to reduce nuclear weapons stockpiles in Europe, but France vehemently disagreed.
'I agree with France,' Rasmussen said after meeting with French President Nicolas Sarkozy at the Elysee Palace. 'The anti-missile defence system is a complement to nuclear deterrence, and not a substitute.'
These words largely echoed those of a French diplomat close to Sarkozy, who had said earlier Friday that Paris saw the missile-defence system as a 'useful' complement to nuclear deterrence, but not as a replacement.
'For us, (nuclear) deterrence remains inevitable and will remain so as long as certain countries continue to develop their nuclear arsenal or want to acquire nuclear arms,' said the diplomat, who spoke on condition that his name not be used.
Rasmussen also said that he was 'confident' that NATO would take the decision to develop an anti-missile defence system at its next summit, on November 19-20 in Lisbon.
The NATO chief said he and Sarkozy had also discussed the war in Afghanistan.
'We need more trainers ... if we want to fulfill our goals,' Rasmussen said.
He said the goal was for the Afghans to begin taking 'lead responsibility' in the conflict in 2011 and have complete responsibility by 2014.
'Afghan soldiers and police must be trained to that end,' he said.
Rasmussen said he and Sarkozy had also discussed NATO reforms and a new Alliance strategic concept 'to address new security requirements' and confront new threats, such as missile attacks, cyberattacks and terrorism.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Daily digest option available.
==============================
- 2.
-
Afghan War: NATO Deaths Soaring As 45 Killed In October
Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff
Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:54 am (PDT)
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-10/16/c_13560641.htm
Xinhua News Agency
October 16, 2010
NATO casualties in Afghanistan soaring as 45 service members killed in October
By Farid Behbud, Abdul Haleem
KABUL: Casualties of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan are on rise as over 45 service members have been killed since the beginning of this month in militancy-ridden Afghanistan.
In the latest suffering the NATO-led ISAF in Afghanistan on Friday reported losing three soldiers in three separate incidents in Afghanistan's restive southern and eastern regions.
"An International Security Assistance Force service member died following an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) attack in southern Afghanistan today (Friday)," the ISAF said in a press release on Friday.
Two other ill-fated soldiers were killed in Taliban insurgents' attacks in the south and east of the war-torn Afghanistan.
A day earlier on Thursday five more NATO troops were killed in IED blasts in the country's western region while two others lost their lives in Taliban-led attacks in south and eastern provinces where Taliban are active.
The birthplace of Taliban militants, Kandahar, the scene of a joint ongoing Afghan and NATO forces operation and neighboring Helmand provinces have been regarded as insurgents' strongholds in Afghanistan.
On Wednesday, the military alliance experienced a bloody day by losing six troops who died in an IED blast in southern Afghanistan, while two other soldiers were killed on the same day in an insurgent attack elsewhere in the country.
An IED is a simple weapon made of explosive devices and planted on roads to target Afghan and well-equipped NATO-led troops.
Both the homemade device IED and suicide attacks have proved challenging and deadly for the military alliance since the start of the regrouping of Taliban militants in 2006.
Meanwhile, the military alliance avoided disclosing the nationalities of the victims by saying "it is ISAF policy to defer casualty identification procedures to the relevant national authorities."
In addition to IED strikes, a helicopter for which Taliban claimed responsibility, crashed in eastern Kunar province on Oct. 12, according to an ISAF statement, leaving one soldier dead and six others injured.
However, Taliban militants insisted that 26 aboard were killed in the chopper crash.
A day later on Oct. 13 an aircraft serving NATO-led troops also crashed outside the capital city of Kabul, leaving all eight crew dead.
The latest military casualties this summer coincided with the deployment of almost all 30,000 additional NATO and the U.S. forces in Afghanistan, bringing to over 140,000 the strength of the alliance in the militancy-plagued country.
However, the diehard Taliban insurgents have said that the troop surge would incur more causalities to NATO and U.S. forces.
The casualties of NATO-ISAF troops in Afghanistan in September was 57 and in August 79 respectively, according to a website.
So far this year, the casualties of NATO-led troops have registered 591 with majority of them Americans against 521 in the whole of 2009.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Daily digest option available.
==============================
- 3.
-
Albright To Give Lecture On 21st Century NATO
Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff
Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:54 am (PDT)
http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20101016/NEWS/10160332/Former-secretary-of-state-to-deliver-lecture-in-Miss-
Jackson Clarion Ledger
October 16, 2010
Former secretary of state to deliver lecture in Miss.
Madeleine Albright to speak on NATO in Hattiesburg
Ed Kemp
HATTIESBURG: Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright will speak Tuesday at the Saenger Theater in downtown Hattiesburg.
Albright, 73, will give a lecture titled "The Future of NATO." Since 2009, Albright has chaired a NATO committee of experts to analyze the alliance's role in the 21st century.
The event is sponsored by the University of Southern Mississippi's second biennial Lt. Col. John H. Dale Sr. Distinguished Lecture Series in International Security and Global Policy.
"We're looking forward to hearing Secretary Albright talk about the commission that she chaired," said Jerry Ross, College of Arts and Letters assistant dean. "This organization (NATO) was born out of the Cold War and has continued to evolve. It must do so now to meet the new security challenges that we face."
....
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Daily digest option available.
==============================
- 4.
-
Petraeus Intensifies Air Attacks In Afghanistan And Pakistan
Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff
Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:54 am (PDT)
http://blogs.reuters.com/afghanistan/2010/10/16/gen-petraeus-turns-up-the-heat-on-pakistan-afghanistan/
Reuters
October 16, 2010
Gen Petraeus turns up the heat on Pakistan, Afghanistan
It's not just Pakistan where the United States has stepped up air raids against members of al Qaeda and the Taliban. Last month, U.S-led NATO planes in Afghanistan conducted 700 missions, more than twice the number for the same month the previous year. It was also one of the highest single-month totals of the nine-year Afghan War, the military-focused Danger Room blog said, citing U.S. Air Force statistics.
September was also the month when missile strikes by unmanned U.S. drone planes in northwest Pakistan hit the highest level of 20 since America launched its secret war inside Pakistan....
And as if that was not enough, NATO helicopters from Afghanistan crossed the border on at least three occasions, triggering a firestorm of criticism in Pakistan which closed off the supply lines to the foreign troops in Afghanistan.
Is there a pattern to this? Has America under new commander General David Petraeus turned up the heat on Pakistan and Afghanistan ahead of a strategy review in December and before next July's planned beginning of a troop drawdown?
While there have been spikes in the past, this looks like part of a creeping rise in the use of air power, which had been eschewed by former commander Lieutenant General Stanley McChrystal because of the risk of civilian casualties from the raids. NATO planes carried out 500 sorties in August, up from 405 for the same month the previous year.
....
[I]ts more than just the surge, says Noah Shachtman in [a] piece for Danger Room. Since Petraeus took command in June, air strikes have gone up each month, and every increase has been greater than the previous month.
Surveillance flights have increased three-fold since last year, reflecting a new, lethal phase of the Afghan war. There had been speculation that the new general would ease some of the restrictions that McChrystal had placed on the use of air power following a series of raids gone wrong and which fueled Afghan anger.
Shachtman says :
"Petraeus' history in Iraq also suggested a greater willingness to bomb adversaries, despite the concerns about civilian casualties. Lethal, munitions-dropping sorties more-than-quadrupled under Petraeus' leadership."
U.S. military leaders, however, said earlier this summer, there would not be any major changes to the rules of engagement. But on the ground, in Pakistan certainly, concerns have grown about a new, more aggressive U.S. war strategy.
Imtiaz Gul heads the Islamabad-based Centre for Research and Security Studies and has written a book called The Most Dangerous Place, says the Pakistani military is increasingly concerned about Petraeus's plans for AF-PAK including imposing a policy of hot pursuit under which foreign forces can enter Pakistani territory in search of militants. Gul writes in Foreign Policy that some Pakistani military officials believe the general ordered the NATO incursions to test the waters ahead of an expanded air war over Waziristan which the U.S. military says is the origin of half the attacks in Afghanistan.
NATO has apologised for the deaths of three Pakistani soldiers in a cross-border strike by a NATO gunship in the most serious incident, after which Pakistani authorities re-opened the Khyber pass route for NATO supplies to move into Afghanistan. But they remain deeply suspicious of American motives, and this week the Pakistani press reported another, small and fleeting incursion by a NATO helicopter in the southern stretch of the border. The two sides are due to a hold a strategic dialogue in Washington next week under the shadow of these incursions that strike at the heart of Pakistan's identity as a sovereign nation,.
The obvious question to ask is how does this new aggressive U.S. military policy towards Pakistan and Afghanistan square up with the bid to seek a negotiated settlement with the Taliban as a flurry of reports over the past week have suggested....
But as independent analyst Matt Waldman tells the New York Times it's hard to see the Taliban coming to the negotiating table, forced by U.S. pounding of their hideouts. If anything, escalating the war against them can only lead to the rise of a new class of leaders more committed to fighting.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Daily digest option available.
==============================
- 5.
-
Afghanistan-Pakistan: Woodward's Ominous Narrative
Posted by: "Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff@yahoo.com rwrozoff
Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:55 am (PDT)
http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=57214
Pakistan Observer
October 16, 2010
Woodward's ominous narrative
Mohammad Jamil
Bob Woodward's book "Obama Wars" in general offers an account of President Barack Obama's national security team's flawed decision-making practices, yet there is malicious intent behind raising the points of Quetta Shura, the Haqqani network in North Waziristan, and ISI's support to the Taliban.
Even if one presumes that there is some truth in these allegations, it is not understandable as to why hundreds of CIA agents and Blackwater mercenaries who are running around in FATA and Balochistan have not been able to either arrest or kill the top Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders despite the fact they are equipped with sophisticated equipment and gadgetry.
Osama bin Laden may be dead or may have been killed a long time ago, but the US wants to keep him 'alive' so that it can use it as justification for its presence in the region and advancing its global interests.
In Bob Woodward's book "Obama Wars," the author wrote: "Once Zalmay Khalilzad brushed off Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari's claim that the US was arranging the (suicide) attacks by Pakistani Taliban inside his country, as madness, and was of the view that both Zardari and Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who believed in this US conspiracy theory, were dysfunctional leaders".
He also quoted President Zardari having said that this was a plot to destabilize Pakistan so that the US could invade and seize its nuclear weapons. But it is not President Zardari or Karzai's perception, as there have been statements from the US think tanks, analysts and members of Obama administration about Pakistan's 'double game' and they suggesting attack on the Haqqani network in North Waziristan.
Before the drone attack in South Waziristan on Baitullah Mehsud, Pakistan had many a time provided information to the US about TTP leaders holed in South Waziristan. It was against this backdrop that President Zardari had said: "We give you targets of Taliban leaders you don't go after. You go after other areas". Khalilzad is reported to have responded that the drones were primarily meant to hunt down members of al Qaeda and Afghan insurgents, not the Pakistan Taliban. This showed the liaison between the CIA and Baitullah Mehsud, as the 'Frankenstein monster' was killed in a drone attack along with other militants in March 2009. It has to be mentioned that Baitullah Mehsud had arsenal and night-vision equipment which the Pakistan army did not have at that time.
The book also revealed that CIA chief Leon Panetta and National Security Adviser Jim Jones were sent by Obama to Pakistan to talk to President Asif Ali Zardari and COAS Ashfaq Pervez Kayani after the failed Faisal Shahzad bombing at Times Square in New York.
Woodward wrote that CIA chief Leon Panetta told President Zardari: "If, God forbid, Shahzad's SUV had blown up in Times Square, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The president would be forced to do things that Pakistan would not like. The president wants everyone in Pakistan to understand if such an attack connected to a Pakistani group is successful there are some things even he would not be able to stop. Just as there are political realities in Pakistan, there are political realities in the US. No one will be able to stop the response and consequences. This is not a threat, just a statement of political fact."
American leadership does not realize that Pakistan is not a banana republic but a nuclear state with the delivery system. Though Pakistan's political leadership dithers while taking decisions, and does not have the guts to give an adequate response, the military leadership has the spine to respond adequately. Anyhow, when Jim Jones and Leon Panetta met General Kayani privately, Jones reportedly told the army chief that the clock was starting now on all four of the requests. Obama wanted a progress report in 30 days.
"But Kayani would not budge very much. He had other concerns. I'll be the first to admit, I'm India-centric," Woodward quoted him as saying. After the London Conference on Afghanistan last year, there was positive change in America's attitude, and it tried to address Pakistan's concerns vis-à-vis Indian influence in Afghanistan. But India has been successful in reversing the situation, and American political leaders and especially military leaders who had pro-Pakistan stance, and now they have suspicious about Pakistan's intelligence agencies supporting the Taliban.
A few months ago, through WikiLeaks an effort was to put Pakistan on the defensive, though out of more than 92,000 reports only 180 related to Pakistan. Though it was admitted in the report that there was "low-level assessments about Pakistan's ISI secretly supporting Taliban insurgents, which was based on Afghan intelligence", yet they insisted that the evidence was credible.
Americans doublespeak was obvious from the fact that whatever was mentioned in the reports regarding Pakistan they said the evidence was conclusive, whereas about American and NATO forces' brutalities and war crimes they said that evidence was not conclusive. Anyhow, the major focus of reports was on brutal military actions involving the United States and the NATO forces, intelligence information, and reports of meetings with political figures. It was also admitted that the report regarding Pakistan was mainly based on the information of Afghanistan's National Directorate of Security, which was under Tajik Amarullah Saleh – a pro-Indian, a CIA asset and diehard anti-Pakistan.
....
[T]he Guardian had called the material "one of the biggest leaks in US military history - devastating portrait of failing war in Afghanistan; revealing how coalition forces killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents; Taliban attacks have soared and NATO commanders fear neighbouring Pakistan and Iran are fuelling the insurgency".
All this disinformation was being spread to pressurize Pakistan into launching military operations in North Waziristan, where they say the Haqqani group is holed up in. But it is a flawed perception that the Haqqani group is based in Pakistan, because American and NATO forces know full well that the Haqqani network is in Afghanistan and giving them a very tough time.
—The writer is Lahore-based senior journalist.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwrozoff@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Daily digest option available.
==============================
Need to Reply?
Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.
MARKETPLACE
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Individual | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
No comments:
Post a Comment