Tag: Military Agreements

This Is How To Stop The US Spread

The US spreads its military might a little thin sometimes…..we have so many troops deployed around the world and we need to stop looking for a fight and return to diplomacy.

Recently when news of the arrival of US troops.in the West African nation of Ghana the people took to the streets in protest…..

On March 28, 2018 thousands of Ghanaians took to the streets of the capital Accra to protest a deal their government recently inked with US diplomats. Demonstrators came to show their objections to a multi-million-dollar agreement to strengthen military ties between the United States and Ghana. While the agreement is multi-faceted, a dominant theme is opening the door for a strong US military presence in the country. The deal allows American forces to use Ghana as a geographical asset in operations in the region, such as utilizing runways, and also permits the use of Ghanaian radio channels.

Also highlighted in the agreement is more joint exercises with American units. Officials in the country tried to play down the significance of the recent deal, presenting it as merely an extension of a two-decades-long relationship between the United States and Ghana, a West African country that has frequently been a host for bilateral military drills for a variety of nations.

https://www.opslens.com/2018/04/02/ghana-thousands-protest-us-military-co-operation-deal/

More countries should try this and say NO to more US troops on their soil.

America: Beacon Of Democracy

For decades now the US has been seen by the world as a shining beacon of democracy around the world….a champion of democracy and freedom….and many Americans still believe that is true….

But there is a stat that many people have NO idea about and they need to know that all is not as perfect as they think….

For decades, the American people have been repeatedly told by their government and corporate-run media that acts of war ordered by their president have been largely motivated by the need to counter acts of aggression or oppression by “evil dictators.” We were told we had to invade Iraq because Saddam Hussein was an evil dictator. We had to bomb Libya because Muammar Gaddafi was an evil dictator, bent on unleashing a “bloodbath” on his own people. Today, of course, we are told that we should support insurgents in Syria because Bashar al-Assad is an evil dictator, and we must repeatedly rattle our sabers at North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and Russia’s Vladimir Putin because they, too, are evil dictators.

This is part of the larger, usually unquestioned mainstream corporate media narrative that the US leads the “Western democracies” in a global struggle to combat terrorism and totalitarianism and promote democracy.

I set out to answer a simple question: Is it true? Does the US government actually oppose dictatorships and champion democracy around the world, as we are repeatedly told?

Source: US Provides Military Assistance to 73 Percent of World’s Dictatorships

The truth is the the US is propping up more dictators than democratic regime…..and for a year now it is getting worse…..

No Democracy–No Weapons

Everyone the regularly visits IST knows that I am an antiwar supporter…..and that I feel that the US Congress has relinquished is power of the use of military force to the president…..there have been a few bills, mostly from Dems, that have tried to re-establish Congress’ power but they usually go nowhere…..

For two years the Saudis have been systematically destroying Yemen under some pretense of fighting terrorism and the US has been supporting the Saudis behind the scenes mostly….but they could change…

The House version of the nearly $700 billion 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) includes multiple amendments aimed at limiting US involvement in the Saudi War in Yemen, explicitly forbidding the deployment of ground troops there, or spending any money on military operations outside the scope of the 2001 AUMF.

The Nolan Amendment prohibits the deployment of troops to participate in any way in the war, which is seen not only as restricting ground troops being sent to Yemen to fight on the side of the Saudis, but also appears aimed at limiting mid-air refueling operations for Saudi warplanes.

The Lieu Amendment requires a report from the State Department and the Pentagon on whether or not the Saudis are complying with the US-provided “No Strike List” for Yemen, as well as their improvement of targeting capabilities to avoid hitting civilians.

Finally, the Davidson Amendment prohibits all US military action in Yemen that is outside of the scope of the 2001 AUMF. This would preclude operations against the Shi’ite Houthis, who obviously were nothing to do with 9/11, though it would not restrict US operations against al-Qaeda forces inside Yemen.

(antiwar.com)

Small efforts that I suspect will go down in flames…but I give them an “A” for effort.

A better idea is one that comes out of Sweden….

Sweden’s Social Democratic government has received general support from opposition parties for a new legislative plan to curb weapons sales to so-called autocratic and nondemocratic nations.

The proposed legislation would have a direct impact on weapons sales to certain countries in the Middle East, Africa, Asia and South America. Military sales to countries applicable under the new proposal would be regulated according to tougher humans rights criteria.

The proposed legislation will amend Sweden’s existing Arms Export Controls Act. The strong degree of opposition party support for the legislative initiative means the new law could be introduced as early as 2018.

Countries that will be affected by the proposed legislation, like Oman, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, all remain important customers for Sweden’s defense industry companies.

(defensenews.com)

A helluva idea….no democracy, no weapons!

Of course the M-IC will fight this tooth and nail…..but what a great way to promote democracy……

Another Answer To The Afghan Problem

I get email from people all over the country and this one came from a friend in New Mexico…..once I read it I knew I had to post it because a loyal reader of Info Ink…Quin of Quintessential Havoc (great thoughtful site….go to blogroll to visit) is from the UK and I wanted to hear his opinion on the idea…..since he and I have a difference of opinion on Afghanistan…his thoughts are always appreciated.

My emailer says that this piece is written by Jason Ditz:

The British Army’s new counter-insurgency field manual, the guidelines for the 9,000+ British soldiers fighting in Afghanistan, sets sights on a new strategy to fight the Taliban: overt bribery.

The guide advises British troops to buy off Taliban with “bags of gold” instead of fighting them. The commanders are also advised to negotiate with Taliban leaders, including those with “blood on their hands.” The guide advises that the Taliban pays its employees about $10 a day, a staggering amount compared to what Afghan security forces make. It doesn’t set out exactly how much British forces should bribe them, but says it should be enough that it will dissuade them from working for the Taliban

With Afghanistan one of the most corrupt nations on the planet, bribery is hardly a foreign concept that needs to be imported. Still, British forces are unlikely to have enough gold to throw at the insurgency to make it simply disappear into Afghanistan’s seedy background.

Personally, I think it would be cheaper in money and blood to do it this way….I understanbd that the US Military is doing this on a small scale right now….but it still only protects conveys to and from a certain area….and that it does not stop attacks on positions…just on the conveys….

Is this an answer or just a way to waste money?

Keep An Eye On Ukraine

The European Union has issued an official statement, and in it they have declared that they recognize Ukraine as “a European country”. While this comes as hardly a surprise to anyone with access to a globe, the relevant message of this statement was clear: that Ukraine might at some point be offered membership in the European Union. And while French President Nicolas Sarkozy made it clear that more needed to be done before membership was offered, this was just the latest sign that Ukraine is emerging as a geopolitical battleground between a resurgent Russia and the worried west.

But Ukraine’s problems go deeper than just what is happening outside their borders. President Viktor Yushchenko’s party has abandoned the coalition government, a move which is likely to lead to snap elections being announced early next week. President Yushchenko has a long-standing rivalry with Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, whom he accused earlier in the week of treason for refusing to voice her opposition to Russia’s naval presence as loudly as he has.

The Russian leased naval base in the Crimean port city of Sevastopol, the main base of operations for Russia’s Black Sea Fleet for centuries, is a contentious issue between Russia and Ukraine and a potential flashpoint between Russia and NATO. Russia’s lease on the base expires in 2017 and Ukraine has said it does not anticipate renewing it beyond that point. Rather, Ukraine aspires to NATO membership, and the port would be strategically valuable for NATO. Vice President Dick Cheney reiterated last week that the United States supports Ukraine’s NATO membership bid.

But many in Russia have contested the legality of Ukraine’s ownership of the Crimean Peninsula, and Russian Ambassador Yuri Fedotov has warned that the nation would consider the expansion of NATO into the Ukraine a “hostile act”. Ukraine and Russia share a long and virtually open border, and the presence of the nation in NATO would, according to the ambassador, lead to his nation reexamining its close economic ties. Its a move Ukraine’s government seems to want to make, but with Russia by far their most important trading partner, can they afford to?