Hey Phil Gramm, are the troops whinning too?

Crossposted from Left Toon Lane, Bilerico Project & My Left Wing click to enlargeThe recent bank failures, suck-ass economy, rising gas prices are all a figment of your imagination. That is what the Bush Administration wants you to think as they keep pounding the podium for off-shore drilling - sucking the last of the Earth's marrow out while they are still in office. Because they sure as Hell don't want to be talking about THIS: US and Afghan troops have abandoned a remote village in eastern Afghanistan where militants killed nine US soldiers and wounded a dozen more on Sunday. It was the biggest loss of life in an Afghan battle since operations began in 2001. Things don't appear to be getting better. At least 100 - some reports say 200 - insurgents stormed the small combat outpost in the village of Wanat on the border of Nuristan and Kunar provinces on Sunday. Some militants briefly broke through defences and into the temporary base. "We are confirming that we have vacated our combat outpost at Wanat," said Nato spokesman Mark Laity. The outpost had only been constructed days before it was attacked. Nato's International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) announced the camp had now been "disestablished" but said there would be a "continued presence" in the area - namely patrols and the use of Afghan security forces. Omar Sami Taza, a spokesman for the governor of Nuristan, said US troops had withdrawn from the area, "leaving the district in the hands of only 20 policemen". "American troops have taken all heavy weapons out of the district," he told the BBC. "This is why we have lost the district to the Taleban because our police couldn't defend it with one AK-47." What an interesting use of propaganda - using a word like "disestablished." That is because the Pentagon don't want to fess up and admit that the Taleban wiped the floor with US troops. NATO refused to label the attackers, only calling them militants, the locals are not in denial, they identified them as Taleban. I guess now the Taleban is a figment of our imagination also. Assholes.

Russia and the Oil Revolution

click to enlarge As we all know, we have troops deployed around the world. Yet I wonder why we have so many deployment locations. Then it occurred to me that we still have a lot of military in place where it would be strategically viable should other oil wars spring up. Do we really need all those troops in Europe? Yes, if you need a strong force to seize East European and Russian oil resources. All those Pacific forces would also come in handy for a Siberian offensive. Are we really spending almost half of our income to the US Treasury on what-if scenarios for oil grabs? Maybe. Even though most of the 9-11 attackers were Saudis, we attacked Afghanistan. Right after we went in, construction on the Afghanistan pipeline began and the next oil target was Iraq. I really hate to think I need a tin-foil hat today, but are we keeping all these troops deployed globally for peaceful missions? Do we really need to be in Japan, 60 years after World War 2? How about Germany, France, Italy and Spain? Are there any Al Qaeda elements these days on Guam?