Excerpts, WaPo yesterday.  Hoh was decorated for "uncommon courage" in Iraq when his helicopter went down and he dove into rushing waters in an attempt to rescue other soldiers.  He writes "we are mortgaging our economy in a war which, even with increased commitment, will remain a draw for years to come."

"Last month, in a move that has sent ripples all the way to the White House, Hoh, 36, became the first U.S. official known to resign in protest over the Afghan war, which he had come to believe simply fueled the insurgency."

"If the United States is to remain in Afghanistan, Hoh said, he would advise a reduction in combat forces."

"Hoh was assigned to research the response to a question asked by Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, during an April visit. Mullen wanted to know why the U.S. military had been operating for years in the Korengal Valley, an isolated spot near Afghanistan's eastern border with Pakistan where a number of Americans had been killed. Hoh concluded that there was no good reason. The people of Korengal didn't want them; the insurgency appeared to have arrived in strength only after the Americans did, and the battle between the two forces had achieved only a bloody stalemate."

Korengal and other areas, he said, taught him "how localized the insurgency was. I didn't realize that a group in this valley here has no connection with an insurgent group two kilometers away." Hundreds, maybe thousands, of groups across Afghanistan, he decided, had few ideological ties to the Taliban but took its money to fight the foreign intruders and maintain their own local power bases.

"That's really what kind of shook me," he said. "I thought it was more nationalistic. But it's localism. I would call it valley-ism."

The reaction to Hoh's letter was immediate. Senior U.S. officials, concerned that they would lose an outstanding officer and perhaps gain a prominent critic, appealed to him to stay.

U.S. Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry brought him to Kabul and offered him a job on his senior embassy staff. Hoh declined. From there, he was flown home for a face-to-face meeting with Richard C. Holbrooke, the administration's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"We took his letter very seriously, because he was a good officer," Holbrooke said in an interview. "We all thought that given how serious his letter was, how much commitment there was, and his prior track record, we should pay close attention to him."

While he did not share Hoh's view that the war "wasn't worth the fight," Holbrooke said, "I agreed with much of his analysis." He asked Hoh to join his team in Washington, saying that "if he really wanted to affect policy and help reduce the cost of the war on lives and treasure," why not be "inside the building, rather than outside, where you can get a lot of attention but you won't have the same political impact?"

Hoh accepted the argument and the job, but changed his mind a week later. "I recognize the career implications, but it wasn't the right thing to do," he said in an interview Friday, two days after his resignation became final.

Francis J. Ricciardone Jr., Ambassador Eikenberry's deputy, said he met with Hoh in Kabul but spoke to him "in confidence. I respect him as a thoughtful man who has rendered selfless service to our country, and I expect most of Matt's colleagues would share this positive estimation of him, whatever may be our differences of policy or program perspectives."

This week, Hoh is scheduled to meet with Vice President Biden's foreign policy adviser, Antony Blinken, at Blinken's invitation.

American families, he said at the end of the letter, "must be reassured their dead have sacrificed for a purpose worthy of futures lost, love vanished, and promised dreams unkept. I have lost confidence such assurances can be made any more."  FULL ARTICLE HERE

Contact congress here, "No troop escalation"

View your congressman's out-of-district military contractor campaign contributions here.

This unpublished UN document has come into my possession as director of the Afghan Marshall Plan Exit Strategy Project, dated June of this year.  I can only say it was leaked to us through our contacts in Kabul.  In it, the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan has in great detail marked the way for a civilian solution in Afghanistan, as President Obama considers throwing more military at the problem.  UNAMA is the cream of the international development corps, with depth and range of expertise in both war zones and peaceful environments.  In this paper the Mission staff clearly delineates the goal of "reduc[ing] support to the insurgency."

The Afghan New Deal will be a mass employment programme concentrating on regenerating rural infrastructure, particularly irrigation systems but its raison d'etre will be to build stability and reduce support to the insurgency.

The programme will focus on fighting age males (a wide age range) during the fighting season (which has been getting longer) and should last not less than three years.

Here is the answer to the terrible choice the president faces in deciding whether or not to send in more troops. The cost would be small fraction of military operations.  It is based on the considered opinion of the world's foremost development experts, representing combined decades of working in combat zones.  Please forward this post and the link to this document to the White House.  Sometimes war is the answer.   But this time it is not.

Contact the White House

Full document "The Afghan New Deal" posted here.

The Afghan New Deal (excerpted)

UNAMA SER is of the view that one of the best means of tackling the growing insurgency in the southeast is to put in place a massive public works programme, employing tens of thousands of fighting age males during the fighting season. For want of a better title, we are calling it the `Afghan New Deal' programme at this point.

The Afghan New Deal will involve all entities of sub-national governance and tribal authorities, thus strengthening linkages between them on the basis of interdependence.

The Afghan New Deal should focus on technologically simple infrastructure projects employing large numbers of fighting age men. The obvious types of projects include restoring irrigation systems, building flood mitigation infrastructure, gravel roads and forestry management.

Planning and preparation for such a programme should take place during the winter so that it commence in spring, before the fighting season starts. The process underlying this programme is in itself tremendously important.

Unemployment and under-employment are very high in the southeast region. This is a major cause of dissatisfaction with the Government and international community and consequent support for the insurgency and also a cause of criminality. Insurgents can pay young unemployed men to carry out attacks for them.

Many parts of the region have enjoyed only minimal development during the past seven years. Development has been patchy. Although there may be no proven causal link between development and security, the districts which are the most insecure (southern and eastern Ghazni, Zurmat and much of Paktika) have also enjoyed little development. However, it is possible that insecurity has dissuaded civilian organisations and even PRTs from operating there. There is a general disillusionment with the international community on the basis of what is seen as failed promises.

There is widespread poverty and the ability of communities to respond to shocks such as the food price rises or natural disasters is limited.

The southeast relies predominately on agriculture. Much of the region is mountainous and has little arable land. Overgrazing is a real problem in the mountains. In the plains areas, there is ample arable land but insufficient irrigation.

Nationally, it is estimated that only a third as much land is irrigated as was the case in 1979. The Soviets targeted the irrigation infrastructure in an attempt to depopulate areas and to prevent mujahidin fighters from using the underground irrigation channels known as karezes to move around. These systems have never been properly restored.

Consequently the lack of irrigation water and irrigation systems is the greatest constraint on agricultural yields and by extension on improving the economic status of people in the southeast.

The Afghan New Deal will be a mass employment programme concentrating on regenerating rural infrastructure, particularly irrigation systems but its raison d'être will be to build stability and reduce support to the insurgency.

The programme will focus on fighting age males (a wide age range) during the fighting season (which has been getting longer) and should last not less than three years.

Each unskilled worker should be paid around $6 per full day of work.

The programme offers a holistic and comprehensive approach, not piecemeal, and should aim for blanket coverage of the region, covering all communities and not pockets here and there.

A Provincial Management Team will be established to manage the Afghan New Deal within the province. This will be headed by the Provincial Governor and comprise the heads of relevant departments (DoRRD, DAIL, DoPW), the Chief of Police and include donor representatives and UNAMA.

The programme will depend on the Community Development Committees (or village shuras where the NSP has not been implemented, but called CDCs within this paper), and will involve all entities of sub-national governance.

All participating CDCs will continually implement discrete projects for the entirety of the fighting season. The scope of the projects will be defined from the outset, as is the case for the NSP, and may include: rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure, gravel road construction, construction of flood retaining walls, reforestation projects and construction of micro-hydro and/or hybrid electrical general schemes.

Another important criteria for Afghan New Deal projects is that the budget is at least 60% local labour costs and that the asset created requires no operational tashkeel or takhsis from the Government.

A District Engineering Team will be established in each district, attached to the district administration, but also under the overall management of the provincial Department of Rural Rehabilitation and Development. The purpose of the District Engineering Team is to provide technical assistance and oversight of the projects implemented by the CDCs. The District Engineering Team could be a commercial firm or an NGO under contract to the DoRRD, but will comprise around ten Afghan engineers and construction specialists and ten less skilled staff.

CDCs will identify appropriate projects and outline a basic proposal which they will submit to the District Development Assembly.

The Afghan New Deal could employ 40,000 people in Paktya (perhaps as much as 7% of the population) for a little over $72 million per year.

A programme of this magnitude would require the support of the highest levels of the Afghan Government, ISAF and major donors and would therefore require extensive discussion and consultation.

Reliable and adequate funding will be necessary for at least three years. Donors would have to make firm commitments.

If there is to be any chance of putting in place this programme before the next fighting season, there is a lot of work to be done. Political outreach with CDCs and tribal shuras so that they understand the programme and undertake to support it.

Forward to your congressmember with your comments

The Afghan Marshall Plan Exit Strategy Project

The writer is co-founder of Jobs for Afghans.

Using an online Excel spreadsheet like a whip list to continually update congress members' positions on the troop escalation, sister peace organization United for Peace and Justice is enlisting citizens to report results of phone calls to their offices to keep the heat on.   This is a bold and creative undertaking in using the Netroots to stop a war.  Jump in and report your call to your congressman on the website NoEscalation.org.  The whip list is updated every five minutes.

Also don't forget the brave Afghan women's activist Zoya (of RAWA.org, who is on a US speaking tour right now) and her plea for help in stopping the starvation now taking place in Afghanistan among its children, including in Kabul.  Demand during your calls that Congress heed RethinkAfghanistan.org's call for a civilian solution.  One important part of a civilian solution is detailed here, at "Afghan Marshall Plan: an Exit Strategy."  You can email the link or the text to your representatives.

Since there is 40% unemployment and the Taliban pays its fighters $8 a day, denying civilian aid could be the military-industrial complex's recipe for further instability and war, to use the term coined by Republican President Dwight Eisenhower in a warning in his Farewell Speech.  Now that Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize, he would do well to remember who else won that prize, George C. Marshall author of the Marshall Plan, which fed starving Europeans and stabilized Europe after WWII.  Troops out.  Civilian assistance in.  This is a manufactured war in which most Taliban recruits would drop their weapons if they had work projects instead, which would cost us a tiny fraction of what is spent on military operations.

From the sister peace website NoEscalation.org:

We need Members of Congress to take a stand against escalation now.

There are three key ways for Members of the House to affect President Obama’s decision: to speak out publicly against a troop increase; to co-sponsor Rep. Lee’s bill HR 3699 prohibiting an increase in troops; and to co-sponsor Rep. McGovern’s bill HR 2404 calling for an exit strategy from our military occupation of Afghanistan.

There are two key ways for Senators to affect President Obama’s decision: to speak out publicly against a troop increase and to introduce legislation in opposition to a troop increase and in favor of an exit strategy from our military occupation of Afghanistan or in favor of a timetable for military withdrawal.

So, what we are asking you to do is call your representatives in Congress – or any Member of Congress you feel comfortable calling (all phone numbers are given in the spreadsheet below – click on the spreadsheet and use arrows to scroll up and down – click the second tab for the Senate – or you can just call the switchboard at 202-225-3121 and be transfered to the Rep or Senator’s office) – try to get a staff person who handles Afghanistan on the phone, and:

for Members of the House: 1) if their office has not co-sponsored the McGovern bill (current co-sponsors are shown in the spreadsheet below), ask them to co-sponsor it.

2) if their office has co-sponsored the McGovern bill but not the Lee bill, ask them to co-sponsor the Lee bill.

3) if they are not shown in the list below as having taken a position against sending more troops, ask them if they have taken a position against sending more troops; and urge them to take a position now against sending more troops. (Here is a script for calling House Members.)

for Senators: 1) ask them if they have taken a position against sending more U.S. troops. If they have not done so, ask them to take a position now against sending more U.S. troops.

2) ask them to introduce legislation in opposition to sending more troops and in favor of an exit strategy from our occupation from Afghanistan or in favor of a timetable for military withdrawal. (Here is a script for calling Senators. )

Then – this is important – we want you to report your results on this website — what did the office say? – using the comments section for this blog, so people around the country can see who has taken a stand and who has not.Tell us if these Members of Congress have taken a stand against sending more U.S. troops. Click on the comment link to add your reportback. If the Congressional office directs you to a website or press clips that documents the Representative’s position, or you come across such links, please post the URLs in your reportbacks.

The groups organizing this project want to end the war. But the first step to ending the war is not to deepen it. If McChrystal’s request is approved, it will likely lengthen the war by many years. Thank you for participating! Please spread the word by spreading this URL: http://noescalation.org!

Watch the 26 minute documentary online "Afghan Marshall Plan: Winning With Jobs Not Guns"

With no photographs or videocameras allowed due to strict security measures, RAWA representative "Soya" of one of the leading women's humanitarian organizations in Afghanistan told a Boston audience that even within a thousand feet of the presidential palace in Kabul, children are starving.  This is the taboo topic for the media, because it reveals the big lie behind media coverage of the insurgency, the idea that it is based on anything but economic desperation.  There is 40% unemployment, the Taliban pays $8 a day, and it's the only job in town.  People hate the Taliban.  They cut off heads and hands.  But when your kids are starving you take what work is available.  

Now that Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize, we might reflect on who else has won that prize: George C. Marshall, author of the Marshall Plan which saved Europeans from starvation after World War II, and prevented some Western European nations from falling into the hands of communist militants and parties which were making rapid gains amid the economic chaos.  

At large events "Soya" speaks behind sunglasses and a scarf up to her nose, to protect her identity.  Both her parents were killed by the Taliban, as was her predecessor in her job, which is coordinator for this group which builds orphanages, wells, schools for girls, housing, and clinics across Afghanistan.  She arguably could win the title of Bravest Woman in the World.  All five-feet-one of her.  She works where your enemies mean business when they tell you to stop, yet she continues the work because the children must be fed.

At an anti-war rally the next day Soya thanked some of the soldiers on the stage who are war resisters, refusing to deploy to Afghanistan, for "refusing to kill our children and our people."  It was an amazing moment.  I had the privilege of meeting her up close after her speech, out of disguise, and can report in passing that she is a stunningly beautiful woman.

The idea that it is impossible to get help to these people on the ground because of Afghan corruption is overblown and used as an excuse to ignore the problem, since if you solved the problem a large number of Taliban who fight for the wage would lay down their arms and stop fighting, which is not profitable for the military-industrial complex which Eisenhower warned about.  Soya said don't give us bombs to eat, give us food and a way to rebuild.  Robert Greenwald is circulating a petition calling for a civilian solution to stability.  This is the film-maker who blew the lid off war profiteering in "Iraq for Sale."

There is a solution. Get money to the poorest people in a way which "tunnels" through the corruption, so that they don't have to depend on the Taliban for the $8 a day they pay for insurgent work, and they will turn on the Taliban themselves. The Taliban is hated by most of the population as it ruled only by fear, not any popular consent.

We identified one functional ministry of the Karzai government which has done the work of building more than 25,000 community development councils (CDCs) which work with the villages and the elders on work projects which benefit the communities, not corrupt contractors like Halliburton or Louis Berger Group, or corrupt Afghan warlords. Details are in our White Paper "Stabilizing Afghanistan Through a Cash-for-Work Initiative."

It was humbling and inspiring to be standing next to this tiny woman who faces sudden death in her country on a daily basis because she will not stop what she is doing.  Her message to the American people was: No troop escalation.  Troops out.  Please don't bomb us, help us, the children are starving.  For her speaking tour dates go HERE.  With the support of many American women's organizations, she'll be in Los Angeles this Wednesday, and soon New York, San Francisco, and Providence.

 "There is a low percentage of the total Taliban force who we  would call ideologically driven. We refer to them as Tier 1 people who  believe their ideology, that what they're doing is right. The vast  majority of Taliban fighters are essentially economically  disadvantaged young men." --Col. Tom Collins, PBS Frontline, April 2, 2007,

"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes." -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC (double Medal of Honor) 1935

Starvation in Afghanistan

Contact congress

Watch new film "Afghan Marshall Plan: Winning With Jobs Not Guns" (26 minutes)

With even the Pentagon wondering how Obama will get 40,000 more soldiers to put into Afghanistan, it is critical for the government to prevent the kinds of mass mutinies and defections among soldiers that hastened the end of the Vietnam War.  The burgeoning movement of soldiers refusing to deploy to Afghanistan presents just such a threat, as war-resister coffee houses are opened outside key military installations as Ft. Lewis in Washington and Ft. Hood (the nation's largest military base) in Killeen, Texas.  Now a report has come out of Ft. Lewis that war-resisters may be having Abu Ghraib-like techniques applied to them to discourage other resisters.  

This is not the first Ft.Lewis has been the center of this kind of attention.  Other attorneys have commented on reports of human rights abuses, including the use of female guards to sexually humiliate prisoners. There is also the 2005 case of Michael Levitt, who was chained to a "stress-chair" (with metal frames but not seat) for 109 hours.

Iraq veteran Sgt. Travis Bishop's lawyer says his clients:

have been strip-searched while being possibly filmed...also been watched by female guards during strip searches, while using the restroom and in the showers. The prisoners were denied one in-person visit by counsel and all phone calls with their attorneys have been illegally monitored by guards.

Seth Manzel, a Fort Lewis Stryker Brigade veteran and executive director of G.I. Voice, said:

"These techniques of sexual humiliation are far too similar to those practiced on foreign prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and Bagram in Afghanistan. Is the Army at Fort Lewis using enhanced interrogation techniques to break down American soldiers here at home?"

Bishop has written in a statement:

I am a Patriot. I love my country, but I believe that this particular war is unjust, unconstitutional and a total abuse of our nation's power and influence. And so, in the next few days, I will be speaking with my lawyer, and taking actions that will more than likely result in my discharge from the military, and possible jail time...and I am prepared to live with that. My father said, `Do only what you can live with, because every morning you have to look at your face in the mirror when you shave.  Ten years from now, you'll still be shaving the same face.' If I had deployed to Afghanistan, I don't think I would have been able to look into another mirror again. Pray for me.

For information on the growing war resisters movement, including moving video of an Iraq veteran, witness and participant in atrocities declaring that "I am no longer the monster I once was," go to the site for the new film "Sir! No Sir!"  A hidden history of the Vietnam war resister movement which forced policy makers to abandon a war which could have gone on much longer is revealed.  Also visit CourageToResist.org

CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSMEBERS AND SENATORS HERE, "NO TROOP ESCALATION"

"Sir! No, Sir!" trailer

Codepink co-founder catching a lot of flak for suggesting that all troops out of Afghanistan immediately would lead to a Taliban takeover and bloodbath.  It began with a Christian Science Monitor article in which Medea Benjamin said after a trip to Afghanistan "We have been feeling a sense of fear of the people of the return of the Taliban. So many people are saying that, if the U.S. troops left the country, would collapse. We'd go into civil war.  A palpable sense of fear that is making us start to reconsider that."

Scott Horton followed up with an interview of Medea HERE.

Anything but everyone and everything out of the water NOW is neo-imperialist stooge?  I guess that would have to include Robert Greenwald, who is circulating a petition calling for a civilian solution to stability.  This is the film-maker who blew the lid off war profiteering in "Iraq for Sale."

What's happening here is a long-overdue discussion that goes beyond "troops out now" for the peace movement.  Does troops out now mean everything out now, even humanitarian aid?  EEETS IMPEERIALEEISM, MON!

First, there is no such thing as "troops out now" because even a full withdrawal would take six months to a year, as there are logistics of troop transport, bringing back equipment or just leaving it and burning it (the military-industrial complex loves that one woo hoo! More contracts).  You don't get 60,000 troops into a country overnight.  You don't take them out overnight either.

We take a pre-bombed country, bombed because Ziggy Brzezinski  couldn't wait to arm Islamic extremists to give the Russians "their own Vietnam", then bomb it some more then split. Nice! In the Seventies women were wearing mini-skirts in Kabul.  Brzezinski and US policy fixed all that.

Leave them to work their own problems out now?  With what? They are already starving, have nothing to grow but poppies, their irrigation and canal systems are still trashed with Russian bomb rubble because we haven't helped them clear it, and this winter if we just split thousands of more children will starve and freeze. Prosecute Brzezinski  as a war criminal if we must, but these people don't know or care who made the mess. Only that they are starving, and someone is always bombing them.  When will the world have pity on this country?

There is a solution. Get money to the poorest people in a way which "tunnels" through the corruption, so that they don't have to depend on the Taliban for the $8 a day they pay for insurgent work, and they will turn on the Taliban themselves. The Taliban is hated by most of the population as it ruled only by fear, not any popular consent.

We identified one functional ministry of the Karzai government which has done the work of building more than 25,000 community development councils (CDCs) which work with the villages and the elders on work projects which benefit the communities, not corrupt foreign contractors like Loius Berger or corrupt Afghan warlords. Details are in our White Paper "Stabilizing Afghanistan Through a Cash-for-Work Initiative."

Everyone knows it's an imperial war; everyone knows we should get out. How do we do this without making the people pay who ALWAYS pay? Dirt poor Afghans. Even when the Russians were bombing they did a few good things, like build lots of sturdy apartment buildings you can see all across Kabul and a bread factory that put out a million loaves a week.

The ministry is the MRRD, Ministry for Rural Rehabilitation and Development. Google it and you will see that reviews are positive, that their bureaucrats are generally honest and dedicated, and that they get help to the villages efficiently. It's time to get the poorest people out of the middle of the "Great Game."  We have proposed a "Mini-Marshall Plan" which targets the most desperate Afghans for cash-for-work projects, meaning they get cash into Afghan hands at the end of a day or week of labor, so they can feed their families. We have proposed legislation which diverts funding which would be used for a troop escalation to the MRRD, which has the capacity to implement thousands of small cash-for-work projects across the country, according to what we learned from an extensive round of meetings while we in Kabul this summer.

"An Exit Strategy for Afghanistan"

We want troops out, but if we don't give these people other means of support, the Taliban is the only employer in town. The Taliban originates in the madrassas in Pakistan backed by the ISI. Imperialists are not nice, but neither is the Taliban. It's downright evil that we starve Afghans so they have to work for the Taliban, then bomb them because they are now insurgents. Good for Halliburton, good for Dyncorp and Lockheed. Bad for everyone else on the planet. Public support for the war depends on people not understanding the game the military-industrial complex is playing: making enemies so we can have a war. Calling for all troops and every bit of aid out now plays into the military-industrial complex's game, because the Taliban would take over, given the shambles economy, and that shores up popular support for the war. Showing people that stability can be had without military occupation is what screws up their game.  The profit is in war, not helping people.

We have taken the step of making the following film, which interviews unemployed Afghans, to improve the general public's understanding, and to cause a drop in the polls of support for the war. Please help put it on your community access TV station, instructions HERE.

"Afghan Marshall Plan: Winning With Jobs, Not Guns" (watch online here, 26 minutes)

As we have seen from the continuing Iraq debacle, the politicians don't care what a tiny number of activists alone think.  But the combination of a "surge" in opposition and a drop in public support for the war could be the knock-out blow for the escalation, then onto withdrawal of troops.

Food and shelter for the winter, and cash-for-work projects for poorest Afghans now, implemented within 2 months.  Begin troop withdrawal.  With a little help, Afghans will take care of themselves and the Taliban.  Without help, they die.  Again.

FILM DESCRIPTION: "Afghan Marshall Plan: Winning With Jobs Not
Guns" (filmed in Kabul)

"In the midst of the superheated debate over the course of the war in Afghanistan, two activists and film-makers, one an American, one an Afghan citizen, release this provocative look at the underside of an insurgency. In a country with 40% unemployment, they talk to those whose voices have been missing: ordinary Afghans.  See and hear them up close in the squares where they gather by the thousands looking for work, and struggle to feed their families. Ranked as the fourth poorest nation in the world, many have never even heard of 9/11, nor the Twin Towers.   But someone is always hiring at a good daily wage: the Taliban.  The documentary reveals that an civilian solution to stability would cost but a small fraction of the present occupation.   Troops in Afghanistan are counterproductive. Help for Afghans is not.  (26 minutes)"

Find your public access TV station here:

Send them this link to the film, which can be downloaded in the format required by professional broadcast outlets:
http://www.pegmedia.org/index.php?q=msvr /showall/253/detail

Ralph Lopez is co-founder of Jobs for Afghans

VIEW IT HERE (26 minutes)

Obama's announcement that it will be weeks before he decides on Afghanistan  opens a window for war opponents to build public opinion against the war and troop escalation.  It's as if Obama understands that time is the enemy of the escalation, as Americans across the spectrum ask more and more questions.  A widened war will be disastrous for jobs in the American economy,  as capital is diverted to the war machine.  An Afghan Marshall Plan for stability would cost 1/10 of the cost of military operations, and build security, not insecurity.  

We call hunger and unemployment the underside of the insurgency, but in fact it is the elephant in the room.  The politicians know this, but pretend to be blind and hard-of-hearing, since war is more profitable for a few in the short-run than peace.

The documentary "Afghan Marshall Plan: Winning With Jobs Not Guns" was created to educate the public on why this war has no military solution, in order to cause a collapse of the "floor" of polled support and to force the politicians to abandon escalation plans.  

As we have seen from the continuing Iraq debacle, they don't care what a small number of activists alone think.  But the combination of a "surge" in opposition and a drop in public support for the war could be the knock-out blow for the escalation, then on to withdrawal of troops.

The film is available for free broadcast and distribution at Pegmedia.org, a site for broadcast professionals to download free, high-quality, independently-produced content in a format ready to burn onto DVD.  Dozens of public access TV stations are now airing it.  Please keep this number growing, see how below.

FILM DESCRIPTION: "Afghan Marshall Plan: Winning With Jobs Not Guns" (filmed in Kabul)

"In the midst of the superheated debate over the course of the war in Afghanistan, two independent film-makers, one an American, the other an Afghan citizen, release this provocative look at the underside of an insurgency. In a country with 40% unemployment, they talk to those whose voices have been missing: ordinary Afghans.  See and hear them up close in the squares where they gather by the thousands looking for work, and struggle to feed their families. Ranked as the fourth poorest nation in the world, many have never even heard of 9/11, nor the Twin Towers.   But someone is always hiring at a good daily wage: the Taliban.  The documentary reveals that a civilian solution to stability would cost but a small fraction of the present occupation.   Troops in Afghanistan are counterproductive. Help for Afghans is not.  (26 minutes)"

Email the below to your nearby public access TV station managers, which you can look up here:
Your public access TV station

CUT AND PASTE THE BELOW INTO AN EMAIL TO THE STATION MANAGERS.  THEY CAN DO THE REST.  ONCE YOU HAVE RUN DATES AND AIR TIMES, SEND AN ANNOUNCEMENT TO YOUR LOCAL NEWSPAPER TO PUBLICIZE.  ADD WATER. STIR.  DONE.  YOU HAVE HELPED STOP A WAR.
-------------------------------
Hi,
I would like to request that you broadcast the timely community-produced documentary, "Afghan Marshall Plan: Winning With Jobs Not Guns" which was filmed in Kabul this summer (26 minutes.)  It is easily downloadable at Pegmedia.org , the site for public access TV managers to find quality, community-produced content (free, in mpeg2 format ready to burn to DVD.)   Please contact me with the run-times and dates if you can run this as a community service.

Thank you!
(YOUR NAME)
Community Television Fan

FILM CONTENT DESCRIPTION: "Afghan Marshall Plan: Winning With Jobs Not
Guns" (filmed in Kabul)

"In the midst of the superheated debate over the course of the war in Afghanistan, two independent film-makers, one an American, the other an Afghan citizen, release this provocative look at the underside of an insurgency. In a country with 40% unemployment, they talk to those whose voices have been missing: ordinary Afghans.  See and hear them up close in the squares where they gather by the thousands looking for work, and struggle to feed their families. Ranked as the fourth poorest nation in the world, many have never even heard of 9/11, nor the Twin Towers.   But someone is always hiring at a good daily wage: the Taliban.  The documentary reveals that an civilian solution to stability would cost but a small fraction of the present occupation.   Troops in Afghanistan are counterproductive. Help for Afghans is not.  (26 minutes)"

LINK TO PEGMEDIA DOWNLOAD PAGE FOR STATION MANAGERS (MPEG2 file)
"Afghan Marshall Plan: Winning With Jobs Not Guns":
http://pegmedia.org/index.php?q=msvr/showal l/253/detail

LINK TO DOCUMENTARY FOR ONLINE VIEWING BEFORE DOWNLOADING (compressed MP4)
www.ralphlopezworld.com/pbs.mp4

MORE BACKGROUND LINKS ON SUBJECT:

LINK TO BOSTON GLOBE/BALTIMORE SUN OP-ED "We Can Win With Jobs Not
Guns in Afghanistan"
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.afghanistan16aug16,0,4671831.story

LINK TO "An Exit Strategy for Afghanistan" by Ralph Lopez
http://jobsforafghans.org/exitstrategy.html

LINK TO FILM WEBSITE:
http://jobsforafghans.org

LINK TO PRINTABLE PUBLICITY POSTER (FOR COMMUNITY LIBRARY BULLETIN BOARDS ETC.)
http://jobsforafghans.org/poster.pdf

A 9/11 anniversary op-ed in the Miami Herald.  I want to see the right-wing wackos call these two retired generals, one a former Marine Corp commandant and the other former CENTCOM commander-in-chief, libtards who don't get that "we're up against terr'ists you fucking morons!" - in their inimitable charming manner of debate.  To their faces.  The little right-wing twerps would get their necks wrung.

Charles C. Krulak was commandant of the Marine Corps from 1995 to 1999. Joseph P. Hoar was commander in chief of U.S. Central Command from 1991 to 1994.

MIAMI HERALD: Fear was no excuse to condone torture

In the fear that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Americans were told that defeating Al Qaeda would require us to ``take off the gloves.'' As a former commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps and a retired commander-in-chief of U.S. Central Command, we knew that was a recipe for disaster.

But we never imagined that we would feel duty-bound to publicly denounce a vice president of the United States,

a man who has served our country for many years. In light of the irresponsible statements recently made by former Vice President Dick Cheney, however, we feel we must repudiate his dangerous ideas -- and his scare tactics.

Cheney insisted the abusive techniques were ``absolutely essential in saving thousands of American lives and preventing further attacks against the United States.'' He claimed they were ``directly responsible for the fact that for eight years, we had no further mass casualty attacks against the United States. It was good policy . . . It worked very, very well.''

Repeating these assertions doesn't make them true.

On this solemn day we pause to remember those who lost their lives on 9/11. As our leaders work to prevent terrorists from again striking on our soil, they should remember the fundamental precept of counterinsurgency we've relearned in Afghanistan and Iraq: Undermine the enemy's legitimacy while building our own. These wars will not be won on the battlefield. They will be won in the hearts of young men who decide not to sign up to be fighters and young women who decline to be suicide bombers.