• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Millions in CIA "ghost money" paid to Afghan president's office: New York Times

And Karzi is now calling for us to get the **** out of his country...
 
TheDemSocialist said:
And Karzi is now calling for us to get the **** out of his country...
Click to expand...

Which we should gladly do, and should have done more than a handful of years ago.

The longer we stay, the more foolish we look, and that's quite a task obviously. Looking more foolish that is.
 
Middleground said:
Yup. Millions of dollars of cold hard American cash have disappeared out of thin air--and still remain unaccounted for--but to the partisans and uninformed, it's so much more fun whining about American welfare recipients!
Click to expand...

Why do we have to choose? I'll continue to bitch about both thank you.
 
The Prof said:
how many of you actually read this article before commenting?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/29/w...-to-afghan-leaders-office.html?pagewanted=all

if so, you'd have witnessed the plastic shopping bags, stuffed with hundreds of thousands, even millions of dollars of graft

who got more, karzai or the claimants against barack obama's usda?

either way, it's THE MIDDLE CLASS stuck with the grocery tab

the bribes only "fueled corruption and empowered the warlords"

all while "undermining washington's exit strategy"

karzai plays both ends, leverages ours vs iranian payola and vice versa---except the iranians are more "transparent"

we're not quite getting what we pay for---how many green vs blue assassinations have seen our soldiers murdered by our "allies" over there

in many cases, the money goes directly to the taliban

"govt in the grips of what are basically organized crime syndicates"

"the cash does not appear to be subject to the oversight and restrictions placed on official american aid to the country or even the cia’s formal assistance program"

abdul rashid dostum, warlord, drug dealer and militia leader---$80,000 per month

"i asked for a year up front in cash so i could build my dream house"

we spend billions in foreign aid, we staff offices of professionals who work diplomatic channels trying to clean up corruption...

we're at cross purposes, laments the lady

karzai's administrative chief of his national security council, mr mohammed zia salehi---arrested in 2010 after an fbi investigation into cash smuggling

"karzai had him released within hours, and the cia then helped persuade the obama administration to back off its anti corruption push, american officials said"

salehi jokes---i'm an enemy of the fbi and hero of the cia

the lady---she may be slut and a bitch and a lush and a slob... but she still tells a heck of a story
Click to expand...

Let me see if I have this straight, we give money to Karzai who in turn pays off the Taliban who, in turn, kill our troops and contractors, etc. So basically we are funding not only OUR side of this war, but the opposition's side as well. :lamo Good God, could it get any more ironic?
 
DiAnna said:
After over a decade, it amazes me that two administrations were unable to see what the average Joe on the street knew within the first year of the war... that Karzai was a corrupt, unqualified narcissist with zero leadership/administrative skills and an insatiable appetite for both power and money. What a massive cluster**** Afghanistan has been, initially implemented in haste without a clear goal or exit strategy, which has left the country in more disarray, with more power in Taliban hands now than when we first arrived.

America may have the most powerful military on the planet, but that doesn't do much when it is controlled by a pack of fools with an agenda, and that is exactly what happened in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Click to expand...

There were too many factions after the fall of the Taliban, and he seemed to be someone people would believe in. Once he was there, what were we suppose to do? The guy is obviously a putz. Just imagine if the Taliban had complied, and handed over bin Laden. They'd still be in power beating women and making them wear burqas.
 
apdst said:
Yeah, the Taliban did SUCH a great job! Look how they took the millions of, "hard cold American cash", from Clinton. Awesome!!!!
Click to expand...

I am not backing the Taliban. As I have stated in the past, the U.S. should have worked to develop a government built around the country's tribal leaders with a weaker central government tasked with truly national issues consistent with Afghanistan's historical and structural realities. The suboptimal outcome in Afghanistan is, in large part, the result of a framework that is inconsistent with those realities.
 
it's way past time to get out of Afghanistan.
 
donsutherland1 said:
I am not backing the Taliban. As I have stated in the past, the U.S. should have worked to develop a government built around the country's tribal leaders with a weaker central government tasked with truly national issues consistent with Afghanistan's historical and structural realities. The suboptimal outcome in Afghanistan is, in large part, the result of a framework that is inconsistent with those realities.
Click to expand...

The tribal leaders weren't getting along.
 
American said:
The tribal leaders weren't getting along.
Click to expand...

They were not in a civil war or anything close to it. A framework that would have yielded sufficient authority with a weaker central government would have been feasible. Moreover, the northern tribes who played an instrumental role in the war should have been given a role commensurate with their contributions. They weren't. The end result will be a country that is not fully stable, lacks perceived legitimacy among a signficant part of Afghanistan's population and therefore faces a continuing risk of insurgency, and is not a reliable American partner once the U.S. largely withdraws in 2014. That outcome will not be the result of largely uncontrollable factors. The Taliban will have played some role, but the choices that were made in building/supporting the Karzai regime will also have played an important part. The U.S. had a chance to shift course during President Obama's first strategic review and had received repeated warnings from Amb. Eikenberry about the nature of Karzai's regime. It chose to pass up that opportunity.
 
donsutherland1 said:
They were not in a civil war or anything close to it. A framework that would have yielded sufficient authority with a weaker central government would have been feasible. Moreover, the northern tribes who played an instrumental role in the war should have been given a role commensurate with their contributions. They weren't. The end result will be a country that is not fully stable, lacks perceived legitimacy among a signficant part of Afghanistan's population and therefore faces a continuing risk of insurgency, and is not a reliable American partner once the U.S. largely withdraws in 2014. That outcome will not be the result of largely uncontrollable factors. The Taliban will have played some role, but the choices that were made in building/supporting the Karzai regime will also have played an important part. The U.S. had a chance to shift course during President Obama's first strategic review and had received repeated warnings from Amb. Eikenberry about the nature of Karzai's regime. It chose to pass up that opportunity.
Click to expand...

I don't think one can overlook or minimize the "Opium" money. When we invaded Afghanistan the country was producing 290 tons of opium annually and now that we have been in charge for ten years Afghanistan is producing aboout 9000 tons of opium annually. That's an industry that we have obviously encouraged to thrive in Afghanistan. Perhaps we are not such a desirable overseer as our overlords like to imply. Corrupt and crooked at every level and we breed the same virtues or lack thereof into our surrogates, becausse it's good for somebody's business. Perhaps it's because the CIA works for USA "Corporations" overseas. Don't you think. I would not bless any activities we are engaging in overseas with those platitudes that we are spreading liberty, freedom and democracy until we 'fess up to torture, rendition, Guantanamo, and all the seedy truth underneath. We are simply not the good guys among a bunch of bad guys. We are just another bad guy.
 
DaveFagan said:
I don't think one can overlook or minimize the "Opium" money. When we invaded Afghanistan the country was producing 290 tons of opium annually and now that we have been in charge for ten years Afghanistan is producing aboout 9000 tons of opium annually. That's an industry that we have obviously encouraged to thrive in Afghanistan. Perhaps we are not such a desirable overseer as our overlords like to imply. Corrupt and crooked at every level and we breed the same virtues or lack thereof into our surrogates, becausse it's good for somebody's business. Perhaps it's because the CIA works for USA "Corporations" overseas. Don't you think. I would not bless any activities we are engaging in overseas with those platitudes that we are spreading liberty, freedom and democracy until we 'fess up to torture, rendition, Guantanamo, and all the seedy truth underneath. We are simply not the good guys among a bunch of bad guys. We are just another bad guy.
Click to expand...

Well, there isn't too much they can do over there to make money apparently, so it's either opium or being paid by terrorist groups to aid them. Pick your poison.
 
Middleground said:
Yup. Millions of dollars of cold hard American cash have disappeared out of thin air--and still remain unaccounted for--but to the partisans and uninformed, it's so much more fun whining about American welfare recipients!
Click to expand...


So you can't have a problem with both?
 
donsutherland1 said:
The Karzai-centric strategy pursued under both the Bush and Obama Administrations has been more akin to a disaster than a success. Karzai has been an erratic and unreliable leader. He is a big reason why Afghanistan remains at risk of conflict and substantial strife once the U.S. largely withdraws in 2014.

In that context, these money transfers are not surprising. IMO, Congress should close the kind of legal loopholes that make such money transfers possible.
Click to expand...

Great idea, but impossible. Remember that CIA is the world's largest drug running group, and has been for decades. McCoy was writing about it in the 70's.

They have more "off the books" cash than you can shake a stick at.
 
DaveFagan said:
I don't think one can overlook or minimize the "Opium" money. When we invaded Afghanistan the country was producing 290 tons of opium annually and now that we have been in charge for ten years Afghanistan is producing aboout 9000 tons of opium annually. That's an industry that we have obviously encouraged to thrive in Afghanistan. Perhaps we are not such a desirable overseer as our overlords like to imply. Corrupt and crooked at every level and we breed the same virtues or lack thereof into our surrogates, becausse it's good for somebody's business. Perhaps it's because the CIA works for USA "Corporations" overseas. Don't you think. I would not bless any activities we are engaging in overseas with those platitudes that we are spreading liberty, freedom and democracy until we 'fess up to torture, rendition, Guantanamo, and all the seedy truth underneath. We are simply not the good guys among a bunch of bad guys. We are just another bad guy.
Click to expand...

Not quite accurate Dave. In April 2001 Colin Powell hand-delivered a US government check for 40 some odd million dollars to the Taliban. Big photo op. The reward was for the astounding success the Taliban had in virtually eliminating all poppy production in the country, by way of strict enforcement of Sharia Law.

Some of the more cynical amongst us theorize that one of the reasons for invading Afghanistan was so that the Agency could get production back up to what it had once been, and thereby reap the enormous profits.

So by the time we actually invaded, the country's production of poppies was almost nonexistent.
 
DiAnna said:
After over a decade, it amazes me that two administrations were unable to see what the average Joe on the street knew within the first year of the war... that Karzai was a corrupt, unqualified narcissist with zero leadership/administrative skills and an insatiable appetite for both power and money. What a massive cluster**** Afghanistan has been, initially implemented in haste without a clear goal or exit strategy, which has left the country in more disarray, with more power in Taliban hands now than when we first arrived..
Click to expand...

Wouldnt they have picked up on that while giving him the money?
 
jmotivator said:
So you can't have a problem with both?
Click to expand...

ChrisL said:
Why do we have to choose? I'll continue to bitch about both thank you.
Click to expand...


My point was lost on you both. It's not that both situations are not wrong, it's just people here go nuts over the most insignificant things while mostly ignoring bigger, more important things.

Want an example?

Take this thread I started a few years back. Over $6.6 billion dollars of hard-earned American taxpayer dollars were most likely stolen in 2003-04, yet it only garnered 25 replies, and some even went as far as to chime in and say they didn't give a rat's behind.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...-money-may-have-been-stolen-auditors-say.html


Now here are a few threads of food stamp misuse:

Soda-buying with food stamps, Replies: 783
Getting Fat on Food Stamps, Replies: 376
Food stamps are crazy..., Replies: 474

See what I am saying? There are much bigger fish to fry, yet nothing gets this forum into a bigger frenzy than a food stamp recipient buying soda pop. :roll:
I don't get it.
 
Middleground said:
My point was lost on you both. It's not that both situations are not wrong, it's just people here go nuts over the most insignificant things while mostly ignoring bigger, more important things.

Want an example?

Take this thread I started a few years back. Over $6.6 billion dollars of hard-earned American taxpayer dollars were most likely stolen in 2003-04, yet it only garnered 25 replies, and some even went as far as to chime in and say they didn't give a rat's behind.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...-money-may-have-been-stolen-auditors-say.html


Now here are a few threads of food stamp misuse:

Soda-buying with food stamps, Replies: 783
Getting Fat on Food Stamps, Replies: 376
Food stamps are crazy..., Replies: 474

See what I am saying? There are much bigger fish to fry, yet nothing gets this forum into a bigger frenzy than a food stamp recipient buying soda pop. :roll:
I don't get it.
Click to expand...

I think it's totally normal for people to be more concerned with domestic policy, don't you? I mean, most people are more familiar with what is happening in their own back yards, so I don't know what you're complaining about really.
 
ChrisL said:
I think it's totally normal for people to be more concerned with domestic policy, don't you? I mean, most people are more familiar with what is happening in their own back yards, so I don't know what you're complaining about really.
Click to expand...

You're so right. No one gives a **** about Iran, Iraq, Israel or any other foreign country. It's all about welfare bums drinking ****ing soda on tax payer's dime, gosh darned it. :roll:
 
Middleground said:
You're so right. No one gives a **** about Iran, Iraq, Israel or any other foreign country. It's all about welfare bums drinking ****ing soda on tax payer's dime, gosh darned it. :roll:
Click to expand...

Did I say that? Why don't you chill out a bit. Let me restate that for you. It's natural for people to be MORE concerned with domestic policy and what is going in their own back yards.
 
ChrisL said:
Well, there isn't too much they can do over there to make money apparently, so it's either opium or being paid by terrorist groups to aid them. Pick your poison.
Click to expand...

I see. So you agree that the USA is in the drug business in Afghanistan and it is our policy. That'd be yours and mine, among others. Howcum I didn't get a vote on that and why aren't the politicians braffin' it up?
 
ChrisL said:
Well, there isn't too much they can do over there to make money apparently, so it's either opium or being paid by terrorist groups to aid them. Pick your poison.
Click to expand...

I see. So you agree that the USA is in the drug business in Afghanistan and it is our policy. That'd be yours and mine, among others. Howcum I didn't get a vote on that and why aren't the politicians braggin' it up?
 
DaveFagan said:
I see. So you agree that the USA is in the drug business in Afghanistan and it is our policy. That'd be yours and mine, among others. Howcum I didn't get a vote on that and why aren't the politicians braffin' it up?
Click to expand...

The USA is working with what it has to work with. Not every situation is going to be ideal. It's a backwards ass country, what would you expect? What would you suggest? And what is "braffin"? :confused:
 
Middleground said:
I have posted a few threads about the lost cash in Iraq and few cared to respond. Millions of missing dollars disappear out of thin air, yet few gave a rat's ass. Yet someone here posts something about food stamps being used for potato chips, and by golly, 85 pages into it, the flaming partisans still have their panties all knotted up.
Click to expand...

I believe their is a difference. I suspect that a lot of the CIA's shadow money is probably never part of our budget or economy, they simply print off money to hand out unbeknown to most. On the other hand government programs that are part of the budget have larger impact on the taxpayers. Don't get me wrong I am against government payouts to anyone. I just don't think the two are the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom