FRN NEWSLETTER

1359 Chandler Ave., Lincoln Park, MI. USA,48146-2009

Office: 313.294.0579, Blackberry: 734.775.2267, E-mail: chrisdardzinski@yahoo.com

Contact: Christopher J. Dardzinski , Publisher & Political Analyst

WE Invite ALL to visit our website: www.freewebs.com/frnnewsletter/

“ If you are reading this, then you are the movement ! “

11.01.2009

“Words from the Several States” The Movement, 8^th inning stretch

Sorry folks, extended intermission before FRN Newsletter dives into the dark reality of a growing global government infrastructure.

note

• *I want to start this foreign policy movement writing by saying our president is not well served by his two principle advisors, Rom Emanuele and David Axelrod. Neither man believes in the whole picture. Neither man sees the awesome need to serve the office of the president in thoughtful forward thinking context. This is dangerous and America will suffer greatly at the hands of these two advisors. In a word, they are both reckless. There I said and I'm glad I did. * *

“Marginal Value”

Those were the descriptive words the Obama administration used for Afghanistan. We will now have a lengthy look at the truth and desperation that is this western Asian nation.

A word of continuing advise to the Obama administration, no nation on this planet should be assigned the term “marginal value.” I'll bet you ten bucks the DNC came up with that term and gave it to Robert Gibbs to spew out at the press briefing. . .

Lets break it down, the way only FRN can:

• This area of the middle east and western Asia is a region of tribes, clans, war lords and despots. Many centuries has seen this region controlled by Tribal governments, extended clan families, war lords controlling provinces or “nation states” and empires now gone. Before World War One, this region had very little use for actual borders. A leader was regaled as much for charisma as his ability to ride a horse. The romantic-historical part of my brain doesn't find all of this bad. I grow weary of powerful nations inflicting border lines and puppet governments on sovereign people, anywhere in the world. Which means all of you can expect another column soon, on Afghanistan's sister country in suffrage, Kurdistan.

• Afghanistan is poor. I mentioned that recently. More than poor, Afghanistan has very few natural resources. The only thing it has going for it, is geography. Huge sections of this nation are rugged, mountains, and wasteland. It is their location between their collective neighbors, that gives them value. Also copper deposits, which I will touch on.

• It all started in 1978 when then national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, went to the CIA with an idea. Brzezinski suggested funneling radical/fanatic Muslims into Afghanistan, to destabilize their government. At this point their government was a very weak Democratic republic. One wonders why a U.S. National Security Advisor would want a democratic form of government, though weak, to be destabilized. Brzezinski's idea was to give the USSR a reason to invade Afghanistan, as the Soviet Union was hoping to buffer their southern provinces and push further south for deep warm water ports. Brzezinski and the CIA were hoping the Soviets would get bogged down in a guerrilla war that they were not properly trained to fight. It worked very well.

• Though I warn you now, be careful the monster you create. These Muslim fanatics started off just protesting the current Afghan government, but when the Islamic fundamentalists took power, they hated America as much as the Russians. It all started with the CIA setting up safe houses for the Islamic-Muslim fanatics inside Afghanistan. It should be pointed out that a very disgruntled son of a wealthy Saudi family ran one of the safe houses. A very young and already fanatic Osama Bin-Laden. I firmly believe from studying and researching Bin-Laden that it would not have mattered where he started his fanatic road to destruction, he would've become the man he is; evil, insane and deeply hateful of America. The Islamic fundamentalist government that took power in '79 would eventually become a Soviet backed communist government. The collapse of the USSR would see more radical elements take power. From 1992 to the rise of the Taliban, warlords and tribal leaders fought endlessly across impoverished Afghanistan. This constant warfare makes for a very unhappy sovereign people, would you not agree?

• A quick side fact here, at this point Afghanistan had about 10 million land mines inside its borders. Think about that.

• Rise of the Taliban. There was no Pastun representation in Kabul, and this gave birth to the Taliban. Over 2 million refugees growing up in camps. Coming mainly from Pakistani educated Madrases. The Taliban was only recognized by three nations around the world, as a legitimate government of Afghanistan.

• Another quick note here on how poor this nation is. Afghanistan has minerals, including copper. China is currently putting in a bid to mine and transport copper back to China. China does share a common 46 mile border with Afghanistan, along the Walkeinn mountain region. China would bring in many sub-contractors, so much of the mining and railroad transport would fall to foreign workers, not citizens.

• Recent stories on network news have said that America has only been doing actual fighting in Afghanistan for 1 year. Wrong! The U.S. Has been fighting or supporting fighters for over 31 years.

So over a 32 year period, the United States, USSR, China, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, North Korea, Britain and the united nations, have been the top tier influential outside forces involved in Afghanistan politics. Deeply and intimately connected at all levels.

Assignment of value. The U.S. Certainly assigned “value” when we wanted to see the Soviets bogged down 30 years ago. We continued to finance elements of either the resistance or one of the governments for the last 30 years. Then when the Taliban gave safe haven to Al-Qaida, we did nothing. Then Al-Qaida hit us, and Afghanistan again had value to us, so we helped the Northern Alliance kick out the Taliban.

So Mr. President, we have been assigning value to this war torn nation for three solid decades.

Mark my words America, as of this moment, the President wants to make a non-decision. He is hoping the Pakistan military, involved in an offensive against the Taliban and Al-Qaida will be very successful. Allowing Pakistan to do the heavy lifting and “hard work” that he is to weak and indecisive to do. Also if the president sends in as many troops as the good general wants, then he sees our military presence in Afghanistan being very visible during the 2012 election cycle.

Yet again, here we are, another president incapable of making decisions and sticking to a policy.

But I digress.

You see Iraq has intrinsic value, because it sits on the middle east's second largest oil reserves. This matters since Saudi Arabian production costs are now at $20 per barrel of crude, Iraq is only at $6.50 per barrel.

We assigned value to Afghanistan when we wanted to bog down the Soviets in an expensive war, and now the current president wants to forget the ravaged and raped nation that we helped to create.

The only southern and eastern border Afghanistan has, is on a map. Routinely, Taliban and Al-Qaida elements move across the border, hitting targets at a whim.

President Obama wants to concentrate forces on the populous cities.

Thats a good idea, but it doesn't matter if the nation doesn't have secure borders.

Get ready I'm going to use the most hated word in all of politics, the one word that scares politicians the most. The “L” word, LEADERSHIP.

I would argue, with 31 years of records, data and information to back up my argument, that our overall policy towards Afghanistan is usury and failed. Usury on a desperate scaled, and failed beyond recognition of any policy cohesion.

We are not alone, the Soviets raped the country and left it for dead, as well as other nations who tried to influence the Afghan political structure.

This is one of those moments where a real leader steps forward and says “no more.” Then decides to right any wrongs and do it with humility and straight forward action.

It is hard work for a president, but it is presidential work alone.

Is former President George W. Bush partially to blame, definitely. Advisors gave him recommendations which sat on his desk for eight months before the November 2008 elections.

Why? The same old reason, he didn't want to make a military decision that would hurt Domestic political policy and the Republican party's chance to keep the White House. Thats my theory, and President Clinton made the same type of decision by not going after Al-Qaida eleven months before the November 2000 elections. What a lack of leadership, it makes me sick.

Allowing Al-Qaida and Taliban forces and fanatics a foothold in the Afghanistan and Pakistan border region, is a clear and present danger to the security of the United States. I choose my words precisely here.

I don't care if troop build-up spills over into daily headlines during the 2010 and 2012 election cycles. I just don't care how the media chooses to spin it or not spin it.

I don't care.

Time for leadership Mr. President, the indecisions of your predecessors DOES NOT MATTER, it is now your responsibility. Secure that border and eliminate Afghanistan as a host country for Al-Qaida and the Taliban. It is proper, practical and necessary foreign policy.

I was going to end the movement writing at this point, but it is Sunday night and I rarely write on Sunday nights.

I fear being mis-understood at this critical point of my foreign policy thinking. I don't think at all, that the Afghan borders need to be defined and secured because America has somehow “abused” the nation over the last 31 years. I'll leave that level of thinking and criticism to college professors. You see, abusive, is a very heavy descriptive word. As the President's press secretary said, Afghanistan only has marginal value.

I am currently starting the beginning work on outlining a new political book, which I am loosely calling “Brutal Honesty.” To be brutally honest here, all nations use and abuse other nations through foreign policy. Other nations also benefit greatly by “allowing” themselves to be abused for a certain period. This may or may not be the case with the United States and Afghanistan, it really is not my place here, or my goal, to say.

We are in a period here in modern human history, where we have general lousy leadership and lack of leadership throughout all the world. The world has mostly self-centered, petty and weak leaders.

I think we need to accept that is where we are, before we can plot a course for changing it. We also need to accept that while we are changing it, the world will suffer even greater set backs. This being due to the fact that all the bad policies and “non-decisions” of lousy leaders will still be filtering across the globe.

This is my greater point and honest “political hope” for President Obama, that he will see the practical clear and present danger of a non-defined and porous Afghan border. See the need to protect America, by securing that border with Pakistan.

It could be the one shining foreign policy star of his Administration. It could easily take the next three years and all his ground work could see the credit given to the president after him. A responsible president is fine with this and does not seek credit for administrating the office in a way that bears fruit after his tenure.

But I am a practical political analyst and realistic economist.

I know President Obama will follow in the foot steps of five presidents before him and make a 80% non-decision on Afghanistan.

Then the world will suffer even more general darkness from yet another lousy leader only interested in padding his life's resume.

If that brutal honesty is more than some can digest, then remember it is Sunday night and I generally don't lay down additional thought at this time.

I am also listening to music right now, which I never do when framing a column in first draft.

For those that it may be of matter, I'm listening to “Passion” by Peter Gabriel, which would become the soundtrack for Martin Scorsese's movie “The Last Temptation of Christ.” A novel by a Russian author, adapted by a Catholic film director. Sort of complicated movie and soundtrack making. Though I feel after 20 years of listening to it, that the music has a real bounty and “spiritual honesty” to it.

Again, for those that care, that is the sub-text of where my thoughts are.

Foreign policy is at the very least hard work. Strong leadership is a needful premise.

If you are reading this, then you are the movement.

“Post Script Muse”

We're going to try something here. I made a new friend this week and she recommended posing a question, for the American readership. So this is what I'm going to do, offer up a weekly question, either on topic or whatever flows from my brain.

If you feel like responding please do. If you want your response published on the FRN website, please indicate as such.

So lets jazz it up: What should be the State department's responsibilities to the Kabul government, while NATO and U.S. Troops secure the countryside?