Lindsey Graham calls for permanent US military presence in Afghanistan

www.rawstory.com...

The US military will never leave Afghanistan if Sen. Lindsey Graham has his way.

The Republican senator from South Carolina expressed his hope Sunday that the country would invite the US to install permanent military bases.

"I hope that we can find an enduring relationship with Afghanistan that will make sure that country never goes back into the hands of terrorists," Graham told NBC's David Gregory. "The idea of putting permanent military bases on the table in 2011, I think, would secure our national interests and tell the bad guys and the good guy we're not leaving, we are staying."

I think that Sen. Graham will get his wish. US forces will never leave the mid East and in fact will expand into Pakistan, Syria, Lebanon and eventually Iran. Israel wants our occupation in these countries and what Israel wants, Israel gets. Some will construe this as antisemitic but in fact it's just global politics.

How does everyone sneak Israel into every thread and paint them as some sort of puppet master?

How about people take responsibility for their own.

Graham is an American.

Team America, World Police. Whoot.

So...WE are the NWO then. Great!


(nsfw lyrics)

reply to post by Kargun

How does everyone sneak Israel into every thread and paint them as some sort of puppet master?
Graham is an American.

Senator Lindsey Graham At AIPAC; No Political Parties in Congress We're all Israeli Firsters
In a shocking display of anti-American Israeli firstism, Graham says that parties make no difference in Congress. For he implies their alliance is first to Israel, and not to America. All out calls for Nuclear war with Iran; disregards the horrible consequences for people in these the United States.

I hope this clears up that question.

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by Kargun

Senator Lindsey Graham At AIPAC; No Political Parties in Congress We're all Israeli Firsters
In a shocking display of anti-American Israeli firstism, Graham says that parties make no difference in Congress. For he implies their alliance is first to Israel, and not to America. All out calls for Nuclear war with Iran; disregards the horrible consequences for people in these the United States.[/url]
I hope this clears up that question.

If that's true, that is bleeping ridiculous. But on an obvious note, the U.S. has bases all over the world, in dangerous spots too. This is not surprising at all.

edit on 3-1-2011 by DevilJin because: no reason

Originally posted by Kargun
How does everyone sneak Israel into every thread and paint them as some sort of puppet master?

How about people take responsibility for their own.

Graham is an American.

Perhaps this is the reason....

en.wikipedia.org...

Puppet master? Goofy hyperbole.....You can't possibly deny their influence!

Permanent bases? In these times?

Even without going into the moral implications, think of the economic costs. It's only benefitting his corporatist and facists partners.

In another time and another age, his head would be cut off for all generations to spit on. Who voted for this guy and how much was paid under table???

Permanent bases or something a little more subtle, America isn't going to leave political structures in place that they are not able to manipulate as always.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

Permanent bases? In these times?

Even without going into the moral implications, think of the economic costs. It's only benefitting his corporatist and facists partners.

Ever since the Clinton Era U.S. strategy has been, "US will maintain its status as one and only world super-power, at any cost". The tactic has been to determine for each country who gets to be friendly nations. By permanently basing in Afghanistan, the U.S. gets to decide that Iran doesn't get to pipe oil and gas to Pakistan. Thus preventing Iran, Pakistan, and India from being trading partners.

Moral standing is tarnished, of course, and economic costs are crippling the U.S. I doubt that the U.S. will change its "One and only super-power" strategy until total bankruptcy forces a re-evaluation.

reply to post by pthena


Yes but his comment are his own. If you look close enough you can say that Canada controls all the US senators as well! Or how about Obama's Nafta lies?

We're so busy policing the world that there's not enough soldiers left to protect our own borders; we don't need another military outpost.

Exactly why this RINO is a HUGE target in his next election cycle. He will not make it past the primaries.

Not all the RINO's were shot down the last election either. Folks like McCain and Marxkowski made it through.

I guess folks actually believed McCain when he said he changed. I have not seen him change back yet, but people are keeping an eye on everything he does.

2012 will be like shooting fish in a barrel. Of the senate seats coming up, about 2/3 of them are Democrats. I still think even though some seats were not won, I believe the best choice was conservatives over RINO's.

With RINO's, they vote the other way and then the conservative base is attacked by the Democrats for actions of RINO's. Look at what happened to the conservatives after Bush.

reply to post by whaaa


It's nothing against the Jewish people to point out the dirty deeds of the Zionists just as it's nothing against the American people to point out the dirty deeds of the CIA. The concept of antisemitism is only used to keep people from looking at the truth. Watch this film to see how involved they were in 9/11 and you'll get the point.

www.911missinglinks.com...

reply to post by pthena


Agree with your assessment regarding the moral and economic standing of the US dropping as a result of the current Afghanistan campaign. However, in regards to your first paragraph, this part in particular:

By permanently basing in Afghanistan, the U.S. gets to decide that Iran doesn't get to pipe oil and gas to Pakistan. Thus preventing Iran, Pakistan, and India from being trading partners.

I can't help but notice that Iran has a border with Pakistan already therefore, how could a US base in Afghanistan affect a pipeline that does not necessarily have to go through Afghanistan? Wouldn't the Iranians just, you know, go around Afghanistan and say "screw you" to the US?

I say that Rhinocerous season will coincide with every future election.

Got me some ammo, do you?

reply to post by BiggyMcBigPants

I can't help but notice that Iran has a border with Pakistan already therefore, how could a US base in Afghanistan affect a pipeline that does not necessarily have to go through Afghanistan? Wouldn't the Iranians just, you know, go around Afghanistan and say "screw you" to the US?

Pakistan, over the course of U.S. occupation of Afghanistan, has been trying to keep U.S. out of Baluchistan province, which is where Iran and Pakistan share a border. U.S. keeps pushing though. The Pakistan coalition government is breaking up. If a less friendly to U.S. coalition forms, we just may see an all-out US invasion of Pakistan.

Honestly, we need to pull out of places like Iraq and Afganistan, close our own borders, let the rest of the world defend themselves
Noone wants our intervention, thats fine, lets pull out of everywhere

reply to post by Kargun

Yes but his comment are his own. If you look close enough you can say that Canada controls all the US senators as well! Or how about Obama's Nafta lies?

That article I linked to has a video clip. Toward the beginning Graham asks all the US senators and congressmen to stand up. There are a lot in that AIPAC meeting. They at least want to appear to agree with Graham.

International appearances get convoluted sometimes. Back 15 years or so, if the President gave a speech and said "x country is closest US ally" and it wasn't Canada, he had to make a statement like, "Well, it goes without saying that Canada is our closest ally." No one seems to feel that's necessary these days since UK became the great US ally for military invasions.

Graham speaks of US-Israel relation as a "marriage" which is a bit disturbing.

I'm not up on Obama's lies about NAFTA, I'm afraid. I'm more concerned with his shifting the US into permanent war footing actually.

Sen Graham is one of the biggest tools in Congress. He's the epitome of legislators working for every special interest except the American people. I'd like to see him thrown out of office in disgrace.

Why do we need a permanent presence in Afghanistan ?

Rome was one of the greatest ancient civilisation that ever lived.

It would maintain permanent armed garrisons in their conquered lands, for their corrupt and self serving senators to rule over the vanquished through their puppets within the conquered nation's governance.

Very often, the pathetic armed force is miniscule, and when the people stage an uprising, they were the ones, unreinforced or supported, stand alone and offered for sacrificed for the greed by the corrupt patricians that had turned a nation wild with anger at their theft.

And with the garrison's sacrifice, their blood and 'heroism' would be paraded in Rome, to wring emotional support from the blue pill addicted roman citizens and mothers to give up their sons to raise an army to 'teach' the supposed 'enemies' - whom were only victims of theft by the monied class - a lesson, an excuse to enforce roman theft upon a robbed nation.

In more recent and noble times, garrisons by the american people were to assist nations against the tide of communism tyranny. It was widely accepted, but that ideology has all but disappeared. There is no more 'idealogy enemy'.

But today, we realized that an even bigger threat to humanity exists, and that is rapacious greed by a few men who would stop at nothing, hiding in the shadows to corrupt and manipulate events to feed that greed, similar to the roman patricians of past.

We mankind are doom to repeat our mistakes if we fail to learn the lessons of the past.