The Establishment has stopped talking about the Afghanistan Papers, but Lee Camp’s searing humor isn’t letting go.
Bombs have numbers. Humans have names. Our American military boasts a skill and passion for using numbers to turn names into yet more numbers. But these numbers have grown so gargantuan and out of control that one struggles to comprehend them.
In just 10 months in 2018 — the latest numbers made available — our military dropped 5,982 munitions on Afghanistan, turning many thinking, living and loving names into cold, lifeless numbers. Over the span of the war, 43,000 Afghan civilians have been numberized. We, as Americans, essentially never even notice when it happens. Statistically speaking, it will happen again many times today, and no one in America will really care. (At least not while the game is on.)
Sixty four thousand Afghan security forces have been numberized since 2001.
Our government has known for years that the war in Afghanistan is a jaw-dropping disaster on the level of “Cats,” the movie. How do we know they knew? The Washington Post actually published some impressive reporting recently, taking a step back from its lust for pro-war propaganda. (The last time it achieved such a feat was during the O.J. Simpson trial. The first one. The one with the glove.) WaPo unearthed a trove of thousands of internal government documents that expose the catastrophic war. And it turns out there are Tinder dates between a young neo-Nazi and an old Jewish lady that have gone better than this war.
“[The document trove] reveals that senior U.S. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in Afghanistan throughout the 18-year campaign, making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unmistakable evidence the war had become unwinnable,” the paper reported.
Let me translate The Washington Post’s fancy-pants language: U.S. officials didn’t “fail to tell the truth;” they fucking lied. The phrase “failed to tell the truth” oozes around the brain’s neural pathways, strategically dodging the anger receptors. “Failed to tell the truth” sounds like veracity is a slippery fish U.S. officials just couldn’t catch.
Four hundred and twenty four humanitarian aid workers have been numberized.
Let’s take a moment to consider the motivations and goals of the war in Afghanistan. The U.S. ostensibly invaded the country to stop al-Qaida from attacking us in any way, namely by flying large planes into our buildings. We achieved this goal within the first couple months. With al-Qaida essentially decimated, it seems logical that we should have left the country, reserving the right to return if any other big passenger airplanes came after us.
Please Donate to the Winter Fund Drive.
But we didn’t leave. We never leave. Rule No. 1 of the American empire is “Never Truly Leave a Country After Invading.” In order to explain our continued presence, we had to move the goal post. To what? We weren’t sure. We’re still not sure. Nearly 20 years later, if you ask a U.S. general or president (any of them) what the goal is in Afghanistan, they’ll feed you a word salad so large it’ll keep you regular for months. In fact, we now know that even during some of the earliest years of the war, the Pentagon and the Bush administration didn’t know who the bad guys were. (Right now, you’re thinking it’s rather juvenile and uninformed of me to refer to enemy forces as “bad guys,” but, as you’ll see in a moment, our government literally spoke about them in those terms. Side note: This is because murderous rampages by war criminals are always juvenile. Murder, by definition, is unevolved.)
According to WaPo’s Afghanistan Papers, an unnamed former adviser to an Army Special Forces team said, “They thought I was going to come to them with a map to show them where the good guys and bad guys live. It took several conversations — [a]t first, they just kept asking: ‘But who are the bad guys, where are they?’ ”
Yet we Americans were instructed in the early years that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had everything under control. To imply otherwise was to make a mockery of tens of millions of yellow ribbons. But in reality, Rumsfeld, too, had a sizable bad-guy problem.
“I have no visibility into who the bad guys are,” he said behind closed, locked, soundproof doors. Meanwhile, Rumsfeld publicly and boldly led the nation in a well-defined and decisive victory in the land of the Afghans.
In 2003, he said, during a press conference alongside Afghan President Hamid Karzai, “General Franks and I … have concluded that we’re at a point where we clearly have moved from major combat activity to a period of stability and stabilization and reconstruction and activities.”
Yep, no more major combat — just 17 years of reconstruction (and activities). Apparently, most U.S.-backed “reconstruction” is done from the air, via bombs. Let that be a lesson to you, rest of the world: You better not screw with us or we’ll reconstruct you and your whole family!
Sixty seven journalists have been reconstructed during the war in Afghanistan.
Is two decades too long for an utter, unmitigated disaster? Maybe we can stretch it to three? We’ve been funding warlords and extremist jihadis and hoping they will play nice. Yet American presidents have continually told us we’re making progress. “Douglas Lute, a three-star Army general who served as Afghanistan war czar during the Bush and Obama administrations, told government interviewers in 2015, ‘What are we trying to do here? We didn’t have the foggiest notion of what we were undertaking.’ ”
I imagine that quote particularly upsets many Americans, because if there’s one thing we’re good at, it’s having a foggy idea of what we’re doing.
Vietnam: foggy idea.
Iraq: very strong foggy idea.
Libya: one hell of a foggy idea.
Unfettered capitalism: the foggiest idea.
To put it simply, we are the best at bad ideas. But these Afghanistan Papers unveil a pretty terrible picture. One we need to confront as a nation and not just sweep under the rug (and not just because the rug would have to be the size of the Pacific Rim).
Upon hearing these revelations, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer did his best impersonation of someone who gives a shit. He said:
“A bombshell series of investigative reports from The Washington Post exposing heartbreaking truths about the U.S. war in Afghanistan, which has claimed some 2,400 U.S. lives and cost nearly a trillion dollars. The Post says … officials routinely lied to the American people about the war. … This is truly a bombshell.”
Yes, it’s a bombshell — despite the fact that much of the information in the Afghanistan Papers has been known for a decade or more. Back in 2012, I myself was doing poorly written standup comedy bits about how our government funded both sides of the war in Afghanistan. This goes to show that the mainstream media has two priorities — one is to spout the U.S. government’s talking points, and the other is to distract us all from the whitewashing of history.
They help Americans believe that we just found out about the failures in Afghanistan; that we just started McCarthyism, and it didn’t happen before in the 1950s to horrific consequences; that we just now discovered the breathtaking environmental consequences of factory farming. (I’m kidding — corporate media will never report on that. You could have a CNN anchor tied up in a sack in Gitmo, and he would still refuse to admit factory animal farming is killing the planet at an aggressive pace.)
But Blitzer wasn’t content pretending to be shocked that the Afghanistan War isn’t going well, so he put his acting chops to the test by further postulating that there also might be flaws with the war in Iraq. He said, “I can only imagine and brace for a similar report about the long U.S. war in Iraq as well. I suspect that could be some horrifying news as far as that is concerned also.”
That’s right: As of last month, Blitzer thinks there might be some problems with the war(s) in Iraq. (Blitzer strikes me as the type of guy who wouldn’t notice if you stole his pants off him in negative-10-degree weather.) Yes, Wolf, not only has there been similar mismanagement and mass war crimes committed in our invasion of Iraq, but you, in fact, helped manufacture consent for that war as well. You are complicit in the deaths of millions of people who will never come back from numberization.
Throughout the past 20 years, the mainstream media reiterated the lies told by our various presidents. They beat those lies into our heads with impressive frequency. Lies like those told by President Barack Obama, when, in 2012, he said on national television: “Over the last three years, the tide has turned. We broke the Taliban’s momentum. We’ve built strong Afghan security forces. … Our troops will be coming home. … As our coalition agreed, by the end of 2014 the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country.”
I don’t know about you, but I’m pretty thrilled for the war to be over in 2014 — whenever 2014 may come.
Three thousand and eight hundred contractors have died in Afghanistan for these lies.
The Afghanistan Papers show that not only has the 20-year war been wasteful of human life, it’s also been wasteful of money. Of course, this is the point when you think, “The military — wasteful?! Well, paint my nipples and call me Phyllis Diller; that’s the damnedest thing I ever did hear!”
Yes, this is hardly shocking, since $21 trillion has gone unaccounted for at the Pentagon over the past 20 years. That’s two-thirds of the amount of money wrapped up in the entire stock market. Money has been flowing into Afghanistan so fast that officials aren’t even able to waste it quick enough! (I wish that were a joke.)
From The Washington Post’s report, again: “One executive at USAID guessed that 90 percent of what they spent was overkill: ‘We lost objectivity. We were given money, told to spend it and we did, without reason.’ … One contractor said he was expected to dole out $3 million daily for projects in a single Afghan district roughly the size of a US county.”
The contractor said he couldn’t conceive of how to spend $3 million a day for people literally living in mud huts. Well, I guess USAID should start handing out furniture built out of blocks of shrink-wrapped hundred-dollar notes. Maybe fill bean bag chairs with small bills. (If you aren’t yet outraged enough, please keep in mind that, according to The New York Times, adjusting for today’s dollars, it would take less than eight days of the Pentagon’s stated budget to give the entire world clean water for a year, thereby saving millions of lives and turning the U.S. into the most beloved nation on earth.)
But rather than accept our own corruption and war profiteering, our military placed the blame squarely on the Afghan people. Per The Washington Post, “The U.S. military also accused Afghan commanders of pocketing salaries — paid by U.S. taxpayers — for tens of thousands of ‘ghost soldiers.’ ”
Although ghost soldiers sound like an incredible and tough-to-defeat resource, I think they meant the Afghan commanders claimed they had a certain number of soldiers, but most weren’t real. So America can’t fund the health care of our own goddamn real soldiers who get home and wait in line for months to secure any semblance of care, but we can fund ghost soldiers half a world away?!
President Donald Trump just cut food stamps to 700,000 people, impacting more than a million children, but we’re funding fucking ghosts? Maybe we could start a campaign asking the ghost soldiers to donate some of their supper to the starving kids of America.
Ghosts seem to be an ongoing difficulty for the U.S. In the same issue of The Washington Post containing the Afghanistan Papers, there was an unrelated article titled, “The U.S. Wasted Millions on Charter Schools” that said, “A report found that [during the Obama Administration] 537 ‘ghost schools’ in America never opened but received more than $45.5 million in federal start-up funding.”
Apparently we’re funding ghost schools and ghost soldiers, and almost nobody in our government seems to give a shit! I guess you could say they give a ghost shit — it’s not really there.
Yet the problems in our forever war don’t stop at the walking dead. The Washington Post says, “The US has spent $9 billion to fight the problem [of opium] over the past 18 years, but Afghan farmers are cultivating more opium poppies than ever. Last year, Afghanistan was responsible for 82 percent of global opium production.”
But what The Washington Post doesn’t tell you is that a lot of that opium was for use inside the U.S., to fuel our opioid epidemic.
An American becomes a number every 11 minutes from an opioid overdose.
So how does our government respond when revelations like the Afghanistan Papers come out? A few senators pause in the middle of their T-bone steaks and red wine to say, “This needs to be looked into, I daresay.” But then a few days pass and they just give the Pentagon more money to sink into a black hole.
The spending bill just passed by Congress sends $738 billion to the Pentagon. And, as RootsAction stated, it contains “almost nothing to constrain the Trump administration’s erratic and reckless foreign policy. It is a blank check for endless wars, fuel for the further militarization of U.S. foreign policy, and a gift to Donald Trump.”
To put it mildly, asking the Democrats to stand up against endless war is like asking Anne Hathaway to bench-press a Chevy Tahoe. It’s not going to happen, and she has no interest in even trying.
Forty-two thousand Taliban and insurgents have been numberized.
That may sound like a successful war to some, but keep in mind that the U.S. military likes to categorize anyone it kills “an insurgent.” The Pentagon goes by the theory that if it kills you, then you’re an insurgent — because if you weren’t an insurgent, then why did it kill you? A great many of the 42,000 were truly innocent civilians.
If there’s one thing we should learn from the Afghanistan Papers, which the mainstream corporate media have already ceased talking about, it’s that ending these immoral, illegal, repulsive wars cannot be left to our breathtakingly incompetent and corrupt ruling elite, who have probably been lying to us about them for decades. So it’s up to you and me to stop them.
Lee Camp is an American stand-up comedian, writer, actor and activist. Camp is the host of the weekly comedy news TV show “Redacted Tonight With Lee Camp” on RT America. He is a former comedy writer for The Onion and The Huffington Post and has been a touring stand-up comic for 20 years. His new book “Bullet Points and Punch Lines” with a foreword by Chris Hedges is available for pre-sale at LeeCampBook.com.
This column is from truthdig. It is based on a monologue Lee Camp wrote and performed on his TV show “Redacted Tonight.”
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Please Donate to the Winter Fund Drive.
Before commenting please read Robert Parry’s Comment Policy. Allegations unsupported by facts, gross or misleading factual errors and ad hominem attacks, and abusive or rude language toward other commenters or our writers will not be published. If your comment does not immediately appear, please be patient as it is manually reviewed. For security reasons, please refrain from inserting links in your comments, which should not be longer than 300 words.
(“I have no visibility into who the bad guys are,”)- Donald Rumsfeld. Well, Donald may have trouble identifying the “bad guys,” but I doubt there are many at this site who would have similar trouble finding the “bad guys” here in the U.S. Personally I’d probably start with the entire zip code coverage areas of D.C. and Langley just to narrow the search area down a bit.
That was wonderful. Thanks CN for including Lee Camp in your roster. I’m sending this to my grandsons who hopefully will get the outrageous irony that our humorists (at least some of them – God rest you George Carlin) are the only ones who regularly tell the truth.
“If there’s one thing we should learn from the Afghanistan Papers, which the mainstream corporate media have already ceased talking about, it’s that ending these immoral, illegal, repulsive wars cannot be left to our breathtakingly incompetent and corrupt ruling elite, who have probably been lying to us about them for decades. So it’s up to you and me to stop them.”
Yes, spot on. It is indeed up to you honest Americans, of whom there are many, to dethrone the psychopaths amongst you who murder in your name.
Please get on with it. The rest of the world has been waiting for several decades now.
Great article, Lee! And, you’re right about this:
“ending these immoral, illegal, repulsive wars cannot be left to our breathtakingly incompetent and corrupt ruling elite, who have probably been lying to us about them for decades. So it’s up to you and me to stop them.”
It’s up to you and me to stop them. Yes!! Okay!! I’m with you!! ( So, … how do we do that? )
I suggest the first step is to be scrupulously honest about what we know the facts to be. Spinning them to fit an agenda is harmful no matter who does it. Spinning them to fit a foggy notion inside an ill-considered agenda is measurably worse.
E.g., looking at the RootsAction statement you quoted:
Statement: the spending bill just passed by Congress contains “almost nothing to constrain the Trump administration’s erratic and reckless foreign policy. It is a blank check for endless wars, fuel for the further militarization of U.S. foreign policy, and a gift to Donald Trump.”
Foggy notion: we (RootsAction, the anti-war constituency) wish to constrain “the Trump administration’s erratic and reckless foreign policy”
Challenge: what IS the Trump administration’s foreign policy? Is it erratic and reckless? If, so, what makes it so? If not, what makes it seem that it is?
Donald Trump ran on the promise to downgrade the US’s role in NATO, close costly overseas bases, bring the troops home, and redirect those expenditures to domestic infrastructure and the well being of US citizens. There are indications that he has actually tried to make good on those promises. He first asked the Pentagon to prepare plans for an orderly withdrawal from the Middle East nearly two years ago. The whole system has been pushing back, and pushing back hard, against that foreign policy agenda. Yet, President Trump continues to try to push his agenda forward against the headwinds of the backlash. Maybe this dynamic is what’s making it seem erratic and reckless.
When the President again ordered (for the third or fourth time) a withdrawal of troops from Syria in October 2019, Congress passed (354 to 60) a bipartisan resolution condemning that move. The resolution’s purpose was certainly to constrain the Trump administration’s foreign policy. Was this the kind of constraint RootsAction is calling for? When Trump responded to the resolution by standing firm on his order for the troops to move out, he was accused of being “crazy”, mentally unfit. Is this what RootsAction also means when it uses the phrase “erratic and reckless” ?
If “we” are going to take responsibility to end the immoral, illegal, repulsive wars, the situation needs to be correctly analyzed, and intelligent strategies need to be developed and implemented. Donald Trump may be a hideous monstrosity in a lot of ways, but when he repeatedly makes a genuine attempt to lift the weight of 75 years of MIC inertia in order to get the US out from under it, I would expect a genuine anti-war constituency to rally in support those attempts. To amplify the message. To push back against the backlash. To drop the partisan finger-pointing and seize a real opportunity to leverage change.
The opportunity presents itself.
Anybody have a cogent explanation WHY the production of Opium Poppies has become ~90% of global production, while Uncle schmuel is there?
That never seems to make it into writing, anywhere.
Cathy Vogan here from CN Live! and Sydney Film School. Going to put on my second hat for a moment to point out how badly this film was made. If it’s not obvious, it was shot on green screen and that is a photo in the background. A poor attempt was made to deceive, by matching the camera zoom on Obama with a digital zoom on the photo, but you also need to match the resolutions and fake a parallax shift between them during the zoom, to really pull off the illusion that your actor is there in that 3-dimensional space.
An even poorer attempt was made to fake the echo of a large hangar, thinking no one would notice if it faded out slowly enough, that the reverb effect was gone for good by 1’30”. Comparing the sound of the president’s voice and footsteps at the beginning and end of the film: he’s in the hangar when he arrives and a small room when he leaves, heading for that passageway between the two trucks. Cut! Before he bangs into the back wall of the studio…
The feedback I would give to a student who submitted this film is that bad postproduction is making it look and sound like Obama’s first five words – ‘Good evening from Bagram airbase’ – are a deception.
I tried to tell that like a joke Lee. Love your work.
Haha that background is indeed totally fake. The sound team really messed that one up…ouch. Another tell is when he walks towards the “trucks” at the end of the video. The way he strides in an arrow straight line from the podium to the screen, keeping his head completely rigid, is unnatural and totally incongruent with the (fake) surroundings. It really highlights the 2D nature of the backdrop. Oh, and the suit…exactly what one would wear in a hangar at a desert air force base.
It’s telling that they thought slapping together a cringeworthy amateur hour production is a good idea. Casually manipulating the American public after all the lies and broken promises they’ve endured from president after president is disrespectful enough – doing it using production values that wouldn’t be out of place in a 1990s era late-night TV commercial shows how much contempt the establishment has for the people they are ostensibly working for.
Or maybe Americans actually like being fooled and tricked by sleazy conmen who promise them peace and prosperity but instead deliver war and austerity. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.
I though Obama himself looked quite fake… :-)
Breaking the momentum of the opponent, whether factual or fabulated makes me think about other notions from my high school physics: moment of momentum measures an objects tendency to continue to spin. Our popular political discourse makes many observation about momentum of this or that, while manifestly, it is moment of momentum that has the largest impact.
Once we spin fast enough we can convince people to mutually exclusive statements, e.g. we never tortured and all of them deserved it.
When you read Lee Camps funny and prescient article, you have to wonder are we ever going to turn the ship of state around and get going in the right direction. The key of course is whether there ever will be enough smart and committed people to start the process, even to participate in it. As of now, most of those smart people are comfortable being aboard and only having to experience what our victims experience will change them.
The ship of state for the MIC is in full sail, on a smooth and prosperous course. This country’s gilded elite, who have managed to take absolute control of all levers of what we used to consider governance, the relics of our so-called ‘Democracy’, can find no problems whatsoever with the cruise.
For the remaining vast majority of citizens, we who make it all possible for there to be a national treasury to be looted by these criminals, there will never be a change of course, for we are not in control of that ship, nor have we been for quite some time now.
As for any attempts at process, with an aim to change course, that will not be tolerated by our security state apparatus. Hail victory, so to speak, or be silent, for fear of the consequences.
Your comment seems motivated more by rage than by reason. Subjecting those who could do something to things that would ultimately make them unable to do anything is hardly the way to instill change.
I wager instead that they comply out of fear of becoming like the masses that are made examples of in lesser ways; all those cut down socially and economically for having the wrong opinion and not only those pushed to the fringes of society and whom end up in prison or worse.
Change starts with making opinion and thought things which cannot be punished and ending the cycle of condemnation and alienation. Unfortunately, those capable of making this happen are comfortable assuming that these very things are the cause of their problems. I do not whatsoever recommend subjecting them to what many of us have experienced, for it will only continue the cycle – as most suggestions made from rage usually do.