The Guardian on Obama’s political victory in Afghanistan.

From a news article punished 20th November 2013, about the recent security pact agreed between the U.S. and Afghan regimes:

‘The draft text published by the Afghans explicitly states that “US military operations to defeat al-Qaida and its affiliates may be appropriate in the common fight against terrorism,” leaving the door open both to US raids, probably by special operations forces, after 2014 . . .

. . . Although the accord paves the way for a residual US force in Afghanistan on an open-ended stay, it represents a political victory for the Obama administration, which had vowed to a domestic US audience it would bring the war to a conclusion’.

To review, the Obama administration actually escalated the war in 2009, leading to a sharp increase in civilian casualties.

They have now ‘negotiated’ an agreement (in the same way that a kidnapper ‘negotiates’ with a hostage, perhaps) in which 10’000+ U.S. troops will remain in the country indefinitely, with free rein to conduct ‘anti-terror’ – i.e. combat – operations (the U.S., of course, will get to decide who is and isn’t a ‘terrorist’).

The Guardian then present this arrangement, in the very same sentence, as a ‘political victory’ for the Obama administration, in that it has fulfilled a promise to bring ‘the war to a conclusion’ – a claim which is diametrically opposed to the truth borne out by the basic facts they had reported only seconds earlier.

Interesting stuff, for collectors of Newspeak.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s