You are hereBlogs / War Criminals Watch's blog / AFGHAN WAR: LARGEST MILITARY COALITION IN HISTORY
AFGHAN WAR: LARGEST MILITARY COALITION IN HISTORY
From Project Censored / Original Article
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has become history’s first global army. Never before have soldiers from so many states served in the same war theater, much less the same country. At the eighth anniversary of the United States’ invasion of Afghanistan, the world is witness to a twenty-first-century armed conflict waged by the largest military coalition in history.
With recent announcements that troops from such diverse nations as Colombia, Mongolia, Armenia, Japan, South Korea, Ukraine, and Montenegro are to join those of some forty-five other countries serving under the command of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), there will soon be military personnel from fifty nations and five continents serving under a unified command structure.
Continue reading at:
http://warcriminalswatch.org/index.php/news/40-recent-news/692-10-12-10-...
- War Criminals Watch's blog
- Login or register to post comments
-

- Email this page
- Printer-friendly version









I figured this'd be based an article by Rick Rozoff, but wondered why the war on Afghanistan was said to be in its eigth year when it has now entered its 10th, having just ended its 9th. It's an August 2009 article.
He's written plenty more since and I'll refer to some of his articles available and for which the titles seem related, enough anyway.
"Ongoing Iran War Preparations? Arabian Sea: Center Of West's 21st Century War"
by Rick Rozoff, Stop NATO, rickRozoff.wordpress.com, Oct. 25th, 2010
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21612
"Global Military Agenda: Increased US-NATO Military Presence in Southeast Asia.
Completing Plans For Asian NATO"
by Rick Rozoff, Stop NATO, Oct. 22nd, 2010
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21562
"Pentagon Partners With NATO To Create Global Cyber Warfare System"
by Rick Rozoff, Stop NATO, Oct. 8th, 2010
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21366
"U.S. And NATO To Wage 15-Year War In Afghanistan And Pakistan"
by Rick Rozoff, Stop NATO, Oct. 6th, 2010
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21328
"Baltic States: Pentagon's Training Grounds For Afghan and Future Wars"
by Rick Rozoff, Stop NATO, Oct. 1st, 2010
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21269
There isn't a continent left untouched. The US and NATO have been militarizing, building up militarily on all continents, with (I believe) the exception of only the US doing this in South America. So not only is the war on Afghanistan, or it and Pakistan, committed by the largest military coalition, of willing and coerced allies, there isn't a part of this globe, planet that's left untouched by the leading military powers.
However, and as far as I've gathered, so far, most countries with military forces making up part of the criminal foreign coalition in Afghanistan or Af-Pak don't have many forces or troops there; while the US and surely NATO keep trying to get all countries taking part in this criminal coalition to provide more troops or forces. But what's supposedly lacking in that respect is surely offset or very offset by the large number of "security" contractors employed for this criminal war.
There are many thousands of them in Iraq, so there surely are many thousands in Afghanistan or Af-Pak. And these mercenaries are from many countries. I've read of them being from the US and UK, as most people have surely read by now; but have also read of others from Colombia, Peru, maybe one or two other South American countries, very possibly Rwanda, Uganda, and maybe some other African countries where the governments are basically proxies for the US, and also read of some coming from Jordan and some southeast Asian countries. There must surely be some from some European countries, western and/or eastern European ones.
When we're told about thousands of American "security" contractors being used in these two war zones, meaning to include Iraq, maybe some mention is also made of some British contractors, but I don't recall having read (in most articles about these wars and mentioning the mercenaries) of these contractors being also employed from many other countries. I wonder what their complete total numbers are in Afghanistan or Af-Pak, as well as Iraq.
Anyway, 50 countries in the coalition of aggression in Afghanistan must surely consist of many that have been coerced, instead of all of them having willingly accepted to take part in this. It was known to be this way with the so-called "coalition of the willing" for the war on Iraq and I imagine that coercion has also been used to get governments to send military forces to "contribute" to the war on Afghanistan. Maybe not though, for I've read of Iran and Malaysia wanting to "contribute", and it surely wasn't because they think the US and NATO are good, but both still want the Taliban out of power and/or wiped out, f.e. Iran wouldn't require coercion anyway.
People can check Rick Rozoff's index of articles at GR by using the link for it at the bottom of any of the above articles. I didn't check the titles of any earlier pieces from this year and maybe there are some that are more strongly related to the massiveness of the coalition warring on Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
Some of those are the following.
"America Threatens Russia: U.S. Consolidates New Military Outposts In Eastern Europe
Bases, troops and missiles along the entire length of Eastern Europe from the Baltic Sea to the Mediterranean"
by Rick Rozoff, Sept. 24th, 2010
"US Led Militarization of the European Union: NATO Provides Pentagon Nuclear, Missile And Cyber Shields Over Europe"
by Rick Rozoff, Sept. 22nd, 2010
"U.S. Marshals Military Might To Challenge Asian Century
The rise of a dynamic, integrated and dominant Asia in this century is inevitable and inexorable. Any attempt to retard or thwart it by military force from outside the continent will produce catastrophic consequences."
by Rick Rozoff, Aug. 21st, 2010
"Iraq: NATO Assists In Building New Middle East Proxy Army"
by Rick Rozoff, Aug. 14th, 2010
"Global Military Agenda: U.S. Expands Asian NATO To Contain And Confront China"
by Rick Rozoff, Aug. 7th, 2010
"Europe And Beyond: U.S. Consolidates Global Missile Shield"
by Rick Rozoff, Aug. 4th, 2010
"NATO Pulls Pakistan Into Its Global Network"
by Rick Rozoff, July 24th, 2010
And there are plenty more; some for which the titles say that the articles are about the U.S. vis-a-vis Russia and China.
This beast is massive, powerful, and totally out of control, so are elections, assuming that the results are very good next month, going to be sufficient to be able to rein in this unleashed beast? It's not Obama who's really commanding. The military chiefs are very much in command. And both work for the rich and influentially powerful imperialist and economic elites. So would a corrected Congress really be able to rein in this beast and put an end to these wars, as well as the global militarism of the U.S.?
In theory, yes; the Congress, a sufficiently or strongly corrected one, could rein in this beast. But we're clearly going to need a much stronger position than only a theoretical one.
And for people who haven't yet fully realized the scope of all of this warring and militarism, welcome to WW III; or IV, for those who understandably consider the former US-USSR Cold War as WW III, such as at World War 4 Report, ww4report.com.
"Ongoing Iran War Preparations? Arabian Sea: Center Of West's 21st Century War"
by Rick Rozoff, Oct. 25th, 2010
Much of what's omitted in the above excerpt of Rick Rozoff's article doesn't seem at all related to US militarism vis-a-vis Iran, but maybe I'm wrong about this.
"Largest U.S. Arms Deal Ever: $60 Billion In Weapons To Saudis"
by Deutsche Presse-Agentur, Oct. 21st, 2010
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21565
The Obama administration clearly is not qualified to assess the defense needs of Saudi Arabia, for it certainly doesn't need anywhere near $60bn worth of war machinery. But the US MIC definitely will be glad.