No doubt Bill Clinton who has been mooching a lot of money from both sources will be involved with lady Macbeth now as the SOS.

Hey Mike! Read up on the First Afghan War. This thing is going to endless and non-winnable.

Sorry... going to be endless...

Three, unfashionable points to make here.

The murderous human-rights record of the Central Asian republics is almost entirely due to the role of Russia and China, who have guaranteed to help these despotisms crush any opposition through the mechanism of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.

Secondly, there would have been no need to invade Afghanistan had it not been for Bill Clinton's negligence during the 1990s. Within about a decade from now, Clinton will be widely recognised as one of the least effectual or important presidents in US history.

Thirdly, it takes some chutzpah to accuse Bush of doing everything badly, given that Mr Tomasky and his ilk were so very eager to declare defeat in Iraq. Had it not been for Bush, that defeat might have become a reality...

Russia doesn't want a US presence in any of the former SSRs, and it came through with a long-discussed $2bn aid package to Kyrgyzstan recently. There was of course no relationship between the aid and the Kyrgyz government's decision!

Michael,

You have already stated the reason why Russia is willing to pay up $2bn aid package to Kyrgyzstan. This is because Russia does not want the US to gain a foothold in the ex-Soviet space. This point is clear.

Second, the US was paying for this air space for aa mere 150M per year and was not able to outbid Russia for the possession of this base/ space. Your claim is that the US is now negotiating with Uzbekistan to set up a new air base.

Now, similar to Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan is another Ex-Soviet space and the Russian must have been aware the US will try to set up a base there. Third, Uzbekistan knows that Kyrgyzstan was able receive 2B from the Russians by playing up the Russians and the Americans against each other. As a result, it was able to secure sweet deal of 2 B dollars package for itself in the process.

Now, do you think that Uzbekistan will not start its bargaining discussion with the US on 2B package? Second, do you think that the US can come up with 2B for the service of this air space?

Now, you must know that US service men have committed documented human rights violations against local people in Kyrgyzstan and this is one of the reasons why Kyrgyzstan wants the US out of their country.

Of course, this is a convenient tactic but it is very embarrassing for the US to insist that its service men and women are above international law and then turn around and accuse others of violating human rights of their citizens.

I am sure you can see how unconvincing the US position is. I am not against the US winning its central Asia contest with Russia. Only, I think the US has lost this contest long time ago.

Secondly, there would have been no need to invade Afghanistan had it not been for Bill Clinton's negligence during the 1990s. Within about a decade from now, Clinton will be widely recognised as one of the least effectual or important presidents in US history.

Oh, shit - another "blame it all on Clinton" type. It really has gotten so old. Can't you find something a little more original?

You're spinning like a neocon on this one, Tomasky. The US was evicted from the K2 base in Uzbekistan because it backed the al-Qaeda-affiliated IMU rebels who staged a violent uprising in Andijan to topple the government, as this UPI report of how and Uzbek Islamic terrorist was feted in Washington reveals.

Of the two CIA-engineered "colored" revolutions in Uzbekistan and Kyrgzstan in 2005, the Uzbek one failed and the Kyrgyz one succeeded, bringing a Kung-Fu kingpin, Bayaman Erkinbayev, to power. Erkinbayev's "Tulip revolution" was however quickly snuffed out by president Kurmanbek Bakiyev, who was allegedly behind an assassination attempt against the CIA-backed Kung-Fu master. The political upset for the US eventually translated into a military one.

Besides, there's a broad trend in former ex-Soviet Central Asian republics to reintegrate with Moscow.

You're looking for a conspiracy in the wrong place, Tomasky. The conspiracy was when the US staged coups to topple the Uzbek and Kyrgyz leaders after the excuse for maintaining bases on their soil - i.e. capturing Osama and defeating A.Q. - lost its credibility. The US attempted to install stooges that would guarantee the permanent status of those bases, but by recruiting Jihadi terrorists and Kung-Fu fighters for the task, achieved the exact opposite.

halgeel wrote:

I am not against the US winning its central Asia contest with Russia.

That's an odd position for someone who wants Russia to return to Somalia. Are you sure you didn't mistype?

This article is too flippant. The subject matter is far deeper and more serious than depicted.

Give me a break already. There are one or two banks in the world that Bin Laden can keep his fortune. They know exactly where he is. If I owe the IRS five bucks you bet your behind they know exactly where I am.

Writers call that "stream of consciousness," and you should save it for your usenet sock puppet.

Did we "win?" Unless we were fighting to keep an airbase in Kyrgyzstan, we neither won nor lost, and your question isn't a question.

You are confused, sir, so let me simplify this for you. Don't thank me; no one ever does.

The government of a sovereign country told us to leave. We did.

Wow! Stunning Russian victory, eh Marvin? Stalingrad 2! Except we obviously weren't paying attention to Putin because we stayed there knowing full well that it pissed him off. Russia doesn't impress, as you saw when their Caracas port call drew barely a yawn from Washington. Kyrgyzstan does own the Manas airbase. Now try again. Why did we leave the Manas airbase?

Have some coffee, and soak your head. Then maybe you'll get it.

Cairncross says: Secondly, there would have been no need to invade Afghanistan had it not been for Bill Clinton's negligence during the 1990s. Within about a decade from now, Clinton will be widely recognised as one of the least effectual or important presidents in US history.

Arkasha answers: Oh, shit - another "blame it all on Clinton" type. It really has gotten so old. Can't you find something a little more original?

You cannot get any more original than ten years of negligence on Clinton's watch. I well remember after 9/11 when Al Quaeda terrorism sprang into prominence the spate of books detailing how the terrorists' network had been building up during the previous decade. When he was in office all Clinton ever did after the sporadic terrorism was slap wrists.

The history of Clinton will be re-written as will that of Bush; and if its current tenure does not kill off the liberal Democrat party as we know it (Just as nu Labour is now dead in the water) I shall be very surprised. After the stimulus fiasco the omens are looking good.

Donaldo, Dream On!