Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Pentagon Pouring Your Money Into Afghanistan: Are They Preparing for a Very Long War?

By Nick Turse, Tomdispatch.com. Posted November 9, 2009.


Forget the "debates" in Washington over Afghan War policy. Construction activity and the flow of money suggests that the Pentagon plans to be there for a long, long time.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
What if People Actually Treated Religion as Just a Metaphor (Like Trekkies and Secular Jews)?
Greta Christina

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Why Can't Prosecutors Even Come Close to Taking Down Wall Street Thugs?
Sam Pizzigati

DrugReporter:
When It’s Crunch Time at College, Students Turn to Adderall
Erik Hayden

Environment:
Is Obama's Latest Agriculture Nominee a Textbook Pesticide-Pusher?
Kate Sheppard

Food:
8 Steps Obama Could Take to Save Food
Robyn O'Brien

Health and Wellness:
Pharmaceutical Giant Paid $500,000 to Psychiatrist Who Used Chicago's Poor as Guinea Pigs
Christina Jewett and Sam Roe

Immigration:
Organizers Fire up Grassroots for Immigration Reform Fight Ahead
Marcelo Ballve

Media and Technology:
Maddow: Anti-Muslim 'McCarthyism' Making Us Less Safe
David Edwards

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
New Right-Wing Craze: Using Bible Quote to Pray That Obama’s 'Days Be Few'
Amanda Terkel

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Hey Guys, Don't Want Kids? A Vascetomy Is Probably the Way to Go
Anna Clark

Rights and Liberties:
Economic Crisis Is Getting Bloody -- Violent Deaths Are Now Following Evictions, Foreclosures and Job Losses
Nick Turse

Sex and Relationships:
How Abstinence-Only Programs Perpetuate Dangerous Stereotypes
Martha Kempner

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Poseidon's Financial Shell Game: Why Is a Private Desalination Plant Asking for Public Money?
Peter Gleick

World:
Reagan Didn't End the Cold War -- Leftist Intellectuals Did
Stephen Zunes

More stories by Nick Turse

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

In recent weeks, President Obama has been contemplating the future of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan. He has also been touting the effects of his policies at home, reporting that this year's Recovery Act not only saved jobs, but also was "the largest investment in infrastructure since [President Dwight] Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System in the 1950s." At the same time, another much less publicized U.S.-taxpayer-funded infrastructure boom has been underway. This one in Afghanistan.

While Washington has put modest funding into civilian projects in Afghanistan this year -- ranging from small-scale power plants to "public latrines" to a meat market -- the real construction boom is military in nature. The Pentagon has been funneling stimulus-sized sums of money to defense contractors to markedly boost its military infrastructure in that country.

In fiscal year 2009, for example, the civilian U.S. Agency for International Development awarded $20 million in contracts for work in Afghanistan, while the U.S. Army alone awarded $2.2 billion -- $834 million of it for construction projects. In fact, according to Walter Pincus of the Washington Post, the Pentagon has spent "roughly $2.7 billion on construction over the past three fiscal years" in that country and, "if its request is approved as part of the fiscal 2010 defense appropriations bill, it would spend another $1.3 billion on more than 100 projects at 40 sites across the country, according to a Senate report on the legislation."

Bogged Down at Bagram

Nowhere has the building boom been more apparent than Bagram Air Base, a key military site used by the Soviet Union during its occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. In its American incarnation, the base has significantly expanded from its old Soviet days and, in just the last two years, the population of the more than 5,000 acre compound has doubled to 20,000 troops, in addition to thousands of coalition forces and civilian contractors. To keep up with its exponential growth rate, more than $200 million in construction projects are planned or in-progress at this moment on just the Air Force section of the base. "Seven days a week, concrete trucks rumble along the dusty perimeter road of this air base as bulldozers and backhoes reshape the rocky earth," Chuck Crumbo of The State reported recently. "Hundreds of laborers slap mortar onto bricks as they build barracks and offices. Four concrete plants on the base have operated around the clock for 18 months to keep up with the construction needs."

The base already boasts fast food favorites Burger King, a combination Pizza Hut/Bojangles, and Popeyes as well as a day spa and shops selling jewelry, cell phones and, of course, Afghan rugs. In the near future, notes Pincus, "the military is planning to build a $30 million passenger terminal and adjacent cargo facility to handle the flow of troops, many of whom arrive at the base north of Kabul before moving on to other sites." In addition, according to the Associated Press, the base command is "acquiring more land next year on the east side to expand" even further.

To handle the influx of troops already being dispatched by the Obama administration (with more expected once the president decides on his long-term war plans) "new dormitories" are going up at Bagram, according to David Axe of the Washington Times. The base's population will also increase in the near future, thanks to a project-in-progress recently profiled in The Freedom Builder, an Army Corps of Engineers publication: the MILCON Bagram Theatre Internment Facility (TIF) currently being built at a cost of $60 million by a team of more than 1,000 Filipinos, Indians, Sri Lankans, and Afghans. When completed, it will consist of 19 buildings and 16 guard towers designed to hold more than 1,000 detainees on the sprawling base which has long been notorious for the torture and even murder of prisoners within its confines.

While the United States officially insists that it is not setting up permanent bases in Afghanistan, the scale and permanency of the construction underway at Bagram seems to suggest, at the least, a very long stay. According to published reports, in fact, the new terminal facilities for the complex aren't even slated to be operational until 2011.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: obama, military, afghanistan, bagram

Nick Turse is the associate editor and research director of Tomdispatch.com. His first book, The Complex: How the Military Invades Our Everyday Lives, an exploration of the new military-corporate complex in America, was recently published by Metropolitan Books. His website is Nick Turse.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Tools: [Post a new comment] [Login] [Signup] View:
We Need The Buildup Is To Catch the 100 Al-Qaeda There
Posted by: mmckinl on Nov 9, 2009 1:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yep, the latest reports estimate 100 or less Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

What are we really there for?

The encirclement of Russia, the land route to Central Asia, the squeezing of Iran, the buffer to China, pressure on the energy and resource rich "Stans" of central Asia and the domination of Pakistan.

The buildup is indispensable for the imposition of Full Spectrum Dominance on Asia for control of resources and strategic military positioning ... Afghanistan today is but our biggest front in the Pentagon's Plans to dominate the entire world and outer space militarily ...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well,...that's that.
Posted by: gazooks on Nov 9, 2009 3:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Deliberating the sending of 40, 50, 500k additional troops apparently concluded some time back. Say, maybe 2003.

It would seem that contemplating an effective political constraint to Pax Americana has about as much a relationship to reality as imagining Dick Cheney heading Amnesty International.

At least the road to Hell will be well paved with good shopping and the fastest of food.

Thanks for the memories, Barak.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How about some truth
Posted by: C. Rich on Nov 9, 2009 5:10 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When it comes to what happened with these killings:

http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/11/the-press-coverage

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

AVF's new recruting slogan...
Posted by: ETSpoon on Nov 9, 2009 5:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Travel to foreign lands, meet interesting new people and kill them.

That's an old Vietnam era anti-war poster slogan but it is even more applicable now since it precisely describes the mission of the All Volunteer Force.

Let us be truthful about the Pentagon, defense contractors and the All Volunteer Force: it is a cabal of death the primary function of which is to dominate and occupy. And as the above article illustrates the goals of functionaries within the Pentagon and the military/industrial complex is divorced from the wishes of the great majority of the American public.

War and the meaningless occupation of foreign countries after all is good for business. Weapons and weapon systems need replacing, updating, upgrading and refinement. New weapon systems need to come on-line under advisement of commanders on the ground. The Rock Island Arsenal is a beehive of activity and share prices for leading defense contractors are steady to rising.

And, in light of falling recruiting figures after the invasion and early period of the Iraq occupation, the current Wall Street and concurrent economic collapse came as something of a minor godsend to military recruiters. As civilian employment grows more scarce military enlistment for the high school or college graduate entering the job market for the first time is very attractive indeed.

The incestuous relationship of leading brass in the Pentagon and their opposites in the defense contractors' community, often former high-ranking Pentagon retirees themselves, is the most egregious example of national-socialism, i.e. private-ownership, with its commensurate profits of industries whose only "customer" is a central government, in he world today.

So while Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and every kind and stripe of Ayn Rand-cultist scream at the top of their lungs that President Obama is "fascist" and the meek and mild health care insurance "reform" slowly winding its way through Congress is "socialism," they are silent on the real national-socialism of the military/industrial complex.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oil, gas, and the access to it.
Posted by: pawheel on Nov 9, 2009 6:24 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We allot about $150-200 Billion in supplemental funding for Afghanistan anually;
That could pay for the best health care for the US in the world.

$650 Billion anually for the military. That makes a TRILLION spent annually for war, not even counting the money specifically going to Iraq, Remember Iraq?

Take 1/3 to 1/2 of that trillion out by bringing our troops home, let the military have $400 billion annually. The rest can go to a project similar to the WW2 Manhatten project that got us nuclear weapons before Germany got them. The project could focus on alternate energy and conservation methods.
The result: We can start to solve global warning, stop killing and wounding innocent people, and have a futue of sustainable posibilities and a better life for us and other countries.
If we just stay at war with Afghanistan, we will always be seen by them as the occupiers, a common enemy for the Afghan people. If we left there, I think the Afghan people will not have the US military as a common enemy that unites them with the Taliban. The taliban, who's main goal is to free Afghanistan from what so many of them see as an illegal occupation. Then they will solve the struggle in their country themselves in their own way.

Support the troops, bring them home!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

JT Barrie
Posted by: rimchamp77 on Nov 9, 2009 7:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, where are the smaller government advocates and anti socialist pundits on this issue? They are cheerleaders for Faux News shrieking: "Send in more troops! Support your generals! Strike out - instead of appeasing - our enemies!" Spend, spend, spend! All the money goes to private contractors and big corporations - where it comes back in campaign contributions. And most of our military spending goes to socialistic Red states who get more tax dollars than Blue states no matter who is president. Any efforts to improve infrastructure and provide basic services to the entire nation diminishes the federal loot going into their coffers. Gotta love these separatists. They want to kill the golden goose and secede? When will the parasite corporations educate them: right before they cut off their funding?

Of course all our problems would be solved if we didn't have these immigrant free loaders! Yeah, the 10-20 billion [very generous estimate that isn't offset by money spent in the US] is really choking our economy - while the half trillion or more spent on our fools' errands in the Middle East are actually good for us [we need more "decisive" military action there!]. Don't pay any attention to the guy behind the curtain...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We are funding the Guarding of the Oil cartel
Posted by: topview on Nov 9, 2009 7:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have to keep troops there to guard the pipeline so big oil can get the Natural Gas and oil from the Stan countries we are exploiting.

Just like Iraq, we most definitely have taken their oil and allotted it to Big Oil.

That was the sole purpose of invading both of those countries. Plus it is where all the drugs are being imported back to America. It's a game to see who can get the richest in the fastest time.
All these Contract companies have our congress as investors and are making millions from their returns.
We now have a false pandemic and a poisonous vaccine that is going to make Big Pharma and thousands of Doctors millions as the population gets sicker and sicker.
The Supermarkets are selling poison additives in all the food, and the FDA just goes along with this.
We are fools and most of the public has no Idea they are being fucked by our own government.
Let me tell you, if you want to change things, just go to http://goooh.com
watch the videos and get involved and lets change our chances to have a normal life again.
Put people in Congress that will do what the people want and not what our government wants.
It is very vital to get this going, so we can get our country back.
The goooh Party

Lets build this grass roots movement to an opportunity to change our future now.Don't expect others to do it for you. Get Involved and become a leader.
I would but at age 76, I am just to old to get to involved, but I can tell everyone about this Grass roots movement.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The whole purpose
Posted by: Archie1954 on Nov 9, 2009 9:22 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
of the Pentagon is war. That's what it does. From recent history we all know it doesn't do it very well but practice makes perfect I guess. To become entrapped in Afghanistan is foolish beyond belief. To protect the potential of some oil pipelines in the future is not appropriate nor good policy. This amalgam of various tribal peoples and their individual warlords masking as a country is an endless hole for both the lives and wealth of America. Why fall into that trap? Are pipelines that important? Is the millions of dollars paid to oil company CEOs an appropriate reason for putting young American lives in danger? Well is it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The whole purpose Posted by: badkitty
What if we DO "win" there?
Posted by: willymack on Nov 9, 2009 10:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Then what?
Will we proceed with the pipeline across Afghanistan and continue protecting the opium production-the REAL reasons for our brutal occupation there?
Does anyone seriously believe the people there will meekly submit to the rule of one of our puppets, or won't attempt to sabotage the pipeline?
This has the stench of a long-term cash cow for Scumbag, Son of Scumbag, and Grandson of Scumbag.
We need to get the hell out of there, NOW, and to hell with the lies of the scumbags.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gorbachev says US needs to pull troops out of Afghanistan
Posted by: Garvagh on Nov 9, 2009 4:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Learn from our catastrophe, warns Mikhail Gorbachev. Obama should pull US troops out of Afghanistan, and allow Iran, India, and other countries to work out the best solution there.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A long war
Posted by: corylus on Nov 9, 2009 8:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
on domestic soil is what the Pentagon is vying for. Attacks on the corporations, politicians, and military installations responsible for the continuing destruction of cultures and the environment will be the only response left to counter the lies, deceit, and treason practiced by these criminals. The response from the government will be war on its own people, and the next civil war will be the next world war.

The American government is the enemy of every last living thing on this earth, and only its complete destruction will allow peace in its wake.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This incursion into Afghanistan is all about forcing them to allow US -----
Posted by: symcokid on Nov 13, 2009 1:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to place a pipeline through their country and diverting the oil to Haifa.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement