Funding Corruption and Waste in Afghanistan
Last week, GOP chairman Michael Steele came under fire for daring to say what a lot of Americans already know – that our involvement in Afghanistan is an ill-advised quagmire with no end in sight. After nearly 10 years and approaching $1 trillion spent, the conflict is going nowhere because there is nowhere for it to go. After all, if victory is never really defined, defeat is inevitable.
With our economy at home in serious trouble, this wasteful occupation is something we clearly cannot afford. Each soldier costs us $1 million per year, and yet most in Washington are only considering how many more soldiers to send. Fuel costs an astonishing $400 per gallon for our military in Afghanistan! Yet somehow, many politicians feel it is acceptable to squeeze this money out of our taxpayers, who are truly struggling economically, to fund this non-war. Our economy here is not showing any real signs of improvement. Official unemployment is pushing 10 percent and getting worse. (Real unemployment is over 20 percent, according to the free-market economists.) The growing debt and inflation used to fund this occupation only dooms us to more economic hardship for a long time to come. And for what?
Where the money for Afghanistan comes from is one problem; where it goes is another. Recently, it has come to light that much of the aid money we send to Afghanistan is lost due to corruption. Billions of tax dollars from hardworking Americans are ending up lining the pockets of corrupt Afghan officials, and likely even filtering into the Taliban we are ostensibly fighting. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that curiously enough, billions more than the Afghan government collects in revenue is leaving the country in the form of cash on huge pallets and in suitcases and mostly ending up in Dubai, as well-connected Afghan officials buy up luxury homes and enrich their personal offshore bank accounts. Investigations into corruption and graft have been blocked by the Karzai government, probably because Karzai’s own brother would have to be implicated. It is encouraging that the foreign aid appropriations subcommittee has attempted to block billions in aid as a response to these allegations, but this is likely temporary and may not even succeed.
The point is that sending aid money to Afghanistan is not making poor people over there better off. It is making poor people here worse off. Corruption is endemic to Afghanistan, with graft comprising about one fourth of their economy! Even though it is considered the second most corrupt nation in the world according to Transparency International, we still send the Afghan government billions of dollars in aid and are shocked to find it is not making its way out of the sticky fingers of the officials entrusted with it.
Robbing citizens here to fund corruption over there is not helping average citizens anywhere. We are sacrificing real economic opportunities at home for the opportunity to line corrupt pockets in Afghanistan. Not only that, but American soldiers are being killed and maimed. It is tragic and frustrating how much we have lost and wasted already. It is time to leave Afghanistan to the Afghans to sort out. I am glad more Americans are finally willing to face this reality.
Read more by Rep. Ron Paul
- Stop Internet Censorship – January 23rd, 2012
- The NDAA Repeals More Rights – December 27th, 2011
- Mutually Assured Destruction vs Mutually Assured Respect – December 9th, 2011
- The Folly of Sanctions – November 29th, 2011
- Iran Sanctions Act Definite Step Toward War – November 4th, 2011





E. A. Costa
July 13th, 2010 at 10:27 am
So, Ron Baby, why didn't you support Kucinich's motion to impeach Cheney, then Bush again?
Oh yes, the latter you first opposed and then voted to bury in judiciary.
Come on, can we hear the whole bedtime story again?
bogi666
July 13th, 2010 at 11:52 am
Thanks for exposing Ron for what he really is. As far as the corruption goes anyone whom thinks the corruption is restricted to Afghani's, as Ron does, is a shill to deflect the corruption by American officials, the Pentagon and their contractors and sub contractors.FOLLOWING THE MONEY TO Dubai, Halliburton style. Cheney to Halliburton contracts, Halliburton Inc. moves to Dubai, secret bank accounts, Dubai booming economy financed with corruption money funded by the American taxpayers monies from Iraq and AfPak. Ron never touches the real corruption does he? Being from Texas and all, hmmm an oil state. All Ron does is to provide politically correct stalking horses and red herrings to dupe the American public which is real easy to do. American like to be lied to, the rest of the world knows it.
Claus Eric Hamle
July 13th, 2010 at 11:53 am
The Trans-Afghan Pipeline.
Bruce Richardson
July 13th, 2010 at 1:17 pm
The profits from the proposed Trans-Afghan-Pipeline (TAP), as well as the promise of some 300 strategic materials in the sub-soil of Afghanistan, according the Geology Professor Jack Schroeder of UNO, are the motive-force behind our occupation and basing of troops in Afghanistan. Washington sees this strategy as shuttingt-out Iran, Russia and China in the race to exploit these valuable resources.
The so-called "War on Terror" should be recast as a war to control pipeline transfer priveledges, oil, gas, lithium, copper, uranium, emeralds, gold, etc., etc., need I go on?
bogi666
July 13th, 2010 at 6:58 pm
So far the cost, $3,000,000,000,000 tillion which includes interest, of securing these treasures exceeds the benefits expected to be derived and this doesn't even take future costs into account, This is a defintion of a failed empire, Soviet style, when the costs of the colonizer exceeds the benefits exploited from the colonies. Using the Soviet model of a failed empire and expecting it to be a success because it is Pentagonized obviously doesn't make sense but then the only sense the USG has is nonsense.
Al_Dove
July 14th, 2010 at 4:25 am
Dude, according to Wikipedia:
Kucinich and Ron Paul are the only two congressional representatives who voted[41] against the Rothman-Kirk Resolution,[42] which calls on the United Nations to charge Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating the genocide convention of the United Nations Charter based on statements that he has made. Kucinich defended his vote by saying that Ahmadinejad's statements could be translated to mean that he wants a regime change in Israel, not death to its people and supporters, and that the resolution is an attempt to beat "the war drum to build support for a US attack on Iran."[43] In October 2009, Kucinich and Ron Paul were the only two congressional representatives to vote against H.Res.175 condemning the government of Iran for “state-sponsored persecution of its Bahá’í minority and its continued violation of the International Covenants on Human Rights.”
On January 9, 2009, Kucinich was one of the dissenters in a 390-5 vote with 22 abstentions for a resolution recognizing Israel's "right to defend itself [against Hamas rocket attacks]" and reaffirming the U.S.'s support for Israel. The other 4 "no" votes were Gwen Moore of Wisconsin, Maxine Waters of California, Nick Rahall of West Virginia, and Ron Paul of Texas.[44]
There is no controversy here.