Yet, when we went into Afghanistan in 2001 to hunt those responsible for 9/11 and push aside those that harbored them we had a clear mission to accomplish our goal through force. Not only did the military leadership know what their mission was, but the American public knew also. It was basic, straightforward and simple for the most part. We were going to get Bin Laden. We were out to get justice for 9/11.

It also was not the Taliban we were going to get, but we were fighting them as they were harboring those responsible for 9/11. But they themselves were not responsible for 9/11 itself. In fact just before 9/11 the Bush Administration had planned to send Afghanistan’s Taliban government aid money. “In mid-May, 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a $43 million grant to Afghanistan in addition to the humanitarian aid the United States had long been providing to agencies assisting Afghan refugees.” (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3556) We knew Al Qaeda and Bin Laden were there at that time. (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB343/index.htm) (Not that these are noble people.)

When the Bush Administration chose to take their eyes away from the ball with regards to chasing those responsible for 9/11 and decided - against the wishes of America - Bin Laden needn't be brought to justice, Afghanistan was left to fester. Instead they decided to send us into Iraq based on faulty evidence from the CIA they had plenty of evidence informing them to the contrary on. So they sent our men and women in and to cover their tracks, lies and missteps they kept them there through stop-loss. Old news maybe but we're still paying billions-a-year to this day.

During that time the mission in Afghanistan became convoluted and confused and got tied to and bogged down in the lies about Iraq. By the time the Obama Administration took over the Bush Administration's neglect of the “other war” had developed rot and bacteria in more than one way. One symbol of this can be seen in the scandal growing out of a series of communiques revealed by WikiLeaks between the then Afghan interior minister and the US State Department under Secretary of State Clinton.

“The Afghanistan cable (dated June 24, 2009) discusses a meeting between Afghan Interior Minister Hanif Atmar and US assistant ambassador Joseph Mussomeli. Prime among Atmar's concerns was a party partially thrown by DynCorp for Afghan police recruits in Kunduz Province.

“Many of DynCorp's employees are ex-Green Berets and veterans of other elite units, and the company was commissioned by the US government to provide training for the Afghani police. According to most reports, over 95 percent of its $2 billion annual revenue comes from US taxpayers. “And in Kunduz province, according to the leaked cable, that money was flowing to drug dealers and pimps. Pimps of children, to be more precise.

“[…] bacha bazi is a pre-Islamic Afghan tradition that was banned by the Taliban. Bacha boys are eight- to 15-years-old. They put on make-up, tie bells to their feet and slip into scanty women's clothing, and then, to the whine of a harmonium and wailing vocals, they dance seductively to smoky roomfuls of leering older men.

“After the show is over, their services are auctioned off to the highest bidder, who will sometimes purchase a boy outright. And by services, we mean anal sex: The State Department has called bacha bazi a 'widespread, culturally accepted form of male rape.' (While it may be culturally accepted, it violates both Sharia law and Afghan civil code.)”

Yet instead of treating the incident with care for the boys being molested and raped the State Department under the current administration apparently had other concerns. The Afghan interior minister “urged the US State Department to shut down a reporter he heard was snooping around, and was horrified that a rumored videotape of the party might surface. He predicted that any story about the party would 'endanger lives.'

“US diplomats cautioned against an 'overreaction' and said that approaching the journalist involved would only make the story worse. 'A widely-anticipated newspaper article on the Kunduz scandal has not appeared but, if there is too much noise that may prompt the journalist to publish,' the cable said.” (http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2010/12/wikileaks_texas_company_helped.php) (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/213720) For years men from the West would secretly travel to Central Asia to purchase sex with young males - anyone from the seemingly innocuous husband next door to well known local media celebrities - now our government has become involved in selling them through contractors using tax dollars. What a cold dirty bucket of shame.

We attempted to shut up the incident, and the fact that the US defense contractor DynCorp, known to engage in pimping and accepting it's employees buying child prostitutes, had been involved instead of admitting the problem and working on it. (http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2002/08/06/dyncorp/index.html) This was instead of coming clean about it and being open about it.

It shows the level to which things in Iraq and Afghanistan have gotten so clouded and out of control where nation building using tax dollars to “stabilize” for oil companies in Iraq and mining concerns in Afghanistan has become more of the goal than justice for 9/11 (not that Iraq ever had anything to do with 9/11 or had any WMD) and how sleaze, rape and the molestation of innocent little children as slaves to be raped over and over during their lives has crept into the war. Sleazy defense contractors, pimps and drug dealers being paid on the tax payer dime are what we are now seeing and when it comes to light the whole thing gets hushed up by the Secretary of State's department. How could this be? Is that how far we've come from seeking justice? Is this the new direction we've found ourselves headed in that the people in charge have a hand in the molestation of children?

How far we've gone. How much we're removed from that original so much more noble goal. There is no need to stay in Afghanistan until 2014. We have helped them set up a government, military, police force and infrastructure. We should get out now as this is becoming a directionless war especially now that we succeeded in getting Bin Laden. We will not accomplish anything significantly different than we would were we to leave by the end of 2012. However, we may end up doing more bad in the short term - DynCorp is still operating all around the globe on our dime for instance…

To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.