America's Dumbest War Ever

[ORAC]

By Michael Yon: America’s Dumbest War, Ever (http://www.michaelyon-online.com/americas-dumbest-war-ever.htm)

Yesterday a concerned father forwarded to me a letter from his son in Afghanistan. I confirmed authenticity, and republish with permission:

Dad,

I am fed up. I cannot believe the lack of attention the recent changes in this war is receiving by the media or the country. I think I saw one thing on CNN about the following subject, but I had to dig extensively to find it. The purpose of this letter is to let you know of the garbage that our soldiers are going through right now. With this knowledge, I hope that you take action by writing your congressmen.

First, because of the recent green on blue incidents or "insider threats" as the new buzz phrase dictates, all coalition forces in Afghanistan have completely stopped partnering with the ANA, AUP, and ALP in order to prevent the death of anymore CF casualties by ANSF or Taliban disguised as them. This is also greatly spurred by President Karzi's indifferent attitude and lack of action to take measures to prevent further insider attacks.

Second, because of this massive change in policy (and complete change in mission) all U.S. forces are forbidden to actively patrol their AO and are to remain on their respective COPs/FOBs. There are only a few exceptions to this rule and they all pertain to "hardening" highway 1 in our AO. We have received orders that clearly state that all CF will no longer be allowed to drop air to ground munitions within the country of Afghanistan. This preempts Karzi's announcement that will be made shortly that states the above mentioned order, making it a tactical directive that he is ordering.

To the first point: Our mission in Afghanistan is to partner with the ANSF on all levels. Now the policy makers are telling us that we are not allowed to do that and further more we are to take immediate measures to secure ourselves from the ANSF that are co-located with us. So the question now becomes, what is our mission? Furthermore, the implication is that we have absolutely no reason to still be in this country if we are not partnering with the ANSF. So why are we here?

To the second point: I don't think that the American citizens would be happy if they knew that their soldiers were being prohibited from defending themselves in any way because of politically driven orders, but that is precisely what is happening in this war right now even as I write this letter. The soldiers of the U.S. never engage the enemy unless we know that we have will always have the tactical advantage in defending ourselves, that advantage is the use of close air support and air weapons team. To take those weapons away from us is to level the playing field for the enemy and thus exposing our soldiers to more danger. In the school house they teach us that the minimum ratio that we are to engage the enemy with, is a 3:1 ratio. In other words, we have the highest probability of winning because we don’t fight fair. The sound tactical principles behind this teaching have saved lives. The very presence of aircraft over our foot patrols has also saved lives and now our chain of command is being told by our political leadership that this is now not allowed. If we are not partnering with the ANSF and we are not actively patrolling to prevent our enemies from massing their attacks on our COP and we can’t drop a bomb on the enemy that we have positively identified, than what the hell are we doing here?

Give us a mission or send us home. I honestly have no preference on what the politicians decide, as long as they just make a decision. Of course this will be a terrible inconvenience on the current elections so I am sure we will be forgotten, which really does not seem to be too different for how things have been going for the last eleven years.

Do not buy into what the some media outlets have already said about this. Casually saying that this is a frequent occurrence is false, and is an attempt to downplay the major ramifications for these decisions. We have never been so restricted in defending ourselves as we have now. This is not just a stand down. The other implication of this decision is that we will perhaps never regain our relationship with the ANA after we have executed these measures to protect ourselves from them. Essentially, we have left them to die as we watch from our high-tech cameras and UAVs. They will not forget this and I fear the relationship will never be the same.

I love you very much Dad and I don’t want you to worry about me any more than you already are, but I also know that this has to be brought up, someone has to say something about this. It is wrong to keep this hidden away while American soldiers are under constant threat of death and dying. I don’t care if you send this letter directly, this needs to be known.

Your son,

[In Afghanistan]

[SASless]

This, if the information in the letter is true, confirms what I have been saying in the Dempsey thread.....that our Senior Military Leadership have sold the Troops out once again.

We saw it at Fort Hood, we have seen it by Dempsey, we have seen Generals who tried to stand up against bad policies fired...and now this capiitulation to very bad decisions by politicians.

In our system the President is Commander-In-Chief and the Military obeys his Orders but nothing keeps those Seniors from telling the President that it is not an Order he shall carry out....and then Resign immediately telling the President to get himself another General.

If enough do that.....even the thickest President gets the message.

Along with the Lobotomy.....where down the line do they remove our General's Dangly Bits?


A second thought......why is it America's Dumbest War Ever? We are not fighting it by ourselves.

That our Politicians and Military Senior Leadership are failing our Troops and our Country is plain to see. Perhaps, as we saw that happen back in Vietnam and we appear to have ignored those lessons and are doing very much the same thing as then.....but using more hi-tech weapons.....I guess that might qualify it as being the "Dumbest Ever" for us.....but I do believe there is some blame to be shared all around. When shall the Military ever stand up to the Civilians and convince them who needs to be the ones calling the shots in how to wage War?

George Bush in Gulf War One....did it right.....gave the Military the assets they wanted....left them free to execute the War....and let them get on with it without interference.

We cannot say that about Bush Junior and Obama. Bush let it go on too long....and Obama gave up the cause last year when he announced we were leaving at the end of 2014. Remember "Vietnamization" and how well that worked once Congress cut off all the money and resources to the South Vietnamese?

We are now into a War of Attrition with the Taliban.....and we know how that works.....they win....we lose. (Especially if our ROE's keep us from using effective measures to counter their tactics and give the initiative to them.)

[6000PIC]

The US Congress and the Executive Branch of Government are totally inept and dysfunctional. These people should be held accountable by the media and the public at large for their lack of firm policy decisions and morally bankrupt attitudes of self enrichment and re-election-at-all-cost before the betterment of the nation. Brave soldiers , cowardly , self serving politicians and a disinterested populace can only lead to failure . Shame. Either sell it hard , fight the fight 110 % or get the hell out. Where is the leadership ???? No Hope , No Change. Pity. Both the Democrats and Republicans are totally to blame.

[cockney steve]

early retirement, fat pension, cushy civvy street post???? any of these ring a bell?

All war is immoral, sometimes the weak /righteous have to be defended, so yes, i get it that ther are sometimes good reasons for widespread killings,maimings and destruction.
It's unlikely these "leaders" give a flying fxxxk about the cannon-fodder at the 5h11tty end of the stick.....they're expendable!
the top dogs are all for feathering their own nests....anyone who thinks that the country's interest is put first, must be thick/naive/wilfully blind to reality.

[500N]

Vietnam all over again ?

Nothing worse than a Commander in Chief who hasn't served
and seems to surround himself with yes men. Those who did
stand up won some early victories but are now out of the picture.
.

[walter kennedy]

It gets even dumber if you get into whose war it is, who benefited from it, who stirred it up. We all deferentially swallow their bull**** propaganda, grind their enemies into the sand, yet Hollywood doesn't have the courtesy to script us a respectable exit strategy.

[Mmmmnice]

Just look at the names behind KBR - lots of money sloshing around wherever the US mil go.......

[SASless]

82nd Airborne Division Brigadier General facing Courts Martial for a list of Offenses.

Another failure of leadership.

The Associated Press: US general charged with adultery, other sex crimes (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ggHzai5R7K48AeiCtDsiQH_GJ3MQ?docId=afe4ab7d4aa74fd78ab 09a4a5cd151a5)

[Two's in]

PN,

Not necessarily, the term "forcible sodomy" is used when a more specific charge such as rape will be harder to prove. Sodomy in this case is defined as contact between a sex organ and any part of another person’s body. I should probably stop there, unlike the General...

[alfred_the_great]

Or this Soldier could man-up, realise that he exists solely to satisfy a Political aim and if he doesn't like that then he should quite. We (or they) don't join up for all the good bits - if the aim is achieved by reducing the amount of shots fired, and the Politicians don't trust the Military to do that by themselves, then restrictive RoE is the result.

Yet again Yon fails to think and simply joins the outrage bus.

[Milo Minderbinder]

Virginia law definition of "forcible sodomy"
Virginia Forcible Sodomy (http://www.sodomy.org/laws/virginia/forcible_sodomy.html)

section B is a bit of a shocker - it seems to allow raping your wife as long as you don't cause serious injury........
surely thats not the current law?

[SASless]

The allegations pertain to acts/actions that occurred in Afghanistan. Military Law applies....not State Law. Even if there were acts committed in the USA and off Military or Federal property....the UCMJ would have jurisdiction as the Offender is subject to the UCMJ.

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) - Sodomy

Article 125—Sodomy (http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm125.htm)

We have fought this "War" for Eleven Years now.....and just over two more Years to go under current plans.

Am I the only one that sees something wrong with that kind of thinking by our Political and Military leadership?

[Pontius Navigator]

Bit of a thread hijack methinks.

[500N]

Alfred

"Or this Soldier could man-up, realise that he exists solely to satisfy a Political aim and if he doesn't like that then he should quite. We (or they) don't join up for all the good bits - if the aim is achieved by reducing the amount of shots fired, and the Politicians don't trust the Military to do that by themselves, then restrictive RoE is the result.

Yet again Yon fails to think and simply joins the outrage bus."


Maybe the Politicians should let the military do it's job
without tying one hand behind their back which always
seems to be a guaranteed strategy to fail.

Especially Politicians that haven't served.

And if they don't trust the military, maybe the Politicians
need to go.


Re Yon, what more could he add ?
He at least had done a fair bit more critical thinking on both wars
than some or most fly in, fly out Journo's. Plus he has done some hard
yards as well.
.

[500N]

Alfred

"Or this Soldier could man-up, realise that he exists solely to satisfy a Political aim and if he doesn't like that then he should quite. We (or they) don't join up for all the good bits - if the aim is achieved by reducing the amount of shots fired, and the Politicians don't trust the Military to do that by themselves, then restrictive RoE is the result.


Have a read of the Book "No Easy Day". A very good few pages in it
about the gradual changes to ROE etc from the sublime to the ridiculous !

[alfred_the_great]

A military exists solely to achieve a political aim - it is the typical of certain sections of the military to think that once the aim has been set that politicians should 'just get out of the way' and 'let them at it' and not limit them with RoE that 'ties one hand behind their back'. Courageous restraint was based around the fact that the Afghanistan Population were fairly ******* threaders with Fast Air/Long Range Artillery Strikes being called in on their homes and families to achieve a fairly nebulous result. Stopping killing the locals probably achieves more in the long-run than making people feel better about being able to 'reach out and touch people'.

If this lad doesn't like being shot at, doesn't like being a tool to achieve his nation's aims and doesn't like having unlimited liability he should leave the armed forces.

Lets not forget Yon has a history of hissy fits, especially when he believes that his 'crusade for the truth' is being impinged. The man takes great photos, and does add some value to reportage, however ISAF don't exist to provide him with a story or 24/7 insta-rebuttal of whatever he's decided to make a drum out of this time.

[Jayand]

Sasless, I won't apologise but I think you should remove that post.
War is graphic, war is awful but I think the publishing of that photo is disrespectful.

[SASless]

No actually I posted it exactly because it shows what we are talking about. It shows no faces.....but it does show the horror of what our Troops are facing each and every day.

War is offensive and the results are far more offensive to those who have to endure it.

Folks here like to treat things as abstractions.....when they are not.

My heart breaks when I read of one more Casualty in Afghanistan....and having been through this myself in Vietnam.....I promised never to let us have another Vietnam without speaking out about it.

Unlike Vietnam....this war is not being shown to the American Public....or the British Public either I bet. We get somber videos of Flag Draped Coffins, shiny black Hearses....crying families but we never see the reality of what caused those coffins and crying families.

The photo is shocking not dis-respectful. I meant it to be.....as it is the real face of the War.....not the made for prime time TV our governments are producing.

I thought hard about posting that photo.....over a couple of days.....so I did not do it out of pure whimsey.

You are welcome to your opinion....perhaps you will agree we need to see the end of these tragic events.....and join me in speaking out against the War. It is time to bring our Troops home.....not in two years time. Not doing so....means more of events just like that in the photo. Which shocks you more....the photo or the thought of two more years of this?

[Tourist]

Mostly I disagree with SASless on things.

On this, however, I am right with him.

Pictures like this should be mandatory viewing for all those who vote in any country at war.

If you don't like it, then vote for parties that don't get involved in wars.

If you are a citizen of a country at war, then the least you can do is see and accept the reality of it.

[onetrack]

Unfortunately, I have to agree with SASless - and so does one Australian Major General - a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan.

General criticises Australia's Afghan 'experiment' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-24/former-top-commander-criticises-afghan-war/4277240)

There is only one way to fight war - "go hard or go home" - as the race/dragster blokes say.

Afghanistan is a cesspit. A swirling cesspit riven by 2000 yr old hatreds, tribal rivalry, and 5th century attitudes. Afghanistan has turned into another Vietnam because no Western politician has the necessary will to win.

For the war to be won in Afghanistan, it would mean decimating a large chunk of Pakistan, too.
It won't happen, and all our blokes there are fighting with both hands tied, not just one.

I'm saddened by the endless losses for virtually no gain. There's no hope of introducing the concept of democracy to these people - their undemocratic, intolerant, 5th century religion is what binds them - and it's what makes them wage continuous war on Western-style democracy - because it undermines their religion and their religious power.

Britain never won any Afghan wars in the 1800's, and God knows they lost some serious numbers of men and fought unbelievable battles.
The Russians never won in Afghanistan, even though they had superior numbers and superior technology.

The will to fight for decades and win, by our politicians, is not there - not now, and not ever. The Afghans and the Taliban have that will though, and they will carry it through for as long as it takes. These people live to wage war.
Pull out ASAP and put the whole useless exercise behind us. We had to do it with 'Nam, and we are going to have to do it again - thanks to politicians who think they can run wars.

Only Generals can run wars, to win - and in the last 60 years, they have rarely been allowed to run wars.

[TT2]

Believe me mate - I've met them. The war pics and Sven Hassel comics. No-one, ever, would ever publish such a pic if they actually had been involved.
Photogs make a living - just as newspapers and magazines feed off them to make profit.
That is their world.

Those of us who have seen disgusting actions don't take pics. We try to forget the mental ones.

[500N]

Alfred.

Don't disagree with your view that the military exists solely to achieve a political aim.

I also don't disagree that hearts and minds help greatly in winning the war but you can achieve hearts and minds without tying one hand behind the soldiers back - the SAS have done it on numerous occasions. That's not to say changing the ROE so less long range arty and Fast Air / CAS on houses and families is not good to achieve the hearts and minds but a blanket ban that costs soldiers lives ???????

I have yet to talk to people who have been there or read any of the books written by people that has them shooting the crap out of everything and anything. Soldiers and commanders are trained professionals, not shoot em up video game specialists.

Why train an army to fight if you then don't use that assett when you, the Politician starts the war ? Might as well train UN peace keepers to start with.

MG Cantwell has seen enough wars around the world to make a good judgement I think.

Re No Easy Day, have a read around page 140 / 141 re the gradual changes made to ROE that made it harder and harder to do the job.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.
.

[Jayand]

I can't wait till the last of our troops leaves that god forsaken place and am convinced history will show what an utter waste of time, money and saddest of all blood the whole thing has been.
I certainly never voted for this and have spent enough time there to know of the horrors that occur.
Pics that graphic, of dead/dying American troops is in my opinion too much.

[SASless]

TT2...I have taken the position we need to reintroduce Conscription in the USA....make it so every Mother's Son and Daughter is subject to fighting in our Wars....not just the volunteer Professional Military. If we did.....perhaps the certain knowledge one's child or children would be one of those sent off to do the bleeding and dying....perhaps the Politicians would have to make a much more definite and compelling case for starting a War.

In this Country right now....as in every "War" since WWII....Korea onwards., we have not mobilized the Country for War....not once.

We are all off shopping at the Mall, taking our holidays, and generally going about our normal, regular, complacent daily business while brave Men and Women are dying in foreign lands for questionable causes, led by questionable Commanders in too many cases, and having to limit their actions for questionable political reasons. The average American Citizen has absolutely no concept what is going on in Afghanistan. The photo shows it as it is....that is why the government and media do not want to show these kinds of things. How long do you think the support for this War would last if we had these things shown us as we eat our Supper at night. The reporting of the Vietnam War proved the effect such images have on public opinion.

Perhaps if those of us who actually fight in these Wars started speaking up and telling the unvarnished truth about how things are....how they are causing death and maiming to those of us fighting the war.....maybe we could change things for the better. Who best knows what the truth is than those who have been there?

Who has earned the absolute right to speak out but those of us who fought and bear the wounds and scars? Our friends who we lost cannot.....don't we owe it to them to speak for them....to tell the truth?

I think so....I am bothered I waited as long as I have. Too many lives have been lost....too many have been wounded....and the truth is any that are harmed from this point on are needlessly lost and hurt as their sacrifice is not going to change the outcome.

There is no dramatic music playing....no beautiful shots of majestic flags flying....just murder and mayhem in combat. We owe it to those serving now to stand with and for them and bring them home as soon as we can.

[Thud105]

The Afghans have never been beaten at home - period. If NATO could fight them in Northern Europe, or the Canadian Bush or the US mid-west (for example) it might be different. At home - they're unbeatable.
I saw an interview with a Russian General who was there in the 80s. When asked if he had any advice for NATO he simply said "go home - now".

[500N]

I think it was on this forum but in another thread where someone posted a great post about why the US / NATO should have got out after 2003 instead of trying to nation build. Yes, they hadn't got Osama - (Tora Bora, by all reports another failed leadership decision partly based on not wanting casualties and by not going in hard then, how many casualties have they caused since) but hadn't they achieved most of the objectives ?

[SASless]

A discussion of the Tora Bora battle....where Osama escaped to Pakistan.

If this is remotely accurate.....we should wonder why we are losing?


Battle of Tora Bora - War in Afghanistan Battle of Tora Bora (http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/afghanistan/p/torabora.htm)

[SOSL]

We can't win or lose the battle against terrorism in Afghanistan any more than we could in Iraq.

For those of us in "the West" terrorism strikes at our infrastructure, here in our backyards; mostly trains, planes, ships and buildings.

The so called war against terrorism can only be won here at home (wherever home is for you) by intelligence and local protection.

[lj101]

A slightly different spin

Is this how bin Laden Escaped? (http://www.sasspecialairservice.com/is_this_how_bin_laden_escaped_sas.html)

[500N]

lj101

I had read that before and used it to cross reference other written information
so yes, that is why they missed him.
.

[alfred_the_great]

SASless - my great big ass came back from deployment with prescriptive ROE 6 weeks ago, which I am willing to bet is considerably more recent than your last deployment.

There are 2 arguments here - the appropriateness of the Politicians to use ROE (and other methods) to shape and limit the military response they wish to achieve. The other is the appropriateness of the specifics of Afghanistan and associated ROE to achieve something (anything?).

And no, a soldier has no choice (beyond leaving) in obeying what is presented to him - there may be some scope to explore other options or influence events, but they don't take place at the fireteam level. To believe otherwise implies that civilians should not have control, or that control is limited, over the military.

(BTW, suggesting that ROE denies someone the use of their weapons (or other appropriate weapons) when required for self-defence simply indicates that you have no idea about ROE, the rules of self-defence and how to apply either of them.)

I'm not impressed by a 2* saying we should 'go hard or go home' - there have been 4*s who've said that and I still won't accept it. For a start we have 'gone (kinetically) hard' and we are in much the same position we were 9 years ago - a Pashtun population who don't want us there and accept no control other than their own (including from a 'capital city' they don't care about). Killing people simply begats killing people - unless you can kill everyone and leave no-one to take revenge. I presume you are seriously not promoting that as a COA?

Could we have limited the damage by ensuring there was a true comprehensive approach to Helmand, using much more civilian power and expertise, avoiding the use of firepower from the off (cf 'The Afghan Papers' by RUSI) and not getting sucked into a local power struggle: that would've been 'going hard'.

Finally, you can post all the graphic pictures you want. I've seen worse, will see worse and they have the same effect - a great sorrow that people like me, my family and my mates will be killed and injured. But I (and they) signed up for this knowing the risks - you simply bet it'll never be you.

[Shytehawk]

Onetrack

That is the best summing up of the whole nasty mess that I have read. Well done Sir.

[TT2]

SASless - no need for conscription. Propoganda, the promise of shiny baubles, and free totty have worked since time immemorial in order to have young men sign up to get slaughtered.

[Thud105]

I honestly think its all about money - not even oil. Wars are good for big business, do you really think BAE, EADS, Lockheed Martin, Boeing etc want the 'War On Terror' to end? When the Cold War ended the Military-Industrial complex was probably pretty concerned about profits. Not any more.
Right now, business is good, and all the dying is being done by somebody else. If the bosses of every major arms manufacturer and every senior politician,were told that they had to send a son or daughter out to the frontline by the end of October you'd soon see a change. How many senators or MPs have a son or daughter out there 'in harms way' right now? Somewhere around the zero mark? What about all the senior executives at BAEs, EADS, Lockheed Martin, Boeing etc. Do any of them have a son or daughter out there, or even worse - that's come back in a box, or with significant parts of their body or mind damaged beyound repair? What do you think?

[Jayand]

I don't think any ammount of shocking photo's will make any difference to the public.
The military don't know what we're doing there, the politicians haven't got a clue and the public have never understood, people aren't stupid they know war is horrific, what helps them deal with it is if they believe in the cause.

[SASless]

Alfred.....since when is War about "Self Defense"? That concept grants the initiative to the enemy and you should know that is the last thing you wish to give to your opponent as that is how he kills you, as he then chooses the time, place, and manner of the fight.

As you say....killing them all and leaving it to God to sort'em out is not one of the choices. We last did that pretty much back in WWII.

Since you just returned.....what chance do we have to turn this around and actually "WIN"? Can we even define what "Victory" is for this war in Afghanistan?

As to young folks signing up for this....I very much disagree with you on that. They signed on for a great many reasons....but to have their lives pissed away for no good reason is not at all what any of them expect out of their Leadership. Quite the opposite.....they want to know that what they are fighting for is the right and honorable thing to do and that it serves a genuine purpose.

It matters not whether I got back this morning or years ago from a different war....as the issues are the same, and the reasons for the failures are the same....and it is the same kinds of folks that are paying in blood, limbs, and lives.

I bear the scars from my war....so don't tell me I don't understand, don't know, and have no basis to talk about this. I paid my dues exactly as you and everyone else who has served in combat.

We got into this in 2001.....are scheduled to be there until late in 2014.....just what is right and holy about that kind of situation?

How many lives do we squander and have we squandered for no good purpose?

I have family serving now and who have done tours in Afghanistan and I pray they do not have to serve one more day there. If ordered they will go...they will take their chances because they are both good Soldiers but I assure you if they elected not to go I would respect them just as much as if they did. If they get Orders that is a decision they themselves will make and I know what they will decide. That kind of Loyalty and Honor should be reciprocated by their Leadership.....but it is not. Too many Generals are putting their fingers to their eyebrows and muttering "Yes Sir!" instead of standing up and telling the truth to the President and SecDef.

At least McNamara had the courage to admit how wrong he had been in the Vietnam years.....Westmoreland never did.

[500N]

Alfred

Soldiers, sailors and airmen and women will do what they are told but they do expect the senior leadership to fight the fight in the background so that they can do the job they are ordered to.

Yes men at the top and Pollies who want to micro manage everything seems
to be the norm nowadays.

Example in the book No Easy Day - helicopter crashed in the compound
- the people in that famous photo watching a live video feed of the raid on Bin Laden couldn't understand what was going on when they saw the helicopter go down so during the raid, a message was sent from the Situation room all the way to Admiral McRaven in Afghanistan asking what was happening !!!

His reply - "helicopter down, changing plans, my people on the ground will handle it."

WTF is the White House asking questions for during a raid like that.
I think the Admirals response was correct.


Having read a few books about Gulf War I, as SaSless stated,
it seems some at the top prefer saying Yes and saluting than
standing up for what is right.

[orca]

Alfred has (IMHO) hit the nail squarely on the head. This 'war' was lost when it was decided that there was a uniquely military solution to preventing AQ and a host of other loosely affiliated organisations using Afghanistan as a training facility and power base.

Other than numerous tactical victories eventually equalling a strategic one (which they don't) I have never been entirely sure what our strategy has been in Afghanistan - which is disappointing given that I have some experience of the place.

[SASless]

Well....some news outlets have announced we recently passed the 2,000 KIA mark in Afghanistan. It was posted and no public hand wringing by anyone....not even the Cindy Sheehan's bothered to stage any sort of show.

Remember how it was during Bush's time in Office?

Tell me the Media is not the most loyal of Obama's support base!:mad:


This is how the one article at MSNBC and Yahoo summed the situation......


"There is a challenge for the administration," O'Hanlon said, "to remind people in the face of such bad news why this campaign requires more perseverance."

[Two's in]

Alfred has (IMHO) hit the nail squarely on the head. This 'war' was lost when it was decided that there was a uniquely military solution to preventing AQ and a host of other loosely affiliated organisations using Afghanistan as a training facility and power base.


Absolutely true, and don't forget, who made those "loosely affiliated organisations" appear to be a single cohesive unit with AQ leading them in the minds of the public? Why, we did of course, even thought it was never, and will never, be true. You can't vote across billions of dollars to fight "brown" people if the great unwashed don't believe there's a big threat out there. Hey, I know, let's keep saying "better to fight them in Afghanistan than on the streets of New York". That way the money keeps flowing, and the average American voter with a room temerature IQ will think it's patriotic to spend all this money - what's a few thousand lives of our youngest and bravest if we keep getting the money right?

[NutLoose]

Personally looking at it, but you cannot win a war by sitting in little outposts and flying over the country, you need to take and hold large areas of the country, and for that you need the troops on the ground in sufficient quantities to do it, without it you are forced to sit in little fortified positions whilst controlling nothing outside your area...
It's alright fighting a smart war if the other side is too, but they are not playing by our rules...
When you have a convoy of vehicles that have cost £1,0000,000's to produce moving along a road at walking pace while a man on foot walks in front sweeping for a £20 bomb, you are on a hiding to nothing.. Lack of manpower and a firm hold on the ground leaves you vulnerable to that.
I see we have just bought 325 foxhound vehicles at a cost of £300,000,000, call me old fashioned, but when you are throwing that type of money at protecting yourselves against a man with a RPG or AK47 or a DIY bomb costing peanuts, you are soon into a financial meltdown and in an non winnable situation. Surely if you up armour vehicles, the simple answer to that is to plant bigger mines..
Prod a rattlesnake in it's hole and it will bite back..

Probably all totally wrong, but that's how I see things as a Joe Public.

.

[galaxy flyer]

Mr. Madison's War of 1812 was far dumber! The Afghans won't be burning down the WH, at least, I think not.

GF

[SASless]

Hey! Remember! God was on our side in 1812......that is why the Tornado hit DC and killed more Redcoats than our Army did!

[A A Gruntpuddock]

Didn't the @holes who started this not read any history of Afghanistan?

Even the Russians who were right on the doorstep with a huge array of equipment and personnel had to admit defeat.

Did the Pentagon think that superior training and electronics were going to make a difference?

As Kipling said -

"A scrimmage in a Border Station --
A canter down some dark defile --
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail --
The Crammer's boast, the Squadron's pride,
Shot like a rabbit in a ride!

No proposition Euclid wrote,
No formulae the text-books know,
Will turn the bullet from your coat,
Or ward the tulwar's downward blow
Strike hard who cares -- shoot straight who can --
The odds are on the cheaper man."

[Sven Langolier]

Didn't the @holes who started this not read any history of Afghanistan?

Evidently not.

As Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the House Armed Services Committee, at least four years ago "We cannot kill our way to victory"

[Pontius Navigator]

Nutloose, quite right. We managed in Malaya which of course is minute compared with AFG albeit jungle is probably worse than desert.

The method there was to separate terrorists from populace but the key was the populace wanted to be free from the terrorists. Also there was nowhere near the proliferation of weapons.

I would not be surprised if the number of AK47s outnumbers the population. While a 'friendly' villager may have an AK47 and fire off hundreds of rounds at a wedding party you remain on a hiding to nothing.

If 10 years ago there had been a serious gun collection programme and an attempt at border controls - but pie in the sky. If 30 years ago the likes of Sandy Gaul could walk in (OK not a walk in the park) with Russian forces trying to keep them out, the end game was obvious even then.

[SASless]

My Beef is less with the folks that started it....as you remember we had rather good success in the first year....but since then we have gone on to squander lives and resources and are still doing so with an eye to staying over two years longer yet.

If our Senior Military leadership have known it is a lost cause....why have they not stood up to the politicians and forced a change in policy/strategy?

We marked the loss of over 2,000 lives in Country recently.....how many more are we going to throw away before we leave.....and leave we shall......just Ten Years too late!

[Green Guard]

Hey, why all of you guys came there in the first place?
As tourists or teachers or what ?

[vulcanised]

Heard some senior mil bod talking about strategy the other day.

He seemed to be preoccupied with not offending the natives.

[Thelma Viaduct]

Like Iraq 2, it was a BS war from the off.

Soldiers pay the ultimate price, but most of them believe the BS reasons for the war, they really believe they are defending their own country by invading another.

It must be a self defence mechanism to justify their own participation and willingness to be conned and have your life put at risk for lies.

[dead_pan]

Anyone remember what our original aims were back in 2001? I recall they were something to do with clearing AQ/the Taleban from the country and installing a stable pro-Western administration in their place. We have certainly crushed AQ in the country and done a pretty job of corralling the Taleban, although this has been complicated by the fact that they are indigenous (they can blend in instantly at the drop of a weapon). The Afghan government although by no means perfect is far better supported and resourced than anything that has gone before. As such I reckon we've gone a long way to achieving these aims.

Did anyone really think when we went in that we were going to fix this country and transform it into a beacon democracy? It was just never going to happen. The country has so little going for it - landlocked in a really crap neighbourhood, no natural resources of any note, an ill-educated and backward populace who seem determined to resist any attempts to bring them into the modern age. The sooner we get out the better.

[The Old Fat One]

Interesting...three pages on the subject from well-educated military sorts who night be expected to have a little strategic nous, and barely a mention of the real problem.

I'm sure all the relevant goverments would love nothing better that to haul tail and get the hell out of Dodge, but there is a wee problem with that.

Let the Taliban/any-islamic-militant-group-you-care-to-mention, consolidate power in Afghanistan and how long before they start to consolidate power in the wee country next door. You know the one I mean...the one with all the nukes.

I guess we will leave when we are one hundred percent sure we can keep the Taliban etc bottled up, cordoned off, destablised whatever.

It's not about nation building (keep that for joe public).

It's about managing the global threat of WMD armed jihadists.

[The Old Fat One]

And another thing...

If you want to use the Vietnam context, then at least look at the big picture.

Vietnam, win, lose or draw, was one of the battlegrounds (and only one) where Uncle Sam chose to take on the ideology of communism....and in time that ideoligical battle was convincingly won, although remmants drag on.

Currently the "free thinking world" (for want of a better expression) is facing a fundamentalist threat from religious extremism...and not just from the islamic world. So there are some aspects which are similar, but historically this battle is much older...back to the crusades at least.

[Pontius Navigator]

TOFO, I am usually in agreement with your views but not here.

one hundred percent sure we can keep the Taliban etc bottled up, cordoned off, destablised whatever

That is what we did in Germany after the second war. In Afghanistan no one has ever managed bottle anything up and to 100% is a pure pipe dream, especially as we have already declared an end date but we have had no period of stability from which that conclusion could be drawn.

Dead_Pan talks of better supported and resourced, yes, by us while we remain there. As for resources they do a pretty good job of destroying those resources if they can.

Do we honestly believe that we will leave a stable Government in control of the whole country?

[The Old Fat One]

PN,

Do we honestly believe that we will leave a stable Government in control of the
whole country?


I agree...no chance.

I'm pretty sure you've misunderstood me. What we want to leave behind is a scenario where the Taliban and their ilk cannot easily regain power. I doubt it will be because of strong and stable democracy (no harm in hoping though), more likely a combination of empowering rival factions and leaving behind the machinery to be able to:

a. Monitor.
b. Interdict.

Bottom line...we cannot just leave, not because the place is a worthless hell hole, but because it is a worthless hell hole next door to the mother of all global threats.

[Pontius Navigator]

Ah.

Now I was also uncertain which you meant in your previous post about a wee country.

Bottom line...we cannot just leave, not because the place is a worthless hell hole, but because it is a worthless hell hole next door to the mother of all global threats.

I presume you don't mean the one with nukes but the one trying to get nukes.

[SASless]

33 NATO Troops murdered by Afghans in Blue on Green attacks in Afghanistan and Senior American Military leaders including General Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, blame our Soldiers for the attacks.

Granted the Taliban have claimed responsibility for many of the attacks but dickheads like Dempsey worry about Political Correctness, protecting the Army's Diversity Program, and not admitting the truth that Aghan forces have been successfully infiltrated by the Taliban and perhaps Al Qaeda members.

We hear all about our needing to learn how to be culturally sensitive.....why do we not hear the same about the Afghans in their dealings with us. Isn't this tolerance thhing a two way street?

Oh....yes....I forget.....our Troops have to learn to be as loving of all things Islamic as our Dear Leader Obama.

Muslims Murder Our Troops and Pathetic Pentagon Blames Us (http://clashdaily.com/2012/10/muslims-murder-our-troops-and-pathetic-pentagon-blames-us/)

[500N]

I just read that article.

This one from the list got me.
"Avoid offering and accepting things with the left hand, which in Islam is reserved for bodily hygiene and considered unclean."


So how do you "untrain" a million troops who instinctively will hold onto the rifle pistol grip with the right hand to grab or take something with the left hand, that way always being ready. It's instinctive and would be hard to "un do".


But do agree that the senior leadership in the US, military and civilian is so PC.

.

[NutLoose]

Even the UK isn't immune to being PC, remember the one that came out forbidding the carrying of the SLR on ones hip as the stance of a raised weapon was deemed to be aggressive posture, you then had to carry the damn thing Barrel facing down which was deemed to be a submissive posture.

[The Old Fat One]

PN

I meant Pakistan. If you want the bejeessuus scared out of you read this and imagine that little lot under Taliban control

Pakistan (http://bos.sagepub.com/content/67/4/91.full.pdf+html)

That's why we ain't leaving town until the job is done.

No matter how much it hurts.

[Robert Cooper]

Don't plan on the US being there. Obama is already drawing down the troop levels and plans to be out in 2014 regardless. Ofcourse, it is an election year.....

Bob C

[Pontius Navigator]

TOFO, oh right :(

So loonies on both sides.

[500N]

TOFO

I remember the US saying a few years ago that the stability
of the Pakistani Nuclear Weapons was a major concern to them

I also got the impression - but bear in mind this was the media -
that the US would somehow go in and get what they wanted if
the need arose.

Would be interesting to see if it could be done.

[Courtney Mil]

Sorry to go back so far in this thread, but there was an interesting line at Post 52.

Anyone remember what our original aims were back in 2001? I recall they were something to do with clearing AQ/the Taleban from the country and installing a stable pro-Western administration in their place. We have certainly crushed AQ in the country and done a pretty job of corralling the Taleban

You raise a good point. I would say this, though. In the early days, the whole lot bent like reeds in the wind and, faced with overwhelming force of arms, they melted away into the country.

The Taliban very quickly severed their links with AQ and have had far less to do with them since than many might imagine. So we actually achieved our main aim, probably in the first year of ops there.

Since then, we've been struggling to contain anything. And they are (in my view) no less prevalent today than they were 10 years ago. They continue to sit it out and chip away at us. As fast as we strike at their key players, more come along to replace them. And the clock is ticking. Careless, vote grabbing politicians have announced the forthcoming 'withdrawal' and you tell me what signal that sends to the opposition.

As the old Afghan proverb says, "You may have the watches, but we have the time"

Afghanistan has been through this so many times down the centuries; eventually it always ended up looking pretty much the same as before once the outsiders retreated.

[dead_pan]

Careless, vote grabbing politicians have announced the forthcoming 'withdrawal' and you tell me what signal that sends to the opposition

The alternatives being either an open-ended commitment, which wouldn't go down at all well with the electrorate, or a quiet draw-down of forces, which the enemy would inevitably spot and exploit. There are no easy choices here.

I believe we would have been a lot better placed had we wound down our combined military presence significantly in 2002/03 once AQ were routed. We could have returned to the country pretty much at will between then and now, if ever a new threat emerged.

[Courtney Mil]

Oh, I really don't argue with that, dead pan. Not at all. Or your point about sorting it years ago. My point there was just about making an early announcement of withdrawal, effectiely no matter what happens or what we leave behind. Exactly as you said, the alternative would not have gone down well with the electorate. Hence my remark that the decision may appear to be a vote-winning one rather that one based when the situation there is right for us to leave. So your point that this may have happened years ago could well be spot on.

I maintain, though, that telling the enemy that they just need to hang on a couple more years and it will all be theirs cannot be a great message to send. Even if they were feeling a bit deflated then, that must have lifted their spirits.

[BSweeper]

Courtney

I agree your analysis but perhaps not your conclusions. I was always against our involvement (for the reasons you clearly state) and I am really coming around to the view that we should get out - asap, as I am sure that it will be the same in 200 years time - as indeed it was 200 years ago.

Why on earth did someone (whoever they were) think we could impose USA style democracy (sic, as if it is) on these people.

The Sweep :ok:

See you at TDPU but don't cut my tie off.

[Pontius Navigator]

a quiet draw-down of forces, which the enemy would inevitably spot and exploit

Actually that would have been the better option.

History has shown us that a quiet draw down with dummies on the ramparts and one in 3 as real people has often worked allowing the defenders to steal away in the dark. Similarly, when safe passage has been offered a massacre has often followed.

A problem now of course is the huge logistics tale.

We saw what has happened in other places. Perhaps the best withdrawal in modern times was Aden. We had something like 5 flat tops off shore with Marines embarked and fixed-wing available. Given the situation then this was a massive rearguard relative to what could be mounted mounted in Afg.

[cuefaye]

Your observations are well made CM. Says it all.

Why, oh why, cannot our elected political leaders accept the, what is to most of their electorate, so very very obvious. Also, I'm dismayed with the occasional comments of some senior-ish Army officers that we should hang in, our efforts are bearing fruit, and that to withdraw now would betray the sacrifices made thus far. When we leave, in my aged and simple view, it will all have been for nothing. Smell the coffee.

[glum]

Can't help but wonder how Afghanistan would look today had the various military budgets been spent on infrastucture instead. I think I read that a couple of years ago the US spent 90 billion dollars a year on the middle east alone. How far would that have gone in getting locals to build roads, hospitals, schools, power generation plants etc?

Would the locals have had a much better view of the west than they do now had we done that? Ultimately all most people want from their lives is to provide for their families and make things a little better than before...

[Pontius Navigator]

Can't help but wonder how Afghanistan would look today had the various military budgets been spent on infrastucture instead.

Do you really think that any money would have been spent on infrastructure without military support?

The power generation project was under attack from the moment it started to the moment it finished and probably has to be guarded all the time.

Families? You joke. Half the families don't count; they use females but they have no regard for them.

Roads? The roads are there and they blow them up don't they.

It is all about tribal control and central government would disappear in the blink of an eye.

PS, returning to the Michael Yon theme, one of his earlier pieces showed a typical Afghan homestead. First thing they built was the wall. Inside the wall they built the house. From the outset they build to fortify. Not for them open communal living except in extended families. Infrastructure is not part of their ethos either.

[Jayand]

Glum, it's been tried. It didn't work cos as soon as it was built or during it's build it was attacked or destroyed!
They don't want anything from us except rid!
The sooner thr better.

[TT2]

I reckon if one wishes to invade another country, a wee bit of homework is in order. That of course, would involve cultural history. Anyone here ever read 'The Zinky Boys' ? We are a classic example of having ignored the Russian experience in Afghanistan. Like the Septics and the French in Vietnam. Sad.

[lj101]

And we did have a go at them before the Russians too:

BBC News - Afghanistan profile - Timeline (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12024253)

[SASless]

TT2,


Like the Septics and the French in Vietnam. Sad.

Like the Tea Bags in America, Afghanistan, Turkey, and South Africa, too you might have added!


I thought we had decided to avoid the use of insulting language here or did you not get the Memo? One of your countrymen reminded us of the EU Laws re such language being a violation of the current EU Law and Speech Police.

[500N]

"I thought we had decided to avoid the use of insulting language here or did you not get the Memo? One of your countrymen reminded us of the EU Laws re such language being a violation of the current EU Law and Speech Police."


Arrrgghhh, the end of banter as we know it !

Bugger the EU and all the other PC rules, a good bit of
nation slanging goes a long way to having a good laugh !!!


SaSless

That thread was quite some time ago, haven't seen a huge change
in the use of names like Septic, Limey etc :O

.

[Pontius Navigator]

500N, how can you say that about the EU?

Where would all the holiday resports be without EU funding for superb paved walkways along the sea front, class electric lanterns, floral gardens etc etc? OK, Madeira had to borrow an extra few billion Euro to finish it but I can't wait to try out the new Icelandic tourist centre or Centre Parcs Maorocco with it superb, top of the range, EU thermal double glazing.

[glojo]

My own thoughts on any type of insurgency conflict is the instant you loose the freedom of movement, you loose the battle. You loose the battle, you loose the war.

Reading that letter begs the question:

Who is the prisoner?

Is it the resident Afghan population that have the freedom of movement to go where they want, when they want; or is it the ISAF personnel that are confined to their barracks?

33 NATO Troops murdered by Afghans in Blue on Green attacks in Afghanistan and Senior American Military leaders including General Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, blame our Soldiers for the attacks.

Granted the Taliban have claimed responsibility for many of the attacks but dickheads like Dempsey worry about Political Correctness, protecting the Army's Diversity Program, and not admitting the truth that Aghan forces have been successfully infiltrated by the Taliban and perhaps Al Qaeda members.

We hear all about our needing to learn how to be culturally sensitive.....why do we not hear the same about the Afghans in their dealings with us. Isn't this tolerance thhing a two way street?

Oh....yes....I forget.....our Troops have to learn to be as loving of all things Islamic as our Dear Leader Obama.

It is NOT a case of blaming anyone...

It is usually a failure to understand cultures completely different from our own.

The Taliban, Al Qaeda, Communists, the IRA any other terrorist organisation will usually jump on the band wagon and take 'credit' for the killing of those they consider to be an enemy but...

The culture in Afghanistan is completely alien to me, you or our soldiers and if we try to treat these people in the same way we treat our own, then things are never going to work out.

If a new Afghan recruit were to drop his rifle and a British Instructor were to call this person a 'Richard head' or any other service insult, then that Afghan will feel insulted. Insulted in front of his piers and that insult needs revenge!! That is the usual problem we are up against and when instructing the locals we are walking on eggshells regarding our behaviour, our language (profanity is NOT acceptable). It is down to us to alter our methods, it is down to us to understand the cultural differences and it is down to us to respect these people for who they are.

As an aside they are suffering far, far, far, more casualties than us. The Taliban are murdering not just Afghan people that co-operate with ISAF forces they are also killing Pakistani people at an alarming rate and yet we ignore those casualties and pretend they never happen?? How often are these facts reported? The shooting of children guilty of travelling in a school bus, all murdered in cold blood by the Taliban but not reported on our news or in the press. Instead we are negotiating a so called handover to the very people we deemed terrorists and unsuitable to govern!!

I have NO idea why we are there, I have NO idea why we are supporting this corrupt government and I have no idea why we are now negotiating with the Taliban!

Do we think air power was a help or did it alienate people we wanted to befriend?

[SASless]

500N......this was within a week or so it was brought up to us.

[Heathrow Harry]

damned uf you do intervene (Afghanistan) and damned if you don't (Rwanda)

I always felt that there was some justification post 911 to turf the Taleban out (as opposed to Iraq which was just Duubya getting his own back) but we should have then got out FAST

History is very clear what happens to foreign invaders in that place - they don't like them/us and they are willing to fight

The last 8-9 years have just been a terrible waste of lives on both sides

[Courtney Mil]

True, but we haven't turfed anyone out.

[TT2]

Mate - amongst a variety of nationalities I am referred to my face as a 'Scottish Git'. I take no offence whatsover. They are decent guys and gals and I rip it out them in similar fashion. Perhaps you should change your moniker to 'SASless Social Worker' ?:D:D

[SASless]

Well now.....a "Git" you are then.

[Toadstool]

Or maybe SASlesshumour ;)

[TT2]

Tee -hee. SASless Social Worker has sense of rumour failure
Pip - Pip and pass me that gote - 'This one is full sir'.

[Pontius Navigator]

Harry, to which you can add Iraq, Libya and Syria?

[SASless]

We might add the 27 Nations that joined in this War.....along with the American Military. It would appear the Title of this thread leaves a lot to be desired re Truthfulness and Accuracy.

I would suppose as it is a JOINT effort......all of the Nations engaged there are as Dumb as the other.....or is suggesting the UK, Frence, Spainish and other of the Nations' Politicians and MOD Management are immune from criticism?

[The Old Fat One]

Dear Pprune Readers,

I'm going to indulge in a bit of "in-yer face" I told you first here; not so much out of big-headed smugness, but more because, IMHV, this stuff is serious and worthy of public attention.

I refer you to my earlier posts on this thread (circa 53-56) and my answers to PN.

And now I refer you to the news last night, that the Taliban are ramping up their efforts in Pakistan because quote they are working up their strength prior to the departure of UK/US forces in Afghanistan in 2014 unquote.

Is is that hard to imagine an Islamic fundamentalist nuclear armed state? Not from where I'm sitting.

[glojo]

I would ask 'Who are the prisoners' in that war torn country?

Once we loose the ability to freely patrol or walk the streets and instead we remain bottled up inside a well armed, well defended fortress then who is the prisoner?

We now know that Bin Laden was living in Pakistan for the last nine years yet we have regularly been told how we 'just missed' Bin Laden at various locations within Afghanistan.

I look at all the brave personnel that have been killed out there and I keep asking myself, for what? What are we doing out there and what is it that we have achieved? Yes we killed an old man defended by was it one person armed with a pistol or maybe the old faithful AK-47? This old man however was living in Pakistan and and had been doing so for nine years.

We also removed from power an organisation we deemed to be evil and not fit to rule that country but here we are negotiating with that self same organisation and trying to negotiate a handing over of power? Does anyone seriously belief the Taliban will not be in power once we leave?

what went wrong? I go along with Alfred and Pontius has hit the nail on the head when talking about Borneo. We removed the threat because the villagers wanted that threat removed. If we had won the hearts and minds of these villagers and convinced them that the Taliban were bad, then would the results have been different? If we cannot live amongst the villagers then is the war lost?

Is it right to drop so called smart bombs on a house and expect that weapon to only eliminate the bad guys? The instant we kill innocent non combatants, we must surely be loosing that moral high ground? (another question) so yes I agree with Alfred, orca and Nut-loose.

Did Great Britain stand up to America and query the reasons why, why we invaded afghanistan and what was the end game... What would be a successful outcome of this invasion of a sovereign state?

[Trim Stab]

Mostly I disagree with Tourist & SASless on things, but they are unusually both right this time.

Images of war should not be censored - they should be shown in their entire reality to counter the sanitised, glamourised versions of war that most people are fed by Hollywood.

I remember in Bosnia in the nineties Martin Bell of BBC telling me that they couldn't possibly show some bloody footage on the news because it would upset too many people. Possibly if the BBC had been able to show footage like that several decades ago we might not still be getting into stupid wars that serve no purpose.

[glojo]

Mostly I disagree with Tourist & SASless on things, but they are unusually both right this time.

Images of war should not be censored - they should be shown in their entire reality to counter the sanitised, glamourised versions of war that most people are fed by Hollywood.

I remember in Bosnia in the nineties Martin Bell of BBC telling me that they couldn't possibly show some bloody footage on the news because it would upset too many people. Possibly if the BBC had been able to show footage like that several decades ago we might not still be getting into stupid wars that serve no purpose.My thoughts are having the media covering wars is a good way of loosing public opinion unless they are controlled and we can all hear the screaming regarding censorship. war is not like how the Americans usually like to show it in Hollywood. It is messy, smelly and ugly (I don't recall anyone mentioning the awful smells that you never forget... EVER)

Borneo, Aden, and the Falklands all saw very tight control of the press, I can't say Aden was a success but the press was kept on a very short leash. I hate the sight of photographers standing over a wounded person filming them screaming, crying or 'just' bleeding. The louder the screaming, the greater the gore the more excited our journalists get. Never mind offering first aid, lets get that award winning image!! No votes for the press on the battlefront.

[ORAC]

Does anyone seriously belief the Taliban will not be in power once we leave? I'll take that bet.

The Taleban were only in control of the southern half of the country prior to the war and had been battling the Northern Alliance for the rest for years.

The war was won not with western ground forces but by the Northern Alliance with SF and air support. The rot started when, as in Vietnam, politics lead to the army taking a major role and ramping up the war.

The majority of the arms left behind will be left in the hands of those not aligned with the Taleban/southern Pashtun. With suitable SF/Int/air support they should be able to hold their own to the north.

Whether an uneasy national alliance, division of the nation or civil war takes place I couldn't say. But the Taleban won't be in charge outside the Pashtun border regions.

[glojo]

Excellent points ORAC :)

[Heathrow Harry]

and you forget that the Great Game will be on again with a vengeance - Iran, Russia, China, India & Pakistan all joining in meddling withe West plaintively trying to welch on any deal they've cut with Kabul

[Lonewolf_50]

Harry, it should be quite entertaining for years to come. :ok:

[SASless]

Orac,

Hope springs eternal!

When the very Afghans we are "standing up" are observed by Drones delivering Arms to a HVT of the Taliban....and no Hellfires are loosed on the exchange due to Political reasons.....mustn't whack a "Friendly" Police Chief you just turned loose to operate on his own.....THE WAR IS LOST!

[Heathrow Harry]

Don't complain when herds of Afghans decide to leave and head to to the west.............

[500N]

"No votes for the press on the battlefront."

Jospeh L Galloway seemed to do well, even won a Bronze Star for his efforts,
the only civilian ever to do so.

[SASless]

Oddly.....Galloway is an Obama Voter....go figure!

[500N]

I didn't know that. I wonder what his reasons are.