| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| “In Afghanistan we do what we can; in Iraq we do what we must.” |
| 2008-10-06 |
| "THE lion of the people will turn on you," warned Mullah Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil, a former Taliban foreign minister, as we sipped green tea at his home in Kabul a few weeks ago. He noted that while Americans had been shocked by a series of spectacular insurgent attacks over the summer, the United States-led coalition faced a far greater danger than the resurgent Taliban: growing despair among average Afghans that their government is fundamentally illegitimate. Every aspect of sound counterinsurgency strategy revolves around bolstering the government's legitimacy. When ordinary people lose their faith in their government, then they also lose faith in the foreigners who prop it up. The day that happens across Afghanistan is the day we lose the war. With more than 230 military deaths since January, this year is on track to be the deadliest yet for the coalition in Afghanistan. July alone saw a brazen attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul, the deaths of nine Americans at a combat outpost in Nuristan and the killing of 10 French soldiers on the outskirts of Kabul. The response has been a growing consensus around sending two to four more combat brigades to Afghanistan -- 8,000 to 16,000 troops. |
| Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC |
| #13 Enough of this defeatism and handwringing. It is quite possible to create an Afghan government that will keep international terrorists from using the country as a base. That is the objective here, not to Christianize, civilize, or consumerize the Afghan hillbillies. At one time, Afghanistan did in fact have a national government that could do that. It was a monarchy and it was quite successful in keeping tribal "disturbances" within reasonable bounds from about 1920 until communist meddling led to its overthrow in the 70s. The last king, Mohammed Zahir Shah, returned from exile in 2002 and died just last year. |
| Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy 2008-10-06 17:22 |
| #12 "Ayers/Dohrn in '12" is what it is really trying to say, TMY. Amazing how witty and clever these libtards think their transparent lies are; fooling the primitive masses, all that. I think it comes from deriving their entire worldview, their entire personalities even, from stand-up comedy and the media sound-bite world. |
| Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy 2008-10-06 17:12 |
| #11 I suppose you think you're a sarcastic democrat making a clever argument. |
| Posted by: Tranquil Mechanical Yeti 2008-10-06 15:08 |
| #10 We need 8 more years of Bush genius. We can only get that if Senator John McCain is elected President. EIGHT MORE YEARS; BUSH LEADS, McCAIN FOLLOWS |
| Posted by: Bush-Man 2008-10-06 14:59 |
| #9 What Procopius said. |
| Posted by: lotp 2008-10-06 13:13 |
| #8 NS, our lines of communication in Afghanistan are just fine (and way better than Mexico 100 years ago); I think you mean our lines of supply, and that would be quite true. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2008-10-06 12:48 |
| #7 Somehow I suspect our lines of communication with the Mexican border were more secure than our lines of communication in Afghanistan. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-10-06 11:59 |
| #6 More should study the Russian and British experiences and explain why we will be successful. Because we can study our own experience on the Mexican border 1860-90 and see how we succeeded. Somehow it worked didn't it? Put enough pressure on those raiders and suddenly they find it easier to do their work back on the other side of the border, making the host government unstable and forcing action. And don't try to sell a bill of goods that the Territorial government let alone those in Washington weren't awash in corruption either at the time. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-10-06 11:49 |
| #5 The first thing we should have done is imposed a MacArthur constitution on Afghanistan. We made the damned fool mistake of trying to preserve what has been *proven* to be a failed system of government. The rule would have from the onset been created with the idea that it could not be changed for at least 20 years. The entire government would have been sent to school to learn how to govern, then apprenticed to western bureaucrats to learn how to do it in practice. Very strict rules, any violation of which results in being fired. Totally disregard any social status not based in meritocracy. Add to this mandatory western style public schools for all children, and a public works project for all unemployed males--which is possible because of their ridiculously low standard wage. Within a few years, all citizens of Afghanistan are intentionally made *different* from their neighbors in other countries. The more different they can be made, the more difficult it is for negative interface between the two. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2008-10-06 11:43 |
| #4 Afghan unity is an illusion. From the beginning we should have supported the Tadjiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras for sustained old style campaigns against the Pushtun bigots. Let the world know that those who attack, or support the attack against, the United States will die in horrible ways and their lands resettled by their enemies. |
| Posted by: ed 2008-10-06 10:27 |
| #3 Agree Glenmore. More should study the Russian and British experiences and explain why we will be successful. A disaster looms. What would Bambi do if there were massacres of unsupplied US troops? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-10-06 09:47 |
| #2 shocked by a series of spectacular insurgent attacks I'm American, and not shocked; nor would I call the attacks spectacular. greater danger...growing despair among average Afghans that their government is fundamentally illegitimate. Agree. By all accounts the government is corrupt and not very effectual. In other words, like every other Afghan government ever. The British couldn't fix it even at the height of their empire-building; the Russians couldn't fix it even with their casual regard for human life; how are we going to do it? We can't 'buy' success like in Iraq; we can't logistically support the force we would need to secure success the way did in South Korea or Germany; we don't have the national will to win the way we did in Japan; what's left? I suspect we should have declared 'victory' and left some time ago - and left some Special Ops units and Predators to continue the hunt for bin Laden et al. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2008-10-06 08:12 |
| #1 BIGNEWSNETWORK > PALIN, BIDEN: NUCLEAR PAKISTAN AND IRAN ARE A THREAT. ION IRAN > WORLD IS SEEING THE EMERGENCE OF NEW REGIONAL POWERS + IRAN WILL NOT STOP URANIUM ENRICHMENT FOR FOREIGN FUEL SUPPLY [even iff guaranteed] + IRAN DOES NOT TRUST WEST FOR NUCLEAR COOPERATION + IRAN IS NOW SELF-SUFFICIENT IN MISSLES. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2008-10-06 03:26 |