Hat tip Instapundit
It's good to see the United States, Britain and Canada starting to focus on the shortage of NATO "boots on the ground" in Afghanistan, particularly in the volatile southern part of the country. It has been obvious to anyone with a modicum of operational experience that this was the case shortly after the U.S. had to divide its resources between Afghanistan and Iraq in 2003.
With NATO taking a leading role in Afghanistan, it was assumed that Article 5 of the alliance's charter that states that an attack against one is to be considered as an attack against all would result in a traffic jam of NATO troops as they deployed in the direction of the threat. Four years later, politically constrained military commanders on the ground are "requesting" the Alliance's civilian leadership find them 2,500 more troops to secure the south of the country.
You don't tippy-toe in incremental steps in search of victory. Another 2,500 troops in the south would ease the burden of those, including our Canadians, bearing the brunt of the fighting. But it won't guarantee victory. If we want to win this fight, pacify the south and leave with a clear conscience, the alliance should send at least an additional 10,000 combat troops to that front.
Where to find the soldiers is the easy part, as the accompanying chart will show. Convincing the political leadership in the countries with the soldiers but not the will is a job for those who have earned the right to address the problem, and that includes Canada.
The chart shows both NATO and non-NATO countries currently serving as part of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. The numbers are not absolutely precise due to the constantly changing nature of military strengths. Percentages are rounded off to the nearest whole. They do, however, give a pretty good idea of which countries are taking the mission seriously and which aren't.
Some countries do not break down their reserve numbers into navy, army and air force so I included their totals, as armies always make up the majority of any reserve force. The percentages I show are based on the size of each country's regular army only.
In the case of Canada I acknowledged the contribution of our air force and navy personnel in Afghanistan by reducing the size of our contingent there from 2,600 Canadian Forces personnel to 2,000 army.
Recent announcements indicate that Canada hopes to have 3,000 to 5,000 Afghan troops trained by the end of the year and that they will be able to conduct combat operations on their own. That is all well and good but it will not ensure victory, particularly with Taliban reinforcements readily available across the border in Pakistan and having easy access to unguarded border crossing points into Afghanistan.
If you add up the total regular army troops available to NATO, it comes to roughly 2.24 million soldiers. All we need in Afghanistan to reinforce the troops currently in theatre and win this thing is half of one per cent of that figure.
Where the hell are they?
Retired Canadian general Lewis MacKenzie was the first commander of the United Nations' Sector Sarajevo during the Bosnia civil war.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
08/14/2007 5:45 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This has been obvious since 1950. The question is why does the US still have 100,000 troops in Europe when they are needed elsewhere and why does it let high value imports flood in when many unemployed US autoworkers are capable and need the work?
Posted by: ed ||
08/14/2007 8:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
When the Western Euros [with a greater population and combined GNP than the US] couldn't handle Kosovo in the early 90s without the US having to do the 'dirty work', what would give anyone else an idea that NATO was nothing more than a bunch of old boys of privilege and inherited wealth sitting around the yacht club bar making believe they were skipper of something larger than a dingy?
#9
Yep, it's high time we cut off funding to our children. Much like the 40 year old who still lives in his parents' basement, it's high time for the Euros to learn to live on their own.
Posted by: BA ||
08/14/2007 10:42 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Actually, we still need troops to be in Europe to protect our friends. Eastern Europe, that is. And yes, eastern Europe is still our friend. And to protect them from the Muslims *and* the Russians.
Western Europe can see a draw down just fast enough to not ruin their economies, but otherwise, they need to learn that just because you have endless bureaucrats and meetings, it doesn't mean that you can get away with not having a military.
The story of the public school in Brooklyn that is poised to become a taxpayer-underwritten, Islamist recruitment and indoctrination center took a dramatic turn last week. The principal-designate of the so-called Khalil Gibran International Academy (KGIA), Dhabah Debbie Almontaser, was forced to resign after she defended a T-shirt emblazoned with the words Intifada NYC making clear her radical ideology and proclivity for dissembling.
...
The inadvisability of allowing the Almontaser influence to persist after her departure is made clear in an Executive Summary of her program, the only document about KGIA provided to date in response to a Freedom of Information Law request submitted by a member of the Stop the Madrassa Coalition, John Matthies of the Middle East Forums Islamist Watch. A scathing critique of this summary is provided by two other coalition members, William Mayer and Beila Rabinowitz, who note on their blog, PipeLineNews.com: [It] is actually a manual for creating an Islamist vocational school, one in which every activity is planned around creating social activists with an Arab supremacist mindset, in the mold of KGIAs activist/principal Dhabah Almontaser.
Mr. Mayer and Ms. Rabinowitz observe that nearly every party and organization involved with KGIA does not just represent Arab Muslims, but hard core Islamists with a definite agenda. For example, according to Ms. Almontasers Executive Summary, an organization known as the Arab-American Family Support Center will have a constant presence on site providing a site coordinator as well as staff members who will: serve as student advisors and Arabic language teachers, offer social services, and develop the extended-day Arabic language and cultural arts programs.
If that were not enough, the AAFSCs director, Lena Al Husseini, also continues to serve on the KGIA planning committee. Ms. Al Husseini and her organization are closely tied to other Islamist groups, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and the Muslim Students Association (MSA). CAIR and ISNA were recently designated as un-indicted co-conspirators in a terrorism-financing case. Rest at link.
Posted by: ed ||
08/14/2007 08:59 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
One of the two major political parties of the United States has linked all its electoral hopes on domestic pathologies, economic downturns and foreign failure. It is actually difficult to name any positive development for America that would benefit the Democratic Party's chances in a national election. Teasers:
If African Americans come to believe that America is a land of opportunity in which racism has been largely conquered, it would be catastrophic for the Democrats.
If women marry, it is bad for the Democratic Party.
If immigrants assimilate, it is not good for Democrats.
The better Americans feel they are doing, the worse it is for Democrats.
The most obvious area in which this rule currently applies is the war in Iraq. The Democrats have put themselves in the position of needing failure in Iraq in order to win the next election.
The list is almost endless. Check out Praeger's discussion of these points at the link.
#2
Prager nails it. I don't know who first said it, but the left is actually invested in the failure of the West generally and the U.S. in particular. Their aim is simple; disarm, disenfranchise (economically), de-Christianize. In order for these things to happen, the U.S. must fail.
Look to Euroland, where this has occurred by the same Gramscian methodology employed by the Democratic leadership and those in control of the education and infotainment industries. This is the path- and the result - that the left wishes to follow and achieve here as well.
It needs to be resisted by whatever means are necessary, by those of us whose meme set is that of the American and not the French revolution.
Even more telling than the article itself are some of the comments by leftists. A sorrier bunch of jailhouse lawyering, arguing from the envelope instead of the core, and downright lying would be hard to find. Oh, they care about America, alright, and want it to succeed - just in a form completely different than what it has always been. Perfect example of circular non-logic.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
08/14/2007 5:45 Comments ||
Top||
#3
In the land of opportunity why wouldn't you expect there to be a party of opportunism, to exploit any situation or tragedy?
Posted by: Sen. John "Winter Soldier" Kerry ||
08/14/2007 9:34 Comments ||
Top||
#5
One of my primary core values that determines my voting trend is the need to be optimistic that things are going to turn out OK for me and mine... In the world of the left, all is lost until they are in power.
I'm sorry but I can't get out of bed every day saying "woe is me" every time the folks I supported are not elected. Life is too short, Dems, and you have just lost 12 years of yours to BDS...Lets see 12 76 ave lifespan...carry the 1, drop the naught... 1/6 of your life just passed driving around with angry bumper stickers and losing candidates.
Current administration policy is replete with examples of quickly enacted efforts whose consequences led to the opposite effect. (Beware of what you wish for . . . .) With Congress caving last week, the National Security Agency no longer needs a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to wiretap if one party is believed to be outside the United States. This change looks reasonable at first, but it could create huge long-term security risks for the United States.
The immediate problem is fiber optics. Until recently, telecommunication signals came through the air. The NSA used satellites and antennas to pick up conversations of foreigners talking to other foreigners. Modern communications, however, use fiber; since conversations don't go through the air, the NSA wants to access communications at land-based switches.
Because communications from around the world often go through the United States, the government can still get access to much of the information it seeks. But wiretapping within the United States has required a FISA search warrant, and the NSA apparently found using FISA too time-consuming, even though emergency access was permitted as long as a warrant was applied for and granted within 72 hours of surveillance.
Avoiding warrants for these cases sounds simple, though potentially invasive of Americans' civil liberties. Most calls outside the country involve foreigners talking to foreigners. Most communications within the country are constitutionally protected -- U.S. "persons" talking to U.S. "persons." To avoid wiretapping every communication, NSA will need to build massive automatic surveillance capabilities into telephone switches. Here things get tricky: Once such infrastructure is in place, others could use it to intercept communications.
Grant the NSA what it wants, and within 10 years the United States will be vulnerable to attacks from hackers across the globe, as well as the militaries of China, Russia and other nations.
Such threats are not theoretical. For almost a year beginning in April 2004, more than 100 phones belonging to members of the Greek government, including the prime minister and ministers of defense, foreign affairs, justice and public order, were spied on with wiretapping software that was misused. Exactly who placed the software and who did the listening remain unknown. But they were able to use software that was supposed to be used only with legal permission.
The United States itself has been attacked. In six hours in August 2006, remote attackers entered computers at the Army Information Systems Engineering Command at Fort Huachuca, Ariz.; the Defense Information Systems Agency in Arlington; the Naval Ocean Systems Center in San Diego; and the Army Space and Strategic Defense Command in Huntsville, Ala. The hackers transported more than 10 terabytes of data to South Korea, Hong Kong or Taiwan, and from there to the People's Republic of China. Each intrusion was only 10 to 30 minutes. The downloaded information included Army helicopter mission-planning-systems specifications and flight-planning software used by the Army and Air Force.
U.S. communications technology is fragile and easily penetrated. While advanced, it is not decades ahead of that of our friends or our rivals. Compounding the issue is a key facet of modern systems design: Intercept capabilities are likely to be managed remotely, and vulnerabilities are as likely to be global as local. In simplifying wiretapping for U.S. intelligence, we provide a target for foreign intelligence agencies and possibly rogue hackers. Break into one service, and you get broad access to U.S. communications.
The Greek wiretapping and Chinese thefts from U.S. military sites are warnings that entities other than the NSA could exploit the vulnerabilities of U.S. communications networks. Were the proposed wiretapping technology penetrated by foreign intelligence services, U.S. security and privacy could be quickly and severely compromised.
In its effort to provide policymakers with immediate intelligence, the NSA forgot the critical information security aspect of its mission: protecting U.S. communications against foreign interception. So did Congress. Lawmakers granted the warrantless wiretapping only for six months -- and they need to look carefully before it endangers U.S. national security for the long term.
#1
I am a communications expert (R&D) and the logic in the article blows right past me.
1) Yes fiber tends to run through the US.
2) Internet wise that is why the DoD created an internet designed on hierarchy instead of a mesh or other equally valid but more robust structures.... If the root nodes are in the US we can tap. It is an advantage. With other structures you might have root spheres or torus or something a bit more tricky to tap.
So we are blessed that the fiber comes to us due to the net structure.
3) How the hell does this tie into hacker attacks on the US and Greece and China and Russia
That's a big jump with no logic explaining it or making the case.
4) from what field did this claim come from: ntercept capabilities are likely to be managed remotely, and vulnerabilities are as likely to be global as local. In simplifying wiretapping for U.S. intelligence, we provide a target for foreign intelligence agencies and possibly rogue hackers. Break into one service, and you get broad access to U.S. communications.
If you want to understand the net I can provide some sites that give clues but this is bogus...
If anything this makes a good argument for implementing other topologies within the DoD and later the US and leaving the rest of the world with a flat hierarchical net.
Consider what I said with these analogies.
Consider the current net somewhat like a binary tree. If you don't know what that is then think "Org Chart"
Now consider other topologies. The most common one is water supply in a city. Water has a mesh of connections in a subdivision. Leading in to the subdivision are one or more water supplies with pressure reduction valves. If there is more than one leading into the subdivision they are usually in opposite ends. If one fails the other still supplies water and pressure.
Now if you were to imagine sailing little itti-bitty boats (packets) in a subdivisions water pipes from a to b there are multiple paths you could take. (direct lines, squared arcs, great ciricles....) You can't do that with the internet and its trees. The only way from a to b is along the tree branches. One way and that's it. So you can be sure to tap any message on the internet along the path from a to b. Not so for trapping the sub in the water system. It has multiple paths. There is no single choke point or valley to watch.
So. The net is designed the way it is to make life easy for SAM and the NSA.
#2
Thanks for the Rantburg U. lecture, 3dc. As someone once said to me long ago: remember the last time you saw or read a news article on a topic you're an expert in, and think about how many things were wrong. Why assume they're any better on topics you're not an expert in?
#3
3dc - thanks. As I read this article, I became suspicious that this was just an end-run attack on the wiretaps. It was just a vague suspicion based on the way the article was written. They never really told us HOW they could use the switches to increase their ability to wire tap - just that it was "tricky" and that communication technology is "is fragile and easily penetrated".
Then they gave examples that may or may not have been related to these land-based switches. It was all very vague.
After reading your post - it just makes me think that Congress didn't have the support it needed to shut down the FISA warrents so now it is trying to create a straw-boogy man that we need to be protected against so that they can try again from this angle.
Posted by: AT ||
08/14/2007 21:39 Comments ||
Top||
#4
3dc, neat summary. When reading the article, the bogusity meter pegged past the scale.
Grant the NSA what it wants, and within 10 years the United States will be vulnerable to attacks from hackers across the globe, as well as the militaries of China, Russia and other nations.
FUD. Plain and simple. Whether NSA monitors or not has no bearing on vulnerability of military or gummint networks. It is an entirely different issue. In fact, it is NSA that makes a substantial effort to develop a secure environment. Point in case is their Secure Linux Layer contribution.
#5
*happy sigh* I do so love Rantburg! Thank you, Professor 3dc!! I became suspicious as soon as I saw the title links to the Washington Post... and the writer's argument that fiber optics vs. airborne telecommunications -- I thought that most of us get our email through phone wires or cable. But I'm not really up on such things, so I could be wrong.
The article runs longer. Go to the link for the balance and a recording of the interview. A excerpt follows.
In June 2005, Marcus Luttrell and three of his fellow Navy SEALs set off on a mission in the mountains of Afghanistan. They were ambushed by the Taliban, leaving him as the only survivor among the American special operations team.
Luttrell, who has since retired from the military, recounts the ordeal in a memoir, Lone Survivor, co-written by Patrick Robinson. The book has received much attention this summer, in part because of the decisions the SEALs made. They're the kind of decisions that lie at the heart of the war on terrorism: Who do you target and who you do kill when the enemy doesn't wear a uniform?
"War's not black and white," Luttrell tells Steve Inskeep. "You can sit there and put it on paper, like, 'This is what has to be done in this certain situation.' But when you get up there on that mountain, or when you're in a battlefield, it doesn't work that way. And sometimes stuff has to be done so you can preserve the life of your men."
Luttrell faced at least two decisions with lives at stake, including his own. The first decision came after the SEALs moved into the Afghan mountains. That's when they were discovered by Afghans who might betray their presence.
The SEALs were looking down from a mountainside, waiting for an enemy leader who was suspected to be in the village below.They soon encountered three males and about 100 goats. The SEALs interrogated the herders, but "couldn't get anything out of them," Luttrell says. "And then, we just had that uneasy feeling. A lot of times, you can talk to villagers and they're really forthcoming with information, and sometimes they're not."
The SEALs discussed their options tie up the herders and take them along, tie them up and leave them, or to kill them. In the end, the Americans decided to turn the herders loose. Luttrell says he's still not sure if they made the right call.
In the book, Luttrell raises questions about the rules of war and whether Americans should be following them. He writes: "Faced with the murderous cutthroats of the Taliban, we are not fighting under the rules of Geneva IV Article 4. We are fighting under the rules of Article 223.556mm that's the caliber and bullet gauge of our M4 rifle.
"Sometimes, it's hard to fight an enemy when ... they're following a different set of rules. They're not following any rules, actually, in some regards. And when we go out there to deal with it, it's tough."
#1
It's necessary that men like Luttrell should die while following ridiculous rules, in order that educated people can sip imported coffee and feel comfortable about themselves.
#2
It's a sh*tty situation for the warfighters to be in -- some commanders have an avoid collateral damage at all costs attitude -- I personally prefer avoid collateral damage if possible.
There's so much fear of a "bad CNN moment" or another incident that could be construed as a my lai that the Cents (based off the recommendations of a lot of jags) really hamstring us. I used to tell my lads - 'tis better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. In the end all the more reason to black out the media & have AFN as the only source of info coming out of iraq/afghanland.
#3
tid up em up oand left them. or kill them whick hindsight is 20/20 but seems ,ore than likeky the goat herders turned them in too the taliban
Posted by: Jesus saves ||
08/14/2007 8:34 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I've seen this book at my local Costco and have been pondering whether or not to buy. I think the quote on the Geneva Conventions just made up my mind for me. I'm headin' there this afternoon.
Posted by: BA ||
08/14/2007 8:55 Comments ||
Top||
#5
We listened to the book on tape on our vacation a few weeks ago. Am now reading the book for the complete version.
'after encountering goatherders with about 100 goats,...' Page 23; "When they find the bodies the Taliban leaders will sing to the Afghan media. The media in the U.S.A. will latch on to it and write stuff about the brutish U.S. Armed Forces. Very shortly after that, we'll be charged with murder. The murder of innocent unarmed Afghan farmers."
Knowing that our military even consider this disgusts me.
Wake up America!
Posted by: Jan ||
08/14/2007 11:47 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Marcus and his team had a real bad day because of stupid ROEs. They said they were more afraid of the MSM and the left in the U.S. than the Taliban.
Ok, granted I wasn't there thank Allah, but I'll drop the flag on this one anyway. First off, deer hunting with a fishing pole generally produces quite predictable results. Those lads belong in a maritime environment, not on a mountain top. That's their specialty, no one is better at it. Use them there, do NOT abuse them elsewhere. Yes, I know.... they are very hooah and will volunteer for anything, but come on damn it, look at the score card and records. Secondly, "discussing options?" WTF, is this decision by committee? Who was in charge? This was obviously a (non-contact) recce mission? What did they think they were going to get out of a local, for phuechs sake? What about actions short of the objective? Contact plan? E&E Plan? Rally points? Wasted talent, wasted lives. More JSOTF lets all be cool direct action or long range surveillance expert bullshit.
#9
BA -- run, don't walk and get this book. Be sure you have soon time set aside to read it. You will be laughing on one page and crying on the next.
My Sunday morning smile lately, is getting my Sunday paper, and looking at the NYTimes top 10 non-fiction books, and Long Survivor is still there are #1. Love how that must just grate them, that a SEAL's book is #1 on their list!
I guarantee you, if you dislike this book, email me, and I'll pay for your book! It's a compelling read and a "must read."
#10
Besoeker, I think I have to disagree with you here. SEALS are sea air land trained. They have alot more than flyrods here. I wish none of our military needed to be on any mountain top, but that's what we need to do.
I think the big problem here is that they thought about how killing the goat herders would be received over the need to kill them for the safety of the mission.
Broadhead6, spot on.
Posted by: Jan ||
08/14/2007 16:54 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Besoeker, they were on a "snatch and grab" of a HVT that they had been hunting for awhile. He wasn't "just a local."
#12
Besoeker, I think I have to disagree with you here. SEALS are sea air land trained.
SEALS are primarily trained to ingress and egress by water, they're also a LOT more comfortable having the Sea at their backs. Sneakin' and peekin' on a mountainside is a mission better suited to the Marine Forced Recon or one of the Army special operations units. Not the SEALS.
I wasn't there, but if it was me, those goat herders would have been found dead, and I'd have scrubbed the mission due to being compromised. Snatch the HVT some other time.
They (the SEALS) were on the wrong mission, and this isn't the first time higher command has screwed the pooch with an assignment like this. The Panama operation at the airport comes to mind.
Posted by: Natural Law ||
08/14/2007 20:17 Comments ||
Top||
#13
perhaps better suited for Marines passed thru the Sonora hi-altitude training, given....
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/14/2007 20:52 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Thanks for the vote of confidence in the book, Sherry. His quote on the "rules of Article 223.556 mm" alone swung me over.
Actually, I was alredy plannin' on picking it up. This article just seals the deal (no pun intended).
Posted by: BA ||
08/14/2007 20:57 Comments ||
Top||
#15
understood, and thanks.
I know it can't be intentional, and it must be a very hard decision for our higher command to choose who to send. Hindsight as always.
I agree with Broadhead6, we need to blackout the media.
Posted by: Jan ||
08/14/2007 21:37 Comments ||
Top||
#16
"That's when they were discovered by Afghans who might betray their presence."
On August 14, 1947, I was a free man, proud citizen of a free, independent, and sovereign country which I could call my own, a country I could live for and die for. I was young-twenty four to be precise- full of joie de vive, idealism, hope and ambition. To quote Wordsworth: bliss was it in that dawn to be alive. But to be young was very heaven. On that day, we dreamed of a shining city on the hill and the distant bright stars. It was a day that should never have ended. For it was like a dream come true, and carried with it a sense of pride, of excitement, of satisfaction, and of jubilation that it is doubtful whether any other can ever come up to it. On that day, over a century and a half of British rule came to an end. The Union Jack was lowered for the last time. I saw the sun set on the British Empire in the sub-continent. I witnessed its dissolution and the emergence of two independent sovereign countries.
Today, Pakistan is a shadow of what it used to be. What is there to celebrate? We lost half the country in a totally unnecessary and easily avoidable civil war. Today, the Federation is united only by a Rope of Sand. 60 years after independence Pakistan is under army rule for the fourth time and at war with itself. It has a disjointed, dysfunctional, lopsided, hybrid, artificial, political system - a non-sovereign rubber stamp parliament, a weak and ineffective Prime Minister, appointed by a powerful president in military uniform. As we look back at all the squandered decades, it is sad to think that for Pakistan it has been a period of unrelieved decline and the dream has turned sour.
Poverty has deepened. While life at the top gets cushier, millions of educated unemployed, the flower of our nation, and those at the bottom of the social ladder, are fleeing the country and desperately trying to escape to the false paradises of the Middle East and the West. The rich are getting richer, while the poor are getting more and more impoverished. The middle classes seem defeated. There was a time when they were the key to prosperity and national stability. Now they appear submissive in the face of a drastic drop in the quality of their life. All these years, the people organised their lives in terms of a better future for themselves and their children. But with the passage of time, the future has quite literally shrunk and the present has stretched out.
Eight years of army rule have reduced us collectively to a plantation of slaves. Our entire political system has been pulled into a black hole. Public criticism of those ruling Pakistan has become widespread. The army, once held in high esteem, is now being seen in a different light. Army rule has eroded peoples faith in themselves as citizens of a sovereign, independent, democratic country. The result is the mess we are in. The country appears to be adrift, lacking confidence about its future. Never before has public confidence in the countrys future sunk so low.
October 12, 1999 will go down in our history as another sad milestone on the downward path. This is the darkest era in the history of Pakistan since 1971. The independence of Pakistan is a myth. Pakistan is no longer a free country. It is no longer a democratic country. American military personnel cross and re-cross our border without let and or hindrance. They violate our air space with impunity, kill innocent men, women and children in Waziristan and Bajaur.
To please the Americans, the government has deployed over 80,000 troops in the rugged tribal area and is fighting a proxy war against its own people. It has handed over more than 700 so-called Al-Qaeda militants to the United States as its contribution to the American war on terrorism. More than 500 soldiers, the flower of our army, have died fighting Wazir and Mahsud tribesmen. For what?
The nation has been forced against its will to accept a totalitarian democracy. The Pakistan Mr Jinnah founded is gone. It disappeared the day Generals used the army as an instrument for grabbing political power. On that day, the lights went out. Pakistan slid into darkness. The eight long years the regime has remained in power will go down in history as the nightmare years. The nightmare is not over yet.
One thing is clear. If Pakistan is to survive, army must be placed outside the turbulent arena of political conflict. The secession of East Pakistan made it abundantly clear that the Federation cannot survive except as a democratic state based on the principle of sovereignty of the people and supremacy of civilian rule. People are getting fed up with military rulers. The people of Pakistan have crossed the psychological barrier and overcome fear. They will resist if General Musharraf tries to perpetuate his rule through rigged elections or extra-constitutional measures. Now that members of the Bar, civil society and political activists have taken to the streets in defence of our core institutions, things will change. The statusquo will shift, dictatorship will crumble, and people will once again believe in the power of the powerless. The long nightmare will be over. It will be morning once again in Pakistan.
With the reinstatement of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhary, people have suddenly woken up as if from a deep slumber, and are demanding end to military rule and return to authentic, unadulterated democracy. Democracy, which all these years was in limbo, stalled, waiting for a strong breeze to carry it forward, is once again on the march in Pakistan. Islamabad had never witnessed such electrifying, intoxicating scenes Thousands of protestors - members of Bar in black coats and black ties, political party activists, members of civil society, all marching up and down the Constitution Avenue, flags flying and drums beating, is unprecedented in the history of Islamabad. This is not a sign of Pakistans decline or threatening doom. It is a sign of Pakistans vitality. It is evidence of a new beginning.
General Musharraf has painted himself into a corner. While he no longer has many true believers, he still has plenty of enablers in key positions - people who understand the folly of his actions, but refuse to do anything to stop him. It is not too late for General Musharraf to spare the country the trauma and himself the disgrace of another confrontation with the Supreme Court. There is a simple way out: he should announce that he will not contest the presidential election, seek forgiveness and depart.
Posted by: john frum ||
08/14/2007 14:31 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
American military personnel cross and re-cross our border without let and or hindrance. They violate our air space with impunity, kill innocent men, women and children in Waziristan and Bajaur.
I say BS. On the other hand, I hope it's true that we are crossing the border when necessary. Someone needs to chase these sorry talibunnies and AQ to ground. Sorry about your diminished joe de vive Roedad. Ya all shouldn't a f@cked with us on 911.
#3
I wonder who this was written for? Who, exactly, is the target audience? I went to the source web site, and found a newspaper that sounds like it thinks in the same vein as the NYT. Anyone got some insight?
Posted by: Whiskey Mike ||
08/14/2007 16:13 Comments ||
Top||
#4
You wonder? Who frequents? Here, go to town: http://www.robtex.com/dns/http:www.nation.com.pkdailyaug-200714columns1.php.html
Our politicians would do well to heed this notion. It is with a "rope of sand" that the MME (Muslim Middle East) is trying to hang the West. Only the most spineless politicianswhich we have in abundancerefuse to admit how that rope of sand can be turned into one made of glass.
More than 500 soldiers, the flower of our army, have died fighting Wazir and Mahsud tribesmen. For what?
How about, "not getting your asses cremated wholesale?"
The statusquo will shift, dictatorship will crumble, and people will once again believe in the power of the powerless. The long nightmare will be over. It will be morning once again in Pakistan.
Except your thousand points of light will more likely be just a few one big ones.
With the reinstatement of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhary, people have suddenly woken up as if from a deep slumber, and are demanding end to military rule and return to authentic, unadulterated democracy.
Bullshit! Democracy flies in the face of sharia law and Pakistan seems to want nothing else.
This is not a sign of Pakistans decline or threatening doom. It is a sign of Pakistans vitality. It is evidence of a new beginning.
That new beginning had better be sans Taliban and al Qaeda or you can kiss your sorry Pakistani ass goodbye.
There is a simple way out: he should announce that he will not contest the presidential election, seek forgiveness and depart.
Yeah, sure thing. Military dictators always chose the path of least resistance.
I'd certainly like to hear john frum's assessment of this article. I'm certain it would amount to nothing more than "wishful thinking."
Precis: Just because you're not paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
After the occupation of Afghanistan in October 2001, a large intelligence support base was created at Jabal-us-Seraj, north of Kabul. It provided the much needed intelligence to the occupation forces, who failed to consolidate their hold over the territories of Afghanistan, except the garrisoned cities of Kabul and Kandahar and the few air bases. The areas in the north from Herat to Mazar-e-Sharif to Badakhshan are virtually under the control of the warlords. In the south, areas bordering Pakistan are practically controlled by the Taliban. Afghanistan, as such presents a sad picture of a fractured society and free for all smugglers, narcotic dealers, conspirators, intelligence agencies and NGOs, to operate with impunity.
US and India signed the Strategic Partnership Deal in 2003, with the declared objectives, to contain and curb the rising military and economic power of China and the increasing threat of Islamic extremism in the region. In this respect, both found harmony and commonality of interests in pursuit of these objectives. However, as the military situation worsened, attention got focused on the larger objective of the occupation forces, to establish the intelligence network in Afghanistan, to destabilise Pakistan and other neighbouring countries such as, China, Russia, Central Asian States and Iran. It was at the time, that the US state department declared that Afghanistan, which has been part of Central Asia geo-politically, henceforth, will be considered as part of South Asia. The implicit purpose was to bring Afghanistan, within easy reach of India, to use it as the base for intelligence network against the neighbouring countries. For this purpose, the intelligence network, which has since been established and is fully operational.
We have enough information to identify this intelligence network inside Afghanistan, fairly accurately, to determine the dimensions of this Great Game, of the civilised world. The nerve centre is at Jabal-us-Seraj, manned and operated by CIA, Raw, Mosad, MI-6 and BND (German intelligence). Its a huge set-up with concrete buildings, antennas and all the modern electronic gadgetry one can conceive of. Its out-posts are Sarobi and Kandahar against Pakistan. Faizabad, against China; Mazar-e-Sharif, against Russia and Central Asian States and Herat against Iran, as indicated in the map.
Against Pakistan
Sarobi is the nerve centre headed by an Indian General officer, who also commands the Border Road Organisation (BRO). Its forward bases are, Ghazni, Khowst, Gardeyz, Jalalabad, Asadabad, Wakhan and Faizabad. BRO has built an all weather road from Sarobi to Asadabad to Faizabad. Sarobi network, targets the province of NWFP, Pakistan. Dissidents from Pakistan, are trained at Sarobi for missions inside NWFP. Wakhan salient has been infested with dozens of electronic outposts, covering Pakistan, China, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.
Kandahar has its forward bases at Lashkargah and Nawah. Their target area is the province of Balochistan. The dissidents from Balochistan are trained at Lashkargah for undertaking missions in Balochistan as well as in support of the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA). One of their tasks is to target Chinese working in the province, particularly at Gwadar, Sandak and Hab. The American anchorages, on the Pakistani coast at Jiwani and Kalamat, jointly plan operations with BLA inside Balochistan. They also use the Pakistani out-posts at Mand, for operations inside Iran. The American warships in the Arabian Sea and their intelligence base in Muscat, provide the back-up support. The facilities at Jiwani and Kalamat were provided by Pakistan, as logistic support bases to the Americans for operation in Afghanistan, but the same are now being used, to destabilise Balochistan and Iran.
Against China.
* The set-up at Faizabad (Badakhshan) holds over 350xpersonnel mainly Muslim soldiers, engineers and workers from India. It serves as the training camp for the Chinese dissidents from the Xinjiang province. Indian Ulemas impart motivational education, giving the impression that the entire out-fit at Faizabad was run by Pakistanis. The recently acquired facility for military deployment by India, across the border in Tajikistan at Kalai Kumli, adds a meaningful capability to India to operate inside Tajikistan, as well as Uzbekistan.
Against Russia.
* The intelligence base at Mazar-e-Sharif is run jointly by CIA, RAW, Mossad and BND. Chechnyan dissidents and agents from Turkmenistan are trained for operations in these countries. Rasheed Dostam and Ahmad Zia Masood are very active supporters of such activities in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.
Against Iran. The forward base at Herat and Farah are manned by CIA, RAW and Mossad for subversive activities inside Iran. Jointly operating from these bases and the bases inside Pakistan, such as Kalamat, Jiwani and Mand, they have been able to undertake actions inside Iran, killing a number of security forces personnel in the last few years. The terrorist organisation named Jandullah has been used for conduct of such operations inside Iran.
Pakistan and Iran are being blamed for supporting terrorists in Afghanistan, whereas Afghan territory is being violated so blatantly to destabilise the neighbouring countries of Afghanistan, by nations, who claim to be the flag bearers of the ideals of international norms of justice and fairplay. This is the worst kind of Terrorism Through Consensus, by the so-called civilised nations, in occupation of Afghanistan. The brutal violation of Afghanistans sovereignty for the shameful purpose of destabilisation of Pakistan and the regional countries, is condemnable. Was this the purpose of the strategic partnership deal between India, United States and NATO?
My argument is based on the research and study, which may not be as accurate as the information held by the government of Pakistan. Yet it is surprising that after so much of suffering at the hands of foreign saboteurs, the government of Pakistan has woken-up now, to say that foreign hands are involved in the recent killing of the Chinese. And on the floor of the assembly, the finger was pointed also to CIA. Why this announcement has come so late? Why such culpable lack of responsibility to protect our national interests, while our enemies have spun a web of espionage and conspiracies, which undermines our national security. Someone rightly said: The peak of tolerance is most readily achieved by those who are not burdened with convictions. (Alexander Chase)
General Mirza Aslam Beg was the Chief of Army Staff, Pakistan
Posted by: john frum ||
08/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
With jerks like the ex-general Pakistan shows its true colors.
Just imagine... this madman once had control over Pakistan's nuclear weapons...
Posted by: john frum ||
08/14/2007 7:19 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Afghanistan, as such presents a sad picture of a fractured society and free for all smugglers, narcotic dealers, conspirators, intelligence agencies and NGOs, to operate with impunity.
#6
Does the author realize his article is directly and strongly hinting = inferring that Osama Bin Laden + AL QAEDA are, were? and remain, US/USG-INTEL-controlled [but PDeniable?] shadow operatives-organizations???
#2
It is an uncomfortable fact for a tolerant society such as ours to acknowledge that sincere religious belief can pose an imminent danger to a society's physical safety.
Which goes to the root of what I have always maintained about the likelihood of Bushs religiosity interfering with his ability to comprehend howas Davis saysthe jihadists are, to a great extent, acting from genuine, deeply-held religious conviction. His earlier observation about the multicultural myth that all peoples, religions, and civilizations are morally equivalent only serves to cement this notion.
Much like Europe, Americas political leadership has chained itself to Multiculturalisms Politically Correct idea of moral equivalency. This despite clear evidence of American cultures complete superiority that of mostif not allother nations. An ability to witness the massive influx of immigrants from all other countries on earth and yet somehow remain immune to this glaring and inconvenient truth signals such blatantly willful ignorance that it poses a dire threat to our nation.
Hope that a "reformation" of Islam will somehow eliminate its fundamental hostility to the non-Muslim world is wishful thinking.
At last, this important concept is finally hitting the mainstream. Islam has reformed itself. It has reformed itself from a less rigorous creed into the violent and intolerant death cult of today that we see murdering all others with total abandon.
Islam is what it is: a repressive, expansionary, militaristic religious and political system with a mandate from Allah to conquer the globe.
Yo, George! Any of this getting through to you?
The fundamental problem is that the Muslim extremists are not really "extreme" at all -- rather they are the orthodox faithful Violence and intolerance are mainstream in Islam, not distortions of its orthodox traditions as they would be in a religion such as Christianity.
The primary task for Western leaders today is to mobilize their societies to confront the Islamic threat -- it is not to manipulate the Muslim world to develop a fictive "moderate" Islam. The danger of encouraging "moderate" Muslims is that it gives a false signal to Westerners that there can be a long-term modus vivendi between Islam and the West. We must understand that, while there are peaceful Muslims, there is no peaceful Islam.
Spot on!
However well-intended, the Western statesmen who insist on "reaching out" to "moderate" Muslims are objects of contemptuous fun to the jihadists, who move from strength to strength while Western governments spin themselves dizzy to avoid the plain reality that Islam is at war with the world.
A solid slap-in-the-face for all appeasers.
We should encourage genuinely peace-loving Muslims to take a hard, unflinching look at their religion and to draw the necessary conclusion: as have prominent apostates such as Ibn Warraq, Walid Shoebat, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali. They have had the intellectual integrity to acknowledge the violent nature of Islam and to reject it by renouncing Islam in its totality. That sort of courage is a tall order -- apostasy is a capital offence in Islam -- and we in the West should do everything to encourage and protect such acts of conscience.
The only problem is that we cant protect such acts of conscience. Giving political asylum to apostate Muslims would only encourage infiltration by hoards of radicals posing as apostates. This is why I continue to maintain that the practice of taqiyya utterly and PERMANENTLY taints ALL MUSLIMS. Islam cannot even successfully reject taqiyya as there is no possible way to ascertain whether such a renunciation is genuine. Again, this is all because of how taqiyya represents such a fundamental moral and ethical trespass upon civilization at large. This islike it or notwhy Islam is destined for historys scrap heap. Be it in the form of burnt Korans or the tangled, smoking ruins of the entire MME (Muslim Middle East).
While the Left fail to see Islamic imperialism as a threat to the freedoms they ostensibly cherish, the bias of much of the right is to see "religion" as a natural conservative force in the world and therefore resurgent Islam as a natural ally.
This important fact was demonstrated in spades when immediately after the 9-11 atrocity, Bush administration delegates sought an alliance with anti-abortion Islamic constituents within the UN so as to remove all financing for abortion from global womens health programs.
#3
(a) It's a pseudo-religious ideology that makes robbery and murder into religious obligations.
(b) It's winning*.
*I don't care how many Jihadis US forces kill in Iraq & Afghanistan every day---the one thing a polygamous society has no shortage off is expendable young men. As long as they building new mosques in Dar el Harb, they're winning.
#4
Does this include my neighbor who brought me dinner last Friday? Maybe I'm wrong, but it didn't seem militant to me. Plus, I'm still alive, so they didn't even poison it. Maybe they forgot. I guess that could be. And I know they're pretty strict in their beliefs because if you go into his store at prayer time, you have to wait for him to stop bouncing his head off the floor before you can buy anything from him.
The funny thing is, I'm pretty sure he's pointing a little north of Mecca when he's praying. I haven't checked it, but I would guess he's probably pointing more toward Turkey. I don't have the heart to tell him though, cuz his wife grills a mean vegetable.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
08/14/2007 22:31 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Mike N., please do me a favor and ask your Islamic pal about what he thinks of taqiyya. If he's against it, well then, he's an apostate. If he's for it ... I'll let you fill in the blanks.
Let me put it this way, my Iranian friend, Ron, has a really dim view of taqiyya.
#6
How can you be sure that Ron really has a dim view of it?
After all, its all about hiding the truth.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
08/14/2007 23:22 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Good question, Mike n.
Ron operates a local Money Store. His income depends upon monetary interest and other accrual-based forms of income. If he was of dubious character, I doubt he would have hugged me out of pure joy whenmuch to his surpriseI expressed an understanding of taqiyya. In addition, he regaled me with a detailed account of how he and his family managed to escape Khomeinist Iran and buy their way to Europeonly to findthat the European beauracracy was so delimiting that all of them came to America in order to enjoy true financial success.
#8
Funny how that seems to happen. Ali tried Greece first, but that didn't last long.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
08/14/2007 23:42 Comments ||
Top||
#9
PS: Mike N., in no way do I resent your effort to turn any dim assessment I might have of Muslim taqiyya against my own posts here. I respect your loyalty for your friendsMuslim or otherwisehowever, when a Muslim immigrant in U.S. calls on West to deport all Muslims, I have a difficult time arguing with him. Please let me know what you think of Taher's article.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
By GENERAL MIRZA ASLAM BEG
